A new internet based work-related test with ipsative properties called Shapes Admin is investigated and categorized as partially ipsative. Ipsative formats have a history of controversies.Some of these are presented as they are directly related to the further inquiries of this paper–investigation of the tests internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct and concurrentcriterion related validity. Respondents were recruited from one of the largest recruitment firms in Scandinavia both in-house and among job applicants. The findings show that Cut-e’s own internal consistency estimates lack theoretical foundation and that a modified Cronbach alpha (mean modified alpha = .57) at best give an underestimate of the true internal consistency, possibly providing a lower bound estimate. Test-retest reliability is provided (mean r = .66) and is argued to be much more suitable for this type of test, although four of the scales are inadequate for selection because of r < .60. Principal component analysis and confirmatory factor analysisindicate some heuristic support for 11 of Shapes Admin’s 15 concepts, but owing to methodological controversies it is advised to compare it to a normative equivalent measure before any such conclusions are drawn. Face-validity examinations were used as a replacement. Nosignificant findings were found amongst the hypothesized concepts with the criterion, but one of the other scales was significantly correlated with the criterion. Despite this, some medium effectsizes are commented. Overall, the main recommendation is that to establish better evidence for the partially ipsative measure’s internal consistency, unidimensionality and validity, a normativeequivalent measure should be correlated with the partial ipsative version. Also, more confident conclusions related to validity estimates require larger sample size.