Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Carl Jung in 1910. Myers and Briggs extrapolated their MBTI theory from Jung's writings in his book Psychological Types.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment is a psychometric questionnaire designed to measure psychological preferences in how people perceive the world and make decisions.[1]:1 These preferences were extrapolated from the typological theories proposed by Carl Gustav Jung and first published in his 1921 book Psychological Types (English edition, 1923).[2] The original developers of the personality inventory were Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers. They began creating the indicator during World War II, believing that a knowledge of personality preferences would help women who were entering the industrial workforce for the first time to identify the sort of war-time jobs where they would be "most comfortable and effective".[1]:xiii The initial questionnaire grew into the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which was first published in 1962. The MBTI focuses on normal populations and emphasizes the value of naturally occurring differences.[3] CPP Inc., the publisher of the MBTI instrument, calls it "the worlds most widely used personality assessment", [4] with as many as two million assessments administered annually. The CPP and other proponents state that the indicator meets or exceeds the reliability of other psychological instruments [5]
[6]

and cite reports of individual behavior. [7] Some studies have found strong support for construct

validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability, although variation was observed.[8][9] However, some academic psychologists have criticized the MBTI instrument, claiming that it "lacks convincing validity data".[10][11][12][13] Some studies have shown the statistical validity and reliability to be low.[13][14]
[15]

The use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a predictor of job success has not been supported in

studies,[15][16] and its use for this purpose is expressly discouraged in theManual.[17] The definitive published source of reference for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is The Manual produced by CPP.[18] However, the registered trademarkrights to the terms Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI have been assigned from the publisher to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust.[19]
Contents
[hide]

o o o o

1 Concepts 1.1 Type 1.2 Four dichotomies 1.3 Attitudes: extraversion/introversion (E/I) 1.4 Functions: sensing/intuition (S/N) and thinking/feeling (T/F)

o o o o o
3 Applications

1.4.1 Dominant function 1.5 Lifestyle: judgment/perception (J/P)

2 Historical development 2.1 Differences from Jung 2.1.1 Judgment vs. perception 2.1.1.1 Orientation of the tertiary function

4 Format and administration 4.1 Additional formats 5 Precepts and ethics 6 Type dynamics and development 7 Correlations to other instruments 7.1 Keirsey temperaments 7.2 Big Five 8 Origins of the theory 9 Validity 10 Reliability 11 Utility

12 See also 13 Notes 14 References and further reading 15 External links 15.1 Official websites

[edit]Concepts
As the MBTI Manual states, the indicator "is designed to implement a theory; therefore the theory must be understood to understand the MBTI".[17]:1 Fundamental to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is the theory of psychological type as originally developed by Carl Jung.[1]:xiii Jung proposed the existence of two dichotomous pairs of cognitive functions:

The "rational" (judging) functions: thinking and feeling The "irrational" (perceiving) functions: sensing and intuition

Jung went on to suggest that these functions are expressed in either an introverted or extraverted form.[1]:17 From Jung's original concepts, Briggs and Myers developed their own theory of psychological type, described below, on which the MBTI is based.

[edit]Type
Jung's typological model regards psychological type as similar to left or right handedness: individuals are either born with, or develop, certain preferred ways of thinking and acting. The MBTI sorts some of these psychological differences into four opposite pairs, or dichotomies, with a resulting 16 possible psychological types. None of these types are better or worse; however, Briggs and Myers theorized that individuals naturally prefer one overall combination of type differences. [1]:9 In the same way that writing with the left hand is hard work for a right-hander, so people tend to find using their opposite psychological preferences more difficult, even if they can become more proficient (and therefore behaviorally flexible) with practice and development. The 16 types are typically referred to by an abbreviation of four lettersthe initial letters of each of their four type preferences (except in the case of intuition, which uses the abbreviation N to distinguish it from Introversion). For instance:

ESTJ: extraversion (E), sensing (S), thinking (T), judgment (J) INFP: introversion (I), intuition (N), feeling (F), perception (P)

And so on for all 16 possible type combinations.

[edit]Four

dichotomies

Dichotomies

Extraversion (E) - (I) Introversion

Sensing (S) - (N) Intuition

Thinking (T) - (F) Feeling

Judgment (J) - (P) Perception

The four pairs of preferences or dichotomies are shown in the table to the right. Note that the terms used for each dichotomy have specific technical meanings relating to the MBTI which differ from their everyday usage. For example, people who prefer judgment over perception are not necessarily more judgmental or less perceptive. Nor does the MBTI instrument measure aptitude; it simply indicates for one preference over another.[17]:3 Someone reporting a high score for extraversion over introversion cannot be correctly described as more extraverted: they simply have a clear preference. Point scores on each of the dichotomies can vary considerably from person to person, even among those with the same type. However, Isabel Myers considered thedirection of the preference (for example, E vs. I) to be more important than the degree of the preference (for example, very clear vs. slight).[18] The expression of a person's psychological type is more than the sum of the four individual preferences. The preferences interact through type dynamics and type development.

[edit]Attitudes:

extraversion/introversion (E/I)

Myers-Briggs literature uses the terms extraversion and introversion as Jung first used them. Extraversion means "outward-turning" and introversion means "inward-turning."[20] These specific definitions vary somewhat from the popular usage of the words. Note that extraversion is the spelling used in MBTI publications. The preferences for extraversion and introversion are often called attitudes. Briggs and Myers recognized that each of the cognitive functions can operate in the external world of behavior, action, people, and things (extraverted attitude) or the internal world of ideas and reflection (introverted attitude). The MBTI assessment sorts for an overall preference for one or the other.

People who prefer extraversion draw energy from action: they tend to act, then reflect, then act further. If they are inactive, their motivation tends to decline. To rebuild their energy, extraverts need breaks from time spent in reflection. Conversely, those who prefer introversion expend energy through action: they prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again. To rebuild their energy, introverts need quiet time alone, away from activity. The extravert's flow is directed outward toward people and objects, and the introvert's is directed inward toward concepts and ideas. Contrasting characteristics between extraverts and introverts include the following:

Extraverts are action oriented, while introverts are thought oriented. Extraverts seek breadth of knowledge and influence, while introverts seek depth of knowledge

and influence.

Extraverts often prefer more frequent interaction, while introverts prefer

more substantial interaction.

