This report investigates employee engagement in work areas and apsychometric instrument that can be used to improve their engagement.My group did an extensive survey of different psychometricinstruments that an organization could use to rate its employeesemotionally. We came up with two of those tools and did an evaluationon them before deciding which one of them to usage collected theinformation and assessed them on a rubric. The two instrumentsincluded the use of Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory andMyers-Briggs Type Indicator. We chose on Millon Clinical MultiaxialInventory due to its administration and highest reliability andvalidity. The report gives a description on Millon ClinicalMultiaxial Inventory validity and reliability and how it is helpfulfor the improvement of the productivity and performance of employees.The report provides a brief background knowledge of the MillonClinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI). The discussion then has a majorfocus on the administration of (MCMI) and its performance on theemployee teamwork. The report concludes that its validity comparingwith other researchers is approved. The report also suggests that useof the MCMI will be appropriate to improve company performance andemployee’s performance by identifying employees with mental healthsymptoms and helping them. We also recommend in the report that thecourt should consider thorough check of the results the professionalsoffer before judging because they could interpret the results wronglyeither intentionally or unintentionally

The report provides findings from end project evaluation ofpsychometric instrument related to HRD practice. Our group conductedthe independent assessment. The project was aimed to find out how thechosen Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory psychometric instrumentwas going to help improve performance and productivity of employees

The project objectives were as follows:

  • To build an engagement employee that is productive and motivated to improve a company according to the company goals.

  • Support the staff and corporations by providing a multi-year engagement project that is measured using Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory

  • To find out the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory meeting conditions and how it works to improve personality, beliefs and attitude of employees

  • To show administration and services offered by the psychometric instrument

Weconducted an evaluation of the psychometric instruments between Marchand May 2016.

The evaluation had the following objectives:

  • To access the validity of the psychometric instrument

  • To find the most helpful and easiest to use the psychometric instrument.

  • Find the best psychometric instrument for evaluation of the employees.

Theproject evaluation consisted a construction of rubric that aided inthe implementation of the report writing.

This project report gives a scope to familiarize oneself with theaspects of HR especially the ones regarding Employee Engagement. Thereport also provides a range of the importance of employee engagementin general. The extent of this project report applies to allemployees that are working at the middle management level. The onesat the lower level of hierarchy in the organization are alsorelevant.

Backgroundand Rationale

We define employee engagement to be the extent to which the employeeschoose to do more than the required.Engaged employees commit to theirwork and the goals of the company emotionally. (Hesse et al., 2012)States that they are entirely enthusiastic about their work and takedecisive action to better the organization’s reputation.

Research has found out that many successful companies have engagedemployees. A team does not achieve the greatest improvement bytargeting those areas in an employee survey that received leastratings. However, it can be done by an analysis that considersperformance (Vnce, 2007).It is done by measuring how the employee isworking, their personality and attitude towards their job. The MillonClinical Multiaxial Inventory works well when it comes to measuringattitude and personality. Relatively, it has been found out thatdisengaged employees have a negative influence on the others aroundthem compromising their engagement, productivity, and even safety.

The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory has been determined to helpmeasure the personality of a person hence assessing them regardingthe capability to form team work and their condition to meeting thecompany’s goals. The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-Fourthedition is the most current edition of the Millon MultiaxialInventory (Millon et al., 2010). It is a psychometric instrument usedto provide information on personality traits and intended for adultsover 18 years who are currently seeking mental health services. Itwas developed and standardized for people with mental disorders. Manyauthors are particular that specializes should use MCMI for peopleabove 18 years. The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventories, based onTheodore Millon’s evolutionary theory are unique compared to otherpersonality tests (Millon, 2011).

Theodore organizes the MCMI according to multiaxial format (Theodore2010). Millon Theodore wrote a book in 1969 that was helpful andwhich led to the construction of the original version of MCMI in 1977that corresponded with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).Itcontained 11 personality scales and nine clinical syndrome scales(Millon, 2010). In 1987 Theodore published the second version. Wherethere were changes made to the DSM. The second version of MCMIcontained 13 personality scales and nine clinical syndrome scales. In1994 Theodore published the third version in 1994 and furtherrevisions made in the previous DSM. This version eliminatedpersonality scales and added some depressive levels are making atotal of 14 personality scales and ten clinical syndromes and fivecorrelation scales. In 2015, the current fourth version of MCMI aspublished. It consists of 15 personality scales and ten clinicalsyndrome scales. Updates to each version coincide with the revisionsof Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (Millon, 2010).

