Over 25 years ago, behavioral scientists Dr. Janice Presser and Dr. Jack Gerber developed ‘Teamability’, — the first software technology that produces metrics that have not been available through any other form of assessment–namely, role-based assessments that measure compatibility in the workplace by targeting one of ten defined roles an individual is innately predisposed to fill, and how each role interacts with other individuals and within a team as a whole.

Teamability is designed to measure compatibility, that is, how an individual interacts with others, and how that individual interacts within a team. Including whether or not they are inclined to work positively and constructively with others, and in what way(s) they are inclined to serve the needs of a team. Distinguishing, for example, between individuals who ‘envision the future’ from those who ‘execute immediate objectives’ from those who are more inclined to ‘help others’, etc. Specifically, Teamability measures: ROLE: Targets which one of ten roles an individual is ideally suited for in order to serve the specific needs of an organization. COHERENCE: Defines which roles work in symphony with others and within a team, to create a rewarding and productive work environment, even during times of high stress, pressure and change. TEAMING CHARACTERISTICS: Provides greater insight into the many variables that influence performance based upon the individual style one has when relating to others, subject to situational context.

Putting a person with high Coherence in a position that fits the ‘Role’ their best suited to fill, is a recipe for individual success. Building teams of highly Coherent people— including the ‘right mix of Roles’ that best meet the team’s objectives—is the foundation for ‘Coherent Human Infrastructure’, which is a state of productive synergy that can trigger peak performance. The Gabriel Institute has categorized and demonstrated the efficacy of Role Ratios, which integrate qualitative and quantitative methods for evaluating and strengthening an organization’s human infrastructure. We call these metrics ‘CHI Indicators’ (pronounced ‘key’ or ‘chee’ as in ‘life‐force’). They include: Role: a person’s affinity for specific modes of service to the needs of a team. Coherence: expressed as positive, flexible, constructive teaming behaviors. Teaming Characteristics: individual styles of responding and relating to others, subject to situational context. Role-respect: the unique manner in which people of different Roles experience appreciation and respect. Role-pairing: known, replicable synergies between specific Roles. Role-fit: an appropriate match between a person’s Role and their assigned set of job responsibilities. Team-fit: structuring a team to include the Roles that are best‐fit to the team’s mission. Through analysis of individual and team strengths and weaknesses, along with potential opportunities and threats, use of the CHI Indicators will guide realignment or reassignment of team members, stimulate overall team performance, and advance the many benefits of Coherent Human Infrastructure.

Personality testing is focused on the measurement of specific personality factors (traits) of the individual: the person’s relative levels of extraversion/introversion, judgment/intuition, and so on. The results of a personality test are expressed as quantitative data, which is compared against data obtained from various populations (such as people in Sales or Executive Management). In contrast, the Teamability experience was designed to measure and predict how people will interact with other people, and the extent of their attraction to serving the needs of their group. Teamability captures qualitative measurements of behavior as it occurs in the context of team activity, using a form of behavioral simulation. Both forms of testing are valid, but where personality test results are like X‐ray films— full of compartmentalized detail—a Teamability report is more like a sonogram (ultrasound) video, because it shows how a person will behave when joining and interacting with team members in various situations. The information in Teamability reports is directly aligned with functional, value‐creating activity.

Yes, definitely. This is the essence of a qualitative behavior assessment. Throughout the development of Teamability, validation was obtained by comparing Teamability results with direct observation and with observation reports submitted by the Teamability subject’s supervisor(s). Is training required to administer the experience and to interpret the assessment? And if so, are there any additional costs associated? No training is required to supervise the assessment, as it is a self‐directed online experience. Reports describe behavior in context, using straightforward language that requires no interpretation. However, TGI provides a 4‐hour training series (at no cost) to customers who wish to acquire a deeper understanding of the instrument and its use.

Most candidates complete the assessment in one sitting, and complete it within 45 to 60 minutes. However, Teamability is not a timed test, and users may log out and return later. The process is simple: The candidate receives an automatically generated email containing a username and password along with a link to the TGI Portal where they will create their own password and begin their assessment.

There are Teamability Reports for management decision-making (M-D) and self-coaching (S-D). They are written in plain language and do not require interpretation.

Upon completion of the assessment, the report is instantly available.

