Ask Yourself – “Why don’t the measures I use have this level of evidence?”.
This is what a valid and reliable measure looks like. It is time to use measures that really work.
We recently received a regular update from ResearchGate. This is one of the sites that gathers information about research and academic papers that are subjected to high scrutiny.
You can see that, in 4 years, the paper establishing the Dimensionality of the Mental Toughness Questionnaire, which was peer-reviewed, has been read by over 1500 researchers around the world – that is about the rate of two a day! It has been cited in 19 papers and recommended by almost 600 researchers.
That is a lot of high-level scrutiny. Of course, some may be critical. However, the overwhelming response is supportive, with researchers recognising that we are bringing new thinking to the development of people.
The MTQ in its MTQ48 and MTQPlus forms is adding so much, reliably, to people and organisation development.
It’s a source of pride that we don’t offer fads and flaky measures. Evidence based practice has to be based on independently well evidenced concepts and materials.
So it’s a frustration that so many of the most popular measures have little or no such evidence behind them or indeed support from the wider community of experts.
If you want to make a difference and do so professionally, what you use should be rooted in solid science. There are too many fads out there.
