We’ve been wrestling with this ever since MeQ was conceived. Part of it comes from our academic background in Organizational Psychology. As you know, with multi-person feedback tools, users will often see differences in opinions from one respondent to another. Technically, statisticians would say the tool is therefore not reliable. The truth is that these very gaps in perception are what make multi-person feedback so powerful. They allow us to see the differences in perceptions that others might have of us. Strong themes become apparent and outlier comments can be identified. That being said, MeQ could be checked for test-retest reliability using the same respondents on the same person and short time gaps of a few days.

Regarding validity, we see face validity as important for MeQ i.e. we need to be sure that MeQ is providing feedback on aspects that a person finds useful. Aspects a person might not normally get feedback on. ‘Invisible-to-self’ aspects like facial expressions or greeting styles that impact how people perceive and respond to a person. Aspects that will increase external self-awareness in a meaningful way.

The MBTI, has received a lot of criticism for being neither reliable nor valid, yet is still one of the most commonly used personality profiles used in the workplace. Adam Grant’s article on the MBTI is entertaining reading as it criticizes the broad use of the tool but his perspective also has gaps. From my personal perspective, as long as it is used to catalyze constructive reflection and not pigeon-hole people, the validity of the MBTI is beside the point.

Similarly, the usefulness of MeQ is at this stage more important to us for example:

  • Did it catalyze reflection, thought and action?
  • Did it raise awareness and help people improve in an area that was important to them? Have people that have used MeQ been able to use the feedback as either directly valuable or as a catalyst to a self-awareness journey they may otherwise not have taken?

These are the types of questions we plan to keep asking users, now and in the future.