Is it defensible against scientifically-trained clients?

Big Five has 30 years of literature, convergent validity with NEO-PI-R, reliability above .80 and public norms. ECR-R, HSQ and ZTPI are published in indexed journals. AVI is proprietary and we flag it as such. Bibliography for the client at /metodologia and /manual-tecnico.

Do you have an account for coaches with multiple clients?

Not yet. Each client has their own account and profile; they share the JSON or PDF with you if they choose. We are evaluating a professional plan for coaches with an aggregated dashboard, but we will not launch it until it makes sense and protects each client’s privacy.

Can you white-label the report with my brand?

Not our priority or our model. We sell a product to the end user, not white-label licences. If you need that, there are other providers. If what you need is rigour and portability for your sessions, that we deliver.

← Back to use cases

Coaches who prefer data to self-help

For executive, life, sports or team coaches. A serious instrument for serious clients. No DISC, no colour wheels, no promises of radical transformation in six sessions.

Coaching has a credibility crisis: anyone calls themselves a coach and the field fills with un-normed instruments. You are not like that. You want a quantified, comparable, defensible data point when a demanding client asks "what is this based on?". Big Five has 30 years of literature. Start there.

The pains you bring

DISC, colours and other folklore

DISC has poor test-retest reliability and has never been validated against rigorous external criteria. Reds-blues-yellows-greens are charming for a corporate offsite, not for career decisions. If your client has seen you selling that, your credibility is gone. Change instrument.

Demanding client asking for the basis

A CEO with an MBA. A tech executive. An elite athlete. They tell you: "prove this is worth it". You want to respond with respondent counts, alpha reliability, convergent validity. Not with "it’s what feels right".

Teams where no one knows why they clash

Three members with high openness propose ideas, two with low openness block them by default. The DISC-only coach misses it. With five Big Five profiles open on a whiteboard, you see the entire dynamic in five minutes.

What Afini solves

Your client brings the profile already done

You send them the test.afini.ai link. They do it at home in 15–45 minutes depending on rigour. They show up with percentiles. You add the context, the questions, the follow-through. What a coach does well.

Defensible data for clients who ask

Big Five is the personality model with the strongest academic consensus (Costa & McCrae 1992; John, Naumann & Soto 2008; Soto & John 2017). It predicts job performance (Barrick & Mount 1991), health (Friedman & Kern 2014) and life satisfaction (Steel et al. 2008). If your client wants to nitpick the bibliography, they won’t find much. If they pick at MBTI, they’ll find plenty in 30 seconds.

Teams: add profiles, see the dynamic

Each member takes the test. In a team session, you build the matrix: five-domain percentiles per person. Who brings openness, who brings conscientiousness, who regulates tension, who generates it. It is not magic: it is a map for conversations that used to be "I don’t know what is going on with Marcos".

Your own coaching bias

If you are high openness, you gravitate to coachees who enjoy ambiguity. If you are high conscientiousness, you get impatient with procrastinators. Doing your own profile is the best way to know which client types are hard for you and why. The personalised AI flags it when you project your style onto theirs.

What you are probably asking

Is it defensible against scientifically-trained clients?: Big Five has 30 years of literature, convergent validity with NEO-PI-R, reliability above .80 and public norms. ECR-R, HSQ and ZTPI are published in indexed journals. AVI is proprietary and we flag it as such. Bibliography for the client at /metodologia and /manual-tecnico.
Do you have an account for coaches with multiple clients?: Not yet. Each client has their own account and profile; they share the JSON or PDF with you if they choose. We are evaluating a professional plan for coaches with an aggregated dashboard, but we will not launch it until it makes sense and protects each client’s privacy.
Can you white-label the report with my brand?: Not our priority or our model. We sell a product to the end user, not white-label licences. If you need that, there are other providers. If what you need is rigour and portability for your sessions, that we deliver.

Your case, with your own data

Start my profile

Cancelable, exportable, no training on your data.

Use cases

Professionals with a full head

For people who use AI several hours a day and need it to understand how they work — not to parrot what they already know.

Couples who want to talk better

Two profiles. One conversation protocol. No sermons about what love is.

Parents who prefer understanding to lecturing

Your kid is not like you. Knowing this does not turn parenting into a manual, but it takes the drama out of half the fights.

Therapists who want an instrument, not a replacement

Big Five with norms from a million respondents, ECR-R, HSQ, ZTPI. Comparable data your patient can bring you done. No AI telling you how to work.