Extraverts recharge and get their energy from spending time with people, while introverts

recharge and get their energy from spending time alone.[21]

[edit]Functions:

sensing/intuition (S/N) and thinking/feeling (T/F)

Jung identified two pairs of psychological functions:

The two perceiving functions, sensing and intuition The two judging functions, thinking and feeling

According to the Myers-Briggs typology model, each person uses one of these four functions more dominantly and proficiently than the other three; however, all four functions are used at different times depending on the circumstances. Sensing and intuition are the information-gathering (perceiving) functions. They describe how new information is understood and interpreted. Individuals who prefer sensing are more likely to trust information that is in the present, tangible and concrete: that is, information that can be understood by the five senses. They tend to distrust hunches, which seem to come "out of nowhere." [1]:2 They prefer to look for details and facts. For them, the meaning is in the data. On the other hand, those who prefer intuition tend to trust information that is more abstract or theoretical, that can be associated with other information (either remembered or discovered by seeking a wider context or pattern). They may be more interested in future possibilities. They tend to trust those flashes of insight that seem to bubble up from the unconscious mind. The meaning is in how the data relates to the pattern or theory.

Thinking and feeling are the decision-making (judging) functions. The thinking and feeling functions are both used to make rational decisions, based on the data received from their information-gathering functions (sensing or intuition). Those who prefer thinking tend to decide things from a more detached standpoint, measuring the decision by what seems reasonable, logical, causal, consistent and matching a given set of rules. Those who prefer feeling tend to come to decisions by associating or empathizing with the situation, looking at it 'from the inside' and weighing the situation to achieve, on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit, considering the needs of the people involved. As noted already, people who prefer thinking do not necessarily, in the everyday sense, "think better" than their feeling counterparts; the opposite preference is considered an equally rational way of coming to decisions (and, in any case, the MBTI assessment is a measure of preference, not ability). Similarly, those who prefer feeling do not necessarily have "better" emotional reactions than their thinking counterparts.

[edit]Dominant function
According to Myers and Briggs, people use all four cognitive functions. However, one function is generally used in a more conscious and confident way. This dominant function is supported by the secondary (auxiliary) function, and to a lesser degree the tertiary function. The fourth and least conscious function is always the opposite of the dominant function. Myers called this inferior function theshadow.[1]:84 The four functions operate in conjunction with the attitudes (extraversion and introversion). Each function is used in either an extraverted or introverted way. A person whose dominant function is extraverted intuition, for example, uses intuition very differently from someone whose dominant function is introverted intuition.

[edit]Lifestyle:

judgment/perception (J/P)

Myers and Briggs added another dimension to Jung's typological model by identifying that people also have a preference for using either the judging function (thinking or feeling) or their perceivingfunction (sensing or intuition) when relating to the outside world (extraversion). Myers and Briggs held that types with a preference for judgment show the world their preferred judging function (thinking or feeling). So TJ types tend to appear to the world as logical, and FJ types as empathetic. According to Myers,[1]:75 judging types like to "have matters settled." Those types who prefer perception show the world their preferred perceiving function (sensing or intuition). So SP types tend to appear to the world as concrete and NP types as abstract. According to Myers,[1]:75 perceptive types prefer to "keep decisions open."

For extraverts, the J or P indicates their dominant function; for introverts, the J or P indicates their auxiliary function. Introverts tend to show their dominant function outwardly only in matters "important to their inner worlds."[1]:13 For example: Because ENTJ types are extraverts, the J indicates that their dominant function is their preferred judging function (extraverted thinking). ENTJ types introvert their auxiliary perceiving function (introverted intuition). The tertiary function is sensing and the inferior function is introverted feeling. Because INTJ types are introverts, the J indicates that their auxiliary function is their preferred judging function (extraverted thinking). INTJ types introvert their dominant perceiving function (introverted intuition). The tertiary function is feeling, and the inferior function is extraverted sensing.

[edit]Historical

development

Katharine Cook Briggs began her research into personality in 1917. Upon meeting her future son-inlaw, she observed marked differences between his personality and that of other family members. Briggs embarked on a project of reading biographies, and she developed a typology based on patterns she found. She proposed four temperaments: Meditative (or Thoughtful), Spontaneous, Executive, and Social.[22][23] Then, after the English translation of Psychological Types was published in 1923 (having first been published in German in 1921), she recognized that Jung's theory was similar to, yet went far beyond, her own.[1]:22 Briggs's four types were later identified as corresponding to the Is, EPs, ETJs and EFJs.[22][23] Her first publications were two articles describing Jung's theory, in the journal New Republic in 1926 (Meet Yourself Using the Personality Paint Box) and 1928 (Up From Barbarism). Briggs's daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, added to her mother's typological research, which she would progressively take over entirely. Myers graduated first in her class from Swarthmore College in 1919[1]:xx and wrote the prize-winning mystery novel Murder Yet to Come in 1929 using typological ideas. However, neither Myers nor Briggs were formally educated in psychology, and thus they lacked scientific credentials in the field of psychometric testing.[1]:xiii So Myers apprenticed herself to Edward N. Hay, who was then personnel manager for a large Philadelphia bank and went on to start one of the first successful personnel consulting firms in the U.S. From Hay, Myers learned test construction, scoring, validation, and statistics.[1]:xiii, xx In 1942, the "Briggs-Myers Type Indicator" was created, and the Briggs Myers Type Indicator Handbook was published in 1944. The indicator changed its name to the modern form (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator) in 1956.[24][25] Myers' work attracted the attention of Henry Chauncey, head of the Educational Testing Service, and under these auspices, the first MBTI Manual was published in 1962. The MBTI received further support from Donald T. McKinnon, head of the Institute of Personality Research at the University of California; Harold Grant, professor at Michigan State and Auburn Universities; and Mary H. McCaulley

of the University of Florida. The publication of the MBTI was transferred to Consulting Psychologists Press in 1975, and the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) was founded as a research laboratory.[1]:xxi After Myers' death in May 1980, Mary McCaulley updated the MBTI Manual, and the second edition was published in 1985.[18] The third edition appeared in 1998.

[edit]Differences

from Jung

[edit]Judgment vs. perception

The most notable addition of Myers and Briggs to Jung's original thought is their concept that a given type's fourth letter (J or P) is determined by how that type interacts with the external world, rather than by the type's dominant function. The difference becomes evident when assessing the cognitive functions of introverts.[1]:21-22 To Jung, a type with dominant introverted thinking, for example, would be considered rational (judging) because the decision-making function is dominant. To Myers, however, that same type would beirrational (perceiving) because the individual uses an information-gathering function (either extraverted intuition or extraverted sensing) when interacting with the outer world.

[edit]Orientation of the tertiary function

Jung theorized that the dominant function acts alone in its preferred world: exterior for the extraverts, and interior for the introverts. The remaining three functions, he suggested, operate together in the opposite world. If the dominant cognitive function is introverted, the other functions are extraverted, and vice versa. The MBTI Manual summarizes references in Jung's work to the balance in psychological type as follows: There are several references in Jung's writing to the three remaining functions having an opposite attitudinal character. For example, in writing about introverts with thinking dominant...Jung commented that the counterbalancing functions have an extraverted character.[18]:29 However, many MBTI practitioners hold that the tertiary function is oriented in the same direction as the dominant function.[26] Using the INTP type as an example, the orientation would be as follows:

Dominant introverted thinking Auxiliary extraverted intuition Tertiary introverted sensing Inferior extraverted feeling

From a theoretical perspective, noted psychologist H.J. Eysenck calls the MBTI a moderately successful quantification of Jung's original principles as outlined in Psychological Types.[27] However,

both models remain theory, with no controlled scientific studies supporting either Jung's original concept of type or the Myers-Briggs variation.[28]

[edit]Applications
The indicator is frequently used in the areas of pedagogy, career counseling, team building, group dynamics, professional development, marketing, family business, leadership training, executive coaching, life coaching, personal development, marriage counseling, and workers' compensation claims.

[edit]Format

and administration

The current North American English version of the MBTI Step I includes 93 forced-choice questions (there are 88 in the European English version). Forced-choice means that the individual has to choose only one of two possible answers to each question. The choices are a mixture of word pairs and short statements. Choices are not literal opposites but chosen to reflect opposite preferences on the same dichotomy. Participants may skip questions if they feel they are unable to choose. Using psychometric techniques, such as item response theory, the MBTI will then be scored and will attempt to identify the preference, and clarity of preference, in each dichotomy. After taking the MBTI, participants are usually asked to complete a Best Fit exercise (see below) and then given a readout of their Reported Type, which will usually include a bar graph and number to show how clear they were about each preference when they completed the questionnaire. During the early development of the MBTI thousands of items were used. Most were eventually discarded because they did not have high midpoint discrimination, meaning the results of that one item did not, on average, move an individual score away from the midpoint. Using only items with high midpoint discrimination allows the MBTI to have fewer items on it but still provide as much statistical information as other instruments with many more items with lower midpoint discrimination. The MBTI requires five points one way or another to indicate a clear preference.

[edit]Additional

formats

Isabel Myers had noted that people of any given type shared differences as well as similarities. At the time of her death, she was developing a more in-depth method of measuring how people express and experience their individual type pattern. In 1987, an advanced scoring system was developed for the MBTI. From this was developed the Type Differentiation Indicator (TDI) (Saunders, 1989) which is a scoring system for the longer MBTI,Form J,[29] which includes the 290 items written by Myers that had survived her previous item analyses. It yields 20 subscales (five under each of the four dichotomous preference scales), plus seven additional

subscales for a new Comfort-Discomfort factor (which purportedly corresponds to the missing factor of Neuroticism). This factor's scales indicate a sense of overall comfort and confidence versus discomfort and anxiety: guarded-optimistic, defiant-compliant, carefree-worried, decisive-ambivalent, intrepid-inhibited, leaderfollower, and proactive-distractible. Also included is a composite of these called "strain." Each of these comfort-discomfort subscales also loads onto one of the four type dimensions, for example, proactivedistractible is also a judging-perceiving subscale. There are also scales for type-scale consistency and comfort-scale consistency. Reliability of 23 of the 27 TDI subscales is greater than 0.50, "an acceptable result given the brevity of the subscales" (Saunders, 1989). In 1989, a scoring system was developed for only the 20 subscales for the original four dichotomies. This was initially known as Form K, or the Expanded Analysis Report (EAR).This tool is now called the MBTI Step II. Form J or the TDI became known as Step III. [30] It was developed in a joint project involving the following organizations: CPP, the publisher of the whole family of MBTI works; CAPT (Center for Applications of Psychological Type), which holds all of Myers' and McCaulley's original work; and the MBTI Trust, headed by Katharine and Peter Myers. Step III was advertised as addressing type development and the use of perception and judgment by respondents.[31]

[edit]Precepts

and ethics

The following precepts are generally used in the ethical administration of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Type not trait The MBTI sorts for type; it does not indicate the strength of ability. The questionnaire allows the clarity of a preference to be ascertained (Bill clearly prefers introversion), but not the strength of preference (Jane strongly prefers extraversion) or degree of aptitude (Harry is good at thinking). In this sense, it differs from trait-based tools such as 16PF. Type preferences are polar opposites: a precept of MBTI is that people fundamentally prefer one thing over the other, not a bit of both. Own best judge Individuals are considered the best judge of their own type. While the MBTI questionnaire provides a Reported Type, this is considered only an indication of their probable overall Type. A Best Fit Process is usually used to allow respondents to develop their understanding of the four dichotomies, to form their own hypothesis as to their overall Type, and to compare this against the Reported Type. In more than 20% of cases, the hypothesis and the Reported

Type differ in one or more dichotomies. Using the clarity of each preference, any potential for bias in the report, and often, a comparison of two or more whole Types may then help respondents determine their own Best Fit. No right or wrong No preference or total type is considered better or worse than another. They are all Gifts Differing, as emphasized by the title of Isabel Briggs Myers' book on this subject. Voluntary It is considered unethical to compel anyone to take the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. It should always be taken voluntarily.[32] Confidentiality The result of the MBTI Reported and Best Fit type are confidential between the individual and administrator and, ethically, not for disclosure without permission. Not for selection The results of the assessment should not be used to "label, evaluate, or limit the respondent in any way" (emphasis original).[32] Since all types are valuable, and the MBTI measures preferencesrather than aptitude, the MBTI is not considered a proper instrument for purposes of employment selection. Many professions contain highly competent individuals of different types with complementary preferences. Importance of proper feedback Individuals should always be given detailed feedback from a trained administrator and an opportunity to undertake a Best Fit exercise to check against their Reported Type. This feedback can be given in person or, where this is not practical, by telephone or electronically.

[edit]Type

dynamics and development

The Sixteen Types

US Population Breakdown

The table organizing the sixteen types was created by Isabel Myers (an INFP).

