Behavioral tendency profile derived from the natal astronomical record. Hermeneutic analysis complementing validated psychometric instrumentation.
The Behavioral Energy Profile is an analysis of individual patterns of motivation, decision style, emotional processing, and interpersonal presentation derived from the astronomical configuration recorded at the exact moment of the evaluee's birth. The framework rests on a hermeneutic-symbolic system developed across twenty centuries of tradition, with historical foundations in Claudius Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos (2nd century A.D.) and reframed in the twentieth century as a system of symbolic psychology by Dane Rudhyar in The Astrology of Personality (1936) and by Marc Edmund Jones in The Sabian Symbols (1925). Rudhyar was the figure who shifted the system's focus from predictive reading toward archetypal categorization oriented to self-knowledge, opening the academic bridge with modern analytical psychology.
That bridge was formalized by Carl Gustav Jung, who in his essay Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle (1952) considered the framework a projective system coherent with his theory of the collective unconscious and archetypes. Jung did not empirically validate it — and was explicit about this — but he incorporated it as a hermeneutic tool for the analysis of symbolic patterns of human behavior. Along the same line, NeoHumanCode's contemporary analysis treats the Behavioral Energy Profile as an interpretive complement to validated psychometric instrumentation (Big Five, Hogan, Korn Ferry ESCI, MBTI), never as a substitute for it. Its value is positioned explicitly in the hermeneutic plane: it offers a structured archetypal vocabulary to describe motivational tendencies, decision styles, and interaction patterns that are difficult to capture with self-administered questionnaires.
The technical differentiator relative to psychometric instrumentation is independence from self-report. The profile is generated exclusively from three objective birth data points — date, time, and place — and from the positional astronomical calculation of the principal bodies of the Solar System at that instant. There is no questionnaire. There are no responses the evaluee can bias through social desirability, fatigue, or longitudinal learning effects. This property makes the Behavioral Energy Profile a stable baseline for development conversations, talent review processes, and team composition diagnostics where a narrative framework consistent over time is needed. NeoHumanCode uses it in a strictly hermeneutic modality: the profile offers a coherent system of symbols to reflect on professional identity patterns, development cycles, and contribution orientations, without presenting itself as a predictive instrument or as the sole criterion for any decision.
The analysis operates on the natal astronomical map, a record calculated with precision astronomical ephemerides that locates, for the birth date, time, and place, the angular position of the ten principal bodies of the Solar System plus two secondary orbital points relative to the ecliptic orbital band. Each body's position is recorded in degrees, minutes, and seconds, and is contextualized relative to the local geographic horizon at the birth instant, which allows defining the reference axes that situate the evaluee relative to the terrestrial observational plane. The analysis is structured in five levels of increasing depth:
Level 1 — Central motivational axis. The solar orbital position at birth translates into one of twelve behavioral archetypes that describe the evaluee's motivational core: what energizes them in professional contexts, what type of achievement they seek, what expression pattern comes naturally. This axis is complemented by the emotional processing style, derived from the lunar orbital position (how the evaluee processes stress, feedback, and interpersonal dynamics), and by the interpersonal presentation mode, derived from the ascending axis (the behavioral interface through which the evaluee presents in new situations). These three elements constitute the foundational triangle of the profile.
Level 2 — Interaction and communication modes. The positions of Mercury, Venus, and Mars map three operational dimensions: cognitive and communicational style (analytical vs. intuitive, detailed vs. big-picture, written vs. verbal), relational and collaborative style (how they build professional bonds, what they value in colleagues, how they approach negotiation), and initiative and conflict management style (how they pursue goals, how they assert their position in meetings, where their assertiveness may generate friction). These three dimensions read as observable competencies in day-to-day work.
Level 3 — Growth and discipline patterns. The positions of Jupiter and Saturn codify two complementary longitudinal dynamics: orientation toward growth and response to opportunity (where the evaluee tends to expand, what risks they assume naturally, where they may over-extend) and discipline, structure, and long-term resilience (their relationship with deadlines, authority, and sustained commitments; the most predictive axis of professional mastery trajectory over ten to twenty years).
Level 4 — Angular relationships between bodies. The calculation identifies the angular relationship patterns between the orbital bodies — geometric configurations of fusion, fluidity, tension, and polarity — that describe how individual tendencies interact as an integrated system. Focalized tension patterns, natural competency circuits, specialized purpose patterns, and multi-point creative tension configurations are identified when present and translated into the language of organizational competencies and priority development areas.
