A self-administered assessment that profiles how you naturally operate, how you actually behave at work, and what the gap between the two predicts about your performance under pressure.
What this is built on — and how it relates to instruments you may know
The territory here overlaps with MBTI, Insights Discovery, and the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument — the patterns those tools surface are real, and you'll recognise them. The foundation is different, though: personality is measured against the Five-Factor Model, the most empirically-validated framework in workplace psychology, rather than Jungian type categories. And it adds one dimension the recognised instruments don't measure: the gap between who you naturally are and how you actually perform at work.
Five-Factor Model (Costa & McCrae) — personality items adapted from the public-domain International Personality Item Pool (IPIP).
Blake-Mouton Managerial Grid (1964) — the five conflict modes; the same two-axis foundation TKI is built on.
Kahler's five drivers (Kahler & Capers, 1974; Kahler, 1975) — reframed positively as working styles, following Julie Hay (1993).
Leadership-derailment research — Robert and Joyce Hogan's dark-side work (Hogan Development Survey, 1997; Hogan & Hogan, 2001) and the Center for Creative Leadership studies (McCall & Lombardo, 1983): strengths overused under pressure are what take careers off the rails.
Transactional Analysis (Berne, 1961) — research mode adds an ego-state "voice under pressure" profile.
The working-styles and derailment readings are concept-level derivations from this instrument's own scores — no proprietary questionnaire items are used, and neither is a substitute for the original assessments. The synthesis — natural-vs-at-work stretch, individualised strengths and potential derailers, bridging guidance, and trainer-flagged patterns — is Ad Astra Human Performance's own integration.
The stretch dimension — and why it matters under pressure
Under pressure, the role-mask collapses back toward natural disposition. An introvert performing an extraverted role doesn't become extraverted — they sustain a performance, and when stress rises, fatigue accumulates, or conflict erupts, the gap between performed style and natural disposition is where the strain shows, often visibly and at the worst moment.
Most personality instruments measure either who you are at rest or how you behave in role. They don't measure the daily energy cost of operating in a way that doesn't match your default — the stretch — and they don't predict which behaviours will hold and which will retreat when the pressure comes on.
It's how we perform, as well as who we natively are, that matters under pressure. The stretch reading in this assessment makes that gap visible before it shows up in a critical moment — so individuals and teams can design around it rather than be surprised by it.
Choose a mode
What you'll get
Your five-factor profile — your standing on Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability, with high-pole and low-pole strengths for each.
Stretch profile — the gap between your natural disposition and how you actually behave at work; the dimension that predicts how you'll behave under pressure.
Individualised strengths — the named strengths you actually scored on, drawn from your specific item endorsements.
Potential derailers — for each strength you scored, how that strength may, in the eyes of others, derail the message you intend.
Working styles — your pull toward Kahler's five working styles (Be Perfect, Be Strong, Hurry Up, Please Others, Try Hard), each read as a strength with a pressure pattern attached.
Under-pressure derailment lens — informed by Hogan and CCL derailment research: which of your dispositions is most likely to overextend when pressure rises, and what that looks like to others.
Bridging guidance — for each dimension where you score strongly, how to work with colleagues whose disposition differs.
Conflict-style profile across five Blake-Mouton modes, read as a whole-profile pattern rather than just highest and lowest.
(Research mode) Transactional Analysis ego-state profile and what it predicts about your voice under pressure.
Trainer-flagged patterns — combinations of scores that warrant specific development conversations.
Print-ready report and a shareable code for retaking or comparing later.
No data leaves this page. Everything runs locally in your browser.
Have a code from a previous session? Restore it.
Section 1 of 3 — Natural styleQ 1 / 68
Question text goes here.
Choose the option more typical of you
Before you read this — what it is, and what it isn't
This is not "who you are." It is simply how you have presented at this moment, and how you tend to present in your work role. It is not a definition of your personality — it is an awareness tool: a picture of your strengths, of how people with different dispositions may perceive those strengths, and of how you might in turn perceive theirs.
The aim is to foster greater understanding of human mindsets, and to aid communication — by understanding ourselves and others a little better. Read it lightly, hold it loosely, and use it as a starting point for conversation rather than a verdict.
Profile
Description.
Your five-factor profile
Each bar shows your standing on one of the Big Five dimensions. The coloured tick marks where you scored; the tinted fill from the centre line toward that tick gives a visual sense of magnitude. A tick on the centre line means you scored balanced — drawing on both poles depending on context. Both poles of every dimension have legitimate workplace strengths — what matters is how each disposition lands in context.
