Loading page content
30 original work-priority choices · Ten full guides free
Compare ten work priorities in 30 original four-option choices. Read all counts, shared ranks and ten full free guides. No job-fit percentage or hiring verdict.
30 questions · about 7 minutes · no signup
Imagine one ordinary next work role and keep that setting throughout. Assume the basic role is feasible and fair pay, safety and legal conditions are already required; those are not benefits to trade away. In each question choose the one offered condition you would protect first, even if several matter or none is ideal. The four conditions are assumed feasible for that imagined comparison, not promises about real employers. You can stop if the task does not fit. Finish all thirty choices before any counts or interpretation. No correct answers, reverse keys, purchases or personal workplace details are needed.
Preparing the test…
All questions and full results are free, with no signup. Saving is optional; only saved attempts can be resumed after a refresh or language change. Tab drafts expire after 24 hours and clear on completion or retake.
What would you protect first when a workable role cannot offer every attractive benefit? Compare Achievement, Autonomy, Creativity, Security, Altruism, Recognition, Relationships, Learning, Work-Life Balance and Impact. These ten editorial work priorities and all thirty questions are independently written for this edition. They differ from Schwartz basic human values, RIASEC activity interests and the six O*NET work values; this is not their questionnaire or a standardized job-match instrument. All ten complete guides are open before you start.
Each question offers four different values and one selection adds one count to its value. All ten appear twelve times, three times in each option position; every unordered pair appears together four times. The fixed bank has thirty selections in total, not a grand personality score. All thirty valid answers are required. Partial or invalid answers receive no interpretation. The design balances appearances, not wording difficulty, context or psychometric precision.
Rank equals one plus the number of values with a greater count. Equal counts share a rank, so counts of 6, 6 and 4 begin with ranks 1, 1 and 3. All highest values retain their own complete reading; no hidden tie-break, fixed top-three cutoff, percentage or norm is used. Three selections each makes an all-ten tie. A lower count means fewer choices in this bank, not rejection, low ability or moral inferiority. Compare the actual selected and unselected alternatives, especially for close counts.
This is an original reflection, not the competitor bank, an O*NET Work Importance Locator, Schwartz PVQ or an occupational-fit score. The CareerOneStop reference explains a separate six-value model and supplies background only; none of its cards, questions, formulas or job data is administered. This edition has no established reliability, validation, norms or language equivalence. All ten full guides are free without an account or email. Sharing copies only the public title and entry; answers stay in this page unless you opt into temporary tab storage. Review conditions, compare evidence or finish here.
Read all 10 complete public result guides below. They contain no private attempts. Every highest-count tie gets its full report, and you can compare other results before answering.
This reading concerns the satisfaction of completing demanding work to a clear standard. It does not estimate ability, productivity or career success.
This reading concerns discretion over how ordinary work is carried out within agreed boundaries. It does not measure independence as a personality trait or permission to ignore responsibilities.
This reading concerns opportunities to invent ideas, designs or approaches. It describes a work priority, not a test of creative ability or artistic talent.
This reading concerns continuity and predictable arrangements in ordinary working life. It does not measure courage, financial worth or a general attitude toward risk.
This reading concerns directly supporting people through ordinary work. It does not measure moral worth, compassion as a trait or suitability for a helping profession.
This reading concerns acknowledgment and accurate credit for work. It does not measure vanity, popularity, social status or leadership potential.
This reading concerns ongoing, respectful connections with people at work. It does not rate your social skill, popularity or the quality of your current relationships.
This reading concerns opportunities to develop knowledge or competence through work. It does not measure intelligence, educational level or how quickly you learn.
This reading concerns time, recovery and commitments outside work. It does not measure dedication, resilience or whether your current workload is healthy.
This reading concerns the effects of work after an output is used. It does not measure social value, objective impact or suitability for a particular mission.
No. These are ten editorial work priorities and thirty original choices. Schwartz basic human values, the six O*NET work values and RIASEC activity interests are different frameworks. Their banks, scores, validity and job recommendations are not inherited.
One selected option adds one to its value. Each value appears twelve times with balanced option positions and pair co-exposure. All thirty valid choices are required; show all ten counts out of twelve, shared ranks and every highest reading. There is no overall score or fixed unique winner.
No. It provides questions about preferred conditions, not occupation rankings, fit percentages, hiring suitability or predictions of satisfaction. Real decisions also require evidence about duties, skills, opportunities and constraints.
It means that value was selected less often against the alternatives offered here. It does not show that you reject it, lack ability or have a character flaw. Every choice also declines three options, so read the actual alternatives and keep close counts close.
No. Equal appearances, positions and pair co-exposure are transparent structural properties. Reliability, validity, norms and language equivalence have not been established. The ten editorial concepts are not claimed to be ten independent psychological factors.
Every full guide is free before and after answering, with no email, account, purchase or another-test gate. Optional sharing contains only the public title and entry link, without answers, counts, private ranks or a personal-result identifier.
These sources provide background, not validation of this questionnaire or an individual diagnosis.
Website content edition fm_work_values_original30_v1 ·
Source question / scoring / report versions: fm_work_values_original30_v1 / fm_work_values_equal12_all_highest_counts_v1 / fm_work_values_original10_full_v1