Question 1

Is Cèrcol based on the Big Five?

Accepted Answer

Yes. Cèrcol measures personality using the OCEAN model (Big Five) via the IPIP public-domain item pool (Goldberg et al. 2006). The 12 team roles are derived from the AB5C circumplex (Hofstee et al. 1992) and team composition research (Bell 2007; Neuman & Wright 1999).

Question 2

What makes Cèrcol different from Belbin or DISC?

Accepted Answer

Cèrcol's roles are grounded in the Big Five (OCEAN) personality model using the IPIP public-domain item pool. The scoring pipeline is fully open source and auditable. Witness Cèrcol uses forced-choice adjective selection — not Likert scales — to eliminate social desirability bias in peer assessment. Unlike Belbin or DISC, all items are public domain and the entire methodology is published and citable.

Question 3

Is the personality assessment free?

Accepted Answer

The New Moon Cèrcol (10 items, Big Five snapshot) and First Quarter Cèrcol (60 items, IPIP-NEO-60, 30 facets) are always free — no account required. The Full Moon Cèrcol (120 items, IPIP-NEO-120, Witness peer assessment, cognitive ability measure) requires a one-time payment.

Question 4

What is Witness Cèrcol?

Accepted Answer

Witness Cèrcol is a peer personality assessment where someone who knows you well rates you using a forced-choice adjective selection method — picking the best-fit and worst-fit adjective per round from a set covering all five OCEAN dimensions. Forced choice eliminates the social desirability bias that affects standard Likert-scale peer ratings. Dimensions where your self-rating and peer ratings diverge by more than 0.8 standard deviations are flagged as potential blind spots.

Question 5

How are the 12 team roles derived?

Accepted Answer

The 12 roles are derived from the AB5C circumplex (Hofstee, De Raad & Goldberg 1992), covering all six intersections of the three team balance dimensions (Presence/Extraversion × Bond/Agreeableness × Vision/Openness) at both poles. The selection of these three dimensions as requiring team-level balance is grounded in Bell (2007) and Neuman & Wright (1999). Discipline (Conscientiousness) and Depth (Neuroticism) modulate role expression but do not define team balance.

Question 6

Is my data private?

Accepted Answer

No account is required for any instrument. During assessment, no personal data is collected — only anonymous scores are logged. Data is stored on our own servers (Hetzner Online GmbH). No third-party analytics. No data is shared with or sold to third parties.

Question 7

Is Cèrcol based on the Big Five (OCEAN)?

Accepted Answer

Yes. Cèrcol measures personality using the OCEAN model (Big Five) via the IPIP — the International Personality Item Pool, a public-domain collection validated in thousands of published studies. The five dimensions are Presence (Extraversion), Bond (Agreeableness), Vision (Openness), Discipline (Conscientiousness), and Depth (Neuroticism). Because the IPIP is public domain there are no licence restrictions: the full item pool and scoring logic are open and citable.

Question 8

How is Cèrcol different from Belbin, DISC, or StrengthsFinder?

Accepted Answer

Three things set Cèrcol apart. First, the items come from the Big Five (OCEAN), the most replicated personality model in academic research — not a proprietary framework. Second, the full item pool (IPIP) and scoring pipeline are public domain and auditable; there is no black box. Third, the Witness peer assessment uses forced-choice adjective selection instead of Likert scales, which eliminates the social desirability bias that affects most 360-feedback tools. Belbin and DISC use closed, proprietary methodologies.

Question 9

What are blind spots in team personality assessment?

Accepted Answer

A blind spot is a personality dimension where how you see yourself and how others see you diverge significantly — more than 0.8 standard deviations apart. Cèrcol's Witness peer assessment detects blind spots by comparing your self-report with forced-choice adjective ratings from people who know you. Blind spots are neither good nor bad: they show where your self-perception and others' experience of you don't match, which is often more actionable than the score itself.