AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE INDICATORS (MBTI) TO DEFINE PERSONALITY TYPE

An Introduction to MBTI AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE INDICATORS (MBTI) TO DEFINE PERSONALITY TYPE Background Before we begin discussing the Myers-Briggs Type Indicators (MBTI), it is worth describing where this psychological profiling framework fits into a powerful strategy for shaping sales, marketing, or training content, so it properly aligns to the way your target audience thinks. By using this approach, you can more readily shape your message, so it is highly understandable and most persuasive. To clarify this approach, it s worth beginning with an explanation of the concept of personality type. We will do this by looking at each word in turn: Personality. Personality is the culmination of many key inherited and learned factors. These combine to create a personality profile that is relatively specific to each of us. The various personality drivers can be categorised within the tiers of the profiling pyramid (see below). Type. The study of personality would be almost impossible if every individual was totally unique. To simplify the study of personality, psychologists have developed trait theories, which you can use to identify the basic personality traits. Each set of traits can then be grouped into Types, so these can be used to describe categories of common personality characteristics. Personality The Profiling Pyramid You can develop detailed insights into another person s personality by utilising the profiling pyramid illustrated in Figure 1 (1). Additionally, this flexible framework can be applied to profile groups (as will be explained in more detail during the forthcoming presentation). Personality Type Agendas (Internal/External) Knowledge (Subject/Situation) Inherited and Learned Shapes Individual Comfort Zones Culture (Societal/Organisational) Human Nature (Universal) Defines Expectations Drives Fears and Aspirations Links Allies or Creates Opponents Knowledge of the Subject Knowledge of the Situation Specific to Group Driven by Race, Religion, Creed, etc. Sets Organisational Style (eg. Aggressive) Inherited/Natural Behaviours Affected by Gender, Age, Health, etc. Sources: Model developed from a variety of different sources including: Briggs Myers, I., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edition, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc, Palo Alto, p. 368 and McShane, S., and Von Glinow, M., 2000. Organisational Behaviour (International Edition), Irwin McGraw-Hill, Sydney. pp. 166-168, 215-217, 498-515 and Linowes, J., 1997, The Psychology of Audience Figure Appeal. The Marketer, 1: The Vol 17, Issue Profiling 3 (June 1997), and Burns, Pyramid P., 2000, Psychology of Mind. [Online] www.barnhill.org.uk/article3.doc and Sartain, A., North, A., Strange, A., and Chapman, H., 1973, Psychology. Understanding Human Behaviour (4 th Edn). McGraw Hill, Sydney, pp. 39-51, 320-321, and Morris, C., 1979, Psychology. 3 rd Edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. pp. 225-226 & 367-380 and Sternberg, R.J., 1988, The Nature of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 125-147 and Schmidt, R., Kess, J.F., 1986, Television Advertising and Televangelism. Discourse Analysis of Persuasive Language. John Benjamins Publishing Co, Philadelphia, p. 8-10 and Bernstein, D., Audley, R.,1988, Put it Together, Put it Across: The Craft of Business Presentation. Cassell Publishers Ltd, London, p. 29 and Hofestede, G., 1991, Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill, New York. P. 6. Seahorses 2012 Page 1

The five tiers in this profiling pyramid are: Tier 1 - Human Nature. The term human nature is used to describe the types of common traits that are programmed into each of us (2). Details of these traits are often the simplest information to collect, because these typically reflect the fundamental characteristics of human beings, and we are therefore already aware of them in many cases. For instance, we all get mentally fatigued over time, and you would therefore need to consider this issue when you are designing a presentation or meeting. Additionally, factors like age, gender, and health will affect these basic traits. As an example, you would want to keep your presentation or meeting short if you know that a critical member of your audience has back pain, and will be uncomfortable sitting for a long period. So begin by thinking through straightforward insights like this, because they can really help you to encapsulate your message more effectively. Tier 2 Culture. When we talk about culture, we are alluding to the effects that our society and organisation will have on the way in which we assess information (3). These cultural factors are very important, because they can profoundly shape our beliefs, ideas, customs and taboos (4). For instance, race or religion may influence the way in which another person will react to your recommendations. Additionally, the culture of the organisation in which the other person is working can also affect that person s thinking and actions (5). As a classic example, people working in risk averse organisations, will often become risk averse in their own business dealings, because they are required to conform (6). Finding out about the societal and organisational culture of other people can therefore be very useful in shaping your message. Tier 3 Knowledge. The person s knowledge of the subject has a very real bearing on how you will need to shape your message. For instance, it is probably going to be counter-productive to couch your content using highly technical terms, if your audience knows nothing about the technology. At the other end of the spectrum, you don t want to spend a long period explaining the basics of physics to rocket scientists, because they will be bored before you get to the key points. In addition to this aspect, you need to bear in mind that your audience might be experts in the subject, but they may know nothing about the specific situation that you are going to be covering. You therefore need to think carefully about the information that you will deliver in your message, so it aligns to what your audience knows and understands. Tier 4 Agendas. We all invariably have some form of personal agenda that determines how we will assess information. These agendas could be driven internally (e.g. by our personal aspirations), or in some situations they can be imposed by organisations or groups to which we belong. It is therefore often important to identify any agendas that may be driving other people, and then use this knowledge to shape your message (7). For example, if you identified that a key decision maker is keen to be promoted, you would need to show how your recommended approach would help them to achieve that promotion. Tier 5 - Personality Type. The pinnacle of the profiling pyramid is defined as a key element of Type, which is discussed below. The insights that you can gain in this tier can be extremely powerful, because they can help you to define how an individual or group will mentally process your message at a truly fundamental level. Seahorses 2012 Page 2

