Assessment for Entrepreneurs

sample
sample1@mettl.com
Test Taken on:
Report Version as on:
Finish State: Normal
Registration Details
Email Address: sample1@mettl.com
First Name: sample
Last Name: Not filled
Date of birth: Jan 17, 1946
Country: Not filled
Experience: Not filled
How to Interpret the Report?
When interpreting the results, it is important to remember that the scores are not good or bad, only more or less appropriate to certain types of work. Since the results are based on one's own view of behavior, the accuracy of the results depends upon both honesty and self-awareness while taking the test. 

This assessment measures work-relevant personality traits that might be manifested in work behaviour and therefore influence success on the job. To best use this report:

1. Review the overall recommendation first. Based on your need, you might want to prioritize candidates who are ‘recommended', followed by those who are ‘cautiously recommended’.
2. If you’re choosing among different candidates within the same band of recommendation, review the competencies’ results. Focus on the competencies you believe are critical for success in the role you’re hiring for, and use those scores to help you prioritize which candidates to select for the next step.
3. Remember: This assessment is just one piece of the puzzle. While hiring, it is recommended that you review other information as well – functional and job knowledge, background and past behaviour (e.g. using structured behavioural interviews), reference checks, etc. in addition to the personality assessment.
4. Use of Response Styles for Recruitment/Selection: The ideal response style is “Genuine” and it is recommended for further analysis. However, if any candidate’s response style displays Social Desirability, he/she needs to be considered with caution.
We do not recommend candidates who display Extreme Responding/Central Tendency/Careless Responding as they indicate that the candidate has not attempted the assessments in the desired manner, and that interferes with an understanding of his/her personality since it would not evoke genuine responses from the candidate's answers. This in turn is expected to interfere with the proceeding decisions, so the candidate may be considered for a re-test. Such cases are usually not considered for a statistical/detailed analysis of scores if required further.
Response Style: Genuine

Explanation of response style:

Genuine: No concerns or red flags just based on response style of candidate.

Social Desirability: If more than 75% of the questions are answered in a manner that indicates an attempt to appear in a falsely positive light or seem ‘socially desirable’.

Extreme Responding: If more than 75% of the questions are answered in a manner that indicates that an individual agrees with the statements at the lower and higher end consistently.

Central Tendency: If the middle response (‘neutral’) is selected more than 30% of the time.

Careless Responding: If more than 95% of the responses selected are from the same direction (i.e. if the candidate selected ‘most like me’ or ‘like me’ from the right-side statement or from the left-side statement alone).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation

Recommended

Strengths

Commercial Acumen: Is able to recognise trends in revenues and profitability, and is also able to utilize findings to support forecasting and budget-setting.

Critical Reasoning: Is also able to critically assess situations and identify informational gaps.

Decision Making: Is able to effectively analyze a scenario and choose among many possible solutions to a particular problem in any complicated situation.

Areas of Development

Problem Solving: Needs to be able to quickly identify patterns and the logical rule underlying those patterns to arrive at solutions. Also needs to be able to apply innovative ways to solve problems.

Creative Thinking: Needs to have an innovative approach to one's work, and should try to come up with novel and original methods at the workplace.

Stress Management: Should try to deal with workplace stress more effectively.

EVALUATION OF COMPETENCIES
Evaluation of Behavioural Competencies
Values shown in above chart are sten scores
Low Moderate High
Achievement Orientation: High

Likely to set challenging goals for oneself, and may often monitor one's own performance against the same. Likely to be intrinsically motivated to accomplish desired results, and may display high energy and enthusiasm when performing one's job. Likely to have a responsible and persistent attitude towards one's work. May be able to display perseverance while dealing with failures and obstacles at the workplace.

Self Confidence: Moderate

Somewhat likely to maintain an optimistic outlook towards life, and may occasionally have a high propensity of self-acceptance and self-adequacy. May at times get affected by what others think of oneself, and is somewhat likely to display self confidence and take a stand for what one feels is right. Moderately likely to reflect on one's own behaviour and be aware of one's limitations and areas of development. May sometimes understand one's strengths and leverage them effectively to accomplish one's goals.

Stress Management: Moderate

Moderately likely to display emotional resilience and may at times deal effectively with pressure by being calm and poised. May occasionally work efficiently and put in sufficient effort even when faced with setbacks. Somewhat likely to maintain optimal performance despite difficult situations. Moderately likely to use appropriate coping strategies to deal with workplace stress.

Dealing with Ambiguity: Moderate

Fairly likely to deal with novel and unknown situations in a comfortable manner. May occasionally be able to work on a task even when all the necessary details are unavailable. May sometimes demonstrate willingness to receive and use information as and when it comes. Moderately likely to be able to give relevant ideas and solutions even when limited information is provided. Somewhat likely to be open to changes in organizational structures, procedures and technology.

Creative Thinking: Low

Less likely to be innovative and may not always be able to design or implement new programs. Not very likely to be high on imagination and originality, seldom adding new dimensions to one's work. Not very likely to be open minded, and may rarely seek opportunities to try out new ideas and find novel ways of carrying out tasks so as to improve work processes. Less likely to use resources creatively, and may rarely be able to develop new and improved methods, systems and products that would enhance efficiency of one's work.

Risk Taking: Moderate

Somewhat likely to be open to working in situations that involve risk and may at times be able to take significant calculated risks to ensure benefits to the organization. May occasionally be able to deal with high risk situations by carefully analyzing all the available information. Somewhat likely to think ahead and foresee the potential success and failures associated with new ventures.

Initiative Taking: Moderate

Moderately likely to initiate tasks without being asked to do so and work above and beyond the expectations of a job. May occasionally seek out opportunities to take up additional responsibilities at work. Somewhat likely to look for areas where one can contribute actively. May at times demonstrate eagerness to work on new tasks and tasks that others don't want to take up.

Networking: Moderate

Somewhat likely to come across as a warm and friendly person and may at times be interested in socializing and building relationships to develop work opportunities. Moderately likely to develop effective relationships with others based on trust and mutual respect. Somewhat likely to gather information and resources from internal and external sources to ensure that tasks are completed efficiently. Moderately likely to be approachable and may at times maintain contact with immediate stakeholders on a regular basis.

Influence: Moderate

Somewhat likely to be good at influencing others. Moderately likely to provide necessary arguments to win over the other party. May at times be able to convince others of one's thoughts and viewpoints by answering questions effectively. Moderately likely to be concerned about others' perspectives and addresses them before they can bring it up themselves.

Evaluation of Cognitive Competencies
Values shown in above chart are sten scores
Low Moderate High
Commercial Acumen: High

Likely to have the ability to collect, analyze and scrutinize a large piece of data and take important business decisions based on the commercials involved. Also likely to have the ability to structure observations and analyze trends from different sources of data.

Critical Reasoning: High

Likely to have the ability to use rational thinking and critically assess situations to identify assumptions, draw inferences and evaluate arguments.

Problem Solving: Low

Unlikely to have the ability to quickly identify patterns and the logical rule underlying those patterns to arrive at solutions. May not be able to gather work related information quickly, from various sources and apply it in innovative ways to solve problems. May not have lateral thinking abilities and fluid intelligence. May not be creative in thinking and in integrating data logically to arrive at solutions.

Decision Making: High

Very likely to effectively analyze a scenario and choose among many possible solutions to a particular problem in any complicated situation. May have strong skills like common sense, intuition and reasoning. May have a very rational thinking and thus may be able to contemplate between positive and negative situations.

Test Log