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. AAP, AHP and ATP are proprietary Bilbao AI instruments, original and undergoing empirical validation (Phase B in progress). 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.

A sample conversation

Preparing a session with the coachee’s data

Executive coachee, CEO of 180 people. E1 = 78, O5 = 24, C2 = 82, A4 = 18. Wants to work on "compassionate leadership". Where to start?

Look at the cocktail: high E1 (surface warmth), low O5 (low openness to others’ values), high C2 (self-rated competence), low A4 (little actual compliance). Translation: charismatic in public, closed to feedback that doesn’t fit, very self-assured, very unwilling to yield. "Compassionate leadership" without touching O5 and A4 is makeup. Start there: how often a month does he change his mind because of something a subordinate said?

He says "almost always". I suspect he’s lying without realising it.

Confirmed. Low A4 + high C2 predicts strong self-perception bias about one’s own openness. Ask for three concrete examples from the last month, with names, dates, and what changed. If he can’t get past two, you have the data. Not confrontation — it’s asking him to exercise the skill he thinks he has.

A typical run-through

A coaching week using Afini

Monday
Prep 4 sessions in 20 minutes
Every coachee sent you their AfiniTwin. You ask your AI, with the profile injected, for three hypotheses and two calibrated questions per session. You walk in prepared, without the "let’s see what comes up" baggage.
Wednesday
A hard session, live
The coachee says "I’m not moving forward". On your screen you see his profile: high C and high N4. It’s not effort missing, it’s tolerance to look incompetent. You reframe the complaint and the frame shifts. Without the profile you’d have gone hunting for strategies.
Friday
Report to the sponsoring company
When HR asks "how’s it going?", you used to run on impressions. Now you present delta percentiles between session 1 and session 8 on two agreed dimensions. Confidentiality intact, data on the table. They re-hire you.

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. AAP, AHP and ATP are proprietary Bilbao AI instruments, original and undergoing empirical validation (Phase B in progress). 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.

Keep exploring

Key concepts for this profile:

Afini compared with:

Afini vs ChatGPT

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, AAP, AHP, ATP. Comparable data your patient can bring you done. No AI telling you how to work.