We’re All Plaid!
An Analysis of Personality Dimensions®
1. Introduction
Understanding ourselves and others is as valuable as it is complex. Patterns of human emotions, thoughts and behaviours are multifaceted, and influenced by our core self, developed self, and contextual self (Berens, 2010). Emotional intelligence theory stipulates the continuous interplay between self-awareness, self-management, social awareness and relationship management (Goleman, 2020); and growing emotional intelligence begins with self-awareness (Lige, n.d.).
Personality assessments, which are specialized psychometric assessments tools, are beneficial for raising self-awareness by allowing an individual to discover and understand their personality traits and temperament. This paper seeks to provide a comprehensive evaluation of one such assessment model, Personality Dimensions®.
2. Foundational Complexities of Personality Theory and Assessments
Prior to shifting the focus on the assessment model of Personality Dimensions®, it is important to address several intricacies in language of personality theory as well as use of personality assessment tools that affect but are not limited to any specific tool.
2.1. Personality vs. Temperament
In the field of personality assessments, the words ‘personality’ and ‘temperament’ are sometimes used interchangeably (Strelau, 1987), and are furthermore given different definitions throughout academic literature, which adds complexity to personality research. Varying definitions include temperament being the percept-based habits and skills component that are contributing to a person’s personality (Cloninger, 1994) or alternatively temperament being viewed as the biological factors and personality as the developmental factors/environmental influences that shape a person (Rothbart et al., 2000).
The definition that will guide this paper is based on David Keirsey’s temperament theory of personality whereas ‘temperament is a configuration of inclinations’ (Keirsey, 1998:64) which contribute to a person’s personality (ibid).
2.2. Current Research in the Field of Personality Assessment Tools
As all areas of psychology, personality psychology is an ever developing area of study, and a primary focus of current research in the field of personality assessments is on leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) in this context (Lee et al., 2025; Sherman and Hogan, 2023). With rapid advancements in AI, personality assessments are an area where AI can provide data rich feedback (Saxena, 2021). But not only advantages of efficiency and effectiveness of assessment analysis must be considered, but also the potential dangers must be contemplated, especially in applications within human resources, education and healthcare, where it can lead to privacy issues, decision bias and loss of transparency towards those being assessed (ibid).
2.2. Ethics and Intent
While personality assessment tools can improve self-awareness and positively impact all areas of emotional intelligence, they also carry the potential for harm (Lundgren, 2019). For them to be effective, they require honesty and vulnerability from the person taking the assessment. Therefore, it is critical to consider ethics and intent in its application.
Considering ethics of personality assessments requires a critical look at the dangers of operationalizing humanity. When metrics become more important than human values and
connection, it can result in bias and loss of human dignity, the essence of the ‘dark side’ of personality assessments (Stachl et al., 2021).
When used with the intent of feedback for the purpose of personal and/or professional growth, personality assessments have the potential to benefit (Myers & Briggs Foundation, n.d.-a). However, when they are used, as often is done in educational or professional settings, to screen applicants or indicate performance, it has the potential to cause harm to the assessee – psychologically and reputationally (Pittenger, 2005).
Personality Dimensions® is an assessment tool focused on highlighting that no temperament is ‘better’ than others and that every person possesses elements of every personality temperament at varying dominances (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e).
3. Overview of Personality Dimensions®
Personality Dimensions® categorizes its temperaments in four classifications, expressed through a colour, combined with a descriptive character quality and a graphic symbol (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-a). Figure 1 shows the four temperaments of Inquiring Green, Resourceful Orange, Organized Gold, and Authentic Blue (ibid). While such naming may appear playful at first glance, and is contrary to common letter acronym classifications (Myers & Briggs Foundation, n.d.-b) or complex linguistic expressions (Arterberry et al., 2014) used in other popular personality assessment frameworks, the combinative display offers effective inclusivity towards every temperament (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-a).
