The DISC Personality Test

[jgawne]

OK, can anyone point me in the direction of any valid scientific studies that have been done on this test which is being picked up by many companies as a way to "improve communications."

I remain skeptical that such a test is actual valid and reliable. But sio many companies are selling these tests (which makes me wonder even more) that sifting truth from fiction is pretty tough.

I had found some material ont he Meyers Briggs which was pretty damning on that- and think the DISC is just a different flavor, but am not really sure.

 

[American]

I have been subjected to both tests you mention. They are good models for grouping people, but the claims and conclusions derived afterward - like how to "get along" with people and work better - are all bogus, synthetic schemes to essentially turn the whole building into a herd of useless, unlead sheep. That's a shame, because - like I said - the initial groupings are accurate in my opinion.

It seems that skeptics typically land in the same zone - as do jerks cluster, as do whores, as do airheads, etc.

From there, each group is then treated to different reasons why they bear absolutely no personal responsibility for person they are. It's just one's "communication style" that others are FORCED to accept; nobody then has faults in need of re-adjustment, and there is basically no reason to ever fire or promote anyone no matter what they do.

 

[gnome]

I've had one, and a couple of things come to mind.

It was described to my group not as a personality test, but a behavior profile. The difference being that theoretically one's personality cannot change, but one's behavior can.

At least in my office, it was not offered as a justification for behavior... just a description--and it was pointed out that there are constructive and less constructive responses in each profile.

 

[Blackwell]

<childish derail>

It seems that skeptics typically land in the same zone - as do jerks cluster, as do whores, as do airheads, etc..

Could you please point me in the direction of the whore clusters?

(That would be a great name for a band, by the way -- Whore Clusters. Or maybe a breakfast cereal.)
</childish derail>

 

[jgawne]

It's all touted a very "scientific" but I can't seem to find any studies that are double blind- and donme by folks not vested in the process. It really worries me that I find people are being hired, or not, depending upon their result in these tests.

So I will keep looking to find out if this is science, or non-science.

 

[hammegk]

I'd like to see the correlations, negative and positive, to iq tests.

 

[gnome]

If it's being (stupidly) used for hiring decisions... go for a strong "C". The "C" profile involves devotion to detail and perfection. Unless it's a sales or management job, then try to get a "D" which is the more "Dominant" or "influential".

Shouldn't be too hard to figure out where the questions lead ...