Dirk Verburg

In my previous post about MBTI I stressed the importance to review the outcomes of this personality assessment with clients, to make sure they understand the outcomes and recognize themselves in their type. However, often practitioners become stuck in these reviews if clients do not indicate their preferred behaviors. Although it is tempting for practitioners to try to shoehorn clients into a specific type, doing so is likely the least productive and helpful approach.

What was the MBTI again?

As all practitioners and users know, the MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) of an individual consists of 4 letters, for instance, ENFP.

Each letter of this Type represents the preferred behavior of the individual for a particular Function. For instance, for individuals who prefer making decisions based on rational arguments, the third letter of their type will be an ’T’, for individuals who prefer making decisions based on feelings or convictions this third letter will be be ’F’.

It is important to note that a preference for a particular behavior does not exclude the ability to display another one; the preference indicates which behavior an individual prefers, and is therefore likely to be the one that is developed and displayed the most.

Function	Preference	Preference
Energy	I – Introversion (ideas)	E – Extroversion (people)
Perception	S – Sensing (data)	N – Intuition (intuition)
Judgment	T – Thinking	F – Feeling
Attitude towards outside world	J – Judging	P – Perceiving

The first step in identifying these preferences is asking the client to take the MBTI questionnaire. The second step is to explain the underlying theory and to verify whether the client recognizes the type suggested by the questionnaire they completed.

What regularly happens in these reviews, is that clients struggles to express a preference for a particular function, feeling they fit into both orientations. For instance, about 30-40% of my clients find it very difficult to accept they have a preference for Introversion when this is the suggested preferred source of energy based on the questionnaire they completed¹.

Resistance or Unawareness?

There are two reasons why clients can be reluctant to express a preference. The first one is resistance. Many people feel their personality is too developed to be confined to one behavioral preference (for this reason I cannot bear to hear the word ‘ambivert’ anymore!).

The second reason is that clients may be genuinely unaware of their behavioral preference for a particular function. This can be a ‘blind spot’ or an ‘unknown’ in their Johari window²:

	Known to self	Not known to self
Known to others	Arena	Blind spot
Not known to others	Facade	Unknown

For inexperienced MBTI practitioners, clients’ inability to choose between orientations can be a nightmare, as it keeps them stuck in the diagnosis phase, preventing the conversation from progressing to potential actions and next steps. In these situations, an unproductive dynamic often develops between the practitioner and the client.

The practitioner may push harder and harder for the client to choose a particular orientation, e.g. by dogmatically insisting the client ‘must’ have a dominant orientation for a specific function. However, the harder the practitioner pushes, the more the client will resist, arguing that both orientations apply equally to their personality.

This issue isn’t unique to the MBTI by the way; it occurs with other type-based personality inventories (e.g. DISC and Birkman) as well.

Purpose of the conversation

A more productive approach in these situations is to focus on the purpose of the conversation: What is the need of the client, and what information is needed to help them? If the client mentions displaying different orientations for a function, it is useful to ask the client when and in what situations each occurs. Depending on the client’s needs, some situations will be more relevant than others. Once clarified, questions can be formulated that advance the conversation.

An example

A while ago, I was working with an executive who, when we discussed her type after she took the MBTI questionnaire, couldn’t decide whether her dominant energy orientation was ‘Extroversion’ or ‘Introversion’ (yes, there we go again). Since understanding her relationship with her peers and direct reports was important to me, I asked whether she got her best work-related ideas during team meetings or when she was alone. She immediately responded that she got her best ideas when she was by herself. This provided me with all the information I needed to continue our session in a productive manner.

CG Jung, we have a problem

MBTI practitioners need to realize is that the MBTI is only an instrument which should enable them to help their clients, and that ‘shoehorning’ their clients into a ‘four letter type’ is not a goal in itself, and often is contra-productive.

If the practitioner cannot help their client without a clear-cut and accepted MBTI profile, both are likely to face a problem. The practitioner’s capabilities may be too limited to provide effective support, and the client may have a practitioner unable to address their needs.

In this context, it is important to remember that the MBTI was developed by Katharine Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers based on Carl Gustav Jung’s book Psychological Types (published in 1921).

Apparently, Jung himself was keenly aware of the potential for oversimplification his theory posed. After the publication of his book, he complained that people had turned it into a ‘childish parlor game’ and that even medical professionals were using his typology to categorize patients and provide corresponding advice.…³.

1. Interestingly enough, clients whose suggested preference is ‘Extroversion’ tend to have less trouble accepting the outcome, which might say something about the preferences we have as a society. ↩
2. Luft, J. and Ingham, H. (1955) ‘The Johari window, a graphic model of
   interpersonal awareness’, Proceedings of the western training laboratory in
   group development. Los Angeles: UCLA ↩
   
3. Bair, D. (2004). Jung : a biography. Bay Back Books. ↩

Illustration: Microsoft Designer