Figure 1. Personality Dimensions® Temperaments. (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-a)
3.1. Temperaments
Each temperament has unique traits and while each person has a dominant temperament, traits from all other temperaments at varying strengths are also part of every person’s personality (Whitehorn, 2025a). This is important to recognize as personality assessment tools have the potential to stereotype people (Lundgren, 2019).
3.1.1. Inquiring Green
With core needs of knowledge and competence, Inquiring Greens value independent thinking, logic, clarity and data (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e). Not knowing, incompetence, as well as social etiquette are stressors for this temperament, which can lead to paralysis on taking action (Bulstrode and Geary, 2010). While at times perceived as unemotional, this temperament feels emotions as intensely as other temperaments but may need additional time to make sense of them and outwardly express them (ibid).
3.1.2. Resourceful Orange
With the core need of freedom and aspirations to become the best in whatever they set out to do, Resourceful Oranges are ‘doers’, valuing excitement and variety (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e). While often impatient when having to wait, Resourceful Oranges are strong problem solvers who perform well under pressure (Bulstrode and Geary, 2010).
Driven by risk tolerance and the desire to make an impact, the key stressor for this temperament are rigid boundaries which can lead to unhealthy choices for taking risks
(ibid).
3.1.3. Organized Gold
Belonging and responsibility are the core needs of the Organized Golds (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e). Valuing loyalty, rules, and a deep commitment to their social group, be it family, friends or professionally, this temperament thrives on systems, commitment, and trust (ibid). Disorganization and feeling ‘on the outside’ are key stressors for this temperament, and can lead to becoming overwhelmed and being perceived as overprotective (Bulstrode and Geary, 2010; Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e).
3.1.4. Authentic Blue
Relationship, with others and self, is the core need of Authentic Blues (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e). Guided by values of authenticity, ethics, and a belief in human potential, this temperament’s personality is focused on connection and a meaningful life (Bulstrode and Geary, 2010). Conflict, criticism and guilt are key stressors for Authentic Blues, and can lead to becoming highly self-critical when achieving harmony isn’t possible (Bulstrode and Geary, 2010; Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e).
3.1.5. Introversion/Extraversion
Contrary to personality assessment tools that view extraversion as a temperament type, such as the Big Five Temperament Theory (McCrae and John, 1992), Personality
Dimensions® assesses Introversion/Extraversion as a separate dimension that is present in each temperament (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-a), with its preference definition based not on sociability and energy levels (McCrae and John, 1992), but influenced by original and contemporary research of Jungian Personality Theory focused on the source of a person’s motivational energy (Jung, 1923; Keirsey, 1998; Myers & Briggs Foundation, n.d.-c).
3.2. Assessment
Assessments are administered through trained Personality Dimensions® Qualified Facilitators, most beneficially delivered through paper and pen based assessments as part of an in-person experiential group workshop (McKim, 2003). While online and one-on-one assessment formats are available, the workshop format, although a more involved process, allows for immediate integration of theoretical data into practical application (ibid).
The multi-step self-assessment is designed with a ‘no wrong answers’ approach (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e), including a 12-section Traits & Characteristics assessment sheet, several multiple-card sort assessments (Knowdell, n.d.) including cards with imagery, linguistic descriptions of life values and work, relationship, communication and conflict related descriptions (structured in 4 temperament cards/topic) as well as a 7-section introversion/extraversion assessment (McKim, 2003). Scores from all assessment steps are combined to reveal a person’s temperament style ranking from preferred style (brightest colour) to the least dominant style (palest colour) as well as the introversion/extraversion dimension score (ibid).
As with any self-report assessment, Personality Dimensions® has a risk of self-report bias, which can distort results due to participants wanting to appear socially desirable (Ashton, 2018) or through lack of self-awareness (Dodorico McDonald, 2008). Personality Dimensions’® assessment design can contribute to risk mitigation through an emphasis on a philosophy of positivity and an approach of raising self-awareness in both language used in the assessment components as well as the workshop delivery format through a trained facilitator, highlighting each person’s unique blend of strengths and qualities (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-e).
