Skip to content

RIASEC Test

Running a RIASEC session in 60 to 90 minutes

A session plan that turns the grid into a group conversation about what draws each person, with what to say and what is better avoided.

This plan works from the group grid: you open a session, everyone answers from the same link, and the grid updates as answers come in.

Create a session →

Free, no signup, from 3 participants.

See how a group session works

What RIASEC is, and what it is not

RIASEC comes from psychologist John Holland's theory of vocational types (1959), developed later in Making Vocational Choices: six families of interests, realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising and conventional, arranged in a hexagon where two neighbouring types are more alike than two opposite ones. This arrangement shows up well in American data, less consistently in other countries (Rounds and Tracey, 1996). This test is an independent test inspired by that model, not an official instrument from Holland's work nor the O*NET Interest Profiler, and it is neither a diagnostic tool nor a career guidance decision.

In a workshop, these six words can serve as a shared vocabulary to talk about what draws each person: the activities that make them want to do more, and the ones that weigh on them. The answers describe interests stated today, not aptitudes, grades or chances of succeeding in a job. It supports a discussion; it does not measure the person. This questionnaire has no reference group, and we have run no study of the stability of its results (test-retest).

What this questionnaire does not allow

  • saying how a person or the group will succeed, at school or in a job;
  • building teams or assigning roles by profile;
  • comparing two people on the same type: each answer spreads points across several types, so a score says what the person preferred over something else, not how much of that type they have, and this questionnaire has no reference group;
  • assessing, hiring or justifying a decision about someone;
  • reading the profile as a job or a course of study to follow: it describes families of activities, and the fit between one's interests and one's job is linked to job satisfaction in a real but modest way (Hoff and colleagues, 2020).

The session plan

  1. Minutes 0 to 10, the frame.

    State the goal: open a conversation about what draws each person, not assign a job or rank each other. Say that the result is a starting point, that a first name is optional and that nobody will have to announce their profile. Share the link or the QR code.

  2. Minutes 10 to 25, taking the test and reading alone.

    Everyone answers on their own, then reads their result page in silence and notes one sentence that fits them and one that does not.

  3. Minutes 25 to 40, the grid.

    Show the grid and first ask what people see in it, before any interpretation. Then read the make-up as questions: a frequent type, a type that is rare in the split, a missing type. Each reading is a hypothesis the group confirms or sets aside. The grid keeps only each person's dominant type, whereas the usual reading of this model is a two- or three-letter code: a type missing from the grid only means that nobody has it first; it can come second or third in the individual results. The scoring does not give the six types the same maximum: a rare type can come from the questionnaire as much as from the group. A type that is very present can say as much about what the group already knows as about what it likes, and a very uniform class can partly come from the way the course recruits its students, not from their abilities.

  4. Minutes 40 to 55, the discussion.

    Do the "where this profile got me wrong" exercise below, then ask this question: "Which recent activity, in class, on a placement or elsewhere, made you want to do more, and which one weighed on you?"

  5. Minutes 55 to 60, the commitment.

    Each person picks a single concrete action before the next session, based on what was said, not on the letters: an activity or a meeting to explore (a job to look at closely, a placement, someone to ask), close to their type or far from it. It is a lead to try, never a job assigned according to the profile: the grid does not appoint anyone.

  6. 90-minute variant.

    Between minute 40 and minute 70, work in pairs: each person tells the other what, in their result, speaks to them or surprises them, then the other rephrases it, before swapping roles. Each pair that wishes to reports back in one sentence, then keep twenty minutes for the commitment.

The "where this profile got me wrong" exercise

Everyone rereads their description and picks out two sentences: the one that describes them least well, and the one that could describe almost anybody. Pool the second ones, without saying which profile they come from.

This is the Barnum effect, described by Bertram Forer in 1949: a general enough description feels personal to most people. Spotting it together is a reminder that the result is a starting point, and makes it legitimate not to recognise oneself in it.

Why start from a real situation

A meta-analysis of debriefs (Tannenbaum and Cerasoli, 2013) links going back together over a specific work episode with better performance afterwards, mostly in simulation studies (medical and military). It covers neither RIASEC, nor career guidance, nor any profile tool: that is why one question in the plan starts from a real, recent activity, and this plan promises no effect on the group or on anyone's choices.

To avoid during the session

  • guessing or announcing out loud the profile of a participant who has not shared it, or locking someone into theirs ("you are Conventional, so creative jobs are not for you");
  • reading out to the group the first names from the facilitator-only list;
  • commenting on a pair of named people, or comparing two participants on the same type;
  • assigning or ruling out a course of study, a job, a placement or a role according to the profile, or tying a type or a job to a gender: the result opens leads, it closes none;
  • drawing from the grid a judgement on what the group is worth or will achieve.

Did this help? If you keep a resource page for your students, trainees or colleagues, you are welcome to mention Profilia (profilia.app) there. That is all: nothing to sign up for, nothing in return.