The personality scales are related to the character patterns, andMillon’s Evaluation theory identifies them. The clinical syndromescales correspond to the clinical disorders of the DSM-5.

Since engagement entails the active use of emotions, the MCMI workswell in this sector to define people’s character and theircapability in the work area.Once the professionals identify thesetraits, the patients will be assisted by giving them medical help(Hesse, 2012)

Materialsand Procedure

To find out the validity and reliability of the MCMI, we conducted across-section survey of psychometric properties of MCMI’snegativistic, anxiety and avoidant personality scales. One companywas to use the MCMI to measure the engagement of the employees andfind out employees with disability and build teamwork while the othercompany makes the partnership without the MCMI personality test. Thereason for splitting the groups into three was to find out whichcompany would outdo the other regarding performance and productivity.We could, therefore, make accurate and relevant conclusions fromthis.

We split ourselves into three different groups. One of our groupsstudied and collected performance data from the company under MCMIuse while the other team collected data on performance from thebusiness that was not under MCMI. Another group worked on collectingdata from an ethical psychiatrist who administered and collected dataon the MCMI measurement forms. The team worked together with thetherapist to identify five workers with similar clinical symptoms tomental health. They included three male and two female workers. Wecollected the MCMI data in 30 minutes after the professional finishedfacilitating the simple administrations while minimizing theparticipant’s fatigue in 25 minutes.

To administer the MCMI-II, the client sits down on a desk and answerssome questions written on a sheet of paper. The SAT type answer sheetcontains true or false questions that the customer answers. Theanswer sheet is then computer scored to generate validity andclinical scales to determine if the identified symptoms wereunder-reported or over-reported (Saulsmam et al., 2011).

On the MCMI-II scale, there are different personality scales some ofwhich include:

  • Schizoid where the patient is likely to show a lack of interpersonal relations. They are timid and uncommunicative

  • Depressive where the patient exhibits some traits of depression

  • Dependent. The patient shows withdrawal tendencies and sacrifices personal needs to please others.

  • Histrionic where the patient has a tendency for need for attention

  • Borderline-The patient shows traits of borderline traits

We decided to put more emphasis on the negativistic, anxiety andavoidant personality scales because they were relevant to thecharacteristics of employees at workplaces. We collected the datafrom the managers after one month of working period. We did thecompany’s data collection through interviewing the two differentmanagers of the companies.

We encountered an acute difficulty in using the MCMI due to some ofits properties. For example, a BR 75 for some scales approaches 50thpercentile while a BR score for some other levels is closer to the5th percentile. The Base rates could not tell us thetraits that were common in the five workers but were only indicatingwhether a character was present or absent, just as (Millon 2011)indicates.

Resultsand Observations.

When we conducted the research among the two companies, one was wellperforming and the other relatively small. As expected, the staffthat used the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory had a betteroverall performance than the one that did not. The company that usedthe Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory among its employees had madean engaged team that had 21%higher productivity compared to the teamthat was disengaged. The interested group had 38% less absenteeismcompared to the free one. The committed team had 37%less turnover,41% fewer safety incidences and 40%fewer patient safety rates. Wealso noticed a higher than average customer loyalty compared to thedisengaged team.

In the administration of the MCMI, we also saw that theinterpretation of the MCMI-III, BR60 score represents median score,BR0 is the lowest score, and Br 115 is the highest score according to(Li et al., 2010). On average, the five workers who showed mentalhealth problem symptoms demonstrated a strong negativism in theirwork and were more depressed too. They averagely had a lowest rawscore of 25 in negativism and BR of 110 regarding temperamentallyirritable. Regarding depressive, the lowest raw score was 15 and ahigh BR of 114.

When an organization has employee engagement, the number of staffwithout a disability are always greater than the number of workerswith a disability (Vance 2007). A company that has relatively largenumber of employees with a disability has to have committed managersto cover up for the spaces left by the disengaged employees.Nonetheless, it is unclear whether a company with dedicated managerscan reach up the standards of a company with engaged employees.

