As others have already mentioned, in practice yes, quadra values are complicated, just like any type trait. They can manifest in multiple ways despite deriving from a single source, which, at the type level, is the valued/subdued dichotomy in Model A. Add to this the effect of upbringing, spiritual development, and cultural values and they can be difficult to spot.

More specifically though, quadras are a unification of opposite traits, among which are the dual pairs Ti/Fe, Si/Ne, etc. This is clearest with the leading/suggestive function axis: most people do not consciously prioritize their suggestive function at all and may seem to not value it very much.

The word "hypocrisy" very much applies here, and I've used it for the suggestive function in the past: it's something you expect or want to get, but not give to others.

This raises the question of how to resolve the contradiction, to see the true essence of the quadra. Or, what do dual pairs have in common? This is a main question driving my research and I've modified or generalized some of the definitions accordingly. The key to all of this is the semantics of the IM elements. They need to be defined in a way that explains how they relate together and interact in Model A.

Not to mention, if you don't think quadra values should be taken seriously, then what should? Aside from Jungian dichotomies or individual functions there is not much else to go on. Quadras, when defined in the right way (which is necessarily very general), are one of the most proven and reliable categories out there.