What to Do After a Team Personality Test: A Practical Manager’s Guide

Completing a personality quiz together can start a useful conversation. It cannot improve a team on its own. The value comes from what the group discusses, tries, and revisits after everyone receives a result.

Use this guide to turn a team’s Animal Personality Quiz results into a few practical working agreements. The aim is not to sort people into boxes. It is to give coworkers a lighter, shared vocabulary for discussing preferences that can otherwise be difficult to name.

Use results for reflection, not evaluation. Do not use this quiz to hire, fire, promote, diagnose, rank, or assign someone’s worth. Participation and sharing should be voluntary. People are the final authority on whether a result describes them.

The short version: a 60-minute post-results session

If you only have one hour, use this agenda:

Send the quiz before the meeting, but do not require people to post their full result publicly. Some people will be happy to share an animal type. Others may prefer to discuss one or two working preferences without sharing the label.

1. Set the ground rules before discussing results

Start by saying what the exercise is—and what it is not.

You can use this script:

“This is a reflection and team-conversation exercise. It does not measure ability or potential, and nobody has to agree with or share their result. We will use it to discuss how we prefer to communicate and work. We will not use it for performance or employment decisions.”

Then agree on four rules:

1. The person interprets the result. A coworker cannot tell someone what their animal “really means.”
2. No type is the best type. Every preference can help in one setting and create friction in another.
3. A type does not excuse behavior. “I am a Lion” is not a free pass to interrupt people. “I am an Owl” is not a reason to delay every decision.
4. People can pass. Sharing a result, an example, or a personal story is optional.

These boundaries matter even when the activity feels playful. In the United States, the EEOC explains that tests used for employment decisions must comply with anti-discrimination law. This quiz is designed for self-reflection and team conversation, not employee selection. If you are considering any assessment for a high-stakes workplace decision, use a qualified professional and get appropriate legal guidance.

This article offers general team-development guidance, not legal advice.

2. Let each person interpret their own result first

Give everyone five quiet minutes with these prompts:

• What part of my result feels accurate?
• What part feels incomplete or wrong?
• When does this working style help me?
• Under pressure, how might this style become unhelpful?
• What is one thing teammates can do that helps me contribute?

During the result round, ask each person to share only two statements:

1. “One part that sounds like me is…”
2. “One thing I want teammates to know is…”

This works better than asking the room to interpret each other. It also makes space for nuance: two people can receive the same animal result and still behave very differently because of their role, experience, culture, current stress, and other traits.

If someone dislikes their result, do not defend the quiz. Ask what description would feel more useful. The disagreement itself can reveal something important about how that person sees their strengths and needs.

3. Map the team without turning the map into a stereotype

Open the personality directory and place the team’s results on a shared board or document. The goal is not to count the “best” animals. Look for patterns that may affect the team’s work.

Discuss four questions:

• Which preferences seem common on this team?
• Which perspectives may be easier for us to overlook?
• Where do we tend to move too quickly, too slowly, too quietly, or too loudly?
• What conditions help different people offer their best thinking?

Use cautious language. Say, “We may have a tendency to…” rather than, “Owls always…” or, “Lions cannot…”

For example, a teammate who identifies with the methodical side of an Owl result may appreciate an agenda before a decision meeting. A teammate who identifies with a more decisive result may prefer a clear deadline and decision owner. Neither preference is automatically right. A useful meeting can provide preparation time and a firm point at which the group decides.

The absence of an animal type is not proof that the team lacks a skill. Results describe a person’s current answers to a short quiz, not the full capability of the group.

4. Explore likely friction with side-by-side comparisons

The comparison tool can help two coworkers discuss differences without making the conversation personal. Treat every comparison as a set of prompts, not a prediction.

For a pair that works together often, ask:

• Where do our preferred pace and level of detail differ?
• How does each of us signal disagreement?
• What does a useful update look like to each of us?
• When a deadline is tight, what behavior from the other person creates stress?
• What small adjustment could each of us try for two weeks?

A practical outcome might be:

“Before a major decision, we will share the key facts by 3 p.m. Tuesday. Questions are due Wednesday morning. The decision owner will choose by Wednesday afternoon.”

That agreement is more useful than, “The Owl needs more data and the Lion needs to slow down.” It describes what the team will actually do.

