IDI is certified by DNV. Here is what the EFPA test review model examines, and what it means for you.

Anyone can put together a questionnaire, give it a name and sell it as a test. Nothing stops them. At the same time, the buyer has little means of judging whether it measures anything, whether it measures the same thing every time, or whether the comparison group the results are set against is reasonable.

That is why independent review exists. Since the autumn of 2026, IDI is certified by DNV according to the EFPA test review model. This article explains what has been reviewed, how the review works, and what it means for you, whether you make a profile, lead the work as a facilitator, or buy IDI for an organization.

What the EFPA test review model is

EFPA is the European Federation of Psychologists' Associations, made up of the national psychologists' associations. The Swedish Psychological Association is one of them. The federation's Board of Assessment has long maintained a shared model for how psychological tests are to be described and evaluated, so that a review in one country can be read and understood in another.

The model is formally called the Model for the Review, Description and Evaluation of Psychological and Educational Tests. The version in use today is 5.0, published in August 2025. It is the first major revision since version 4.2.6 from 2013. The reason for the revision was that test practice had changed: almost all tests are now taken on a screen, norms are updated continuously rather than in editions, and reports are written by computers rather than by psychologists.

What the review examines

The model has two main parts. The first describes the test: what it measures, for whom, in which situations, how it is administered, and what is required of the person interpreting the results. The second part is the evaluation itself. There, the test is rated on a scale from zero to four across a number of areas, and each area ends in a verdict.

The areas assessed are the theoretical basis and documentation of the test, the norms the results are compared with, reliability, validity, how the test handles equality, diversity and inclusion, and the computer-generated reports. The review ends in an overall evaluation.

Two of the concepts deserve a pause. Reliability is about how stable the measurement is: whether the same person would get roughly the same result if the measurement were repeated, and whether the questions meant to measure the same thing actually hang together. Validity is about whether the test measures what it claims to, and whether the results say something about what happens outside the test. A test can be reliable without being valid. It can measure something very stable that is not what was promised.

That norms and reports are reviewed matters for a tool like IDI. The norms decide what counts as "more" or "less" of a behavior, and the reports participants receive are what actually lands with people.

How the certification works

In Sweden, DNV has been responsible for certifying occupational tests since 2015, when it took over from the Foundation for Applied Psychology. DNV uses the EFPA model as its basis and is an independent certification body, not an industry association.

The test publisher submits the documentation: manuals, technical reports, norm data, studies of reliability and validity, and examples of the reports that are generated. Two independent reviewers, academics and practicing psychologists, assess the material separately against the model's criteria. The publisher receives a review report with the verdicts per area. If the test meets the requirements, a certificate is issued, stating whether the test is certified for development, for selection, or for both.

The certification is not a grade given once and for all. A certificate covers the test that was reviewed, and if the construction of the test changes, it needs to be reviewed again.

What the certification means for IDI

IDI has a long research background. The framework was developed by Dr Richard Zackrison at the University of Minnesota in 1977, has been used in Swedish working life since the 1980s, and more than 300,000 profiles underpin the Swedish norm. In 2013, Professor Bo Ekehammar at Stockholm University reviewed the psychometric properties of the test and confirmed its reliability and validity.

The certification adds something different. Where the scientific review answered the question of whether IDI measures well, the certification answers whether the whole test, from theory and documentation to norms and reports, holds up against an established European standard, judged by two reviewers with no stake in the outcome. It is a verdict a buyer can rely on without having to read a technical report themselves.

Equally important is what the certification does not mean. It does not make IDI a selection tool. IDI is used only for development, never for recruitment, promotion or termination, and results are visible only to the participant. That holds exactly as before. Nor does the certification change how the work is done: a profile is still interpreted in conversation with a certified facilitator or through the guided self-presentation in the platform.

A test of a different kind

Most tests certified under the EFPA model belong to one of two families. Personality tests ask you to describe yourself: how you tend to be, what you prefer, how you react. Ability and aptitude tests measure what you can perform when you do your best, such as logical or numerical reasoning. The descriptive part of the model sorts every test into a type, and the great majority land in one of those two.

IDI fits neither. In the certificate, IDI is therefore registered under the test type Other, with the description "Perceived interpersonal behaviour / social-interaction style in a defined work role". IDI is the first and so far only tool certified in that category.

The difference is not a formality. A personality test measures your picture of yourself, and that picture is, as the research shows, often a different one from the picture your colleagues hold. IDI measures the other end: how your behavior is actually experienced by the people you work with, in the role you have right now. The answers come from your colleagues, not only from you, and they concern a defined context rather than you as a person in general. Change roles and the profile may look different, which is the point.

It also raises different questions in the review than a personality test does: norms built on how people are described by others, the stability of the measurement when several colleagues answer, and validity against what happens in interaction at work rather than against a personality trait. That IDI has passed the review in a category of its own therefore says something about what the tool is. Not a personality test in other words, but a measurement of how you come across.

What it means for you

If you make a profile, the certification means that the picture your colleagues give of you rests on documented norms and on a measurement whose stability and accuracy have been tested by outsiders. It is not an opinion about who you are, but a comparison against a large group of others, made with a tool that has been reviewed.

If you buy IDI for an organization, the certification is evidence you can show. More and more procurements require certified tests. And in ISO 10667, the standard for assessment services that IDI's service process follows, it is the client's responsibility that the tools used are documented and reviewed. The certification answers that question before it is asked.

If you are a facilitator, it means you can point to an independent review when participants or clients ask what lies behind the profile. The method, the conversation and the way of working are the same. What has been added is a third party's confirmation that the tool you work with holds up.

Which tests are used in your organization today, and do you know who has reviewed them?