SUMMARY.
The HBDI, although reportedly receiving a uniformly positive response from participants of Herrmann's management training workshops, cannot make claims for meeting test standards that would recommend it to the public domain. Appropriate reliability and validity studies are not available. The instrument's format itself would appear to present problems for establishing the former, whereas the variety of claimed purposes and constructs would present difficulties for demonstrating the latter. Despite decades of research, there is only minimal credible evidence that the HBDI results in scores that are temporally stable and that the scores relate to meaningful nontest behavior. Otherinstruments, with established psychometric properties, are better suited for the individual applications that the HBDI claims. For instance, the Myers-Briggs Type indicator is a better instrument for assessing more general personality type or style. For career or occupational decision-making, the Hogan Personality Inventory (Hogan & Hogan, 1995) or the System of Interactive Guidance Information (SIGI-Plus; Katz, 1993), updated for adults, are better suited. Cognitive style is perhaps best assessed by the more established perceptual tasks such as the Embedded Figures Tests (Witkin, Oltman, Raskin & Karp, 1971) or by exploring more complex processes, such as Sternberg's thinking styles (1994).
[...]
References:
Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions. American Psychologist, 51(5), 469-477.
Katz, M. R. (1993). Computer-assisted career decision making: The guide in the machine. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Thinking styles: Theory and assessment at the interface between personality and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg & P. Ruzgis (Eds.), Intelligence and Personality. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E., & Karp, S. A. (1971). A manual for the Embedded Figures Tests. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.