Level 5 — Generational bodies and secondary orbital points. The positions of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto contribute generational context that helps situate the evaluee within their age cohort and read their response to structural changes in the environment. Chiron and the orbital nodes add complementary markers on sensitive learning areas and development trajectory. This level is used conservatively, with descriptive emphasis and without overinterpretation.
Academic and certification ecosystem. The discipline is supported by an international set of training bodies. The International Society for Astrological Research (ISAR) offers the CAP certification (Certified Astrological Professional) with international examination. The National Council for Geocosmic Research (NCGR) structures its training in four progressive levels with examination at each. The Federation of Australian Astrologers (FAA) and the Organization for Professional Astrology (OPA) complement the certification map in the Asia-Pacific and North America regions. Institutionally, Kepler College (Washington State, USA) is the only regionally accredited university institution in the United States that offers formal academic programs in time sciences and the analysis of behavioral archetypes derived from the natal astronomical record, and the Faculty of Astrological Studies (London, founded in 1948) is the reference institution in Europe with certifiable diplomas. NeoHumanCode analysts work with professional-grade ephemeris calculation software (Solar Fire, Astro.com, TimePassages) equivalent to that used by these institutions.
Role alignment for high-complexity roles. The profile contributes a descriptive layer on motivational tendencies and decision style that is not usually captured in self-report psychometric evaluations. In roles where decision-making under uncertainty, strategic autonomy, or ambiguity handling are critical — executive positions, technical leadership, senior consulting — the Behavioral Energy Profile combines with Big Five, Hogan, or Korn Ferry ESCI to produce a more robust triangulation than any of the tools separately, informing development and role-alignment conversations.
Diagnosis of leadership decision style. The combination of the central motivational axis with the emotional processing pattern and the long-term discipline profile allows anticipation of the evaluee's decision style under pressure: whether they tend to decide through sustained analysis, through rapid response to stimulus, through consultation with trusted circles, or through emotional processing before acting. This information, combined with frameworks like Goleman or Hersey-Blanchard, allows designing leadership development programs that work with the leader's natural style instead of forcing generic models.
Team composition and diagnosis. In team diagnostic exercises, individual profiles overlap to identify configurations of the whole: teams dominated by a single motivational axis tend toward cohesion but also toward groupthink; teams with strong dispersion of decision patterns require more structured meeting infrastructure. The analysis does not replace observable performance metrics, but offers a useful narrative framework for talent review committees.
Career development and succession planning. The long-term growth and discipline patterns are particularly valuable in succession planning exercises with a five-to-twenty-year horizon. The configuration allows identification of probable professional mastery trajectories, expected consolidation cycles, and areas where the evaluee may need additional structural support to sustain long-term commitments.
Executive coaching. The profile provides the coach with a structured archetypal vocabulary to describe observable tendencies and development areas to the coachee. The property of being independent from self-report makes the coachee encounter the framework as an external input that invites reflection, instead of as a mirror of self-reported answers. This effect is valued by executive coaching firms seeking complementary frameworks to their usual inventory.
The report delivers a ten-section structured analysis that the talent review team, people manager, or coach can consult according to the decision they must make. It opens with a five-to-seven-line executive summary (top 3 behavioral strengths and top 2 development areas with an indication of preliminary fit to the role under consideration if specified), continues with the analysis of core behavioral tendencies (motivational axis, emotional processing style, interpersonal presentation mode) and with interpersonal dynamics (cognitive and communicational style, collaborative style, initiative and conflict management style).
It continues with the map of decision and stress-response patterns, a table of key competency indicators with the 3-5 most solid strengths and their concrete manifestation in day-to-day work, a table of risk factors and development areas with 2-3 priorities and recommended actions, team compatibility indicators, conditional evaluation of role fit if specified, and a role-alignment indication (High / Moderate / Low Fit) with a rationale paragraph connecting findings to development and role-alignment conversations. The report is issued in professional PDF format with Roboto and Raleway typography, in Spanish or English per client preference, with a length of 12 to 18 pages depending on the depth of integration with other methodologies in the same package.
The Behavioral Energy Profile is especially valuable in three professional scenarios. First, as a diagnostic complement in development and role-alignment for leadership positions or positions of high autonomy, where self-report evaluations show limitations and where an input not dependent on social desirability bias adds differential value. Second, as a framework for structured conversation in executive coaching programs and senior executive onboarding, where the archetypal vocabulary facilitates the coachee's reflection on their decision and development patterns. Third, as input in team diagnostic exercises and succession planning, where the profile offers a narrative layer consistent over time that complements observable performance metrics and standard psychometric instruments.