4. Basis, Influences & Validity
Personality Dimensions®, developed in 2003 in Canada by Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc. (CLSR) (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-d), offers a ‘flexible framework that respects and embraces individual differences’ (Whitehorn, 2025c).
With over one million people worldwide having experienced Personality Dimensions® (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-b), it may be a lesser known assessment compared to more commonly deployed tools such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, estimated to have been taken by approximately 50 million people since its inception in the 1960s (Hunt, 2021). However, a perceived potential for lower credibility due to this fact should be evaluated critically prior to concluding judgements as Personality Dimensions® is backed by comprehensive research and data.
4.1. Theorists That Have Influenced Personality Dimensions® Development
The development of Personality Dimensions® was informed by research and theorists in the field of personality psychology (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-d). The work of Carl Jung (Jung, 1923), Isabel Briggs Myers (Myers and Myers, 1995), David Keirsey (Keirsey, 1998), and contemporary theorists, Linda Berens (Berens, 2010), and Don Lowry (Lowry, 1989) have directly contributed to the development of Personality Dimensions® (Personality Dimensions®, n.d.-d).
4.2. Empirical Data and Validation
While referenced in academic writing (Fockler, 2019), Personality Dimensions® is underrepresented in published academic research, which has the potential for reputational challenges compared to other personality assessment tools such as NEO-PI-R (Witt et al., 2010) or Myers-Briggs (Randall et al., 2017). However, Personality Dimensions® is grounded in empirical data, supported by a validation report, demonstrating the measurement tool’s accuracy (Appendix A), a reliability report, summarizing evidence of the measurement tool’s consistent and stable results (Appendix B), as well as annually published Canadian Personality Dimensions® Population Statistics (Personality Dimensions, 2025-c).
Given the limited studies available, there are opportunities for future academic research of Personality Dimensions®, particularly in the context of its advertised use cases in the areas of personal development, professional development, conflict management and communications. Such studies would not only provide further empirical data on reliability and validity, but also increase its market visibility and credibility.
5. Considerations
Personality Dimensions® goes beyond simply being a tool for feedback of a person’s
personality traits.
5.1. Genetic Vs. Environmental Influences on Personality Development
As personality psychology advances, a consideration is the genetic vs. environmental influence on personality development.
Personality Dimensions® shares Linda Berens’ philosophy on temperament theory, viewing it as dynamic (Berens, 2010). This is reflected not only in its assessment but also throughout its workshops (McKim, 2003). Berens defines a person’s temperament threefold: the Core Self, which we come into the world with, the Developed Self, adapted through experiences, and the Contextual Self, determining current behaviour, with the choice to be, or not to be, informed by the Core Self and Developed Self (Berens, 2010).
5.2. A Tool for Raising Emotional Intelligence
Building on the three dimensions of Linda Berens’ perspective of temperament theory (Berens, 2010), emotional intelligence, defined as the ability to recognize, understand, and manage one’s own emotions and the emotions of others (Goleman, 2020) becomes the bridge between theory and practice in personality psychology.
Viewing the value of personality assessments through the lens of emotional intelligence shifts the perspective of it being merely a snapshot of a person’s temperament to becoming a tool for personal and professional growth (Whitehorn, 2025b). Being able to understand and manage beliefs, emotions, needs, values, and behaviours of oneself and others is the foundation for raising emotional intelligence, ultimately leading to healthier relationships with self and others (Lige, n.d.).
Given the experiential nature of Personality Dimensions® assessments and workshops, it lends itself to being a tool for raising emotional intelligence (Whitehorn, 2025b) through building awareness of self and others as well as engaging in experiential learning within the framework of temperament theory through exercises not only focusing on one’s brightest (most dominant) temperament, but also on exploring one’s palest (least dominant) temperament, encouraging participants to embrace who they are, and build connection as well as resolve conflict with those around them (McKim, 2005).
