As I mentioned at the beginning of this course, working with personality type is based on the work of Carl Jung. And this has been refined and modified by Katherine Briggs and Isabel Myers. The popular tool that is based on their work is the Myers Briggs Type Indicator, also known as The MBTI. And this often gets a lot of negative criticisms. Many critics don't really understand what the Myers Briggs Type Indicator is or how to use it. Blend statements that the tool is useless or it's not scientifically validated, and not true, and skeptics are not able to provide the evidence to substantiate these claims.
Like any scientifically assessed instruments, The MBTI is open to scrutiny and to peer review. There are literally hundreds of studies demonstrating both reliable validity and validity to accepted scientific standards. critics claim that a personality assessment is valid if it predicts outcomes that matter. And if it's going to be used in an organization, it should shed light on how well someone performs in a particular job or with a certain group of people. There are many human resources tools that are used for a wide range of purposes within an organization. Some are being used for recruiting and assessment whilst others are used to strengthen the mutual understanding between people and to allow them to communicate better with each other in a non threatening way.
This is how type is used. The Center for applications of psychological type has always stated that the Myers Briggs Type Indicator should not be used for recruiting and evaluating job performance. So it seems odd that critics will fault the Myers Briggs Type Indicator for not doing something which it says it can't do. Critics often mistake preference with aptitude. For example, if you have a preference for logical thinking, it doesn't necessarily mean that you're good at it. The results that you get from your type assessment don't imply excellence, competence or natural ability, only what is preferred?
Used well, using type supports a coaching process to help people gain an understanding of their preferences and how to use them. I'm going to repeat this once again, using type supports a coaching process. Step one, is very valuable in this way. And step two is much more empirical. It tends to be completely over Looked by critics and again is very useful in supporting a coaching process.