XIQ - the personality driven sales and marketing platform
Discussion
Does anyone here use XIQ when considering how to approach customers and potential customers? For those of you that dont know it is a software package that mines various data sources to create a profile for you of an individual who you may be wanting to do business with so that you know how to approach them in a positive way.
https://xiqinc.com/
Being the inquisitive person I am i put my own details in and was horrified with the report it spat out. It is not me at all. The data it mines comes from Linkedin initially and then any other social media you use with the same email address as your linkedin profile. All you have to do is search first name, surname and company and it will find them on linkedin and then take the email address from linkedin and find your other stuff and then mine it all and come up with a personality profile. The profile is loosely based on the discovery insights psychological profile.
If you want to see what it would say about you then you can find your own profile for free by going here
https://xiqinc.com/view-profile/
Mine is complete rubbish and I have no idea how it has made those assumptions. My concern is that the use of it will spread beyond sales and marketing and soon you will be sifted out of a job because "Xiq said you were this and we are looking for something else"
https://xiqinc.com/
Being the inquisitive person I am i put my own details in and was horrified with the report it spat out. It is not me at all. The data it mines comes from Linkedin initially and then any other social media you use with the same email address as your linkedin profile. All you have to do is search first name, surname and company and it will find them on linkedin and then take the email address from linkedin and find your other stuff and then mine it all and come up with a personality profile. The profile is loosely based on the discovery insights psychological profile.
If you want to see what it would say about you then you can find your own profile for free by going here
https://xiqinc.com/view-profile/
Mine is complete rubbish and I have no idea how it has made those assumptions. My concern is that the use of it will spread beyond sales and marketing and soon you will be sifted out of a job because "Xiq said you were this and we are looking for something else"
xyyman said:
Entered my details and it just wanted me to book a demo despite saying I could have three searches for free, not very impressive. Therefore can't comment on the accuracy of my search.
Strange. It gave me the three searches and outputs and if you clear the cookies you can have another three etc craigjm said:
Mine is complete rubbish and I have no idea how it has made those assumptions. My concern is that the use of it will spread beyond sales and marketing and soon you will be sifted out of a job because "Xiq said you were this and we are looking for something else"
Arguably psychometric testing already does something like this.My guess is that Employers might use this kind of technology alongside more traditional recruitment processes, at least until it becomes more accurate.
Countdown said:
craigjm said:
Mine is complete rubbish and I have no idea how it has made those assumptions. My concern is that the use of it will spread beyond sales and marketing and soon you will be sifted out of a job because "Xiq said you were this and we are looking for something else"
Arguably psychometric testing already does something like this.My guess is that Employers might use this kind of technology alongside more traditional recruitment processes, at least until it becomes more accurate.
President Merkin said:
People still believe in Myers Briggs which even a cursory search will show is made up nonsense, so good luck to them, there's always a market for exploiting fools.
It’s not really made up of nonsense. The way people use it is nonsense. The basic psychology is sound but people do something like MB or discovery insights which is what this is based on and then think “oh I am an ENTP”. Or recruiters think “we need INTJ’s” etc. That is totally wrong and a misuse of the psychology. The result you get shows you “may have a preference towards” a certain behaviour in certain situations. That is a totally different kettle of fish and why it’s always been clear these things should never be used for recruitment.The issue with XIQ is that it is all without your consent and decisions could be made on that basis. Crazy use of data mining and AI before the psychology is even looked at
President Merkin said:
Hmmm. K, whatever you say boss.
This thread was more about getting your profile from the link and seeing what you would think about random people being able to get such information without your consent and using it how they wish. At least if you did a test that you don’t believe in you would have consented to doing it. President Merkin said:
People still believe in Myers Briggs which even a cursory search will show is made up nonsense, so good luck to them, there's always a market for exploiting fools.
I wouldn't say it's nonsense. It opened my eyes as to why I hated my career/role, and made me choose a diferent path. That new direction was a much better fit, and way more rewarding (financially).98elise said:
President Merkin said:
People still believe in Myers Briggs which even a cursory search will show is made up nonsense, so good luck to them, there's always a market for exploiting fools.
I wouldn't say it's nonsense. It opened my eyes as to why I hated my career/role, and made me choose a diferent path. That new direction was a much better fit, and way more rewarding (financially).President Merkin said:
That's all good. I simply think it's a bit rich digging at one determining platform, whatever its flaws while sticking up for another that is at best pseudoscience & widely held to be so.
You do know about the origins of Myers Briggs, right?
I do yeah. All I was saying about MB was that people generally misunderstand it. It is not saying you are a type it is saying “you may have a preference” towards a type. The words may and preference are key in that in no way should it be used as an absolute as the science is not an absolute and humans don’t behave like robots You do know about the origins of Myers Briggs, right?
Something can be interesting, helpful and flaky. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. MB's flaws amongst other things is it divides people into strict categories with no middle ground. No one is truly 100% introvert or extrovert. It is ridiculously reductive to believe that, it's like insisting someone is a fascist if they say they're not a communist. It is a core criticism of MB that it relies on binary choices that bear little relation to the actual world. You can also go back to its formulation by two housewives in WW2, using Jungian theory to develop a test to find appropriate jobs for women in the war effort, which I would describe as a red flag for any HR trying to work out if Harry from accounts is suitable for a promotion to purchase ledger.
