Our customers are amazed at the accuracy of PEP. Consider: we have sold this program
since 1985. The only way we sell PEP is to people who have already tried the program. If
it didn't work... they wouldn't buy it. So since people keep buying our program... they must
consider it to be valid.

In fact, according to customer response-- and by our tests (and we have tested this system
on a LOT of people), PEP has been found to have an accuracy of 95% and above. This is
amazing in a field in which common accuracy is only 60 to 70 percent. It is not unusually
for a customer to tell us that "PEP nailed me right on the head".

Sometimes you may seem to get a "conflicting" report. You may find a report that says that
this person is "cautious". But in another place it says the person is "daring". This would
appear to be inconsistent. However, this is not necessarily the case. If a person was NOT
cautious and was daring, he would jump into any situation without foresight. However, a
person who IS cautious and yet daring, is one who will get all the facts available, then be
willing to take a chance based on an educated decision. You see the difference between
the two. You've heard the term "calculated risk"? Cautious Daring.

Considering that we have been in business since 1985 and sell only to people who have
already tried our program, it is obvious that PEP is considered by our clients to be
"amazingly accurate".

Whenever you decide to use a programs such as PEP, you will naturally be concerned
about potential manipulation of the Response sheet by employees and applicants.

While it is possible for any survey or testing system to be answered incorrectly,
manipulation is another thing entirely. The Personality Evaluation Program is designed to
cross-reference information that is entered into it. PEP contains routines which detect
possible manipulation of responses. In addition, if an applicant decides to give false
information, it is VERY likely that it will have just the opposite result the applicant wishes to

Suppose for example an applicant survey indicates that the applicant is a liberal, outgoing,
energetic person. If the applicant during the normal course of interview, barely speaks, is
wearing very conservative clothing, slumps in his chair, etc. you are going to become
quickly aware of the situation. Thus the Personality Evaluation Program, while in that
particular case did not tell you the true personality of the applicant, certainly DID clue you
into the fact that this person may have falsified the information (or alternately, simply failed
to follow directions and filled everything in BACKWARD. Such things happen).

Is it possible for a person to answer with traits he THINKS the employer wants? Yes, that
is possible... but is likely to produce unwanted results. First of all, the terms used in PEP
are not always easily associated with specific traits. In addition, the applicant is usually
not aware of the job traits the employer is seeking (if the applicant even understands the
concept of PEP in the first place). Therefore, if a person tries to manipulate answers, they
may find that the results they've attempted to achieve are exactly the opposite of what the
employer was looking for in the first place. Maybe the employer is looking for a submissive
salesperson to handle a delicate product; the go-getter mover and shaker suddenly
"manipulated" himself right out of a job... and PEP succceeded in doing its job.

PEP is a tool; it is not the decision maker. That job is left to you, the manager. But PEP is
designed to eliminate manipulation as much as possible. It will help provide you with the
information necessary to make better and more informed decisions. PEP can inform you
when potential manipulation has occurred.