You may have come across many models and tests of personality - some of the most commonly mentioned being DiSC and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). How do they differ from the five-factor model, that Alva bases its personality test on?

Like in any scientific discipline, there are many different theories in the science of personality. Likewise, there are many different ideas about how to best measure it. Two broad perspectives that are important to mention are type theory and trait theory.

One commonly mentioned school of thought in personality is that of personality types. In this sub-field, personality is described using more of an “either-or” language. You are either an extrovert or an introvert, you are either a blue individual or a red individual. Examples of tools that stem from this line of thinking are the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and DiSC.

These tools are widely spread and appreciated, mainly for their simplicity and somewhat playful approach to human differences. They are often seen as useful in e.g. team development. They are not, however, suitable to use in selection.

Another subfield of personality research, that clearly contrasts to the idea of types, is trait theory. The core idea of this school of thought is that there are a number of traits that all individuals have, but to a varying extent (as depicted in the image below). Depending on ‘how much’ you have of a specific trait, certain behaviors are more common and expected. The most commonly mentioned theory here is the five-factor model. Examples of test tools here are the NEO-PI, and Alva’s personality test. The main use case for these tools is rather selection (hiring) than development.

Trait theory is, within the scientific world, seen as the gold standard for how to best capture and describe personality. There are more studies proving this theory, with better scientific quality. There are more established, published researchers backing it up. This means trait tests have a higher proven value and credibility than type tests, at least if we go to scientific documentation.

The problem with type tests, but also their attractiveness, stems from the fact that they give a simplified image of reality. Obviously people are more complex than these tests paint them to be, but that is also the beauty of the tools. When things are simple, they are manageable.

However, this simplified image can’t help us predict future behavior, and therefore type tests are directly inappropriate in selection. Traits tests, on the other hand, give a more vivid and complex description of an individual. They capture more of the individual and are more tightly associated with how people are likely to come across and act in the future. Therefore, trait tests are more appropriate to be used in recruitment than type tests.

Want to learn more about the five-factor model of personality? Find it HERE.