Mettl Assessment for Safety Conscious Behavior

Test Taken on:
Report Version as on:
Finish State: Normal
Registration Details
Email Address:
First Name: sample
Last Name: Not filled
Date of birth: Not filled
Experience: Not filled
Country: 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 Central Tendency 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: If questions are answered in a sufficiently varied manner.

Social Desirability: If questions are answered in a socially desirable manner.

Central Tendency: If many questions are answered as ‘neither agree nor disagree’.


Cautiously Recommended


Open to Learning: Likely to learn from one's experiences and mistakes and is likely to expose oneself to training and development opportunities regularly.

Attentiveness: Likely to be vigilant/attentive at one's workplace.

Cautiousness: Will be able to exercise caution when taking risks or dealing with hazardous equipments.

Areas of Development

Ability to Handle Emergencies: Needs to be proactive and confident when handling emergency situations.

Taking Responsibility: Needs to learn to take responsibility for one's actions and mistakes, and take corrective actions.

Emotional Stability: Should learn how to maintain one's calm and composure when faced with challenging tasks/situations, more often and regulate one's emotions and feelings accordingly.

Values shown in above chart are sten scores
Low Moderate High
Attentiveness: High

Likely to focus on the task at hand, often able to avoid disturbances or maximizing safety. Likely to be safety conscious or put up a high amount of resilience when doing repetitive/monotonous tasks. Likely to demonstrate alertness at all the times and less likely to get bored very easily. May have the ability to identify a potential threat or break the chain of events to avoid escalation of the error. Likely to develop skills to observe and manage the same.

Cautiousness: High

Likely to avoid risky situations. Rarely seeks adventure at work and is less likely to be casual, at the cost of one's and others safety. Less likely to be carefree when dealing with dangerous equipments at work and may at times likely to follow safety procedures outlined by one's organization. Likely to demonstrate regards for one's safety and rarely executes tasks without any caution, and thinking carefully through the possible consequences of one's actions.

Rule Conscientiousness: Moderate

Moderately likely to follow instructions and directions to complete tasks assigned to oneself. Somewhat likely to adhere to the established systems and processes in one's organization, strictly. Somewhat likely to be highly ignorant about the implications of non adherence to SOPs. Somewhat likely to be aware of the imminent danger to one's life or pay attention to the same. Tends to be somewhat serious about following the safety procedures outlined by one's organization.

Ability to Handle Emergencies: Low

Not likely to anticipate hazards and prepare for the same. May not be able to effectively plan prevention techniques for potential dangers to one's safety. Not likely to have confidence in one’s own ability to handle an emergency situation, in a calm and relaxed manner. Gets highly overwhelmed when put through unseen/ambiguous situations and may not be able to use available resources to mitigate the consequences of hazards.

Self Management
Values shown in above chart are sten scores
Low Moderate High
Open to Learning: High

Likely to display a high level of curiosity to learn new things even beyond one’s own expertise. Likely to to learn from one's mistakes. Likely to effectively identify and understand one’s shortcomings and the need to up-skill. Likely to take initiatives, willingly and make significant efforts to up-skill oneself. Seeks constant feedback on one's performance. Likely to understand importance of training to adopt safer procedures or techniques of working.

Emotional Stability: Moderate

Moderately likely to remain calm, thereby experiencing high levels of anxiety, anger and hostility in times of stress. Gets overwhelmed sometimes, when unable to take control of a challenging situation. Takes impulsive decisions, at times. May be able to provide direction in crisis situations, occasionally. At times, experiences emotional upheaval and overreacts when dealing with potentially violent people or situations, causing harm to oneself and others.

Pioneering Safety
Values shown in above chart are sten scores
Low Moderate High
Taking Responsibility: Low

Not likely to be responsible and active at work and may rarely ensure to follow safety procedures in one's work. Less likely to accepts when mistakes are done and take corrective actions to rectify them immediately. Less likely to take responsibility for guiding co-workers when dealing with hazardous equipments and warn them of adverse consequences in case of negligence.

Test Log