ISTJ
1114%

ISFJ
914%

INFJ
13%

INTJ
24%

ISTP

ISFP

INFP

INTP

46%

59%

45%

35%

ESTP
45%

ESFP
49%

ENFP
68%

ENTP
25%

ESTJ
812%

ESFJ
913%

ENFJ
25%

ENTJ
25%

Estimated percentages of the 16 types in the U.S. population.[33]

The interaction of two, three, or four preferences is known as type dynamics. Although type dynamics has garnered little or no empirical support to substantiate its viability as a scientific theory,[34] Myers and Briggs asserted that for each of the 16 four-preference types, one function is the most dominantand is likely to be evident earliest in life. A secondary or auxiliary function typically becomes more evident (differentiated) during teenage years and provides balance to the dominant. In normal development, individuals tend to become more fluent with a third, tertiary function during mid life, while the fourth, inferiorfunction remains least consciously developed. The inferior function is often considered to be more associated with the unconscious, being most evident in situations such as high stress (sometimes referred to as being in the grip of the inferior function). The sequence of differentiation of dominant, auxiliary, and tertiary functions through life is termed type development. Note that this is an idealized sequence that may be disrupted by major life events. The dynamic sequence of functions and their attitudes can be determined in the following way:

The overall lifestyle preference (J-P) determines whether

the judging (T-F) or perceiving (S-N) preference is most evident in the outside world; i.e., which function has an extraverted attitude

The attitude preference (E-I) determines whether the

extraverted function is dominant or auxiliary

For those with an overall preference for extraversion, the

function with the extraverted attitude will be the dominant function. For example, for an ESTJ type the dominant function is the judging function, thinking, and this is experienced with an extraverted attitude. This is notated as a dominant Te. For an ESTP, the dominant function is the perceiving function, sensing, notated as a dominant Se.

The Auxiliary function for extraverts is the secondary

preference of the judging or perceiving functions, and it is experienced with an introverted attitude: for example, the auxiliary function for ESTJ is introverted sensing (Si) and the auxiliary for ESTP is introverted thinking (Ti).

For those with an overall preference for introversion, the

function with the extraverted attitude is the auxiliary; the dominant is the other function in the main four letter preference. So the dominant function for ISTJ is introverted sensing (Si) with the auxiliary (supporting) function being extraverted thinking (Te).

The Tertiary function is the opposite preference from the

Auxiliary. For example, if the Auxiliary is thinking then the Tertiary would be feeling. The attitude of the Tertiary is the subject of some debate and therefore is not normally indicated; i.e. if the Auxiliary was Te then the Tertiary would be F (not Fe or Fi)

The Inferior function is the opposite preference and attitude

from the Dominant, so for an ESTJ with dominant Te the Inferior would be Fi. Note that for extraverts, the dominant function is the one most evident in the external world. For introverts, however, it is the auxiliary function that is most evident externally, as their dominant function relates to the interior world. Some examples of whole types may clarify this further. Taking the ESTJ example above:

Extraverted function is a judging function (T-F) because of

the overall J preference

Extraverted function is dominant because of overall E

preference

Dominant function is therefore extraverted thinking (Te) Auxiliary function is the preferred perceiving function:

introverted sensing (Si)

Tertiary function is the opposite of the Auxiliary: intuition Inferior function is the opposite of the Dominant: introverted

feeling (Fi) The dynamics of the ESTJ are found in the primary combination of extraverted thinking as their dominant function and introverted sensing as their auxiliary function: the dominant tendency of ESTJs to order their environment, to set clear boundaries, to clarify roles and timetables, and to direct the activities around them is supported by their facility for using past experience in an ordered and systematic way to help organize themselves and others. For instance, ESTJs may enjoy planning trips for groups of people to achieve some goal or to perform some culturally uplifting function. Because of their ease in directing others and their facility in managing their own time, they engage all the resources at their disposal to achieve their goals. However, under prolonged stress or sudden trauma, ESTJs may overuse their extraverted thinking function and fall into the grip of their inferior function, introverted feeling. Although the ESTJ can seem insensitive to the feelings of others in their normal activities, under tremendous stress, they can suddenly express feelings of being unappreciated or wounded by insensitivity. Looking at the diametrically opposite four-letter type, INFP:

Extraverted function is a perceiving function (S-N) because

of the P preference

Introverted function is dominant because of the I preference Dominant function is therefore introverted feeling (Fi) Auxiliary function is extraverted intuition (Ne) Tertiary function is the opposite of the Auxiliary: sensing

Inferior function is the opposite of the Dominant: extraverted

thinking (Te) The dynamics of the INFP rest on the fundamental correspondence of introverted feeling and extraverted intuition. The dominant tendency of the INFP is toward building a rich internal framework of values and toward championing human rights. They often devote themselves behind the scenes to causes such as civil rights or saving the environment. Since they tend to avoid the limelight, postpone decisions, and maintain a reserved posture, they are rarely found in executive-director type positions of the organizations that serve those causes. Normally, the INFP dislikes being "in charge" of things. When not under stress, the INFP radiates a pleasant and sympathetic demeanor; but under extreme stress, they can suddenly become rigid and directive, exerting their extraverted thinking erratically. Every type, and its opposite, is the expression of these interactions, which give each type its unique, recognizable signature.

[edit]Correlations [edit]Keirsey

to other instruments

temperaments

David W. Keirsey mapped four 'temperaments' to the existing MyersBriggs system groupings SP, SJ, NF and NT; this often results in confusion of the two theories. However, the Keirsey Temperament Sorter is not directly associated with the official Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.

ISITEJ Inspector ISETIP Crafter ESETIP Promoter ESITEJ Supervisor

ISIFEJ Protector ISEFIP Composer ESEFIP Performer ESIFEJ Provider

INIFEJ INITEJ Counselor Mastermind INEFIP INETIP Healer Architect ENEFIP ENETIP Champion Inventor ENIFEJ ENITEJ Teacher Fieldmarshal

[edit]Big

Five

McCrae and Costa[11] present correlations between the MBTI scales and the Big Five personality construct, which is a conglomeration of characteristics found in nearly all personality and psychological tests.

The five personality characteristics are extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability (or neuroticism). The following study is based on the results from 267 men followed as part of a longitudinal study of aging. (Similar results were obtained with 201 women.)

Extraversio Agreeablenes Conscientiousnes Openness Neuroticism n s s E0.74 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.16 I S0.10 0.72 0.04 0.15 0.06 N T0.19 0.02 0.44 0.15 0.06 F J0.15 0.30 0.06 0.49 0.11 P The closer the number is to 1.0 or 1.0, the higher the degree of correlation.
These data suggest that four of the MBTI scales are related to the Big Five personality traits. These correlations show that E-I and S-N are strongly related to extraversion and openness respectively, while T-F and J-P are moderately related to agreeableness and conscientiousness respectively. The emotional stability dimension of the Big Five is largely absent from the original MBTI (though the TDI, discussed above, has addressed that dimension). These findings led McCrae and Costa, the formulators of the Five Factor Model (a Big Five theory),[35] to conclude, "correlational analyses showed that the four MBTI indices did measure aspects of four of the five major dimensions of normal personality. The five-factor model provides an alternative basis for interpreting MBTI findings within a broader, more commonly shared conceptual framework." However, "there was no support for the view that the MBTI measures truly dichotomous preferences or qualitatively distinct types, instead, the instrument measures four relatively independent dimensions."

[edit]Origins

of the theory

Jung's theory of psychological type, as published in his 1921 book, was not tested through controlled scientific studies.[28] Jung's methods primarily included clinical observation, introspection andanecdote

methods that are largely regarded as inconclusive by the modern field of psychology.[28] Jung's type theory introduced a sequence of four cognitive functions (thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuition), each having one of two orientations (extraverted or introverted), for a total of eight functions. The Myers-Briggs theory is based on these eight functions, although with some differences in expression (see Differences from Jung above). However, neither the Myers-Briggs nor the Jungian models offer any scientific, experimental proof to support the existence, the sequence, the orientation, or the manifestation of these functions.[28]

[edit]Validity
The statistical validity of the MBTI as a psychometric instrument has been the subject of criticism. It has been estimated that between a third and a half of the published material on the MBTI has been produced for conferences of the Center for the Application of Psychological Type (which provides training in the MBTI) or as papers in the Journal of Psychological Type (which is edited by Myers-Briggs advocates).[36] It has been argued that this reflects a lack of critical scrutiny.[15][36] For example, some researchers expected that scores would show a bimodal distribution with peaks near the ends of the scales, but found that scores on the individual subscales were actually distributed in a centrally peaked manner similar to a normal distribution. A cut-off exists at the center of the subscale such that a score on one side is classified as one type, and a score on the other side as the opposite type. This fails to support the concept of type: the norm is for people to lie near the middle of the subscale.[11][12][13][15][37] Nevertheless, "the absence of bimodal score distributions does not necessarily prove that the 'type'-based approach is incorrect."[37] In 1991, the National Academy of Sciences committee reviewed data from MBTI research studies and concluded that only the I-E scale has adequate construct validity in terms of showing high correlations with comparable scales of other instruments and low correlations with

instruments designed to assess different concepts. In contrast, the SN and T-F scales show relatively weak validity. The 1991 review committee concluded at the time there was "not sufficient, welldesigned research to justify the use of the MBTI in career counseling programs". [16] However, this study also based its measurement of validity on "criterion-related validity (i.e., does the MBTI predict specific outcomes related to interpersonal relations or career success/job performance?)."[16] The ethical guidelines of the MBTI assessment stress that the MBTI type "does not imply excellence, competence, or natural ability, only what is preferred." [32] The 2009 MBTI Form M Manual Supplement states, "An instrument is said to be valid when it measures what it has been designed to measure (Ghiselli, Campbell, & Zedeck, 1981; Murphy & Davidshofer, 2005)."[5] Studies have found that the MBTI scores compare favorably to other assessments with respect to evidence of convergent validity, divergent validity, construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability.[5][8][9] The accuracy of the MBTI depends on honest self-reporting by the person tested.[17]:52-53 Unlike some personality measures, such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory or thePersonality Assessment Inventory, the MBTI does not use validity scales to assess exaggerated or socially desirable responses.[38] As a result, individuals motivated to do so can fake their responses,[39] and one study found that the MBTI judgment/perception dimension correlates with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire lie scale.[40] If respondents "fear they have something to lose, they may answer as they assume they should."[17]:53 However, the MBTI ethical guidelines state, "It is unethical and in many cases illegal to require job applicants to take the Indicator if the results will be used to screen out applicants."[32] The intent of the MBTI is to provide "a framework for understanding individual differences, and a dynamic model of individual development".[41] The terminology of the MBTI has been criticized as being very "vague and general"[42] as to allow any kind of behavior to fit any personality type, which may result in the Forer effect, where individuals give a high rating to a positive description that supposedly applies specifically

to them.[15][28] Others argue that while the MBTI type descriptions are brief, they are also distinctive and precise. [43]:14-15Some theorists, such as David Keirsey, have expanded on the MBTI descriptions, providing even greater detail. For instance, Keirsey's descriptions of his four temperaments, which he correlated with the sixteen MBTI personality types, show how the temperaments differ in terms of language use, intellectual orientation, educational and vocational interests, social orientation, self image, personal values, social roles, and characteristic hand gestures. [43]:32-207 With regard to factor analysis, one study of 1291 college-aged students found six different factors instead of the four used in the MBTI.[44] In other studies, researchers found that the JP and the SN scales correlate with one another.[11]

[edit]Reliability
Some researchers have interpreted the reliability of the test as being low. Studies have found that between 39% and 76% of those tested fall into different types upon retesting some weeks or years later.[13][15] One study reports that the MBTI dichotomies exhibit good split-half reliability; however, the dichotomy scores are distributed in a bell curve, and the overall type allocations are less reliable. Also, testretest reliability is sensitive to the time between tests. Within each dichotomy scale, as measured on Form G, about 83% of categorizations remain the same when individuals are retested within nine months, and around 75% when individuals are retested after nine months. About 50% of people tested within nine months remain the same overall type, and 36% remain the same type after more than nine months.[45] For Form M (the most current form of the MBTI instrument), the MBTI Manual reports that these scores are higher (p. 163, Table 8.6). In one study, when people were asked to compare their preferred type to that assigned by the MBTI assessment, only half of people picked the same profile.[46] Critics also argue that the MBTI lacksfalsifiability, which can cause confirmation bias in the interpretation of results.

[edit]Utility
In her research, Isabel Myers found that the proportion of different personality types varied by choice of career or course of study.[1]:4051[18]

However, some researchers examining the proportions of each

type within varying professions report that the proportion of MBTI types within each occupation is close to that within a random sample of the population.[15] Some researchers have expressed reservations about the relevance of type to job satisfaction, as well as concerns about the potential misuse of the instrument in labeling individuals.[15]
[47]

Studies suggest that the MBTI is not a useful predictor of job performance.[48] As noted above under Precepts and ethics, the MBTI measures preference, not ability. The use of the MBTI as a predictor of job success is expressly discouraged in the Manual.[17]:78 It is not designed for this purpose.

[edit]See

also

Adjective Check List (ACL) BarOn EQ-i Birkman Method CPI 260 DISC assessment Enneagram of Personality FIRO-B Fort Profile Holland Codes Humorism Interaction Styles Interpersonal compatibility Keirsey Temperament Sorter Kingdomality List of personality tests Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

NEO Personality psychology Socionics Strong Interest Inventory Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument

[edit]Notes

1.

