From Jung's Desk to HR's Favorite Tool: The Rocky Road of the MBTI

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) has long been a staple in the world of personality assessments. From corporate team-building exercises to online dating profiles, the MBTI's four-letter personality types have become a part of our cultural lexicon. 89% of the Fortune 500 and 200 US government agencies use it. But where did this test come from, and how did it gain such prominence? The journey of the MBTI is a rocky one, filled with questionable origins, scathing criticisms, and surprising revelations.

The Origins: Carl Jung's Unscientific Hypotheses

The roots of the MBTI can be traced back to famed psychologist Carl Jung. In 1921, Jung hypothesized the existence of eight identifiable personality types. However, it's crucial to note that Jung did not employ the scientific method when formulating these types. Instead, his conclusions were largely based on personal observations and opinions. A particularly eyebrow-raising example is how he categorized his wife as a "feeler" based on his perception of her frequent emotional expressions. Such anecdotal evidence hardly qualifies as a rigorous scientific approach.

Enter Myers and Briggs: Amplifying Jung's Ideas

While Jung laid the groundwork, the actual creation of the MBTI test was the handiwork of Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers. Neither of these women had formal scientific training or experience. Their primary qualification? A keen interest in Jung's writings. Taking Jung's eight personality traits, they expanded them into 16 distinct personality types. This expansion was not based on new research or findings but rather their interpretations and biases. The result? A test that many argue is built on a shaky foundation. A hundred years ago. When half the population were farmers, women had only just won the vote, and it was pre-civil-rights era.

The Test's Flaws: A Foundation of Sand

One of the most significant criticisms of the MBTI is its assertion that personality traits are static. This notion contradicts the lived experiences of countless individuals who have witnessed their personalities evolve over time. For instance, many people find themselves becoming more extroverted or introverted depending on life circumstances. The idea that our personalities are set in stone from a young age is not only scientifically dubious but also dismissive of human growth and adaptability.

Furthermore, the MBTI's reliability is questionable at best. A staggering 50% of individuals who retake the test receive a different personality type upon their second attempt. Such inconsistency casts doubt on the test's validity and its ability to provide meaningful insights.

Flattering and Vague Descriptions

MBTI results are often flattering and lack negative descriptors. This can lead individuals to see what they want to see in their results, a phenomenon known as the Forer or Barnum effect. This effect is often exploited in horoscopes and fortune-telling, where vague generalities are provided, and individuals fill in specific examples from their own lives. People are far less accepting of negative descriptors of themselves, so MBTI avoids them.

Potential Discrimination

The use of personality tests, including the MBTI, in hiring can inadvertently lead to discrimination. For instance, many neurodivergent individuals, such as those with autism, bipolar disorder, or ADD, might be labeled as "too intense" based on their test results. If employers screen out candidates based on such labels, they could inadvertently exclude many individuals with disabilities, which is not only unethical but also illegal.

Board Members' Silent Protest

Perhaps one of the most telling criticisms of the MBTI comes from within. CPP, the company responsible for publishing the test, boasts three leading psychologists on its board. Yet, none of these experts utilize the MBTI in their professional endeavors. One board member even cited that he refrains from using the test because it would be "questioned by his academic colleagues." This glaring lack of endorsement from those at the helm raises questions about the test's credibility.

Conclusion

The MBTI, despite its widespread use, is a tool built on questionable foundations. From Jung's unscientific hypotheses to Myers and Briggs' lack of qualifications, the test's origins are riddled with red flags. While it may be tempting to categorize ourselves and others into neat four-letter boxes, it's essential to approach the MBTI with a healthy dose of skepticism. After all, the complexities of human personality cannot be distilled into a simple test, especially one with such a rocky road behind it.