Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ) Test
How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- Rarely
- Sometimes
- Regularly
- Often
- Always
- Rarely
- Sometimes
- Regularly
- Often
- Always
- Rarely
- Sometimes
- Regularly
- Often
- Always
Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ) Test - Description and methodology of the test
Employees, managers, and researchers who want a structured view of day-to-day functioning can use the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ) Test to examine how work is planned, carried out, and supported through initiative. As a work performance assessment, it focuses on self-reported work behaviors rather than a single overall judgment, helping readers identify strengths, development priorities, and patterns worth discussing.
What This Assessment Explores
Performance is not limited to output. It separates core duties, extra-role support, and behaviors that harm the organization. This individual work performance questionnaire examines planning, learning, initiative, cooperation, and responses to workplace problems. It suits people reviewing work habits and supports focused reflection or development conversations.
Three dimensions are presented:
- Counterproductive Work Behavior (0–20) measures behaviors that harm the organization, including discussion of negative work aspects and focus on workplace difficulties; bands are Low 0–6, Moderate 7–13, and High 14–20.
- Task Context (0–32) reflects initiative, enthusiasm, cooperation, and help beyond formal duties; bands: Limited support behaviors 0–10, Consistent support behaviors 11–21; Strong support behaviors 22–32.
- Task Performance (0–20) assesses core or technical proficiency through completion, planning, knowledge, thoroughness, and problem-solving; bands: Developing 0–9, Solid 10–15, and Strong 16–20.
Methodology and Evidence
Each statement asks how often a behavior occurred, using five options: Rarely, Sometimes, Regularly, Often, and Always. Items cover planning, task focus, professional growth, initiative, creative problem solving, participation, and reactions to workplace difficulties. Responses are reported by domain and interpreted through the displayed bands; those labels should be read according to each domain’s definition, not as a universal ranking of a person or job.
The published IWPQ manual describes the source instrument, and the 2013 development study reports its three-domain framework for employee performance assessment. The 2016 cross-cultural adaptation study shows that wording and administration may require adjustment across languages and settings. This online presentation is conceptually consistent with that framework, but it is not an adaptation of the published instrument and is not a workplace-specific normed or standardized form.
Self-report is sensitive to recall, honesty, current workload, and the respondent’s awareness of their own habits. Results are most informative when considered alongside concrete work examples and repeated over time, rather than treated as a fixed personal trait or a standalone measure of organizational performance.
- Koopmans, L. (2015). IWPQ Individual Work Performance Questionnaire: instruction manual. Amsterdam/Hoofddorp: Body@Work; TNO. 25 p.
- Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., van Buuren, S., van der Beek, A. J., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2013). Development of an individual work performance questionnaire. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 62(1), 6–28. 10.1108/17410401311285273
- Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., Lerner, D., de Vet, H. C. W., & van der Beek, A. J. (2016). Cross-cultural adaptation of the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire. Work, 53(3), 609–619. 10.3233/WOR-152237
Updated: