defending the MBTI
Flurries of contention about the Meyers Briggs, the DiSC, and other temperament assessments have made me thoughtful about using these as a part of an approach to self-knowledge. I’ve been using these assessments for years and since the MBTI, in particular, has been taking some heat, it seemed like a wise moment to stop and read some of the claims against its use.
The instrument is based on Jungian personality research started in 1917 and the instrument we know and use today was first created in 1962. The language is hideously archaic and requires some training to usefully decipher it. The sheer age of the instrument means there has been plenty of time for scholarly research to be published, both in support of the instrument and debunking its use. One client referred to it as a “blunt instrument” and another asked, “how is this different than my horoscope?” A dig into research about the MBTI shows a fairly even split about the MBTI’s reliability and validity; the company itself claims a 90% accuracy rating and a 90% average test-retest correlation, “making it one of the most reliable and accurate personality assessments available.”
The assessment sorts the results into one of sixteen categories, each with a sliding “clarity” scale that indicates the intensity preference. The Myers Briggs tags me with “the Advocate,” an INFJ,
That means I’ve inclined toward introversion [I], prefer the metaphorical and the big picture [N], and lead with feelings and values when it comes to making decisions [F]. One look into my very tidy sock drawer suggests—yup—I prefer order and structure [J]. The arguments against the use of this or any other assessment rest largely in the notion of a fixed label used to describe us. But I chuckled about a reference to the INFJ label that says, “Nothing lights up an Advocate like creating a solution that changes people’s lives.” That is pretty much my mission for coaching.
As a consequence of being so widely used, there are plenty of frivolous spin-offs which describe, based on each Myers-Briggs “personality:” the best and worst gifts to give, which classic food combo you are, the kitchen style you deploy, the best vacation, how to date for the perfect match, where you should live, and even the best sex positions.
The MBTI is not an exam; there are no right or wrong answers. It generates sixteen types, yes, but there are countless variations within each, and none of them are bad or wrong. However, the argument goes that if we experience the assessment result as permanent, we might feel “stuck” with a fixed sense of ourselves and won’t experience the capacity, inclination, or inspiration to change our behaviors.
My own sense of independence bristles at a permanent label, prompting my inner toddler to shout, “you’re not the boss of me!” This label is also not true for my behaviors in all settings. My introversion is socially adjusted with years of professional seasoning and I can work the room with friendly finesse. My intuitive capacity for a big perspective is reliably balanced with skepticism and practical questions about how we’re actually going to get the project done. My feeling-oriented decision-making approach is well-tempered with logic. And yes, while I prefer life in structured, orderly chunks, I’m pretty comfortable with more flexible, spontaneous behaviors.
But the MBTI is about my preferences, not my traits or behaviors.
A better way to view the MBTI—or any of these self-assessments—is simply as a means to enhance self-awareness (a cornerstone of EQ and leadership development). Taking a look at my preference promotes stronger group dynamics because it deepens empathy for your preference. (“While I hate being interrupted, you need to engage in a conversation in order to get things done! Let’s figure out how to respect each other’s styles.”) These assessments can be a first step to empowering the inclusion and tolerance of others. That’s especially useful in the middle of our vast cultural shifts about how we work now and how we want to design our future.
It’s a way to ignite a conversation. And we definitely need more of that.
