What we find when we test INR.
INR is a model of human behavior. A model deserves to be tested, not just applied. On this page, we share our own research, including the findings that reinforce our approach and the areas where it is still a work in progress. Open, even where it's difficult.
In-depth, in-breadth, and the protocol.
We are examining INR along three complementary lines. One delves deeply into a small group, another looks for patterns across the board—from an initial exploration to a fully developed assessment—and the third tests the rigorous method we use to unravel the narrative. Together, they provide a more accurate picture than any one of them alone.
Into the deep
Qualitative and observational. We listen to what people themselves identify about their behavior under pressure, and reflect that without judgment. Rich and personal, with few people.
Expanding the scope
Quantitative. We are measuring how the three layers relate to each other via an anonymous questionnaire, from an initial exploration to a test with over three hundred people. Pattern-oriented, in two steps.
The protocol
Method and fidelity. We test whether people arrive at their narrative themselves, without guidance, through a strict protocol. Exactly, at the purest point.
What has been done so far.
Four studies, along three lines. We only show what truly exists, with the method, the scope, and an honest word about what it does and does not say.
Behavior under pressure in one organization
Twenty employees named their own behavior under pressure. We listened and provided insight into the underlying motivation and narrative, without judgment and without imposing labels. A first, in-depth look at how people recognize their own reactions.
What this does and does not say. Participants strongly identified with what emerged. This shows that the model resonates and gives language, not that it is proven by it. The insights are valid within this one organization.
How workers view the three layers
Fifty full-time employees anonymously completed a questionnaire on the three layers of INR: intrinsic motivations at work, their personal narrative, and behavior under pressure. An initial exploration of how these layers can be measured across the board.
What this does and does not say. The layer of intrinsic drives measured as a highly coherent whole within this group. The narrative layer could not yet be captured as a single measurable construct. This called for further development, which led to the chain validation below.
Unlocking the narrative through a tight protocol
We conducted the self-perception exercise 35 times across eight organizations. It’s a rigorous protocol in which the trainer never provides the narrative, but instead guides participants to arrive at it themselves through a set of fixed steps. It’s the most precise test of how INR unlocks the N-layer.
What this does and does not say. In twenty-eight instances, the participant approached the narrative themselves, without the trainer providing it. This shows that the narrative can be accessed without imposition. It does not prove that behavior changes afterward.
The chain tested on over three hundred people
Three hundred and three working people filled out a questionnaire designed in such a way that the model could have been undermined by it. The question: is behavior directly related to what someone is missing, or does it pass through the story someone tells themselves? The adult continuation of the exploration above.
What this does and does not say. The link between need and behavior runs through narrative, and that outcome remained under five different controls. No evidence of cause and effect, but evidence of a model that could have been refuted and was not.
Research with the same ethics as the model.
INR works with individuals through reflection, never through judgment. Our research follows the same approach. That determines how we interview people and how we interpret their words.
Reflect, don't interpret
People bring their own stories. We make visible what lies beneath, without labeling or judging it.
Anonymous wherever possible
The broad survey is completely anonymous. No one can be traced, so people can answer freely.
Possibility, not a promise
We speak in terms of what something "might" mean, not in definitive claims. A model that takes itself seriously does not exaggerate its outcomes.
Growing work, honestly delivered.
This is research within a broader line. The small studies suggest, the large ones test. Together, they show that the model resonates, provides language, and yields patterns that pass the test, always honestly outlining the limits.
That's what we're building towards. With more organizations, more participants, and measurements taken over a longer period of time, we’ll move step by step toward a deeper understanding. Along the way, we’ll share what we find, even what’s not yet finished. That’s what INR means to us: starting with ourselves in an open way.
A model that tests itself and dares to test.
Would you like to know what scientific principles INR is based on? We’ll cover those principles separately for anyone who wants to understand the foundation behind the studies.
Explore the science behind INR