In all cases, the framework is recommended as a complement to validated psychometric instrumentation (Big Five / NEO-PI-R, Hogan, Korn Ferry ESCI, MBTI, DISC), never as a sole decision instrument. NeoHumanCode's position is explicit: development, promotion, and succession decisions must integrate multiple sources of evidence, and the Behavioral Energy Profile contributes one of them — the hermeneutic layer — with rigor and intellectual honesty about what the framework can and cannot predict. It is not recommended as a sole instrument in any automated mass-evaluation process nor as an exclusive criterion for decisions with high legal or contractual impact on the evaluee. Its optimal use is consultative: it adds vocabulary and interpretive depth to decisions that must always integrate other inputs.
Does this analysis have validated empirical/scientific backing? Not in the strict psychometric sense of the term. The framework does not have peer-reviewed meta-analyses equivalent to those available for Big Five or Hogan. The most-cited empirical research on the predictive capacity of behavioral tendencies derived from the natal astronomical record is the double-blind study by Shawn Carlson published in Nature in 1985, which found no predictive capacity above chance for the Gauquelin effect hypothesis. NeoHumanCode explicitly incorporates this result into its positioning of the framework: the Behavioral Energy Profile is presented as a hermeneutic-symbolic system in the academic tradition of Carl Jung (synchronicity, archetypes) and Dane Rudhyar (humanistic psychology, 1936), and not as a predictive instrument of performance. Its value lies in the structured archetypal vocabulary it contributes to self-knowledge, development, and talent review conversations, always as a complement to psychometrically validated instruments. Complementary mixed empirical evidence exists: Michel Gauquelin's statistical work (1955) on correlations between orbital positions at birth and high-performance professions — the so-called Mars Effect — reported significant correlations in large samples, but independent replication has been inconsistent.
How does this analysis differ from popular horoscopes? In focus, audience, and rigor. Popular horoscopes offer generic readings applicable to broad birth cohorts (for example, everyone born in the same month of the year) and typically adopt a predictive tone. The Behavioral Energy Profile is based on the individual and unique astronomical record — calculated with precision ephemerides for the exact date, time, and place of birth — and is presented as a descriptive-archetypal framework of behavioral tendencies, not as a forecast of events. The theoretical reference framework is Rudhyar's humanistic psychology (1936) and Jung's analytical psychology (archetypes, synchronicity), not the divinatory tradition. The difference is analogous to that between a generic magazine personality quiz and a professionally applied psychometric inventory like Big Five.
How does it complement other evaluations in the NeoHumanCode portfolio? Through explicit triangulation. For development plans and role-alignment, it is recommended to combine the Behavioral Energy Profile with at least one validated psychometric instrument (Big Five / NEO-PI-R, DISC, MBTI) and, for leadership roles, with the Leadership Styles framework (Goleman / Hersey-Blanchard) or 360-Degree Feedback. Triangulation adds robustness: the astronomical component provides the archetypal reading independent of self-report, the psychometric instruments provide validated scales of traits and competencies, and multi-source feedback provides observational evidence. No single component is sufficient for high-impact decisions.
What data from the evaluee is required? Three data points: date of birth (day, month, year), time of birth with minute precision (a critical datum for the definition of the ascending axis and the precise lunar position), and place of birth with city precision. If the time of birth is unavailable or its precision is lower than fifteen minutes, the profile is generated anyway with an explicit note indicating that time-sensitive elements are approximate. In that case, the non-time-sensitive elements of the report (central motivational axis, growth and discipline patterns, angular relationships between bodies) preserve their original precision.
Is it reproducible and consistent over time? Yes. The same three input data points always produce exactly the same profile. The analysis is not subject to test-retest learning effects, to evaluee mood variations, or to questionnaire fatigue — properties that do affect self-report psychometric instruments and must be mitigated with careful longitudinal designs. This property makes the Behavioral Energy Profile a stable baseline for longitudinal evaluations and team diagnostics over extended horizons.
Professional roadmap: leadership strengths, ideal sectors, and immediate goal plan.
Leadership diagnosis with GRIT, chronobiology, pattern analysis, and decision architecture. Personalized SWOT.
Comprehensive map of 12 leadership dimensions using chronobiology, numerical patterns, and temporal cycles.
Vocational and chronobiological professional analysis for developing people in the SME.