Use the Personality Index in Quelixa

How someone works

Lina: Tuesday the second of February. The Dubai hub needs one more person: a team lead for the four specialists.

Amara Okafor: Skills we can test. What I need to know is how they lead people under pressure.

James Whitfield: Then we ask it properly — the same questions for everyone, and we tell them how much it counts.

Lina: That is this chapter: the Personality Index — a work-style questionnaire, what it measures, and how much weight it should carry.

Lina: A work-style questionnaire has no right answers. It describes how someone says they work, and compares that with what the role needs — as one input, never the decision.

A profile, not a score

Lina: Four ideas.

Lina: One hundred short statements — agree or disagree — ten for each of ten traits.

Lina: The result is a profile: each trait lands somewhere between zero and a hundred. Nobody passes or fails.

David: So what makes a result good?

Lina: Only the role. Each job post says which range fits it, and how much each trait matters.

Lina: And the company chooses the weight. At zero per cent, the profile only helps the panel prepare the interview.

Ten traits

Lina: These are the ten traits.

Lina: Each one runs between two ends that are both fine: team leadership goes from contributes to takes the lead.

Lina: Job continuity from seeks variety to stays the course.

David: Neither end is the wrong one.

Lina: Neither. It depends on the job. And each trait has ten statements behind it.

The questionnaire

Lina: The questionnaire itself is an online paper of a different kind: no right answers.

David: Why ten for each?

Lina: Because one statement can be misread. Ten for each trait,

Lina: and the note on the right is the rule: it counts in the merit score only where a job post gives it a weight — and then as the match to that job's target profile.

Lina: Candidates are told to answer as they usually are, not as they think they should be.

Switched on for one post

David: Is it switched on for every job?

Lina: Only where someone chooses. On the team lead post, Elena switches it on.

Lina: The questionnaire,

Lina: sent automatically when an application passes scrutiny, with five days to answer,

Lina: and a weight of fifteen per cent.

David: Why fifteen and not thirty?

Lina: Enough to matter, not enough to outvote the interview.

Lina: Below that, the target profile for this role.

What this role needs

Lina: Team leadership from sixty up — key to the role: this person leads four specialists from day one.

Lina: Empathy, key as well.

David: And the other five traits?

Lina: Still measured, still shown to the panel — just not part of the match.

David: Why stop collaboration at ninety?

Lina: Because a lead who takes every decision to the group is not what Amara asked for. A range is what fits; more is not always better.

Where fifteen per cent comes from

Lina: The weights have to add up. Test thirty, interview fifty-five,

Lina: and with the profile's fifteen, a hundred.

David: So the merit score still reads as a percentage.

Lina: The minimums are the usual ones: four years' experience, a bachelor's degree.

Bonus marks

Lina: And on top of the weights, bonus marks, each with a cap.

Lina: One mark for each year beyond the four required, up to four marks.

Lina: Two marks each for Arabic and French — useful in Dubai, not required.

David: So the extras can't outweigh the assessment.

Lina: Capped, and published with the post.

Four rules worth keeping

Lina: A few rules make this fair.

Lina: Candidates are told before they answer — what it is and how much it counts.

Lina: The target is a range that fits the role, set before anyone applies.

David: And it never decides on its own.

Lina: Never. And if a company is not comfortable with it counting at all, zero per cent is a perfectly good setting.

Said up front

Lina: Monday the eighth: Layla passed scrutiny this morning. Her application page says exactly what comes next.

Lina: A hundred statements, no right or wrong answers, and the match to this role counts fifteen per cent.

David: Before she's answered a single one.

Lina: The invitation is in her updates: complete it within five days.

Fifteen minutes

Layla Haddad: One hundred statements, no right answers. Fine — let's be honest about it.

Lina: Half past seven in Dubai. Layla opens the questionnaire.

The invitation

Lina: The email that came at five past ten.

Lina: How many statements, about how long, the date to finish by — and one button.

Before she starts

Lina: A hundred statements, thirty minutes, and the closing date.

Lina: The line that matters most: there are no right or wrong answers.

Lina: She ticks that she will answer on her own, as she usually is.

One statement at a time

Lina: One statement at a time: how far do you agree?

Lina: Five answers, from strongly disagree to strongly agree.

David: Some of them are written the other way round?

Lina: Half of them — agreeing with this one means less drive, not more. It keeps people from agreeing with everything.

David: And if her connection drops?

Lina: Every answer is saved the moment she gives it.

Handing it in

Lina: Sixteen minutes later: a hundred of a hundred, and she hands it in.

Her answers, in her own words

Lina: And straight away she sees her own profile — in words, trait by trait.

David: She gets to see it before the panel does?

Lina: She sees what she said about herself. Not the target, not the score — those stay with the panel.

Four profiles

Elena Novak: All four have answered. One of them in three minutes.

James Whitfield: Three minutes for a hundred statements? Let's see what that looks like.

Lina: Wednesday morning. Elena opens the applications — still blind at scrutiny.

Four applicants, four codes

Lina: Four applicants for the team lead post, under codes.

David: Still no names at this stage.

Lina: Not until scrutiny is over — the profile is read blind too.

One profile

Lina: One of them — Layla, though Elena only sees a code.

Lina: Profile match: a hundred per cent. Every trait inside its target range.

Lina: Each bar is a trait, the shaded band is the range the post asked for, and the dot is where her answers put her.

David: How does it know the answers are real?

Lina: Two checks. Consistency: statements about the same trait were answered the same way — seventy-five.

Lina: And pace: sixteen minutes, about nine seconds a statement.

The three-minute one

Lina: And the three-minute one.

Lina: One point eight seconds a statement — flagged,

Lina: and a consistency of thirty-two: the same trait answered one way, then the other.

David: But the match is still ninety-four per cent.

Lina: Because random answers land in the middle, and the middle sits inside most ranges. That is exactly why flagged answers do not count: the note says this match adds nothing to the merit score.

Lina: Two traits even fall below the range the post asked for.

David: Is he out, then?

Lina: No. The questionnaire doesn't reject anyone. It simply stops counting, and the panel finds out more.

Questions for the panel

Lina: What the profile is best at is this: for every trait outside the range, a question for the interview.

Lina: Team leadership: tell us about a time you had to take charge of a group without a formal title.

David: So the panel asks, instead of assuming.

Lina: Exactly. The questionnaire opens a conversation; the interview settles it.

Three things to keep

Lina: Three things to keep.

Lina: It is a profile against ranges that fit this role — not a verdict on a person.

Lina: Answers are checked before they count, and rushed or inconsistent ones earn nothing.

David: And the people in the room still decide.

Lina: Every gap becomes a question for them.

The questions themselves

Amara Okafor: Those interview questions are good. Can every candidate get the same ones?

Elena Novak: That's what an interview kit is for.

Lina: Next chapter: structured interview kits — the same questions, anchored ratings, and a panel that marks apart.

Lina: That was the Personality Index. See you in chapter five.