5. Turn the discussion into three team agreements

Do not leave the session with a long list of personality observations. Choose three behaviors that the team can see and test.

Good agreements are specific:

• We send decision documents at least one working day before review.
• During brainstorming, we collect written ideas before open discussion.
• The meeting owner states whether an item needs discussion, a recommendation, or a final decision.
• Anyone can ask for five quiet minutes before the group responds to a difficult question.
• Feedback describes an observed behavior and its impact; it does not use an animal label as criticism.

Weak agreements sound positive but cannot be tested:

• Communicate better.
• Respect every personality.
• Be more collaborative.

Ask the group to select one agreement about communication, one about decisions, and one about handling disagreement. Record an owner and a review date for each.

6. Use results in 1:1s without putting people in a box

A result can open a 1:1 conversation, but the employee’s current experience should lead it.

Try questions such as:

• Which part of your result is most useful at work right now?
• Is there a strength you are not getting enough opportunity to use?
• What kind of context helps you make a good decision?
• How do you prefer to receive difficult feedback?
• Is there anything in your result you do not want me to assume about you?
• What is one working experiment you would like us to try?

Do not silently use the result to assign work. Asking a detail-oriented person to review every spreadsheet can turn a perceived strength into an unfair burden. Offer opportunities, discuss preferences, and continue to support growth outside someone’s comfort zone.

For a deeper agenda, use the companion guide on using personality results in 1:1 meetings.

7. Know what not to do

Avoid these common mistakes:

• Do not publish a team result list without consent. Let each person decide what they share.
• Do not use types as nicknames during conflict. “You are being such a Lion” is personal criticism wearing a playful costume.
• Do not make employment decisions from the quiz. It is not designed or validated for selection, promotion, compensation, or performance scoring.
• Do not force role alignment. Preferences can inform a conversation, but they should not limit development opportunities.
• Do not treat the result as permanent. Answers and behavior can change with context and over time.
• Do not diagnose a person or a team. If a group is dealing with harassment, discrimination, severe conflict, or mental-health concerns, use the appropriate professional process.

You can review how the quiz works before the session so you can explain its purpose and limits clearly.

8. Follow up after two weeks and 30 days

The first session should produce experiments, not permanent rules.

After two weeks, spend ten minutes in a regular meeting asking:

• Which agreement did we actually use?
• What became easier?
• What felt forced or unhelpful?
• What should we change for the next two weeks?

After 30 days, keep, revise, or remove each agreement. If an agreement helped, add it to the team’s normal working guide. If it did not, discard it without blaming the quiz or the people involved.

You do not need to discuss animal types in every meeting. A successful exercise may eventually fade into ordinary habits: clearer agendas, more inclusive discussions, better feedback, and fewer assumptions about how coworkers think.

Manager checklist

Before the session

• Explain the purpose and voluntary nature of the exercise
• Share the quiz and the privacy information
• Give people time to read their result privately
• Prepare a 60-minute agenda and a shared working document

During the session

• State that results are for reflection, not evaluation
• Let each person interpret their own result
• Use cautious language and avoid stereotypes
• Choose three observable team agreements
• Set a two-week review date

After the session

• Share only the information people agreed to share
• Test the agreements in normal work
• Review them after two weeks and again after 30 days
• Remove labels once the useful working habit is clear

Frequently asked questions

How soon should we discuss the results?

Usually within a week, while the exercise is still fresh. Give people enough time to read their result privately before any group discussion.

Should everyone reveal their animal type?

No. Participation and sharing should be voluntary. Someone can discuss a working preference without disclosing the full result.

Can managers use the results for project assignments?

Use them to start a conversation about preferences, not to make the decision for someone. Consider skills, experience, interest, workload, development goals, and the actual requirements of the work.

Can we use the quiz in hiring or performance reviews?

No. Animal Personality Quiz is a self-reflection and conversation tool. It is not designed or validated for high-stakes employment decisions.

How often should a team retake the quiz?

There is no required schedule. Revisit the discussion when the team changes substantially or when people feel the earlier agreements no longer fit. The working conversation is more important than repeatedly taking the quiz.

Sources

• U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: Employment Tests and Selection Procedures
• U.S. Surgeon General: Framework for Workplace Mental Health and Well-Being
• UC Berkeley People & Culture: Helpful Toolkits and Guides