Loading…
An example, not a real person
A report about someone who doesn't exist.
Before you pay for anything, you should be able to read one. So we made up a person, made up her answers, and left everything else exactly as it reads.
We have called her Meera. She is not real, the job is not real, and nothing on this page was measured about anybody.
What you are looking at
You shouldn’t have to take our word for it.
Almost everything you can read about an assessment was written by the people selling it. That is a poor way to work out whether to trust one.
So here is the thing itself. Meera is invented. Her answers were typed in by us, and her numbers were chosen by us too. What is real is the shape: what a report says, how it says it, and what it refuses to say.
She sat TIGER Core. 48 questions, about 15 minutes and often less, answered before you would have met her.
Meera isn’t real. The shape of the report is.
What comes back
Five readings, and the room around each one.
The same five on everyone you are considering, in the same words.
High is not better. Low is not worse. A careful auditor and a restless closer should not look the same, and we do not pretend they should.
Example only. Meera is invented and her answers were made up by us.
Trust
Our estimate: 71How honestly and fairly they deal with people when nobody is checking.
LowerWhere the score most likely sits: 64 to 78HigherInfluence
Our estimate: 58How readily they step forward, speak up, and move other people.
LowerWhere the score most likely sits: 50 to 66HigherGrit
Our estimate: 44Whether they keep going when work gets long, slow, or hard.
LowerWhere the score most likely sits: 36 to 52HigherExecution
Our estimate: 66Whether they deliver finished, careful work — not just effort.
LowerWhere the score most likely sits: 59 to 73HigherResilience
Our estimate: 52How steady they stay under pressure, and how quickly they recover.
LowerWhere the score most likely sits: 44 to 60Higher
Every number arrives with the range it most likely sits in. The range is part of the reading, not a footnote to it.
When there is less to go on, that range gets wider and you can see it get wider. It never quietly narrows to look tidier than the answers were.
Where to put your questions
One thing stands out. Two are worth pressing on.
Example only. Meera is invented and her answers were made up by us.
What stands out
Strongest within this person’s own profile. This compares them to themselves, not to other people, and it is an ordering rather than a measured difference between their readings.
Trust.
Her highest reading, and the one to lean on.
What is worth pressing on
Lowest within this profile, and worth probing in an interview. Again an ordering within this one person, not a measured gap.
Grit.
Her lowest. Ask about the long, dull middle of a piece of work.Resilience.
Ask about a week that went badly, and what the next one looked like.
Two of the five carry no label at all, and that gap is the design. A report that calls everything a strength has told you nothing.
Not everything is a number
Two parts of it have no number at all.
Example only. Meera is invented and her answers were made up by us.
Asked twice
We asked about several of these twice — once about how they are in general, and once about how they are when other people are relying on the outcome. Their answers shifted noticeably between the two. That can mean they adapt well to what a situation needs, or that meeting the demand costs them something; this evidence cannot tell those apart. Ask them for a recent example where a lot was riding on them, and listen for which one it was.
How they meet new ideas
In their answers, they go looking for new information and ask questions beyond what the job requires, and they tend to suggest new ways of doing things. Worth knowing when the work involves change or ambiguity. This reading describes how they engage with ideas and change. It is not part of the five scores above and is not something to rank people on.
Both are written the way you have just read them. Neither is scored, and neither is counted into anything.
When the answers do not hold together
Sometimes the honest answer is don’t use this.
Meera’s made-up sitting is a clean one. Plenty of real ones are not.
People rush. People answer on a train. People tick the same box down a page. When that happens the report says so, and the range on every reading gets wider on its face.
If it is bad enough, this is what you read instead of a result.
The answers in this sitting did not meet our quality checks, so this result should not be used for a decision. A free re-sit has been offered.
That is a delay for you and a second sitting for us. We would rather both than hand you a tidy number nobody should act on.
The line we do not cross
What you will not find anywhere in it.
No score out of ten.
There is no single number for a person here, and nothing that adds the five together into one.No pass mark, no ranking.
Nothing turns anybody down, and there is no setting anyone could switch on to make it.No percentage, no percentile.
You are never told she beat some proportion of other people, because we do not measure that.No profile name.
She is not given a type, a label or an animal to carry around afterwards.Interests are never a hiring signal.
If you are ever shown what somebody is drawn to, it is not part of this and it is not something to weigh when you are deciding about them.It never decides. You do.
TIGER informs. You review it, weigh everything else you know, apply your own judgement, comply with employment law, and make the call.
One more thing worth knowing, because it surprises people. The scoring never sees a name, a photo, an age, a school or a CV. Only the answers.
If this is useful
Then the next step is a conversation.
A Core sitting is set up by us, by hand, for a decision you are actually making. Tell us the role and where you are in the process.
Everything above is an example. Meera does not exist, her answers and her numbers were made up, and no real person's result appears anywhere on this page.