Abstract Gold Stripe

We hear you have a question on the Growth Mindset programme. Let's see if the answer is not already here...

How different is your growth mindset concept from the originator's?

Dr. Carol Dweck did her research primarily on children and their behaviours based on their fundamental mindset. In her research, she identified 2 types of mindset, the growth and the fixed. Our concept is based on Dr. Dweck's finding, but we uncovered that instead of having a binary concept of either fixed or growth, we realised that this is a continuum, where there is a range of scores that move from one end to another. We also uncovered a transition zone, where people can exhibit both fixed and growth behaviours, depending on the context.

How does the 5 Dimensions link with Dr. Dweck's work?

It does not. This is something that we uncovered on our own. It was driven by our need to understand what drives the growth or fixed mindset, so that we can both calibrate it for individuals, and from there, propose developmental programmes targetted at specific outcomes.

How valid is your assessment?

Our assessment is valid so long as a person responds to the questions truthfully. If someone wants to affect the outcome of the assessment, they can do so very easily. However, one questions the reason for this, since this is purely developmental tool.

How reliable is your assessment?

A reliable assessment is one that will produce the same results for the same inputs over time, and in this case, it is 100% reliable.

Is your assessment verified and validated?

The results of our assessment have been verified by a third party PhD researcher who has a behavioural competency assessment platform. This allowed us to converge onto the 5 Dimensions that we now use. However, this has not been validated by the third party.

What happens if I disagree with the results of your assessment?

Because the validity of the assessment can vary due to the responder's truthfulness, the output may differ from current reality. It is for this reason that respondents must answer all statements truthfully.  If they have done so and still disagrees with the results, they are requested to accept it at face value first, and see if they can identify a situation or two where they did indeed show those behaviours. When they do that, they will understand that the report is indeed valid.