Comparing Assessments

In today’s world, understanding personal motivations and strengths is becoming increasingly important for personal and professional success. Two popular tools for identifying personal motivations and strengths are the Resilience Innovator® Type Assessment and Motivational Maps®. In this article, we will compare and contrast these two assessments, exploring their similarities and differences and their potential applications in personal and professional contexts.

What is Motivational Maps®?

Motivational Maps® is a personality assessment tool developed by James Sale that identifies an individual’s motivations based on nine motivators: Achievement, Relationship, Power, Recognition, Learning, Security, Autonomy, Creativity, and Spirituality. Each motivator represents a different source of motivation, and each has its unique strengths and preferences.

How Can I Use Motivational Maps®?

Motivational Maps® can be used in various personal and professional contexts, such as career development, team building, and organizational development. It can help individuals identify their sources of motivation, understand their natural tendencies, and enhance self-awareness. It can also help organizations build stronger teams by leveraging each individual’s unique motivators and creating a motivating work environment.

What is RITA?

The Resilience Innovator® Type Assessment (RITA) is a personality assessment tool. It identifies an individual’s Resilience Innovator® archetype, of which there are ten. These archetypes represent different approaches to resilience, problem-solving, and innovation, with each type having its unique strengths and preferences.

How Can I Use RITA?

RITA is specifically designed to assess an individual’s resilience level and innovation style and can be used in various contexts, such as innovation and entrepreneurship training, organizational development, and leadership development. It can help individuals understand their reactions to stressful environments, their natural innovation tendencies, their strengths in the innovation process, and their areas for growth. It can also facilitate effective teamwork and collaboration by bringing together individuals with complementary innovation styles.

What are the similarities between RITA & Motivational Maps®?

As outputs go, both RITA and Motivational Maps® use typology to communicate preferences and traits, though those preferences and traits measure different things between the two assessments.

What are the differences between RITA & Motivational Maps®?

1. Focus: While the Resilience Innovator® Type Assessment focuses on natural preferences and tendencies related to resilience & innovation, Motivational Maps® focus on an individual’s sources of motivation.
2. Number of Types: The Resilience Innovator® Type Assessment has ten archetypes, while Motivational Maps® have nine motivators. RITA also identifies top Key Traits related to resilience & innovation and has three Resilience Conditions that it measures.
3. Depth of Assessment: Motivational Maps® provide a detailed assessment of an individual’s sources of motivation, with practical tips for enhancing motivation and aligning it with personal and professional goals. The Resilience Innovator® Type Assessment provides a comprehensive assessment of an individual’s innovation style and level of resilience, with detailed descriptions of each archetype’s characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. It also provides insight into how to improve the resilience and innovation of the individual and those around them.

In conclusion, the Resilience Innovator® Type Assessment and Motivational Maps® are two valuable personality assessments that provide insights into an individual’s natural tendencies and sources of motivation. They have different focuses, contexts, and depths of assessment, making them suitable for different personal and professional contexts. Individuals and organizations can choose the assessment tool that best aligns with their specific needs and goals for personal or professional development.