Part I: Getting Started with the EQ-i 2.0

Introduction

Responsibilities of the Administrator

Consider the following situation: Mary, an outside consultant, is contracted by an organization to coach a group of leaders. The leaders take the EQ-i 2.0 and each attends a feedback session with Mary, who reaffirms that the leaders’ results are confidential and for professional development purposes. Midway through the contract, the organization asks Mary to provide the leaders’ individual EQ-i 2.0 scores to upper management so they can use the results in their succession planning initiative. They also request the composite results so they can compare the group to a control group of leaders who did not participate in the EQ-i 2.0. When Mary points out that these requests violate the leaders’ consent to take the EQ-i 2.0 confidentially, the organization reminds Mary that they are the stakeholders and the paying client.

Identifying Your Client

Who is the real client in Mary’s situation? The organization’s upper-management team? The leadership group? Or the individuals Mary individually assessed?

When embarking on any assessment initiative, consider how the results will be used, who will have access to the scores, and discuss any potential future uses with the participants and any party engaging your services. As part of getting the informed consent of the participants, you must disclose the planned uses and ensure that participants will not be penalized for withholding their participation.

In Mary’s case, her ethical dilemma could be prevented by having a discussion upfront with the organization that identified the EQ-i 2.0 participants as her clients, and clarifying that should the scope of the initiative change, they would not be able to make use of the initial results.

Who Owns the Data?

The EQ-i 2.0 respondent owns their results in most development situations. When the EQ-i 2.0 is used in selection, the organization is also an owner. Should the organization request it in this case, you are obligated to provide the EQ-i 2.0 results. Additionally, should the job applicant request to see results, these should be made available to the requesting party in a timely fashion.

In Mary’s case, the organization could have been established as co-owners of the EQ-i 2.0 data prior to administration, and Mary would have included succession planning as one of the potential purposes of the EQ-i 2.0 when gaining the informed consent of the leaders.

For a complete discussion of identifying your client and sharing EQ-i 2.0 data, please see Planning the EQ-i 2.0 Assessment Process.

Confidentiality

EQ-i 2.0 results (including scores, reports, and composite results) should be viewed only by those responsible for their preparation and for delivery of feedback to the respondent and those responsible for candidate selection. All information is regarded as confidential.

All information shared between the administrator and respondent is confidential and subject to rules regarding privileged communication between qualified professional and client. If any aspect of one’s results is discussed with others who are not directly involved in the provision of feedback, such as for consultation or teaching purposes, no identifying information should be disclosed.

There are some situations in which reporting is compulsory by law. For example,

• suspicion of child abuse,
• indication of intent to commit suicide or physically harm others,
• indication of previous or present sexual abuse by any other Regulated Health Professional,
• subpoena by the court, and
• fraudulent use of personal identification.
• Most administrators list the exceptions to confidentiality in their jurisdiction on an informed consent form that must be signed by the respondent before the EQ-i 2.0 is administered. See the Preparing Participants section in EQ-i 2.0 Setup and Scoring for further details.

You may wish to communicate a policy to respondents that following your feedback session, all copies of the reports are destroyed. Your clients should have a general understanding of your expectations of test disclosure, discussed in the next section.

Test Disclosure

The EQ-i 2.0 is a copyrighted tool. Therefore, it cannot be reproduced without the explicit written permission of the publisher. The EQ-i 2.0 is also a regulated test; in accordance with the ethical and professional standards of the American Psychological Association and the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, the use and interpretation of results is restricted to qualified professionals (see Qualification and Certification for more information).

Any printed EQ-i 2.0 reports should be retained in a confidential and secure location as long as required by any applicable laws or regulations. Recent laws (e.g., the United States’ Health Insurance Probability and Accountability Act [HIPAA] and the Canadian Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act [PIPEDA]) require that individuals have access to the personal information contained in their files. Additionally, a file may be subpoenaed for a legal proceeding. It can be difficult to know how to provide the legally required information while maintaining copyright protection and security of test materials. It is recommended that local laws and regulations be followed for the appropriate storage and release of personal information, test materials, and results.

Please view the MHS Test Disclosure Policy, which includes recommendations for best practices regarding client access to test results and the release of test materials under legal and ethical obligations.

Rights of the Respondent

Respondents of the EQ-i 2.0 have the right to

• participate voluntarily,
• complete the inventory in a private setting,
• know how the results will be used and who will have access to the results (informed consent), and
• withdraw at any time.

The basic rationale for administering the test should be explained to the respondent(s) before beginning the EQ-i 2.0 assessment and explained in more detail after completing it. The respondent(s) should not merely be e-mailed a link and told to complete it. In either a group or individual meeting, the administrator must put the inventory into proper context, ensure confidentiality, explain that the results will not be the only factor in decision making, and assuage any anxiety the respondent(s) may feel about completing the inventory.

Informed consent must be obtained before administration, and the EQ-i 2.0 must not be used to trick or dupe respondents into giving information they do not want to share. Informed consent refers to providing the respondent with as much relevant information as necessary to allow him or her to consciously decide whether to participate in the assessment process. At the very least, the respondent must be told the reasons for issuing the inventory and how the results are going to be used. Participation must be voluntary, and verbal or written permission must be acquired. Written permission is recommended over verbal consent whenever possible. Informed consent is required in clinical, medical, educational, corporate, and even research settings.

Obtaining consent does not imply that once permission is granted the respondent cannot change his or her mind. Respondents should be free to withdraw consent and discontinue participation at any time.

Data Security

Access to MHS online scoring services is restricted to qualified users and requires an ID and password. Registration of MHS customers or their designated administrators (“Administrators”) is rigorous with defined qualification user levels. Identity is confirmed by a Qualification Form which is a binding test user agreement coupled with a review of qualifications and certification.

All MHS data (including Administrators and test user information, test data, including responses to test items, and report text) are stored in an industry-standard secure database. Access to these data is strictly controlled. A temporary password initially provided by MHS must be changed upon initial log-in. MHS is able to reset a password at the request of the customer, if necessary.

The EQ-i 2.0 is scored by a separate secure scoring server controlled by MHS with an advanced level of security protection. Once administered, test reports are returned to the Administrator by using an encryption technology described below.

MHS protects the personal data of MHS customers, the data of their clients, and the data collected via electronic commerce transactions with the highest levels of security. Through the e-commerce purchase process, we ask for the purchaser’s name, address, license number, credit card information (“Financial Data”), and other personal data required to process requests to purchase and maintain customer accounts. MHS servers use 128/256-bit industry-standard Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) encryption which is encryption technology that works with the most current web browsers. SSL encrypts the purchaser’s personal information (including Financial Data and other personal data) as well as test user information (including test data, responses, and reports returned to the Administrator), protecting against disclosure to third parties.