6. Closing Thoughts
Personality Dimensions®, as any temperament assessment, is a tool, an invitation to get to know oneself and others better. When we accept that invitation, it becomes a call to remind ourselves we are all human and to lean into empathy over judgment towards ourselves and those around us (Lige, n.d.). The colours of Personality Dimensions® represent the truth that we are all plaid, a blend of all four colours, each of us carrying traits of every temperament, allowing us to recognize our strengths, and appreciate our differences (Whitehorn, 2025c).
References
Arterberry, B.J., Martens, M.P., Cadigan, J.M., Rohrer, D. (2014). ‘Application of Generalizability Theory to the Big Five Inventory’. Personality and Individual Differences, 69 pp. 98–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.015
Ashton, M.C. (2018). Individual Differences and Personality. London: Academic Press.
Berens, L.V. (2010). Understanding Yourself and Others: An Introduction to the 4 Temperaments – 4.0. West Hollywood: Radiance House.
Bulstrode, A., Geary, S. (2010). Colour Savvy: Helping You Achieve Success in Your Work Life. Concord: Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc.
Cloninger, C.R. (1994). ‘Temperament and Personality’. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 4(2) pp. 266–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4388(94)90083-3
Dodorico McDonald, J. (2008). ‘Measuring Personality Constructs: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Self-Reports, Informant Reports and Behavioural Assessments’. Enquire, 1(1) pp. 75–94. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228403240_Measuring_personality_constructs_The_advantages_and_disadvantages_of_self-reports_informant_reports_and_behavioural_assessments
Fockler, A. (2019). Improving The Employee Transfer Experience Within An Organization. Doctor of Education. Western University. [Online] [Accessed on November 3, 2025] https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/oip/75/
Goleman, D. (2020). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books.
Hunt, E. (2021). What Personality Are You? How The Myers-Briggs Test Took Over The World. The Guardian. [Online] [Accessed on November 2, 2025] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/aug/30/myers-briggs-test-history-personality-types
Jung, C. (1923). Psychological Types. International Library of Psychology Philosophy and Scientific Method. University of Edinburgh.
Keirsey, D. (1998). Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company.
Knowdell, R. (n.d.). How To Use All 4 Of The Knowdell Card Sorts [Online Video] [Accessed on November 1, 2025] https://www.knowdellcardsorts.com/Knowdell-All-4-CardSorts-Video.cfm
Lee, T.C., Förster, C.A., Ziegler, M. (2025). ‘Does Artificial Intelligence Genuinely Predict Personality Traits? A Meta-Analytic Review of Machine-Predicted Big Five Scores:Convergence and Bias’. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5238288
Lige, T. (n.d.). Being You – Lead Your Life from the Inside Out Coaching. Inside Out Leadership Development Group. Unpublished. [Accessed on October 22, 2025]
Lowry, D. (1989). True Colors: Keys to Successful Teaching. Communication Companies International.
Lundgren, H. (2019). Pigeonholing Or Learning Instrument?: On The Practice And Perception Of Personality Testing In Human Resource Development. Doctor of Philosophy, s.l. Tilburg University. [Online] [Accessed on October 19, 2025] https://research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publications/pigeonholing-or-learning-instrument-on-the-practice-and-perceptio/
McCrae, R.R., John, O.P. (1992). ‘An Introduction To The Five-Factor Model And Its Applications’. Journal of Personality, 60 (2) pp. 175–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
McKim, L. (2003). Personality Dimensions® – A Guide for Facilitators Manual. Concord: Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc.
McKim, L. (2005). Winning Workshop Strategies – Techniques and Excercises for Personality Dimensions® Workshops. Concord: Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc.