Yes. Throughout all three iterations of its development, Teamability results were examined for evidence of bias (age, race, gender, nationality, culture), and no indication of bias was found. As noted above, no claims of bias have ever been filed, but a detailed examination of the job‐assessment landscape had this to say: “Personality Tests in Jeopardy: An Evaluation of the Seventh Circuit’s Decision in Karraker v. Rent-A-Center and its Implications on the Future Use of Personality Tests in Preemployment Screening” by Jennifer Gonzales-Frisbie, University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law, Fall 2006): I comparing The Gabriel Institute’s Role-based Assessment to ordinary personality and personality/IQ testing, the report states: “The Role-Based Assessment provides an alternative method of pre-employment screening that does not carry the same risk of violating the ADA*.” (p 202) Comparing the risks of other forms of testing to Teamability: “Measuring people by what amount of a trait they encompass does not tell you much about who they are and how they work... The problem with other assessments and tests is that they focus on what a subject does not have rather than on what a subject does have... In short, the Role-Based Assessment works to get people into jobs and not into litigation.” (p. 204) “Employers throughout the country should be wary of using personality tests and should evaluate them carefully to confirm that they are used in compliance with the law. Given how unsettled the issue is in the courts, the negative precedent that now stands, and the lack of evidence of the effectiveness of the tests employers should consider other methods of pre-employment screening. The Role-Based Assessment proves to be a viable alternative. Its technique has not only proven to be successful in the employment process but also in being in compliance with the ADA.” (p. 205) *note: ADA is the Americans with Disabilities Act

Results are presented in clear, simple, straightforward text reports, typically 6 to 8 pages long. Managers and Executives can easily understand and derive value from a report without the assistance of a consultant or analyst.

Yes. Teamability reports contain material that is very useful for both individual and team coaching, and also for self‐development, motivation, and management decision‐making. The Management‐directed report (MD‐1) is a concise overview of Coherence, Role, and Teaming Characteristics, including management and coaching recommendations as well as cautionary comments—if any are present. MD‐1 reports are generally not provided to the individual. The Self‐directed report (SD‐1) is designed to benefit the assessment‐taker, providing a positive experience that enhances the value of working on a team. The report contains links to online resources, such as information on how to respect and successfully interact with team members who have different Roles. Most Teamability users purchase the SD‐ 1 reports for the person who is actually hired (or promoted), for team members engaged in teambuilding initiatives, and as personalized reference material for outplacement packages. The content of each type of report is derived from responses entered by the person taking the RBA, and thus all reports (both MD‐1 and SD‐1) are comprised of information that is unique to each individual.

The online TGI Portal System is accessible via standard Web browsers. It is used by the person(s) responsible for setting up Teamability. The portal enables designated Administrators to assign reports, set preferences, retrieve reports (or have them automatically sent to the designated recipient), and view account status. After a new TGI Portal account has been set up by TGI Client Services, the customer takes control over the assignment of assessments and reports‐delivery preferences. However, the portal’s automated functions make the actual assessment process ‘hands off’ from the customer’s point of view. After the assessment‐taker’s basic information has been entered (name, email address, report types needed), the TGI Portal sends email notification containing a login and instructions. Assessments are conducted online on the taker’s schedule. No monitoring or proctoring is required. When the candidate has completed the Teamability experience, the TGI diagnostic engine immediately generates a report. The portal system will then send notice of completion to the designated Point of Contact (typically someone in an HR or other management position). This notice can either contain the report, or (for tighter security) can advise the POC to enter the TGI Portal and retrieve the report.

TGI Teamability is the capstone of three cycles of research, development, and commercial use, beginning in 1988 with the Executive Behavior Assessment (EBA). As the name implies, this assessment focused on leadership behaviors. A second iteration, the Enhanced EBA, was launched in 1998. Subsequent work verified that the behaviors being measured are found in teams at any level of an organization, leading to the development, revalidation, and launch of Teamability as an online assessment in late 2009.

Yes. Teamability is currently available in U.S. English, Korean, and Portuguese. Spanish and French versions are planned.

There is no licensing agreement, nor is there a time commitment. We have found that as people become familiar with our Teamabiliity reports—and with the business benefits that result from improved team synergy—that customer retention improves over time without the use of contracts, penalties, or incentives.