^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Myers, Isabel Briggs with

Peter B. Myers (1980, 1995). Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing. ISBN 0-89106-074-X.

2.

^ Jung, Carl Gustav (August 1, 1971). "Psychological

Types". Collected Works of C.G. Jung, Volume 6. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-09774.

3.

^ Pearman, Roger R.; Sarah C. Albritton (1997). I'm

Not Crazy, I'm Just Not You (First ed.). Palo Alto, California: Davies-Black Publishing. xiii. ISBN 0891060960.

4. 5.

^ "CPP Products". Retrieved 2009-06-20. ^ a b c Schaubhut, Nancy A.; Nicole A. Herk and

Richard C.Thompson (2009). "MBTI Form M Manual Supplement". CPP. pp. 17. Retrieved 8 May 2010.

6. 7.

^ Clack, Gillian; Judy Allen. "Response to Paul

Matthews' criticism". Retrieved 2008-05-14. ^ Barron-Tieger, Barbara; Tieger, Paul D. (1995). Do

what you are: discover the perfect career for you through the secrets of personality type. Boston: Little, Brown. ISBN 0-31684522-1.

8.

^ a b Thompson, Bruce; Gloria M. Borrello (Autumn

1986). "Construct Validity of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator". Educational and Psychological Measurement (SAGE Publications) 46 (3): 745752. doi:10.1177/0013164486463032.

9.

^ a b Capraro, Robert M.; Mary Margaret Capraro

(August 2002). "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Score Reliability Across: Studies a Meta-Analytic Reliability Generalization

Study". Educational and Psychological Measurement (SAGE Publications) 62 (4): 590 602.doi:10.1177/0013164402062004004.

10.

^ Hunsley J, Lee CM, Wood JM (2004).

"Controversial and questionable assessment techniques".Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Lilienfeld SO, Lohr JM, Lynn SJ (eds.). Guilford. ISBN 1-59385070-0., p. 65

11.

^ a b c d McCrae, R R; Costa, P T (1989).

"Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator From the Perspective of the Five-Factor Model of Personality". Journal of Personality 57 (1): 1740.doi:10.1111/j.14676494.1989.tb00759.x. PMID 2709300.

12.

^ a b Stricker, L J; Ross, J (1964). "An Assessment of

Some Structural Properties of the Jungian Personality Typology". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 68: 62 71.doi:10.1037/h0043580.

13.

^ a b c d Matthews, P (2004-05-21). "The MBTI is a

flawed measure of personality". Bmj.com Rapid Responses. But see also Clack & Allen's response to Matthews.

14. 15.

^ Kline, Paul, The handbook of psychological testing,

Psychology Press, 2000, ISBN 0415211581, 9780415211581 ^ a b c d e f g h Pittenger, David J. (November

1993). "Measuring the MBTI...And Coming Up Short." (PDF). Journal of Career Planning and Employment 54 (1): 4852.

16.

^ a b c Nowack, K. (1996). Is the Myers Briggs Type

Indicator the Right Tool to Use? Performance in Practice, American Society of Training and Development, Fall 1996, 6

17.

^ a b c d e f Myers, Isabel Briggs; Mary H. McCaulley

(1985). Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (2nd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. ISBN 0-89106-027-8.

18.

^ a b c d e Myers, Isabel Briggs; McCaulley Mary H.;

Quenk, Naomi L.; Hammer, Allen L. (1998).MBTI Manual (A

guide to the development and use of the Myers Briggs type indicator). Consulting Psychologists Press; 3rd ed edition. ISBN 0-89106-130-4.

19. 20.

^ "Trademark Guidelines" (PDF). Consulting

Psychologists Press. Retrieved December 20, 2004. ^ Zeisset, Carolyn (2006). The Art of Dialogue:

Exploring Personality Differences for More Effective Communication. Gainesville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc. p. 13. ISBN 0-935652-77-9.

21.

^ Tieger, Paul D.; Barbara Barron-Tieger (1999). The

Art of SpeedReading People. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company. pp. 66. ISBN 978-0-316-84518-2.

22. 23.

^ a b "CAPT: "The Story of Isabel Briggs Myers"".

Retrieved 2009-07-29. ^ a b "The TYPE Writer: "It Happened In 1943: The

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Turns 60 Years Old"". Retrieved 2009-07-29.

24. 25.

^ Geyer, Peter (1998) Some Significant Dates.

Retrieved December 5, 2005. ^ "Guide to the Isabel Briggs Myers Papers 1885-

1992". University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries, Department of Special and Area Studies Collections, Gainesville, FL.. 2003. Retrieved December 5, 2005.

26. 27. 28.

^ "TypeLogic". Retrieved 2008-09-14. ^ Eysenck, H.J.. Genius: The Natural History of

Creativity (1995 ed.). pp. 110. ^ a b c d e Carroll, Robert Todd (January 9,

2004). "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator-The Skeptic's Dictionary". Retrieved January 8, 2004.

29. 30.

^ "Hierarchical Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-09-14. ^ Myers, Isabel Briggs; McCaulley Mary H.; Quenk,

Naomi L.; Hammer, Allen L. (1998). MBTI Manual (A guide to the development and use of the Myers Briggs type indicator) p.131.

Consulting Psychologists Press; 3rd ed edition. ISBN 0-89106130-4.

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36.

^ "CAPT Step III". Retrieved 2008-09-14. ^ a b c d "Ethics for Administering the MBTI

Instrument". Retrieved 2009-02-15. ^ "CAPTCenter for Applications of Psychological

Type". Retrieved 2010-06-19. ^ "The Personality Junkie: Personality Type Theory".

Retrieved 2009-11-22. ^ "University of Oregon: "Measuring the Big Five

Personality Factors"". Retrieved 2008-08-08. ^ a b Coffield F, Moseley D, Hall E, Ecclestone K

(2004). "Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review" (PDF). Learning and Skills Research Centre.

37.

^ a b Bess, T.L. & Harvey, R.J. (2001). "The Annual

Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego 2001" (PDF).

38.

^ Boyle, G J (1995). "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

(MBTI): Some psychometric limitations".Australian Psychologist 30: 7174. doi:10.1111/j.17429544.1995.tb01750.x.

39.

^ Furnham, A (1990). "Faking personality

questionnaires: Fabricating different profiles for different purposes". Current Psychology 9: 46 55. doi:10.1007/BF02686767.

40.