An Introduction to MBTI Type Myers Briggs Type Indicators You can use information on Type to look at common aspects of human psychology. Most importantly, by identifying the personality Type of key people or groups, you can gain profound insights into the way you need to put your message across. However, to predict the way in which the key members of your audience might think, you must use an appropriate psychological framework. There are many psychological frameworks available, but I have used the MBTI, because: The MBTI can provide good results. The MBTI is generally accepted as a reliable framework for successfully predicting behaviour (8). Most importantly, this reliability means that it can be used to predict specific differences in people, and then cope with those differences constructively (9). The MBTI is commonly used. This framework is still the most commonly used model for personality profiling, as the test is taken over 2 million times annually. Because of the prominence of this test, there is a substantial amount of research available to assist in understanding personality Type. The MBTI Framework is Easy to Understand. One of the main reasons for the wide acceptance of this model is that it is readily understandable by most people, and not just professional psychologists (10). You therefore don t need to do a course, to get some very real benefits from this psychological framework. Using MBTI Information can Improve Effective Communication. Research by people like Yeakley (11) and Thompson (12) has indicated that you can improve the quality and persuasiveness of communication, by aligning a presentation to the personality Type of the audience. The MBTI can therefore provide a powerful tool for developing winning presentations and sales/marketing materials. So what is the MBTI? The Myers-Briggs Type Indicators were developed by a mother/daughter team (Katharine Briggs/Isabel Briggs Myers), so they could refine concepts in personality typing published by the eminent psychologist C.G. Jung (13). Their MBTI framework uses four separate facets of character (which are known as functions). These functions are illustrated in Figure 2 (14), and they each contain two opposing dichotomies. These dichotomies equate to opposite ends of a personality Type spectrum. For example, as shown in Function 1 at Figure 2 some people are extroverted and others might be more introverted. Extraversion Introversion Sensing Intuition Directs energy outward Gains energy from interaction 1 Directs energy inward Loses energy from interaction Focussed on information from 5 senses 2 Focussed on patterns and relationships. Thinking Decisions based on: Logic & Analysis Objectivity & Detachment 3 Feeling Decisions based on: Personal & Social values Understanding & Harmony Judging Deals with: Decisiveness Seeks Closure Focus on decision 4 Perceiving Deals with: Flexibility Open Options Focus on process Figure 2: The Four Functions and their Dichotomies Seahorses 2012 Page 3