Stretch profile: natural style vs at-work style
For each dimension, the coloured tick shows where you naturally sit; the gold dot shows where you actually behave at work. The gap between the two is your stretch — the daily energy cost of operating in a way that doesn't match your default. Stretch is the dimension that predicts how you'll behave under pressure: when stress, fatigue, or conflict rise, the role-mask tends to collapse back toward natural disposition. Reading your stretch now is reading the most likely shape of your pressure response in advance.
Natural dispositionAt-work behaviour
Overall stretch
Your individualised strengths and their potential derailers
Dimensions are grouped by how strongly they showed up in your responses. The strong-disposition section is where the strengths and potential derailers are most likely to be useful in development conversations; balanced dimensions are shown for completeness but represent flexibility rather than a fixed default.
A word on the potential derailers
The potential derailers below are not things you have displayed negatively, and they are not faults. They are called potential derailers deliberately: each one is a way a genuine strength of yours may, in the eyes of others, derail the message you intend — particularly with colleagues wired unlike you. The same quality that helps in one pairing may land as something you never meant in another. This framing follows the leadership-derailment research tradition (Hogan; McCall & Lombardo): careers are rarely derailed by weaknesses — they are derailed by strengths overused, in the wrong context, or under pressure. Treat each one as a possibility to be aware of, not a behaviour you are being accused of.
Your working styles — the five drivers
In the Transactional Analysis tradition, Taibi Kahler (1974, 1975) identified five "drivers" — internalised working patterns that shape how we deliver under everyday conditions and, importantly, which pattern intensifies first when pressure rises. Julie Hay (1993) reframed them positively as working styles: each one is a genuine workplace asset with a recognisable pressure signature attached. Most people carry one or two dominant styles.
The pulls below are derived from your dimension and conflict scores, not from Kahler's own questionnaire — read them as indicative hypotheses to test against your experience, not measurements.
Under pressure — the derailment lens
Robert and Joyce Hogan's research into the "dark side" of personality (Hogan Development Survey, 1997; Hogan & Hogan, 2001), building on the Center for Creative Leadership derailment studies (McCall & Lombardo, 1983), reached a finding that reshaped leadership development: managers rarely derail because of missing skills. They derail because strengths overextend — usually when pressure is high and self-monitoring is low — and the overextension is visible to everyone except the person doing it.
This section reads your profile through that lens. It connects directly to your stretch profile above: the moments when the role-mask collapses back toward natural disposition are precisely the moments when derailment behaviours surface.
This is a concept-level reading derived from your scores on this instrument. It does not use or reproduce the Hogan Development Survey, and a full dark-side profile requires the Hogan assessment itself.
Conflict style — your five-mode profile
How you tend to behave when interests diverge. The five modes are derived from the Blake-Mouton Managerial Grid (1964), which maps behaviour against two axes: concern for results and concern for people. There is no single "best" mode — leadership effectiveness is using each one when the situation calls for it.
What this suggests for you
Transactional Analysis — ego-state profile
Research module
Eric Berne's framework (1961) maps the "voice" you tend to operate from. The healthy default for adult-to-adult leadership dialogue is the Adult state. The other states are not bad — they're useful in moderation, dangerous in dominance.
What this predicts under pressure
Working across difference — bridging & relational friction
Where your disposition leans strongly, this brings together two things that belong together: the friction that can run in both directions when you work with someone on the opposite pole, and the bridging moves that ease it. So for each strong disposition you get the whole picture in one place — what may grate, what you may project, and what to actually do about both. It is derived from your disposition, conflict-style and ego-state scores — not a separate emotional-intelligence test. Throughout, "they" means a disposition type, never a named individual, and none of it is a judgement on any real relationship — only the patterns worth watching for.
Integrated reflection
Cross-module synthesis, EQ moves, and trainer notes. Trainer notes appear only when specific patterns are detected across your scores — they highlight combinations worth surfacing in 1:1 coaching or team debriefs.
A self-report instrument intended for development and team dialogue, not for hiring or selection. Personality items are adapted from the public-domain International Personality Item Pool (IPIP). The instrument draws on the Five-Factor Model (Costa & McCrae, 1992), the Blake-Mouton Managerial Grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964), and Transactional Analysis (Berne, 1961). The working-styles reading is informed by Taibi Kahler's driver research (Kahler & Capers, 1974; Kahler, 1975) and Julie Hay's working-styles reframing (1993); the derailment lens is informed by Robert and Joyce Hogan's dark-side leadership research (Hogan Development Survey, 1997; Hogan & Hogan, 2001) and the Center for Creative Leadership derailment studies (McCall & Lombardo, 1983). Both are concept-level derivations from this instrument's own scores; no proprietary items from those instruments are used, and neither substitutes for the original assessments. The integration, narrative, and trainer-flagged patterns are Ad Astra Human Performance's own work.