Myers, I.B., Myers, P.B. (1995). Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View: Quercus
Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.-a). Ethical Use of the MBTI® Assessment. [Online] [Accessed on October 19, 2025] https://www.myersbriggs.org/unique-features-of-myers-briggs/ethical-use-of-the-mbti/
Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.-b). Myers-Briggs® Overview [Online] [Accessed on October 20, 2025] https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/myers-briggs-overview/
Myers & Briggs Foundation. (n.d.-c). The Preferences: E–I, S–N, T–F, J–P. [Online] [Accessed on November 1, 2025] https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/thembti-preferences/
Personality Dimensions®. (n.d.-a). About Us. Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc. [Online] [Accessed on November 2, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/about/
Personality Dimensions®. (n.d.-b). About The Program. Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc. [Online] [Accessed on November 1, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/about-the-program/
Personality Dimensions® (2025-c). Canadian Personality Dimensions® Population Statistics. Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc. [Online] [Accessed on November 3, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/PD-Stats-2025.pdf
Personality Dimensions®. (n.d.-d). History. Career/LifeSkills Resources Inc. [Online] [Accessed on November 2, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/history/
Personality Dimensions®. (n.d.-e). PD Building Blocks – Certified Facilitator Presentation. Unpublished. [Accessed on October 26, 2025]
Pittenger, F. (2005). ‘Cautionary Comments Regarding the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator’. Consulting Psychology Journal, 57(3) pp. 210-221. https://doi.org/10.1037/1065-9293.57.3.210
Randall, K., Isaacson, M., Ciro, C. (2017). ‘Validity and Reliability of the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’. Journal of Best Practices in Health Professions Diversity, 10(1) pp. 1–27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26554264
Rothbart, M.K., Ahadi, S.A., Evans, D.E. (2000). ‘Temperament And Personality: Origins And Outcomes’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1) pp. 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.78.1.122
Saxena, S. (2021). ‘AI In Personality Assessment And Profiling’. Indian Journal of Research in Pharmacy and Biotechnology, 9(1) pp. 39-45. https://ijrpb.com/issues/Shivya%20Saxena%20%202021.pdf
Sherman, R.A., Hogan, R. (2023). ‘Personality Assessment: Past, Present, and Future’. In: Kantrowitz, T., Reynolds, D.H., Scott, J. (eds.) Talent Assessment: Embracing Innovation and Mitigating Risk in the Digital Age. Oxford University Press.
Stachl, C., Boyd, R.L., Horstmann, K.T., Khambatta, P., Matz, S.C., Harari, G.M. (2021). ‘Computational Personality Assessment’. Personality Science, 2(1) e6115. https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.6115
Strelau, J. (1987). ‘The Concept Of Temperament In Personality Research’. European Journal of Personality, 1(2) pp. 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2410010205
Whitehorn, B. (2025a). The Colour You’re Not. Personality Dimensions. [Online] [Accessed on October 31, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/the-colour-youre-not/
Whitehorn, B. (2025b). Leading With Emotional Intelligence Starts With Self-Awareness. Personality Dimensions. [Online] [Accessed on November 8, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/leading-with-eq/
Whitehorn, B. (2025c). Personality Dimensions® is Canadian. Personality Dimensions®. [Online] [Accessed on November 2, 2025] https://personalitydimensions.com/recognizing-strengths-its-a-canadian-thing/
Witt, E.A., Hopwood, C.J., Morey, L.C., Markowitz, J.C., McGlashan, T.H., Grilo, C.M., Sanislow, C.A., Shea, M.T., et al. (2010). ‘Psychometric Characteristics And Clinical Correlates Of NEO-PI-R Fearless Dominance And Impulsive Antisociality In The Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study’. Psychological Assessment, 22(3) pp. 559–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019617
Appendix A
Personality Dimensions® Validation Report
Appendix B
Personality Dimensions® Reliability Report
Alexandra Krieger, MSc Communication, Behaviour and Credibility Analysis
Aaron Garner, Jordan Lansley, Deidre Scott – Emotional Intelligence Academy (EIA Group) in partnership with Manchester Metropolitan University
November 11, 2025
Reprinted with permission.