The dichotomies within each of the four functions are: Function 1 - Orientation of Personal Energy (Extraversion/ Introversion). The first function describes the way in which a person wants to interact with the world. The preferences can therefore be described as: Extraversion. An Extravert mainly directs energy toward the outer world of Extraversion Directs energy outward Gains energy from interaction Introversion people and things, and they appear to be energised by interacting with other people. When discussed within the MBTI, the single letter E is used to signify a preference for Extraversion. 1 Directs energy inward Loses energy from interaction Introversion. This preference is the opposite of Extraversion, because Introverts mainly tend to direct their energy toward the inner world of experiences and ideas. These people often pursue solitary activities, but this does not mean that they do not like to be around people. It simply means that they tend to lose energy from social interactions. Interacting with other people can therefore tire them out. The single letter I denotes Introversion. Function 2 - Perceiving Function (Sensing/ intuition). Within the MBTI framework, this function describes the way in which people perceive the world around them. In other words, these dichotomies relate to the way in which we draw-in information. The two dichotomies for this function are: Sensing Focussed on information from 5 senses 2 Intuition Focussed on patterns and relationships. Sensing. Individuals with a preference for Sensing, mainly focus on information perceived through the five senses. People who prefer this function therefore generally want to operate with concrete objects and facts. The Sensing preference is denoted by the letter S. intuition. People who prefer to use intuition mainly look at the patterns and relationships that they see in the world around them. These people tend to be less preoccupied with concrete reality, and may spend more time thinking about what may be, rather than what is. In MBTI shorthand the intuition preference is shown by the letter N (Just to confuse everyone, and because the letter I had already been used for Introversion). Function 3 - Judging Function (Thinking/ Feeling). The Thinking/Feeling dichotomy is used to describe how people judge the information they have gathered, when they are making decisions. The two alternate preferences are: Thinking. As the name suggests, people Thinking Decisions based on: Logic & Analysis Objectivity & Detachment 3 Feeling Decisions based on: Personal & Social values Understanding & Harmony Seahorses 2012 Page 4

An Introduction to MBTI using the Thinking preference generally want to use impersonal, objective, and logical analysis for decision-making. The letter T represents the Thinking preference. Feeling. The opposite of Thinking is Feeling. In this preference, the individual will be inclined to reach conclusions based on personal and social values, with a focus on developing personal understanding of others and the generation of harmony. In shorthand, the letter F signifies this Feeling preference. Function 4 - Decision Style (Judging/Perceiving Preference). The final dichotomy describes a person s preferred decision style. In essence, this final function illustrates the way in which we all tend to balance our need to apply the Judging (Thinking/Feeling) and Perceiving (Sensing/ intuition) preferences. These opposing decision style preferences can therefore be described as follows: Judging Deals with: Decisiveness Seeks Closure Focus on decision 4 Perceiving Deals with: Flexibility Open Options Focus on process Judging. People with Judging personalities typically seek closure through the decisive use of the judging function (Thinking/Feeling), as illustrated in Figure 3 (15). The key to understanding this preference is therefore the concept of closure. For example, people with a strong inclination toward this end of the dichotomy are likely to finish the perceiving process as soon as they believe that they have enough information to make a decision (16). The letter J is used as shorthand for this preference. Orientation of Personal Energy P E R CE I VI NG Information Processing J UD GI NG Information Evaluation Decision Style EXTRAVERSION SENSING THINKING JUDGING or or or or INTROVERSION INTUITION FEELING PERCEIVING Figure 3: The Decision Style in Relation to the Judging/Perceiving Functions. Perceiving. At the other end of the spectrum, a Perceiving person tends to focus on information collection. For this reason, an individual with this preference may want to keep their options open. This preference stems from their focus on collecting more data, rather than seeking closure. Within the MBTI dichotomies, the letter P denotes this preference. As individuals typically show preferences in each of the four functions, there are 16 combinations of personality Types, as shown in Figure 4 (17) (overleaf). Each of these Types is simply a way of showing the preferences that an individual has toward each of the dichotomies. For instance, a person classified as an ISTJ would tend to be driven by their preferences for the Introversion (I), Sensing (S), Thinking (T) and Judging (J) dichotomies. Seahorses 2012 Page 5

INTROVERSION EXTRAVERSION SENSING TYPES INTUITION TYPES ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ JUDGING ISTP ISFP INFP INTP ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP PERCEIVING ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ JUDGING THINKING FEELING THINKING Figure 4: The 16 Myers/Briggs Personality Types However, unlike many other personality-typing systems, the MBTI does not say that there are only 16 Types of people in the whole world. This is an important part of the MBTI approach, because most people simply do not fit neatly into fixed pigeonholes. The MBTI is a much more flexible approach, because this model simply states that each of the dichotomies in our personality Type just illustrate our comfort zones. The strength of the preference for one dichotomy or the other is what is important. You can understand this concept by thinking about the four functions (E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P) as though they were the slides on a graphic equaliser. We can then start to think about different people s personality type in the manner illustrated in Figure 5 (18). Figure 5: MBTI Profiles for Two Individuals In this diagram, we have represented the strength of two people s preferences as sliding pointers. When the slider is at either end of the scale, this indicates a very strong preference one way or the other. However, once the pointer moves away from the ends of the slide, the individual s preferences become more balanced. For example, you can assess Person 1 in Figure 5 as showing strong preferences towards Extraversion. Person 2, however, does not Seahorses 2012 Page 6