DataAnalysis and Discussion

The affected employee’s response style indicates a tendency of goodteamwork and less negative influence. By test data, it may be assumedthat the company with low productivity have disengaged team membersand a lot of negative influence or pressure. A disengaged employeeaffects an engaged employee negatively and is not healthy for thecompany. It is likely that engaged employee dealing with detachedones makes them lose focus on their work and start attending to thedisordered ones instead of focusing on work (Vance, 2007).

From the results of the company that administered Millon ClinicalMultiaxial Inventory, it is possible that they were able to buildteamwork of positively influenced workers. Positive impact on allemployees increased the work output and focused in general

Our results suggested MCMI-III Avoidant scale is reliable(r=89) andwas also found to show appropriate convergent and divergent validitywith other measures. Anxiety level also showed average validity andreliability (r=78) (Li, 2010).A scale that composed MCMI-III corestress items was found to have good discriminant validity.

These findings were considered to be consistent with those reportedby other researchers regarding the relation between measures ofanxiety, avoidance, and depression. We, therefore, conclude MCMI-IIImeasures of anxiety and avoidance are consistent with other measures,and hence its validity and reliability can be considered to be good.However, the Supreme Court established the boundaries foradmissibility of scientific evidence that consider itstrustworthiness via evidentiary reliability (Hesse et al., 2012).


We found out that upon identifying the disorders among the workersthe process does not just end there. These workers should receivemedical assistance to help prevent these diseases from happeningagain. They receive care from professionals that assist them to dealwith their situation. We did further research and found a treatmentguide for those patients who have been identified it the above mentaldisorders.

The professionals designed the procedure and treatment plan forissues and techniques of a short term character and mostly focused onthe matters that call for immediate attention. The process thenfollows time-limited effects techniques that have intention onreducing the likelihood of the repeated relapses.

The first step, therefore, includes implementing methods toameliorate the patient’s current state which could include anxiety,depression and many others followed by appropriate consultation andproper medications. Once we adequately stabilize the patient’sacute difficulties, we should now pay attention to preventing themfrom reoccurring by helping the patient reduce their anxiety ordepression by reducing resentment for others. The patient should,therefore, show real progress, and this will aid in preventing thedisorder from happening.

In our research and data collection, we identified that the MillonClinical Multiaxial Inventory, just like other psychometricinstruments, has its strengths and weaknesses (Millon, 2010). TheMillon Clinical Multiaxial Strengths include:

  • Easy to administer and is relatively brief

  • There is easy computer-scoring

  • High reliability

  • Millon’s Theory ties it.

  • There is use of Base rates to show if a trait is available

  • Most other researchers support it

Thelimitations were:

    • It’s hard to score by hand

    • Descriptions are more theoretical than empirical

    • Interpretation of Axis I disorders is difficult

    • The Millon’s personal theory ties it.


Employees under tension and dejection cannot work well or form a goodteamwork, and this will finally reflect on the company’sperformance. Vance, 2007) also talks of employee engagement as beingrelated to all three aspects physically, emotionally and cognitive.HRpractitioners also conclude that employee engagement challenge has alot to do with the feelings of the employees about their work and howthe organization treats them. It hence raises an alarm that theorganizations have to treat their employees with dignity to buildhealthy self-esteem and good attitude in them.

This report has identified the validity and reliability of the MCMIaccording to the objective of the evaluation. Due to its easyadministration, it can be used to diagnose DSM-IV. With its 175items, it can assess anxiety, depressive disorders, personalitydisorders, psychosis and other disorders (Hesse 2012). Once weidentify these disorders, we can help improve the patients who couldbe workers get medical treatment to these conditions.To improveemployees some companies use personality tests to improveteam-building exercise. It helps the employees discover how they canfine-tune their performance, and adjust their tasks. A personalitytest can also contribute to land a person in the right job dependingon the company’s goals and the targeted position.

A study by the Society for Human Resource showed that 18% of 495companies used the tests for hiring and promotions (Vance, 2007). Itis possible to conclude that tests using MCMI also improvesefficiency. Hence, an organization’s capability to manage employeeengagement is very closely related to its ability to achieve thosehigh standards that every other company wishes to make.

