Target Assessment Practice
A short behavioural questionnaire from a small Dutch agency placing people into industrial roles. What it asks, what it reports, and why there is nothing to revise
Which Target this is
Worth clearing up before anything else, because the name collides badly in search. This page is about a Dutch recruitment agency called Target, which places people into the industrial sector, was founded in 2015 and employs around twenty people. It has nothing to do with Target Corporation, the American retail chain, whose hiring process is entirely unrelated.
Thomas International publishes a case study naming this Target as a user of the Behaviour assessment, historically called the Personal Profile Analysis or PPA.
Being assessed by an agency, in industrial placement
Two features of this situation shape everything else. The first is that the agency, not the end employer, administers the questionnaire, so your result goes into a pool and travels with your file to more than one client. The second is that industrial placement covers a very wide range of work, from production and warehousing through to technical and supervisory roles, and the same behavioural profile suits some of those and not others.
Both of those point the same way: the questionnaire is a matching tool. It is not there to decide whether you are good, it is there to decide where you go. A profile you constructed to look impressive gets you matched to work that suits somebody else.
The four DISC factors, and what each end means
The three graphs
The twenty-four “most like me” choices build your work mask: how you present at work. The twenty-four “least like me” choices build your behaviour under pressure: where you go instinctively when things go wrong. The third graph, self image, is the first minus the second, which is why it can run negative.
That arithmetic is why trying to look ideal does not work. A constructed profile lives in the work mask and does not survive into the pressure graph, and the gap between them is what a Thomas-trained reader treats as behaviour modification. The instrument is ipsative, meaning it ranks your qualities against each other rather than against other people, so there is genuinely no way to be high on everything.
How to sit it
- Answer as your working self. The adjectives describe behaviour at work, not personality in general.
- Take the first reading. There is no clock and no reward for deliberating. Word-level judgements get worse with overthinking.
- Expect awkward sets. Some will feel like all four words fit and some like none do. Thomas says so itself. Choose the closest and move on.
- Check the language. Thomas publishes in many languages. Adjective nuance is exactly where a second language costs you accuracy, so ask which versions are available.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I fail this?
No. Thomas states there is no correct behavioural style and that you cannot pass or fail the assessment. The relevant outcome is fit with a particular role, which is a matching question rather than a quality judgement.
Will there also be an aptitude test?
The Thomas case study on Target names the Behaviour assessment only. Thomas also sells the Aptitude assessment, the GIA, a timed five-task battery that requires a desktop and a mouse. If your invitation says the test is timed, that is what you have, and it is a genuinely different preparation problem.
How long is my result valid?
Agency policy rather than test policy. Agencies usually reuse a result across several introductions for a period rather than retesting each time, so it is worth asking your consultant.
Can I see my own report?
Ask for it. Thomas reports are designed to be discussed, and in the Netherlands candidates generally have a right of insight into a report written about them. It is the most useful thing you personally get out of the exercise.
Practise the format
Our Thomas practice hub runs the PPA the way Thomas builds it and shows all three graphs afterwards, plus the GIA in case a timed test turns up in your process.