An Introduction to MBTI seem to demonstrate a strong preference either way. The advantage of this MBTI approach is that we can start to understand how likely it is that a person will prefer to act and think in one way or another. Although this limitless shades of grey approach within the 16 MBTI Types is one of the real strengths of this framework, it would simply be too difficult to use the system for sales or presenting if we left it there. Fortunately, the whole model can be further simplified by grouping the Types in relation to the individual s Perceiving (Sensing/iNtuition) and Judging (Thinking/Feeling) preferences. This creates four key groups of personality Type, as shown in Figure 6. These four groups (ST, SF, NF, and NT) use the two centre letters from the MBTI type. The Four Types ST SF NF NT INTROVERSION EXTRAVERSION SENSING TYPES INTUITION TYPES ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ JUDGING ISTP ISFP INFP INTP ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP PERCEIVING ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ JUDGING THINKING FEELING THINKING Figure 6: Defining the Four Types These four groups are particularly useful to presenters, sales people and marketeers, because the two middle functions are typically the most important aspects for communication. This importance is illustrated in Figure 7 (19), which shows that these two centre functions are the ones people rely on, when making decisions. Orientation of Personal Energy P E R CE I VI NG Information Processing J UD GI NG Information Evaluation Decision Style EXTRAVERSION SENSING THINKING JUDGING or or or or INTROVERSION INTUITION FEELING PERCEIVING Keys to Decision Making Process (Prime Persuasion Issues) Attitude & Orientation Figure 7: The Centre Letters The Prime Persuasion Issues Additionally, where it is possible, you should also take into account the Decision Style (J/P) of your audience members. This preference is used to determine how quickly the target audience is likely to want to shift from perceiving to judging activities. For example, an Seahorses 2012 Page 7

understanding of this function will help you to shape the amount of information you will deliver in a message, before the person will believe you and take the recommended action. Using the information This handout provides a basic introduction to some very useful concepts, which will be discussed during Bruce Hilliard s presentation. As he will demonstrate during this session, this profiling framework can be used to significantly enhance presenting, sales, marketing and numerous aspects of your interpersonal relationships. Additionally, you can get more information on collecting profile information about individuals and groups by downloading the document at the following web location: http://www.seahorses-consulting.com/persuasion_influence/collectinginformationexamples.pdf. You can also download other free (and very useful) documents from this web site: http://www.seahorses-consulting.com/persuasion_influence.html. Alternatively, if you have a query and you would like to contact the author, you can send an email to info@seahorses-consulting.com. ENDNOTES 1. This model was developed from a variety of different sources including: Briggs Myers, I., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edition, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc, Palo Alto, p. 368 and McShane, S., and Von Glinow, M., 2000. Organisational Behaviour (International Edition), Irwin McGraw-Hill, Sydney. pp. 166-168, 215-217, 498-515 and Linowes, J., 1997, The Psychology of Audience Appeal. The Marketer, Vol 17, Issue 3 (June 1997), and Burns, P., 2000, Psychology of Mind. [Online] www.barnhill.org.uk/article3.doc and Sartain, A., North, A., Strange, A., and Chapman, H., 1973, Psychology. Understanding Human Behaviour (4th Edn). McGraw Hill, Sydney, pp. 39-51, 320-321, and Morris, C., 1979, Psychology. 3rd Edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. pp. 225-226 & 367-380 and Sternberg, R.J., 1988, The Nature of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 125-147 and Schmidt, R., Kess, J.F., 1986, Television Advertising and Televangelism. Discourse Analysis of Persuasive Language. John Benjamins Publishing Co, Philadelphia, p. 8-10 and Bernstein, D., Audley, R.,1988, Put it Together, Put it Across: The Craft of Business Presentation. Cassell Publishers Ltd, London, p. 29 and Hofestede, G., 1991, Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill, New York. p. 6. 2. Hofstede, G., 1980, Motivation, Leadership and Organisation: Do American Theories Apply Abroad. Organisational Dynamics. Summer 1980. American Management Association. pp. 6-7. 3. Sath, V., 1885, Culture and Related Corporate Realities. Richard Irwin, Homewood Illinous and Morris, C., 1979, Psychology. Third Edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp. 176-178. 4. Rokeach, M., 1968, Beliefs, Attitudes and Values. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Seahorses 2012 Page 8

