(877) 344-8612 Blog | Log In | Contact |

The Five Behaviors of a Cohesive Team® assessment has been well researched and full results can be found in The Five Behaviors Research Report.

Testing the assessment

The first sampling included 1,483 participants recruited to test the assessment during its trial phase. Later a second sample was taken of 5,004 participants who took the assessment as part of The Table Group’s team workshops. Overall, teams ranged in size from three to 33 people and participants had various demographics.

Team assessment

The five scales used for the team assessment showed good internal consistency. In other words, items on each scale correlate with each other.

Cronbach’s Alphas, a commonly used scale, range from .73 to .82 (N = 5004) and from .68 to .82 (N = 1483). This supports that the reliability of The Five Behaviors of a Cohesive Team assessment scales is satisfactory to good.

The trait of ethnicity was looked at specifically and was found not to play a meaningful role in determining how team members respond to the team survey.

Consulting Sample Scale Intercorrelations
Sample table from The Five Behaviors Research Report.

Individual assessment

The Everything DiSC model has been shown to be reliable, stable, and valid.

Results from a test-retest examination suggest that “results produced by the Everything DiSC assessment are quite stable over time. Consequently, test takers and test administrators should expect no more than small changes when the instrument is taken at different times.”

Summary statement from The Five Behaviors Research Report

“Evaluation of the Everything DiSC® assessment indicates that there is strong support for the reliability and validity of this assessment. Analyses suggest that the scales’ reliabilities are in the good-to-excellent range, with a median coefficient alpha of .87 and a median test-retest reliability of .86. Analyses examining the validity of the assessment were also very favorable. The circumplex structure of the assessment conforms well to expectations, as assessed by multidimensional scaling, scale intercorrelations, and factor analysis. The relationships among the eight scales are highly supportive of the circumplex structure and strongly reflect the expected pattern of correlations hypothesized under the DiSC model. Correlations between the Everything DiSC scales and the scales of the NEO PI-R and the 16PF provide additional support for the validity of the assessment.”