^ Francis, L J; Jones, S H (2000). "The Relationship

Between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Among Adult Churchgoers". Pastoral Psychology 48.

41. 42. 43.

^ "MBTI Type at Workl". Retrieved 4 August 2010. ^ "Forer effect from the Skeptic's Dictionary". ^ a b Keirsey, David (1998). Please Understand Me II:

Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company. ISBN 1-885705-02-6.

44.

^ Sipps, G.J., R.A. Alexander, and L. Friedt. "Item

Analysis of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator."Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 45, No. 4 (1985), pp. 789-796.

45.

^ Harvey, R J (1996). Reliability and Validity, in MBTI

Applications A.L. Hammer, Editor. Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, CA. p. 5- 29.

46.

^ Carskadon, TG & Cook, DD (1982). "Validity of

MBTI descriptions as perceived by recipients unfamiliar with type". Research in Psychological Type 5: 8994.

47.

^ Druckman, D. and R. A. Bjork, Eds. (1992). In the

Minds Eye: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. ISBN 0-309-04747-1.

48.

^ Letters to the Editor: It's Not You, It's Your

Personality." (1992, February 3). Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), p. PAGE A13. Retrieved November 8, 2008, from Wall Street Journal database. (Document ID: 27836749).

[edit]References

and further reading

Hunsley, J.; Lee, C.M.; and Wood, J.M. (2004). Controversial

and questionable assessment techniques. Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Lilienfeld SO, Lohr JM, Lynn SJ (eds.). Guilford, ISBN 1-59385-070-0

Bess, T.L.; and Harvey, R.J. (2001, April). Bimodal score

distributions and the MBTI: Fact or artifact? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Diego.

Bess, T.L.; Harvey, R.J.; and Swartz, D. (2003). Hierarchical

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Orlando.

Bourne, Dana (2005). Personality Types and the Transgender

Community. Retrieved November 14, 2005

Falt, Jack. Bibliography of MBTI/Temperament Books by

Author. Retrieved December 20, 2004

Georgia State University. GSU Master Teacher Program: On

Learning Styles. Retrieved December 20, 2004.

Jung, Carl Gustav (1965). Memories, Dreams,

Reflections. Vintage Books: New York, 1965. p. 207

Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (Collected works of C.

G. Jung, volume 6). (3rd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. First appeared in German in 1921. ISBN 0-691-09770-4

Killian, Shaun (2007). More About the MBTI, personality and

its impact on your effectiveness, MBTI Online.

Matthews, Paul (2004). The MBTI is a flawed measure of

personality'.'. bmj.com Rapid Responses. Retrieved February 9, 2005

Myers, Isabel Briggs (1980). Gifts Differing: Understanding

Personality Type. Davies-Black Publishing; Reprint edition (May 1, 1995). ISBN 0-89106-074-X

Myers, Isabel Briggs, Mary H. McCaulley, Naomi Quenk, and

Allan Hammer. (1998) MBTI Handbook: A Guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Consulting Psychologists Press, 3rd edition. ISBN 0891061304

Pearman, R.; Lombardo, M.; and Eichinger, R.(2005). YOU:

Being More Effective In Your MBTI Type. Minn.:Lominger International, Inc.

Pearman, R.; and Albritton, S. (1996). I'm Not Crazy, I'm Just

Not You: The Real Meaning of the Sixteen Personality Types. Mountain View, Ca: Davies-Black Publishing.

Personality Plus. Employers love personality tests. But what

do they really reveal?

Saunders, D. (1989). Type Differentiation Indicator Manual: A

scoring system for Form J of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

Skeptics Dictionary. "Myers-Briggs Type Indicator" [1] Virginia Tech. The Relationship Between Psychological Type

and Professional Orientation Among Technology Education Teachers. Retrieved December 20, 2004

Thomas G. Long (October 1992). "Myers-Briggs and other

Modern Astrologies". Theology Today 49 (3): 291 95. doi:10.1177/004057369204900301.

[edit]External

links

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to:Psychological Type

[edit]Official

websites

Association for Psychological Type International Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT) CPP, Publisher of the MBTI The Myers & Briggs Foundation Murphy-Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children (MMTIC) at

CAPT website

Psychometrics Canada, Canadian publisher of French and

English MBTI
[hide]v d eAnalytical psychology People Concepts Employment testing Carl Jung Sigmund Freud Marie-Louise von Franz Isabel Myers David Keirsey Personal unconscious Collective unconscious Archetype Three-factor model 16PF Big Five NEO-PI MMPI Kingdomality INTP INTJ INFJ INFP ISTP ISTJ ISFJ ISFP ESTP ESTJ ESFJ ESFP ENTP ENTJ ENFJ ENFP Artisan (Composer Crafter Performer Promoter) Guardian (Inspector Protector Provider Supervisor) Idealist (Champion Counselor Healer Teacher) Rational (Architect Fieldmarshal Inventor Mastermind) Enneagram FIRO Interaction Styles Socionics Temperament Four Temperaments

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

Keirsey Temperament Sorter

Others

View page ratings

Rate this page

What's this? Trustworthy

Objective Complete Well-written I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional) Submit ratings Categories: Jungian psychology | Personality typologies | MBTI types | Personality tests

Log in / create account

Article Discussion Read Edit View history

Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia Interaction Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes Contact Wikipedia Toolbox Print/export Languages esky Deutsch Espaol Franais

Magyar Nederlands Norsk (bokml) Polski Portugus

Simple English Slovenina Slovenina Suomi Svenska

This page was last modified on 1 October 2011 at 23:33. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike
License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details. Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a nonprofit organization.

Contact us Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers

 Mobile view MBTI Basics

The purpose of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI ) personality inventory is to make the theory of psychological types described by C. G. Jung understandable and useful in peoples lives. The essence of the theory is that much seemingly random variation in the behavior is actually quite orderly and consistent, being due to basic differences in the ways individuals prefer to use their perception and judgment.

"Perception involves all the ways of becoming aware of things, people, happenings, or ideas. Judgment involves all the ways of coming to conclusions about what has been perceived. If people differ systematically in what they perceive and in how they reach conclusions, then it is only reasonable for them to differ correspondingly in their interests, reactions, values, motivations, and skills." In developing the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator [instrument], the aim of Isabel Briggs Myers, and her mother, Katharine Briggs, was to make the insights of type theory accessible to individuals and groups. They addressed the two related goals in the developments and application of the MBTI instrument: The identification of basic preferences of each of the four dichotomies specified or implicit in Jungs theory. The identification and description of the 16 distinctive personality types that result from the interactions among thepreferences. Excerpted with permission from the MBTI Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

Favorite world: Do you prefer to focus on the outer world or on your own inner world? This is called Extraversion (E) or Introversion (I). Information: Do you prefer to focus on the basic information you take in or do you prefer to interpret and add meaning? This is called Sensing (S) or Intuition (N). Decisions: When making decisions, do you prefer to first look at logic and consistency or first look at the people and special circumstances? This is called Thinking (T) or Feeling (F). Structure: In dealing with the outside world, do you prefer to get things decided or do you prefer to stay open to new information and options? This is called Judging (J) or Perceiving (P). Your Personality Type: When you decide on your preference in each category, you have your own personality type, which can be expressed as a code with four letters. The 16 personality types of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator instrument are listed here as they are often shown in what is called a type table.

ISTJ

ISFJ

INFJ

Myers Briggs PersonalityType Indicator A Project Manager Tool

IN: PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Myers Briggs for Human Resource Management

Human Resource Management is one of the key knowledge areas that project managers need to be efficient in. When you are leading and managing people on projects and you want to make the most effective use of people involved with the project, an understanding of the Myers Briggs Personality Type Indicator (MBTI) tool is essential. The purpose of this article is to educate and equip project managers with a thorough understanding and appreciation of the Myers Briggs personality type indicators. It will explain how people process information in very different ways. They also interpret life in different ways and are motivated by different things. By recognising the differences in people, the project manager is empowered to be a more effective leader who in turn will have a more motivated team.

What is Myers Briggs Type Indicator?

The Myers Briggs [personality or psychological] Type Indicators are based on the theories of Carl Jung, which he developed to attempt to explain the differences between normal healthy people. Based on observations, Jung came to the view that differences in behaviour are the result of innate tendencies of people to use their minds in different ways. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment is a psychometric questionnaire designed to measure psychological preferences in how people perceive the world and make decisions. Source: Wikipedia. The MBTI instrument is called the best-known and most trusted personality assessment tool available today. The publisher, CPP (formerly Consulting Psychologists Press) calls the MBTItool the worlds most widely used personality assessment.

More blind to this than we realise

I have a friend who I connected with instantly from the moment we met. We thought the same way about many things and we shared similar strong points that we used in our very different careers. Co-incidentally, when we both did theMyers-Briggs Personality Type

Indicator questionnaire, we discovered that we shared exactly the same personality type. This explained why we got along so well and why our friendship flourished. At the same time, while managing many different projects, I came across team members who were typically classified (by colleagues) as difficult people. Upon taking a closer look, I discovered why! It was due to a very specific Myers-Briggspersonality type. Being aware of the persons personality type had made me much more effective in dealing with them in such a way as to gain their full trust and commitment to the project. If I was blind to the existence of Myers-Briggs personality types, I would probably not know how to get past the perception of dealing with a difficult team member in order to achieve the results that I as the project manager wanted and needed. Not to miss the rest of the article: How to Use Myers Briggs Personality Type Indicator as a project manager tool where I explain the different components of the personality types and how that will help you achieve leadership success(next blog post), please subscribe to the RSS feed. Also subscribe to my blog to receive more project management articles and tips in your inbox. If you are based in South Africa, and you would like to have your team assessed with the MBTI instrument, please contact Willem Conradie & Associates Assessment, Learning and Development Consultants, for a professional service atwillem@willemconradie.co.za.

Jung Marriage Test Demo

FIRST SOULMATE TYPE
Extroverted Sensing Thinking Judging

Strength of the preferences % 50 25 30 34

SECOND SOULMATE TYPE

Extroverted Sensing Thinking Judging

Strength of the preferences % 23 45 45 54

MatchIndex is over 62%

Index\Compatibility MatchIndex

Bad 25%-37%

Unsatisfactory 38%-62%

Satisfactory Good 63%-86% 87%100%

MBTI Basics
What the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator instrument is and what it measures. Information on the sixteen types, the eight preferences and other tools for helping you with a basic understanding of personality type.

Take the MBTI Instrument

Where and how to take the MBTI personality assessment and get your personal one-on-one or group feedback. Sources and suggestions for finding MBTI qualified administrators.

Hiring an MBTI consultant

What to look for when you bring in a consultant to administer the MBTI instrument.

What to look for when you bring in a consultant to administer the MBTI instrument.

My MBTI Results

Why interactive feedback and your personal verification are keys to finding your best-fit type plus suggestions for helping you choose the MBTI type that is right for you.

Why interactive feedback and your personal verification are keys to finding your bestfit type plus suggestions for helping you choose the MBTI type that is right for you.

Understanding MBTI Type Dynamics

Your MBTI type is more than the sum of its parts. Learn about the importance of understanding Your MBTI type is more than the sum whole type, the interactions of your preferences and how different preferences emerge as you of its parts. Learn mature. about the importance of understanding whole type, the interactions of your preferences and how different

preferences emerge as you mature.

MBTI Type at Work

The Myers Briggs Type Indicator instrument and knowledge of personality type are used by many organizations, large and small. Since type provides a framework for understanding individual differences, and provides a dynamic model of individual development, it has found wide application in the many functions that compose an organization," write Gordon Lawrence and Charles Martin in Building People, Building Programs (CAPT 2001).

Type and Organizations Type can be introduced into an organization to support many different functions and situations including managing others, development of leadership skills, organizing tasks, creation and management of teams, training for management and staff, conflict resolution, motivation, executive coaching,diversity, recognition and rewards, and change management. Type and Your Work When you understand your type preferences, you can approach your own work in a manner that best suits your style, including how you manage your time, problem solving, best approaches to decision making, and dealing with stress. Knowledge of type can help you deal with the culture of the place you work, the development of new skills, understanding your participation on teams, and coping with change in the workplace. If your work involves selling, knowledge of type can be helpful in understanding what clients need from you, especially how they best like to learn about products and services and how they like to interact during the process of gathering information and making decisions. Resources Introduction to Type in Organizations by Sandra K. Hirsh and Jean M. Kummerow (CPP 1998)

Looking at Type in the Workplace by Larry Demarest, Ph.D. (CAPT 1997)

Type and Retention by Allen L. Hammer (CPP 2003) Using Type in Selling: Building Customer Relationships with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator by Susan A. Brock (CPP 1994)

Work it Out: Clues for Solving People Problems at Work by Sandra Krebs Hirsh and Jane A. G. Kise (Davies-Black 1996) WorkTypes: Understanding Your Work PersonalityHow It Helps You and Holds You Back, and What You Can Do to Understand It by Jean M. Kummerow, Nancy J. Barger, and Linda Kirby (Warner Books 1997)