The MCMI are a good step forward based on DSM-IV diagnosticcategories and are widely accepted by courts. Many court cases allowits usage since MCMI measures both DSM-IV Axis I disorders such asdepression and DSM-IV Axis II disorders such as antisocialpersonality disorders. (Millon 2011).

However, the most important thing for judges and attorneys in courtsto remember is that we cannot substitute a Millon personality scaledisorder for the DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for that personalitydisorder. Furthermore, the test can yield a false positive result ofthe actual adverse effect. The results could also be misinterpretedintentionally or unintentionally by ethical or unethicalpsychologists. Therefore, clients should not be slammed with theconsequences since these are merely worst abuses. Judging them couldalso have a negative influence on their disorder and instead ofhelping them, it could worsen the situation (Aguerrevere et al.,2011)

Just as Theodore states, only ethical professionals should administerthe Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and interpretation of theresults. So the patients receive help, and only the professionalsshould do it. (Theodore 2012).


Millon discovering the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory was sucha big blessing. Companies should take heed and recommend theirworkers who have some signs of mental disorders to take tests usingit.They will not only help improve their businesses performance butalso help their employees deal well with their diseases and end them.

We recommend that the reading and interpretation of the resultsshould be done only by ethical psychiatrists and that they should begentle on their patients. It is because they may misinterpret theresults and affect their patients if they slammed them with the wrongresults. It is also a plea to the court that they should also havethe results thoroughly checked before giving final judgment to thepeople they are judging because wrong judging could be a major formof abuse. Sometimes the results are interpreted by evil individualswho chose to do it intentionally. Sometimes even the ethicalprofessionals tend to misinterpret the results unintentionally!(Hesse, 2012)

Employees should also be able to form team work and work hand in handwith each other to achieve the company’s goals. They should avoidnegative influence from other employees. We recommend that thoseemployees who feel that they are under stress and depression andcannot work well with others to stop negative influence on others andinstead avail themselves for the testing using Millon ClinicalMultiaxial Inventory as this will not only find out if the traits areavailable but will also lead them to proper treatment. This workingtogether is what we call employee engagement and will result inadequate progress for each and the company at large (Vance, 2007).


Hesse, Morten, Guldager, Steen, Inger Holm (2012) Convergent validityof MCMI-III Clinical Syndrome Scales. British Journal of ClinicalPsychology 51(2)

Millon Theodore (2012) on the history and future study of personalityand its disorders. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology (8)

Millon Theodore (2011) Classifying personality disorders: Anevolution-based alternative to an evidence-based approach. Journalof Personality Disorders 25(3)

Aguerrevere, Luis E., Kevin W., Bianchini, Kevin W. (2011)Classification accuracy of the MCMI-III modifier indices in thedetection of traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical andExperimental Neuropsychology 33 (5)

Saulsman, Lisa M. (2011) Depression, anxiety and the MCMI-III:Construct validity and diagnostic sufficiency. Journal ofPersonality Assessment 93(1)

Millon Theodore (2011) Disorder of Personality: Introducing aDSM/ICD spectrum from normal to abnormal Hoboken, NJ, US: JohnWiley &ampSons Inc.

Ravndal, Edle, Vaglum (2010) The MCMI-III: Stability over time? Aseven-year follow- up the study of substance abusers in treatment.European Addiction Research16 (3)

Vance (2007) the Society of Human Resource and Management.Employee Engagement and Commitment

Li, Ya-wen, Yang, Yun-ping, Jiang, Chang-qing (2010) Study of thereliability and validity of MCMI-III. Chinese Journal of ClinicalPsychology 18(1)

Millon, Theodore (2010) Classification considerations inpsychopathology and person ology. Contemporary directions inpsychopathology: Scientific foundations of the DSM-V and ICD-11 NewYork, NY, US: Guilford Press.






Worthless Self-Image



Cognitively Fatalistic



Temperamentally woeful




Temperamentally irritable



Discontented self-image



Expressively resentful




Temperamentally labile



Interpersonally paradoxical



Uncertain self-image