Click Here for the latest
CERT and Belbin news
If you find this Belbin information website useful please support the sponsor by using CERT for all your Belbin products and services
for details
This Belbin Team Role and Work Role information site is sponsored by CERT Consultancy & Training
It is edited by Barrie Watson, a member of Belbin Associates. The purpose of the site is to provide free information for people using or planning to use Meredith Belbin's Team Role model and other Belbin tools techniques and philosophies.
Please Note: The answers and information provided on this website represent my own personal views and opinions, except where stated otherwise.
Articles and research relating to the Belbin methodology
About the reliability and validity of Belbin assessments and the e-interplace computer system
Reliability and validity are concepts commonly used in evaluating Psychometric Tests.
Reliability is a measure of the internal consistency of a test, while validity relates to whether a test measures what it purports to measure.
Internal consistency is highest where test items are repeated, but this narrows their focus.
Rather than repeating questions, or dealing with items that are virtually identical, Belbin assessments and the e-interplace system seeks to find clusters of useful forms of related behaviour. For example, the Shaper cluster refers to an individual who is challenging, competitive, hard driving, tough and outspoken. However, that does not mean that everyone who is competitive happens to be outspoken.
Most Psychometric Tests rely on self-reporting. But here the behaviour assumed may not correspond with what others observe. The strength of the latest Belbin methodology lies in its emphasis on validity in the way that the advisory and diagnostic reports take account of a consensus on observed behaviour. This can be made evident by looking at how far the Observers agree with each other. Formal correlations are, however, difficult to calculate as Observers are not required to make any fixed number of responses. Genuine responses are more easily obtained, and are more valuable, when forced choices are avoided. Differences in perception between the self and others provide valuable leads for action.
The demands of jobs also have to be taken into account when assessing validity since the many varied forms of behaviour can be seen as effective or ineffective according to the context. Here the fit between the profile of the individual and the profile of the job plays a key consideration.
For more information on the reliability and validity of Belbin Team Role profiling please click here
On this page you will find information and articles relating to the Belbin methodology that are not covered in the FAQ’s pages.
How Belbin assessments differ from psychometric testing.
Many people contact me and ask me how they can the use the Belbin psychometric assessments or ask me why I think it is better than other forms of psychometric profiling. To help answer these and similar questions I wrote an article which might be helpful in shedding some light on how Belbin Team Role Profiling differs from psychometric profiling. If you would like to download it Click Here.
Using Belbin for career planning
It is probably true to say that the vast majority of people regard Belbin Team Role profiling as a team building tool. While there is no denying that this is and will continue to be a valuable use of the methodology I always encourage people to widen the uses and applications. After all, once you have incurred the cost of obtaining a Belbin report you may as well make the most of it. So, it is in this spirit that I scribbled a few works on how Belbin can be used for career planning. If you would like to see this article please Click Here and do let me have your views and comments.
MTR-i Versus Belbin
In the January 2002 edition of Training Journal Steve Myers compared the MTR-i team role model with Belbin and gave some useful information relating to the issue of "stretch" - the difference between a person's preferred and actual team roles.
Unfortunately the article contained some inaccuracies in the way it made comparisons between MTR-i and Belbin.
The letter below was sent to the editor of Training Journal to ensure readers of the publication were made aware of the inaccuracies and could make a proper comparison between the two models.
Dear Editor
I have just read the article by Steve Myers in the January edition of Training Journal on the MTR-i questionnaire.
While I commend the author for dealing with the important issue of "stretch" between preferred and current team roles there are some inaccuracies in the article. These relate to the comparisons he makes with the Belbin methodology.
Having used the Belbin Team Role model and the Interplace computer system with great success in numerous countries around the world for more than 15 years I would like to address these inaccuracies by making your readers aware of the following points:
1. No qualification criteria apply to people wishing to use the Belbin questionnaires. This is because the scoring and the creation of the 20 plus reports available is managed by the Interplace software. This is a highly sophisticated "expert" system now in its sixth generation. Also, the Belbin Team Role model is based on experimental work rather than psychological theory and thus, no psychological qualifications are required.
2. The Belbin Interplace system does deal with what Steve Myers describes as the "stretch" between the preferred and current team role. In fact it does this in a very comprehensive and efficient way by using four questionnaires:
a) The Self Perception Inventory which elicits what people believe to be their natural preferences.
b) The Observer Assessment which asks work colleagues to report behaviours they have observed.
c) The Job Requirement and Job Observation assessments which elicit the behavioural demands of the job.
The Interplace system uses the above information to produce text, graphical and numerical advisory and diagnostic reports dealing with the issue of "stretch".
I hope you will see fit to publish this letter in the next edition of Training Journal in order to preserve the high integrity of your excellent publication.
Yours sincerely
Barrie Watson
Managing Director
CERT Consultancy & Training
Footnote: The above letter was published in the March 2002 edition of Training Journal.