.png)
Frequently Asked Questions About OMS and Hire Capacity
1. What is the OMS Assessment?
OMS stands for Organizational Management System and was developed by ADGI, Inc. It's a behavioral assessment that gives you insight into how people are wired to behave at work. We measure seven key traits: how assertive someone is, how social they are, their pace and patience level, how much structure they need, how adaptable they are, how they handle stress, and how they approach problem-solving.
What makes OMS unique is that we measure behavior in two ways. First, we look at who you are naturally (your default settings, so to speak). Then we measure how you adapt those behaviors to fit your current job. The difference between these two tells us a lot about whether someone's truly a good fit for a role or if they're just trying to be what they think you want.
2. What does "normative" mean, and why should I care?
Here's the thing most people don't realize about behavioral assessments: many of the popular ones out there can't actually compare one person to another. Tools like DISC describe personalities, sure, but they're built in a way that makes it impossible to say "this candidate is more assertive than that candidate." They're ipsative, which means forced-choice. When someone picks one trait, it automatically lowers their score on another trait.
OMS is normative, which means we can make actual comparisons. You can look at two candidates and objectively say one scores higher on discipline or sociability than the other. If you're making hiring decisions, this matters tremendously. Using an ipsative tool to compare candidates is like trying to measure distance with a thermometer. The tool just wasn't built for that purpose.
3. How long does it take To take?
About seven minutes on average. We use a simple adjective checklist (108 words, twice). First you check the words that describe you naturally, then you check the words that describe how you think you should act in your job. People actually like it because it's straightforward. No weird scenario questions or puzzles to figure out.
4. Is this thing actually validated, or are you just making it up?
Fair question, and yes, we have the data. OMS has been through rigorous statistical validation. Our reliability scores range from .80 to .87, which is strong (anything above .70 is considered acceptable, and above .75 is quite good). We've done construct validity work using principal component analysis and correlated our results against established assessments like the OAD Survey.
Our most recent large-scale study looked at nearly 14,000 people. The research was conducted by Blue Edge Consulting out of the UK. They're psychometric experts who specialize in this kind of validation work. We're not just claiming it works; we can show you the numbers.
5. Does OMS discriminate against women or minorities?
We've studied this extensively because it matters. In our most rigorous gender study, we matched 141 men with 141 women at similar job levels. We found only one statistically significant difference: women scored slightly higher on discipline. That's it. No differences when it came to how people adapt to their jobs.
Research on racial bias shows no adverse impact against African-Americans or Hispanics, and we continue monitoring this. The adjective checklist format actually helps here. There's less room for cultural stereotypes to creep in compared to scenario-based questions that might mean different things to different groups. In addition, OMS is available in 19 different languages, so individuals can take it in their native language.
6. How is OMS different from tools like DISC or Predictive Index?
Three big differences. First, as I mentioned, OMS is normative. You can actually compare people, which most DISC tools can't do. Second, we measure behavior in two parts: who you are naturally versus how you're trying to show up at work. That gap tells you whether someone's energized by the role or burning out trying to be someone they're not.
Third (and honestly this is huge), when you work with us, you're not just buying software. I'm personally involved in helping you figure out what behaviors matter for your specific roles, interpreting candidate results, and making sense of what you're seeing. A lot of assessment companies sell you a platform and wish you luck. That's not how we work.
7. Can I use OMS for coaching and development, or is it just for hiring?
Both. The normative design makes it great for hiring because you can compare candidates. But the dual-scale approach (seeing the gap between natural behavior and job adaptation) is incredibly valuable for coaching. When you can show someone exactly where they're stretching versus where they're in their sweet spot, it opens up really productive conversations about support, development, and career fit.
We use it all the time for succession planning, leadership development, and helping managers understand their teams better.
8. What's this JAX thing I keep hearing about?
JAX is our job analysis tool, and it's one of my favorite parts of the system. Instead of making assumptions about what a job requires behaviorally, JAX lets you gather input from people who actually know: the person in the role, their manager, their peers, maybe even a top performer in a similar position.
You end up with a behavioral benchmark specific to your organization and that particular role. Then when you assess candidates, you're comparing them to what actually drives success in your environment, not some generic job description. Takes the guesswork out.
9. What's SellingOptix?
That's our specialized report for sales roles, and we've been refining it for over a decade. It looks at a candidate's behavioral profile and tells you which of nine different selling environments they're most likely to succeed in. Everything from short-cycle transactional sales to long-cycle consultative selling.
The beauty of it is you don't need training to use it. It's built from years of pattern recognition, seeing what behavioral profiles actually succeed in different sales roles, not just what theory says should work. If you're hiring salespeople, this can save you from a lot of expensive mistakes.
10. What does this cost? Can a small company afford it?
We work with companies of all sizes. Larger organizations typically buy annual subscriptions for ongoing hiring needs, which brings the per-assessment cost down. Smaller companies can buy individual assessments as needed.
Yes, the per-assessment price is higher if you're only doing a few, but think about it this way: a bad hire costs you $50,000 to $150,000 or more depending on the role. Spending a few hundred dollars on an assessment that helps you avoid that? That's a pretty good investment. And you get the same quality assessment and the same access to my expertise whether you're a 10-person company or a Fortune 500.
11. Who looks at the results and tells me what they mean?
I do. That's a big part of what makes us different. I've been doing this for over 13 years, and I'm involved in helping you make sense of the data. We'll work together on the job benchmarking, I'll help you interpret candidate results, we'll even generate interview questions specific to what you're seeing in their profile.
You're not getting software and a manual. You're getting a partner who knows how to read behavioral data and translate it into hiring decisions. If you want to build internal capability, we also offer certification training through our Maximizing Human Performance workshop.
12. What kinds of companies work with you?
We work across industries, but we specialize in professional services and sales-driven organizations, typically in the 100 to 1,000 employee range. Places where people decisions are expensive to get wrong.
A lot of our clients are hiring for leadership positions where a bad fit can cost millions, or building sales teams where turnover kills momentum and revenue. Basically, if you're tired of relying on gut feel and impressive resumes only to have people not work out, we can probably help. We also work with smaller companies when they're making critical hires. You don't need to be big to benefit from good data.
13. Can people fake this assessment?
Can they try? Sure. Any self-report tool has that risk.
But several things work in our favor. First, it's hard to fake consistently across 108 adjectives in two different contexts. Second, when we compare their natural scores to their job adaptation scores, inconsistencies tend to show up. Third, research shows most people don't actually try to fake these things, especially when they know deceptive answers can be spotted.
And honestly, OMS is just one piece of your hiring process. You're still doing interviews, checking references, maybe work samples. If someone faked the assessment, it'll show up somewhere else. Plus, after 13 years of reading these profiles, I've gotten pretty good at spotting when something doesn't add up.
14. What happens to someone's assessment data? Is it secure?
Assessment data is confidential. It should only be used for its intended purpose (hiring, development, coaching) and only accessed by people who have a legitimate need to see it. We follow strict data protocols and comply with privacy legislation.
People who complete the assessment have a right to see their results and get feedback. We actually insist that feedback comes from someone trained in OMS interpretation so they're getting accurate information, not someone's uninformed opinion.
One other thing: if assessment data is more than five years old, you should either re-assess the person or interpret the old results cautiously. People change, especially in how they adapt to different roles.