An Introduction to MBTI 5. McShane, S., and Von Glinow, M., 2000. Organisational Behaviour (International Edition), Irwin McGraw-Hill, Sydney. p. 498. 6. Clark, R., 1996, Australian Human Resources Management. Framework and Practice. Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, Sydney. 7. Burns, P., 2000, Psychology of Mind. [Online] www.barnhill.org.uk/article3.doc [Accessed] 16 Jan 2004 and Linowes, J., 1997, The Psychology of Audience Appeal. The Marketer, Vol 17, Issue 3 (June 1997) and Noe, R., 1986, Trainees Attributes and Attitudes: Neglected Influences on Training Effectiveness. Academy of Management Review, October 1986, pp. 736-749, and Hicks, W., and Klimoski, R., 1987, Entry into Training Programs and its Effect on Training Outcomes: A Field Experiment. Academy of Management Journal, September 1987, pp. 542-552 and Baldwin, T., Magjuka, R., and Loher, B., 1991, The Perils of Participation: Effects of Choice on Training on Trainee Motivation and Learning. Personnel Psychology, Spring 1991, Vol 44, pp. 51-56 and Sim, S., and Duffy, A., 2002, Knowledge Transformers A Link Between Learning and Creativity. Paper Delivered at AID 02 Workshop on Learning and Creativity. [Online] http://www.cad.strath.ac.uk/aid02_workshop/knowledge.pdf [Accessed] 21 January 2004 and Bandura, A., 1977, Self Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioural Change. Psychological Review 1977, pp. 191-215 and McShane, S., and Von Glinow, M., 2000. Organisational Behaviour (International Edition), Irwin McGraw-Hill, Sydney. pp. 66-88 and Morris, C., 1982, Psychology. An Introduction. 4th Edition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp. 280-305. 8. Carlson, J., 1985, Recent Assessment of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Journal of Personality Assessment No. 49. p. 364. 9. Briggs Myers, I, McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, and N.L., Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edn. Consulting Psychologists Press Inc. Palo Alto. p. 21. 10. Furnham, A., 1992, Personality at Work. The Role of Individual Differences in the Workplace. Routledge, London. P. 60. 11. Yeakley Jr., F.R., 1982, Communication Style Preferences and Adjustments as an Approach for Studying Effects of Similarity of Psychological Type. Research in Psychological Type, Volume 5, pp. 30-48, and Yeakley Jr., F.R., 1983, Implications of Communication Style Research for Psychological Type Theory. Research in Psychological Type, Volume 6, pp. 5-23. 12. Thompson, H., 1997, Type Languages, Dialects, Styles and the Extraverted Function: Is there a Relationship? [Online] http://www.hpsys.com/resrch~1.htm. [Accessed] 23 Feb 2004 and Thompson, H., 2001, Type Languages, Dialects and Styles. Bulletin of Psychological Type, 20:2 pp. 37-38, [Online] http://www.hpsys.com/commart.htm, [Accessed] 23 Feb 2004. 13. For more information on Jung s model of psychological type see: Jung, C., 1959, Psychological Types. Pantheon, New York cited in Jung C., (Ed) De Laszlo, V., 1959, The Basic Writings of C.G. Jung. The Modern Library, New York, pp. 183-285 14. Model developed from information at Briggs Myers, I., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edition, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc, Palo Alto, p. 6 and Keirsey, D., Bates, M., 1984, Please Understand Me. Character and Temperament Types. Prometheus Nemesis Book Company, Delaware. pp. 14-24. 15. Model developed from information at Briggs Myers, I., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edition, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc, Palo Alto, pp. 24, 27. Seahorses 2012 Page 9

16. Briggs Myers, I, McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, and N.L., Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edn. Consulting Psychologists Press Inc. Palo Alto. p. 26. 17. Model developed from information at Briggs Myers, I, McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, and N.L., Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edn. Consulting Psychologists Press Inc. Palo Alto. pp. 31 and 38. 18. Model Developed from information at Briggs Myers, I, McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, and N.L., Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edn. Consulting Psychologists Press Inc. Palo Alto. pp. 5-6. 19. Adapted from information at: Briggs Myers, I., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. Hammer, A.L., 1998, MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. 3rd Edition, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc, Palo Alto, pp. 6, 31 and 38. Borchert, R., Jensen, D., and Yates, D. Hands-on and Visualization Modules for Enhancement of Learning in Mechanics: Development and Assessment in the Context of Myers Briggs Types and VARK Learning Styles. ASEE Annual Conference, Charlotte, NC, [Online] http://www.usafa.af.mil/dfem/research_info/ed_research/paper_final3.pdf, and Keirsey, D., Bates, M., 1984, Please Understand Me. Character and Temperament Types, Prometheus Nemesis Book Company, Delaware, pp. 13-24. Seahorses 2012 Page 10