Show HN: Better than Myers-Briggs? 2min assessment based on Stanford research

Show HN: Better than Myers-Briggs? 2min assessment based on Stanford research(notion.so)

20 points by superzadeh 5 years ago | 11 comments

superzadeh 5 years ago |

Bunch Co-Founder and CTO here.

We built an iOS app for personalized 2-minute leadership tips (think Duolingo for learning how to lead or just work better in teams).

One of the challenges we've run into is the fact that there are several different working styles - there's no universal "right" way to lead. We found an interesting way to solve this problem using a model from Stanford. Here's a quick write up, that I hope you'll find interesting both from a technical perspective and for leading/building teams.

zeek21 5 years ago |

Looks interesting. I can see this picking up. I'm wondering though, what's the difference between this and other tests? I've gone through many different ones and always a bit skeptical.

superzadeh 5 years ago | |

yeah there are sooo many, you are right to be sceptical, basically we partnered with this Prof. from Stanford (https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/charle...) and used his model that measures what's important to people at work (aka Mindset Norms) instead of using a generic personality test.

That way it is actually saying something about your priorities at work and is more directly linked to your behavior at work.

m4tchs 5 years ago |

What’s the difference between this and personality profiling? I know many of those personality tests aren't scientific, so how this one differs from, for example, tests like 16 personalities?

superzadeh 5 years ago | |

TLDR; - it's not fixed -> but can vary over time with new jobs, new teams - it's based on the measurement of what matters to you (your norms), not WHO you are acc. to a personality test - it's also more recent research

16 personalities is a typical personality test, based on a trait-based approach: Myers-Briggs (originally based on Jung's theory). The Stanford model we use is based on the work of Prof. Charles O'Reilly, who was studying team and company culture and how that relates to performance and satisfaction at work.

So the model we used in the product basically measures more "what's important to you at work" and what your priorities are rather than "who you are" based on a pesonality model.

That also means that your mindset can change over the course of even just a few weeks, while personality is something more stable.

PragmaticPulp 5 years ago |

Can you include a link to the research from Stanford?

It feels strange to see vague claims that this is based on “model from Stanford” with zero citations or even attribution to the model.

superzadeh 5 years ago | |

Oh yes! Absolutely, it's actually there, but a bit buried, thanks for calling that out, will work it into the top of the article:

Prof. Charles O'Reilly -> https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/charle...

The model we're using is called: OCP (Organizational Culture Profiling => which measures the norms on individual, team and company level) and here are a few papers that are using it too: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1059601114550713 https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5785r45z

Summary of the model by our team -> On 14 archetypes: https://bunch.ai/blog/14-leadership-types/ On company culture: https://bunch.ai/blog/company-culture/

destromas 5 years ago |

Concept seems pretty nice! As you guys developed the iOS app, but any plan for Android platform? Or maybe, Hybrid app with Flutter or ReactNative?

superzadeh 5 years ago | |

We are actually kicking off an Android app in January, and we want to keep native app development (so far, we’ve seen that it helps us in building better UX, even if it takes more effort)

Charles_Bregho 5 years ago |

How is it better than Myers-Briggs actually?

superzadeh 5 years ago | |

Ah good question! Myers-Briggs is measuring personality, which is kinda stable overtime, you can't change it easily, this model measures Norms/Mindset, that is actually something you can influence + there is lots of critique around the fact that Myers-Briggs is just made up and not really actually replicable (so not really reliable/scientific).