Note: This is an abbreviated version of the MPAP Interpretive Guide. The full guide and materials will of course be available for users of CareerLeader™.

.

The MPAP helps you analyze your strengths and weaknesses specifically in those ability areas that are essential for effective performance in management and other business professional roles. The goal is to generate a profile that will enable you to match your particular abilities with those required for success in specific business work roles. The MPAP helps you to see your business ability strengths and weaknesses in patterns, which will allow you to better understand which of your abilities are important for success in various business careers.

You'll get two important types of information regarding your abilities from the the MPAP Score Summary: a Relative Strength score, and a Peer Comparison indicator. The Relative Strength score shows which of your abilities are stronger or weaker compared to your other abilities. The Peer Comparison scores reflect how strong your abilities are when compared to other people's abilities. Obviously, it is important to have some sense of where you stand in comparison to your peers:if you are significantly weaker than your peers in some area that is crucial to success in your chosen career, this will have significant implications for your success (you might want to formulate a skill development plan, for example). At the same time, even if you are strong in every ability area compared to other people, it is still helpful to have some sense of which of your strengths are your personal "standouts."

Relative Strength. The number in the first column to the right of each ability indicates the number of times you assessed your strength in that ability as greater than the abilities it was paired with. Like the MPRP, the MPAP forces you to rank your skills by choosing one over another. Because of the forced choice nature of the instrument, you cannot be high on everything.

Peer Comparison. These scores reflect your assessment of the strength of your abilities relative to your current peer group. A 1 indicates that you see your ability as "notably poor;" a 2 indicates that you see this as an ability that "needs improvement"; a 3 indicates that you see this as an ability where you are "strong"; and a 4 indicates that you see this as an ability where you are "very strong."

Inconsistency. This score is a measure of the clarity of your assessment of your strengths. Not that Jan's score summary suggested that her Inconsistency level was slightly higher than normal. She would do well to review the complete discussion of the implications of inconsistency in sorting out your abilities, which is included in the full Interpretive Guide.

The first step in analyzing your MPAP Score Summary is to understand the specific abilities being measured within each of the three business ability groups: Problem Solving, Taking Initiative, and Interpersonal Effectiveness.

Problem Solving

Critical Thinking	Able to think critically (define a problem and determine the information needed to solve it; understand unspoken assumptions; form and test hypotheses; and judge the validity of conclusions).
Quantitative Analysis	Skillful in using quantitative analysis to understand business issues.
Creativity	Able to think creatively, generating new ideas and approaches to issues, and recognizing new opportunities.
Quick Thinking	Have a quick intellect: I pick up new information and ideas easily and can "think on my feet."

All business situations call for problem solving abilities and Jan sees her abilities as generally very strong in this area. Her Relative Strength and Peer Comparison scores for Critical Thinking are 10 and 4; for Quantitative Analysis they are also 10 and 4; for Creativity they are 8 and 3; and for Quick Thinking 3 and 3. In regard to this last ability she sees herself as strong relative to her peers but sees thinking on her feet as one of her own lesser abilities.

Taking Initiative

Power-orientation	Ambitious, forceful, competitive, comfortable with using power and taking risks.
Action-orientation	Action-oriented: I am someone who makes decisions and then makes sure they are implemented.
Multi-focus	Able to juggle many ideas, responsibilities and projects at once.
Leveraging	Leverage my time well (e.g. set priorities and keep to them, delegate when appropriate).

All business professional roles require a capacity to identify a desired outcome or goal and to execute a plan that will effect the desired results. Good managers and leaders in particular "make things happen" without waiting for others to take initiative or for the situation to change on its own. Managers are hired, in essence, to continually effect positive change in the business environment. Jan sees her abilities as much weaker in this area than in Problem Solving. Her Relative Strength and Peer Comparison scores for Power-orientation are 5 and 1; for Action-orientation they are 4 and 2; for Multi-focus they are also 4 and 2; and for Leveraging her time they are 3 and 2. In general, then, if Jan's assessment of her abilities is generally accurate, the picture is forming of someone who is an excellent analyst and problem solver but not skilled at "taking charge" and wielding power.

Interpersonal Effectiveness

Confidence	Feel and project self-confidence: I can be persuasive even in uncertain and difficult situations.
Leading/Managing	Able to lead, motivate, and directly manage other people effectively.
Sociability	Socially venturesome and self-assured -- I form and maintain relationships easily.
Teamwork	A team player, cooperative, work well as part of a group.
Communication	Listen well. Write and speak to individuals and groups in a clear and effective manner.

Almost all business is accomplished through people working together to accomplish a business goal. The best product, service or strategy is useless if managers can't motivate and direct the activities of the individuals who are working toward a business objective. People cannot accomplish their tasks without the knowledge, guidance or information provided by their managers and peers. We need other people if we're going to get our work done well, whether we are CEOs or brand new managers.

Jan sees her abilities as generally strong in the Interpersonal Effectiveness arena, although with more variation than in Problem Solving. Her Relative Strength and Peer Comparison scores for projecting Confidence are 9 and 3; for Leading/Managing they are 8 and 3; for Sociability 7 and 3; for Teamwork 6 and 3; and for Communication 1 and 1. In regard to this last ability she sees herself as significantly less strong than her peers, and also sees this as her own weakest ability area.

Because the MPAP is a self-rated instrument it is possible that someone's overall level of self-confidence can affect the ratings, so we provide a means to measure whether someone's ratings overall are generally higher or lower than average. Jan's Response Style is in the average range, meaning that she was neither overly generous in her self-appraisal (too many "4s" and "3s") nor was she overly critical (too many "1s" and "2s").

Business Ability Group Patterns
One important step in understanding your MPAP results is to consider the general range of your ratings in the three business ability groups. In order to do this, you need to rate each ability group either as "strong" or "weak." In Jan's case, clearly she is strong with her Problem Solving abilities. Taking Initiative is weak; these were most of Jan's lowest ratings. Jan's Interpersonal Effectiveness abilities on the whole are rated pretty well, so she'll call them strong. So Jan will classify herself as an "SWS" for her business ability pattern. Each pattern contains information about the implications of weaknesses in the various abilities the business ability group comprises and offers suggestions for developing those abilities that may not be as strong as desired. (Note: we're only going to show you the SWS pattern during this tour; of course all of the other group patterns are available to users of CareerLeader™.)