The Risk Type Compass™ 2019 Norm Group
The Risk Type Compass™ 2019 norm group is gathered using an opportunity sampling method, comprising of people who have completed the Risk Type Compass™ assessment. This is a sample that is almost exclusively comprised of working adults, all of whom have passed the Risk Type Compass™’s in-built validity scale.
The 2019 Risk Type Compass™ norm group consists of 10,000 individuals. This reflects an increase of nearly 3,000 from the previous norm group. The norm group includes 5,000 males and 5,000 females.
Risk Type Compass™ and Age
A total of 9,343 participants provided their age. The lowest and highest reported ages were 18 and 79 respectively, and the average was 40.08 (SD 21.75). A breakdown of the ages can be seen in Table 1 below.
The key point established by the information above is the even spread of ages across the adult working population.
The ability to draw from various age categories contrasts with norms that are heavily reliant upon student populations and supports the norm’s appropriateness for use in the working population.
Risk Type Compass™ and Job Roles
A total of 6,652 participants volunteered information on their jobs, and this information is presented in Table 2 below.
The opportunistic nature of sampling for the 2019 norm reflects the innate appropriateness of the norm by definition, as users would typically be completing the questionnaire for application in a professional capacity.
The most frequently reported job category is ‘Professional Services’, as this is the most common group of workers who use the Risk Type Compass™. Some recurring job roles in the Professional Services category include consultancy, health and safety and auditors.
Risk Type Compass™ and Job Level
Additional data was requested on the job level of participants. Job level data was collected for 1,694 participants and a breakdown of these levels is included in Table 3 below.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the opportunistic sampling method, the most prevalent job level in the data is that of standard employees. However, there is still considerable representation from more senior positions, with management prevalent in the norm group.
Comparison with Previous Norms
The 2019 norm group of 10,000 participants represents the fourth major norm update for the Risk Type Compass™, with the previous norm groups utilised in 2012 (2,167 participants), 2014 (4,050 participants), and 2016 (7,072 participants). Figures 1 and 2 below provide a comparison of these four norm groups for the underlying Emotional:Calm and Daring:Measured scales respectively.
Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate the inter-norm stability of the Risk Type Compass™’s two underlying scales, as only minor percentile variations have emerged over the four norm groups.
The Influence of Biological Sex
After identifying the demographics of the norm and determining the stability of the scales, our analyses moved on to establishing consistency of application between males and females.
Our analysis comparing males and females focused on the Emotional:Calm and Daring:Measured scales. Findings indicate that, on average, females scored lower on the Emotional:Calm and higher on the Daring:Measured scales respectively. These findings are illustrated in Figures 3 and 4 below.
Despite reporting variation between males and females on each scale, the considerable level of overlap should also be noted. This leads us to conclude that focus should be given to the Risk Type designation of individuals, with subsequent feedback conducted accordingly.