Myers-Briggs Doesn’t Define You
If you’re anything like me and hate to be categorized as a set personality “type,” then this article is dedicated to you. What follows is an exploration of one of the most commonly used psycho-analytic tests — the “Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).” I’ve met far too many people who have let the results of this assessment negatively affect their lives. If I’m honest, I almost allowed it to define and compartmentalize me.
The first time I became aware of Myers-Briggs was as part of a job application at a rapidly growing start-up. My initial interview went well — really well, to the point I thought I was going to be offered the role on the spot. I was told I would have a final round, and in the meantime to complete a quick personality assessment.
I headed over to the website (16personalities.com), did the test, and mailed over my results. I had come out ENFP — “The Campaigner.”
Within an hour, I was told that my profile didn’t suit, and my application would not be progressing further. I was gutted.
Those four letters weighed on me for weeks. That company seemingly had made a decision based on those results, and I couldn’t shake the feeling I had been judged incorrectly. How could a few multiple choice questions encapsulate me? Even worse, it wasn’t the first time this had happened. Psychoanalytical tests had plagued me during graduate applications, with companies refusing to interview me after my results came through.
This time I’d had enough. Nobody was going to tell me I was born a certain way and I couldn’t change. I dug into the research and found what I needed — compelling evidence that suggested it isn’t so definitive after all. Beyond that, I was able to change my habits and behaviors through sheer will and commitment.
Myers-Briggs can’t define you or me — and it never will.
By the end of this post, you’ll know why the process has significant weaknesses, how to still draw substantial benefit from the results, and most importantly, you will see that you are responsible for your destiny — not some online test and four-letter acronym.
Let’s establish some groundwork for discussion.
For those who aren’t aware:
It’s an online questionnaire of 88 questions (European version), with each answer based on a scale from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. Once finished, you receive your four letters and a summary of your personality type. Every year millions of copies of the test are taken around the world, across a variety of contexts including workplaces, schools, community, groups, management workshops, and even in marital councilling (Pittenger, 1993).
There are 16 distinct personality types. Each type is a combination of four main categories (in bold below), each with two sub-components to choose from:
For example, if you answer 11 questions with an Extroversion answer and 9 with Introversion, you’re Favorite World is classified as Extroversion (E).
As mentioned, I came out ENFP — Extroverted, Intuition, Feeling, Perceiver.
At first, I enjoyed reading my results. I’m allegedly curious, observant, energetic, an excellent communicator, popular, and friendly. Sounds like a great guy — until you get to the weaknesses.
I read in horror as I was described as having poor practical skills, an inability to focus, subject to overthinking and stress, a tendency towards emotional outbursts, and independent to a fault. No wonder my profile “didn’t fit.” According to Myers-Briggs, I’m good at talking but not much else.
I didn’t know what to make of being so definitively categorized by an online test that took 4 minutes to complete, with subjective answers. The experience reminded me of the time I was harassed into taking the “Oxford Capacity Test” by the Scientologists on Goodge Street, who used the results as an opportunity to sell me “personal development” products by Ron Hubbard.
There’s no denying that I saw elements of truth in my results. What concerned me was how easily I could be branded a type, and discovering that according to the principles of Myers-Briggs — your personality is inborn and can’t change.
Most people aren’t aware of that last piece, and for many, it doesn’t even matter. Being allocated those four letters can be enough to define and limit you unless you have the resolve to fight back and determine your fate.
Given the MBTI generates a list of weaknesses per personality type, it’s only fair that I do the same.
I have three main criticisms that I want to raise.
As described by David Pittenger in his paper “Measuring the MBTI…And Coming Up Short”, given MBTI is a theory of types, a person can only have one preference. In the case of Introvert vs. Extrovert, this means your primary preference will always dominate your personality.
This is a weak and narrow view. One of the first things I noticed about my results was my classification as an extrovert. I couldn’t help but question this definitiveness — there are many situations in which I much prefer introversion. I spend hours writing and reclusing from people because I enjoy being alone creating content — it’s energizing and stimulating. Conversely, I love to socialize, meet new people, build relationships, and try new things. Those situations again leave me excited and recharged. For me, it’s contextual, so I am not comfortable with accepting an E over an I or vice versa.
Interestingly, although the MBTI is based on the work of the legendary Carl Jung, much of the theory has been constructed from the interpretations made by Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs. For example, the inclusion of Judging vs. Perceiving was their creation, not based out of Jungian theory. Cracks are beginning to show.
This has happened to numerous friends. More importantly, it was researched by Howes and Carskadon in 1979. Their studies showed that even in test-retest intervals as short as five weeks, as many as 50% of people were classified into different types.
This particularly interesting given two claims made by the Myers-Briggs Foundation — that your type won’t change and the process produces consistent results.
If you think that research was too old, then never fear because Robert and Mary Capraro continued this work in 2002 which confirmed variability at odds with what was proclaimed. What’s important here is assessing what is defined as consistent. The MBTI suggests a lack of any variability, so anything that deviates from this is cause for concern.
Part of the reason for this is likely because the assessment can only assign a participant into one of 16 possible types. Further research conducted by Pettinger in 2005 raised concerns over this limited number of types intended to fit any human taking the test. Questions have been raised as to whether the current MBTI is indicative enough of the full range of personality traits that can be encapsulated by a human being. In short, are we “rounding up” categorizing people unfairly, and sometimes inconsistently based on a shortage of buckets to place them?
Finally, the notion that my personality is inborn and can’t change doesn’t sit well with me. Frankly, I find it offensive. How can any test tell me whether I’m capable of change? By what metric does this indicator judge the measurable changes in my life?
Yes, I have struggled with overthinking. I have fallen prey to emotional states. Focusing has proven difficult in the past, and it could be argued that at times I lack execution skills to see things through. But what am I supposed to do if you tell me it’s how I’m born? How is this a beneficial belief given its restrictive nature and discouragement from challenging myself? When I bought heavily into MBTI, I was disheartened and felt destined to be someone who could do nothing more than think of great ideas but never execute them. Thankfully, I chose to empower myself and discard this backward mindset.
In truth, seeing these traits on a report was exactly what I needed. It lit a fire under me and motivated me to get myself together — to improve and eradicate these weaknesses that held me back.
I put everything I had into confronting my shortcomings and turning them into strengths. I shifted my attitude from talker to doer. I learned techniques to control my emotions and began to develop a relentless focus on execution instead of theorizing.
The results were life-changing. My progress at work rapidly increased as my obsession with doing led to consistent project delivery. For the first time in my life, I followed a diet to the tee and saw my abs. I started writing daily on Medium, tripling my views, fans, and earnings. My entrepreneurial projects started moving because I stopped thinking and just started doing. All this happened because I took that test and hated the results. I wanted to do everything in my power to change them.
How does this all apply to you? Does this evidence render the test irrelevant? No, and I would argue far from it. The title of this post is “Myers-Briggs Doesn’t Define You” but it could just as well have been “Myers-Briggs Lit A Fire Under Me.”
If you’re reading this and haven’t done the test — do it. If you already have your results, evaluate what you don’t like about them. Challenge yourself to change and accept responsibility for being the person you want to be. No four letter acronym is capable of defining any one of us. We are the agents of our own change, and it starts with an internal promise and commitment to ourselves. As the studies show, the test is fallible and is by no means an inescapable dictation on how you will live your life. We are all capable of being who we want to be.
Processing my results was eye-opening. While elements were inconsistent as they did not consider context (e.g. extrovert vs. introvert), I couldn’t argue with a number of the weaknesses listed.
Regardless of whether my four letters change, my personal metrics show me that I have. I’ve addressed significant issues highlighted by MBTI, and I couldn’t have done it without taking the test — and believing they could be resolved.
How do you use Myers-Briggs? It’s simple. Take the test, embrace the positives, and set out your plan to destroy all the behaviors and habits that contribute to the negatives. It doesn’t matter if they say it’s inborn — you’re in control of you, not anyone else.
Make it happen.
Myers-Briggs Doesn’t Define You
Research & References of Myers-Briggs Doesn’t Define You|A&C Accounting And Tax Services
Source