It's also true that MB has wide reach in organisations, often deployed at expense & I would suggest, generates a sunk cost in doing so. It's actual human nature as opposed to flaky human nature testing to defend something one is invested in, a form of self fulfilling prophecy. We see examples of this all the time, Brexit champs. anti vax melts, 5G loonies. When pressed on just what would be sufficient confirming evidence to disavow a belief for which the vdence is against, the answer is usually none.
The study of human nature is a valid field, MBTI otoh is a massively simplifying & limited way to go about it & for those reasons, is a dangerous & damaging concept in my view.
It's also true that MB has wide reach in organisations, often deployed at expense & I would suggest, generates a sunk cost in doing so. It's actual human nature as opposed to flaky human nature testing to defend something one is invested in, a form of self fulfilling prophecy. We see examples of this all the time, Brexit champs. anti vax melts, 5G loonies. When pressed on just what would be sufficient confirming evidence to disavow a belief for which the vdence is against, the answer is usually none.
The study of human nature is a valid field, MBTI otoh is a massively simplifying & limited way to go about it & for those reasons, is a dangerous & damaging concept in my view.
President Merkin said:
Something can be interesting, helpful and flaky. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. MB's flaws amongst other things is it divides people into strict categories with no middle ground. No one is truly 100% introvert or extrovert. It is ridiculously reductive to believe that
It doesn’t do that at all and in my last few replies I have said what it does. It suggests that you may have a preference for a certain position. It does not put you in boxes and it does not say “you are an introvert” etc. To do so would be wildly inaccurate. The terms introvert and extrovert in psychology don’t mean what they do in the general world. An introvert is not necessarily someone who is quiet and doesn’t engage which is what the general view of an introvert would be. The whole problem with MBTI is people believing they have been given a label from it and therefore saying crap like “I am an INTJ” you are not you just have a possible preference to that behaviour.As for me sticking up for MBTI and then decrying XIQ it is the fact that anyone with my name and company I work for can look me up without my consent and be given a report of how I may behave to help them interact with me
President Merkin said:
Something can be interesting, helpful and flaky. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. MB's flaws amongst other things is it divides people into strict categories with no middle ground. No one is truly 100% introvert or extrovert. It is ridiculously reductive to believe that, it's like insisting someone is a fascist if they say they're not a communist. It is a core criticism of MB that it relies on binary choices that bear little relation to the actual world. You can also go back to its formulation by two housewives in WW2, using Jungian theory to develop a test to find appropriate jobs for women in the war effort, which I would describe as a red flag for any HR trying to work out if Harry from accounts is suitable for a promotion to purchase ledger.
Not the version we did. From memory I think it scored you based on each of the 8 (?) indicators. for example it didnt say you were 100% introvert/extravert you could quite easily be 49%/51%.Countdown said:
President Merkin said:
Something can be interesting, helpful and flaky. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. MB's flaws amongst other things is it divides people into strict categories with no middle ground. No one is truly 100% introvert or extrovert. It is ridiculously reductive to believe that, it's like insisting someone is a fascist if they say they're not a communist. It is a core criticism of MB that it relies on binary choices that bear little relation to the actual world. You can also go back to its formulation by two housewives in WW2, using Jungian theory to develop a test to find appropriate jobs for women in the war effort, which I would describe as a red flag for any HR trying to work out if Harry from accounts is suitable for a promotion to purchase ledger.
Not the version we did. From memory I think it scored you based on each of the 8 (?) indicators. for example it didnt say you were 100% introvert/extravert you could quite easily be 49%/51%.I was strongly introvert though with was a lightbulb moment for why I disliked particular parts of my job, and why I'm not big on socialising.
I'm not the quiet shy type so it wasn't obvious before.
Countdown said:
President Merkin said:
Something can be interesting, helpful and flaky. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. MB's flaws amongst other things is it divides people into strict categories with no middle ground. No one is truly 100% introvert or extrovert. It is ridiculously reductive to believe that, it's like insisting someone is a fascist if they say they're not a communist. It is a core criticism of MB that it relies on binary choices that bear little relation to the actual world. You can also go back to its formulation by two housewives in WW2, using Jungian theory to develop a test to find appropriate jobs for women in the war effort, which I would describe as a red flag for any HR trying to work out if Harry from accounts is suitable for a promotion to purchase ledger.
Not the version we did. From memory I think it scored you based on each of the 8 (?) indicators. for example it didnt say you were 100% introvert/extravert you could quite easily be 49%/51%.This XIQ tool allows you to search anyone and then gives you a similar report to MBTI and others based on some AI interpreting what it sees on linkedin etc. At least with the psychometric tools you have to engage in them and consent.
I went into my LinkedIn and took out the one job that I have done with a charity and suddenly I am less of a people person that needs social interaction and more of a leader
maybe we all need to think about what roles and projects we list on our LinkedIn that appears to be able to be data mined even if you have set yourself to not be able to be found in a general search 98elise said:
That's how I remember it.
I was strongly introvert though with was a lightbulb moment for why I disliked particular parts of my job, and why I'm not big on socialising.
I'm not the quiet shy type so it wasn't obvious before.
it also explained why certain people in the team irritated the hell out of me I was strongly introvert though with was a lightbulb moment for why I disliked particular parts of my job, and why I'm not big on socialising.
I'm not the quiet shy type so it wasn't obvious before.
(and vice versa to be fair)Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff