# Myers Briggs at work...



## CountZero (Sep 28, 2012)

This came up in my news feed today...









Why Companies Are So Interested in Your Myers-Briggs Type - JSTOR Daily


If you’ve looked for a job recently, you’ve probably encountered the personality test. You may also have wondered if it was backed by scientific research.




daily.jstor.org





Unlike some other outlets who are very dismissive of the MBTI, this is more of a "jury's out" perspective.

Do you think MBTI has a place at work? If you're in management, how much weight would you give someone's type in a hiring decision? Could this be used in a discriminatory, or just unfair, way?

Personally I think MBTI is fun to theorize about and debate, but using it in hiring or HR decisions makes me a little queasy...


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

CountZero said:


> This came up in my news feed today...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd take it with a grain of salt, personally. I see all of typology as a means of understanding the self and others to a certain degree, but humans can have deep life-altering experiences that defy any sort of personality typing. People are more than just their types just as we strive to be more than the sum of our parts.


----------



## CountZero (Sep 28, 2012)

tanstaafl28 said:


> I'd take it with a grain of salt, personally. I see all of typology as a means of understanding the self and others to a certain degree, but humans can have deep life-altering experiences, that defy any sort of personality typing. People are more than just their types just as we strive to be more than the sum of our parts.


Totally agree, but more specifically, how do you feel about MBTI being used for HR decisions in the workplace?


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

IMO the executives sell its tool to mid level as inclusivity.

What I really think it is used for is a few different areas though.

1. They have data to indicate what groups are closer affiliated with corporate political agendas/political correctness. So with that data they can help both meet hiring quotas to get their kick backs with diversifying. But also they are getting certain kind of people that are specifically able to be marketed to. I.e. appealing to Hipsters for example means being able to sugar coat and gloss over corporate agenda, using causes/affiliations to appeal.

2. There are many many in depth studies dating back over the course of 20+ years that have studied things like risk assessments. With the mbti at work. I.e. who costs most money in workers comp, who quits etc etc So much further up the ladder they are checking things like risk involved and compliancy. Corporate Hr cares bout bottom line. So they peddle it as inclusivity further down the line in my view. Hence all those sill damn workshops

But yes you are right that the midlevel employees especially ones with very superficial level of knowledge could very easily inadvertently discriminate. I doubt most people with more in depth knowledge than a hack would use the tools to discriminate. I would suggest more well versed people on mbti would utilize the knowledge to assess where people can be weak and strong and compliment each other, and communication styles if anything. Only a silly hack would just go and hire types they read about that sound good. Most people with in depth knowledge of Mbti or most Managers whether they know about Mbti or not understand the value and need for many kinds etc for the entire system to work.


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

CountZero said:


> Totally agree, but more specifically, how do you feel about MBTI being used for HR decisions in the workplace?


at the risk of sounding like a typist here  with the subject of being a typist

It is a concern with high Fe in Hr who are younger. An ExFJ trying to impose their world order based on political views or friendships could taint the well water fast. Most other types I do not think would be as much a worry. Maybe young ENFPs possibly too if they are activists or something who think they should just hire based on their value system. I do not even think these types older would usually be a problem.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

CountZero said:


> Totally agree, but more specifically, how do you feel about MBTI being used for HR decisions in the workplace?


I think it might be dangerous to make too many assumptions about someone based solely on their MBTI type (or any other typology). Could it be a factor? Sure. 

As for practical application, it only came up once when I applied for a job making picture tubes for a TV factory. They actually included an MBTI test in our application packets. My future ex wife (ISTJ) and I (ENTP) both applied. She got an offer, I did not. From what I understood, they concluded I would quickly get bored with assembly line work (somewhat true).


----------



## bifurcations (Jan 31, 2021)

tanstaafl28 said:


> She got an offer, I did not. From what I understood, they concluded I would quickly get bored with assembly line work (somewhat true).


Maybe they did you a favor. (For purely selfish reasons, but still...)


----------



## OrchidSugar (5 mo ago)

Suggested PerC Reading:

Personality Assessments in the Hiring Process
-and-
"Achiever" Pre-employment assessment test - anyone with experience?

To reiterate my views on the subject, I think there is a high chance of bias and discrimination when people are using personality assessments on employees. Not only in hiring, but throughout the duration of employment. It also represents an unfair power imbalance. At this point you're just hoping that whoever is privy to that information is using it ethically and morally.


----------



## lww23 (Mar 7, 2021)

CountZero said:


> This came up in my news feed today...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would consider someone's MBTI in making my hiring decision _only if:_

1. MBTI types are real. By being real it means it is like blood types and all the medical data that you can obtain from blood work. 
AND
2. MBTI types do not change. 
AND
3. MBTI types can be tested with a reasonable degree of certainty. One of the main weaknesses of MBTI, as has been pointed out by critics, is its inconsistency. Many people take the same test two weeks apart, and the results are different. Which one is true?
AND
4. Everyone can be typed correctly. 
AND
5. MBTI tests cannot be manipulated. One can only get his/her true type and it is impossible for one to take a test and get the desired result. 

None of these conditions can be met. 

MBTI types can be a potential cause of discrimination. People, in a collective sense, can be judgmental and may assume that everyone should occupy a "proper" role in society based on their type. For example, if you are a "nurturer" type, then you cannot be a manager. Such a view would be ridiculous, but MBTI types can become a superstition and an instrument to reinforce unfairness. 

MBTI types should have no place in the workplace. Personality is far more dynamic and multidimensional than the four letters. If HR wants to keep a record of every employee's personality traits, the Big Five sounds more reliable. At least it is widely used in scientific research.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

lww23 said:


> I would consider someone's MBTI in making my hiring decision _only if:_
> 
> 1. MBTI types are real. By being real it means it is like blood types and all the medical data that you can obtain from blood work.
> AND
> ...


1) yes it's real
2) the type doesn't change
3) nope. Tests are and will always be inaccurate. Typing is significantly more complicated than tests. If you want to type someone you need to have a better method, which includes being an expert (10,000 hours) in the subject.
4) there are lots of mistypes. Even among those who actually understand what they are talking about. To not mistype you have to be on MY level, and I haven't met anybody who takes this shit as seriously as me and put in the time and effort to figure out the precise mechanisms of this shit.
5) again, tests shouldn't be used. You're thinking about this the wrong way. You need an expert.

It's real, the main thing is getting people to treat it as real and take it seriously. Then, improve and update things. Because there's a lot of misinformation out there. From stereotypes to faulty claims to different systems... it needs clearing up to get the attention of those who are interested in taking it seriously.

But I agree, personality is more dynamic than mbti. It's only a part, not the whole. And same with big 5. It's just one portion of personality and should only be used if those specific personality traits are required for the job.


----------



## impulsenine (Oct 18, 2020)

It'd be useful to know and understand the personality of your employees/colleagues.
But not through giving them some dumb tests like MBTI, Big Five, Enneagram & so on.

The most important traits of people are non-quantifiable.
You know those stupid things that get the Fe-dom HR department wet when they hear? 
They're all abstract. 

Only experience in analyzing and understanding people would make that work.

You can have a person XXXX mbti type that is super productive and friendly and at the same another person XXXX mbti type, that is super not productive and hermit.

In some companies, they give IQ tests during interview. The lower the IQ = higher chances to be hired.


----------



## OrchidSugar (5 mo ago)

impulsenine said:


> In some companies, they give IQ tests during interview. The lower the IQ = higher chances to be hired.


Wait, what? This is horrible lol


----------



## impulsenine (Oct 18, 2020)

OrchidSugar said:


> Wait, what? This is horrible lol


I worked in one company that did that (yeah, you can make a joke about my IQ now) and I heard about another dozens that do that. I even heard about cases when people weren't hired because of high-IQ.

The thing is, the profile of a good employee tends to be the same as a good citizen (voter). Has to obey authority and don't ask questions or think that much/have ideas/being creative. The ideal employee needs to be like that in most companies.


----------



## OrchidSugar (5 mo ago)

impulsenine said:


> I worked in one company that did that (yeah, you can make a joke about my IQ now) and I heard about another dozens that do that. I even heard about cases when people weren't hired because of high-IQ.
> 
> The thing is, the profile of a good employee tends to be the same as a good citizen (voter). Has to obey authority and don't ask questions or think that much/have ideas/being creative. The ideal employee needs to be like that in most companies.


Sadly I agree, as the contributions of high IQ people is usually over everyone’s heads and doesn’t seem practical. And if your IQ is too low you won’t be able to perform the job function or following along with training. So average IQ is best.

I mean I agree with the rationale. Not the actual practice necessarily.


----------



## CountZero (Sep 28, 2012)

OrchidSugar said:


> Wait, what? This is horrible lol


You wanted some proof? Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops

Not exactly the same thing, but a few points on why being (seen as) smart as work isn't always a great idea. Why Being Too Smart at Work is a Bad Thing


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

CountZero said:


> You wanted some proof? Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops
> 
> Not exactly the same thing, but a few points on why being (seen as) smart as work isn't always a great idea. Why Being Too Smart at Work is a Bad Thing


Being too smart is not just seen as bad at work. I've dealt with it all my life and I've adapted to appear like a "bro" in order to fit in with people. I've literally had people refer to me as a dumbass,, an idiot, the stupidest person in the world etc so my act is working. It's funny because it's basically the opposite of who I really am, but I'm not one to care about expressing myself. All I need is me.


----------



## OrchidSugar (5 mo ago)

CountZero said:


> You wanted some proof? Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops
> 
> Not exactly the same thing, but a few points on why being (seen as) smart as work isn't always a great idea. Why Being Too Smart at Work is a Bad Thing





CountZero said:


> You wanted some proof? Court OKs Barring High IQs for Cops
> 
> Not exactly the same thing, but a few points on why being (seen as) smart as work isn't always a great idea. Why Being Too Smart at Work is a Bad Thing


That second article is so sobering and kind of true about the jealousy, extra unpaid labor, and lack of promotion. When you’re the one handling everything without falling apart, the manager sees you as good in that role and cant afford to lose you. So sad.

But where can smart people go though? Everybody needs to earn a living. 

I was recently denied a job because I was considered overqualified. Even though I really liked the people who interviewed me and knew I could do the work. I was so disappointed, but I think they were using the same rationale as in the first article. They were worried about longevity. I just thanked them for the opportunity and made myself feel better by saying a better fit will come along soon.


----------



## impulsenine (Oct 18, 2020)

CountZero said:


> Not exactly the same thing, but a few points on why being (seen as) smart as work isn't always a great idea. Why Being Too Smart at Work is a Bad Thing


I didn't read that article but I somehow sense what he is talking about, so I will speak from my experience and that of other people around me, following the analysis of a lot of work relationships.

This is simple: the more capable/smarter you seem, the more exploitable you become. By every colleague! Those superior to you (leader/manager etc.) would start to gain your trust and they will give you more responsibilities, for the same money (most often). Those on the same level or lower as you would start asking for help or favors. 

Looking smarter? It means you can be more productive! 

2 real stories: my first job. I was such an amateur that I wanted to "prove" my abilities. Doh, young man, you want to prove that you can. What do you think happened? I got to learn EVERYTHING that was done in the company in less than a month. I was one of those "super versatile" employees who could be made to do anything. And look, that's how I ended up doing all of them because, well, "I'm capable". For the same money, of course.

The second story: a friend that works something on computer (IT they say, linux admin or networking stuff, don't know) emigrated to UK. In that company he had english, indian, pakis colleagues. After 1 month, his manager came to him and said: "Dude, you're the employee of the month. That would not be a problem if it wouldn't make us look like not working at all". Imagine he was the guy that had about ~120 tickets solved/month when the next most productive employee had somewhere around 60. And there were guys with 1 or 2 tickets solved, whole month. 
Imagine he was already playing Diablo ,Starcraft or WoW games 2 out of 8 hours of working. So what did he do? Started to work 2 hours/day and then spending whole time minding his business (I guess more starcraft tournaments lol). The next month, everyone was happy. There wasn't anymore that "hardworking job stealing super productive romanian worker" at such a great distance from the others in terms of productivity.

Moral of the story: DON'T BE TOO SMART AT THE JOB! SOMEONE IS AROUND THE CORNER TO EXPLOIT YOU AT ANY MOMENT! (or you'll just have conflicts because you make others look like not working)

There are exceptions, of course.
I think one of the most important ones is this: by proving your abilities you'd catch attention of someone that can offer you new greater opportunities. Otherwise: don't.


----------



## Aarya (Mar 29, 2016)

OrchidSugar said:


> Sadly I agree, as the contributions of high IQ people is usually over everyone’s heads and doesn’t seem practical. And if your IQ is too low you won’t be able to perform the job function or following along with training. So average IQ is best.
> 
> I mean I agree with the rationale. Not the actual practice necessarily.


That's just people following other people in terms of what they think authority looks and feels like.

A company in its inception for instance will want plenty of high-IQ people because then the company can just harvest their employees' ideas and implement them for free. I doubt most of the companies implementing these rules will have performed IQ tests themselves to see what works and what doesn't for the kind of demographics they target. Most if not all companies can easily implement some IQ tests in the "training days" disguised as "fun stuff to do".

Some companies in Bucharest that my friends work at (usually having to do with recruitment, HR, PR stuff) use Myers Briggs but it's unclear to what degree or purpose. *Some* people in the administration, who have a say over how the results from Myers Briggs are used, believe in stuff such as Astrology and blood types. I just happen to know one. She actively looks at people through MBTI/astrology lenses.


----------



## Eren Jaegerbomb (Nov 13, 2015)

I've never seen it used at work where I live.

Maybe it's in particular jobs or industries.


----------

