|
Home | Login | Recent Changes | Search | All Pages | Help
WhatsYourTypeBack to MyersBriggsTypeIndicator CharlesAdams -- INTP MichaelBolton -- ESTP (S's do so do wikis, Dave :) ) FionaCharles -- INTP EstherDerby -- INTP CherDevey --INFP (Just did the test on humanmetrics.com to remind me my type :-) (I skipped questions like I did when I first took the test back in 2001) LoisFrench -- ISFP DianeGibson -- INTJ DonGray -- ENTP SherryHeinze -- INFP BobKing -- INTP DaveLiebreich -- INTP (S's don't do wikis, I guess) HuwLloyd -- ENFP ( Immersion when reading/thinking tends to balance my E, as I like to process aurally ) MikeMelendez -- INTJ SuePetersen -- ISTJ DwaynePhillips -- ISTJ DavidPickett -- ISTJ (used to be INTP, but apparently I've morphed over the years...) JohannaRothman -- ENTJ BrettSchuchert -- ENTP - though Jerry thinks maybe F instead of T StuartScott -- ENFJ AdrianSegar -- ?NF? PhilStubbington -- complete schizophrenic! Let me explain. I thought I was INFP now, and some years back an INTJ. I've just tried an online MBTI test (www.humanmetrics.com) and it says I'm an EIFJ (slightly expressed extrovert 11%, moderately expressed intuitive personality 33%, slightly expressed feeling personality 11%, and slightly expressed judging personality 1%) SteveSmith -- ENFP DaveSmith -- IsTJ JohnSuzuki -- ISTJ JerryWeinberg - INFP By Type The tags for each type are taken from "Type Watching" ISTJ -- ?Doing What Should be Done? ISFJ -- ?A High Sense of Duty?
INFJ -- ?A Inspiration to Others?
INTJ -- ?Everything has Room for Improvement? ISTP -- ?Ready to try anything Once?
ISFP -- ?Sees Much but Shares Little?
INFP -- ?Performing Noble Service to Aid Society? INTP -- ?A Love of Problem Solving? ESTP -- ?The Ultimate Realists? ESFP -- ?You Only Go Around Once in Life?
ENFP -- ?Giving Life an Extra Squeeze? ENTP -- ?One Exciting Challenge after Another? ESTJ -- ?Life's Administrators?
ESFJ -- ?Hostesses and Hosts of the World?
ENFJ -- ?Smooth Talking Persuaders? ENTJ -- ?Life's Natural Leaders? Phil, my experience is that many of the on-line sites show results that are errrr... pretty distant from the results reported when people use the actual MBTI instruments. ED 051604 Narasimhaiah Gorla and Yan Wah Lam, "Who Should Work With Whom?: Building Effective Software Project Teams", Communications of the ACM, June 2004, pp 79-82. presents research attempting to answer the title question using MBTI. Thought you might want to take a look. MikeMelendez 040528 I read the article and remember thinking that the article wasn't worth the paper it was printed on. I tossed it. One of the conclusions was we needed projects with NTs, without considering the value of the NFs, the SJs, or the SPs. Sure we need NTs and we need people who can work the relationships (because NTs won't remember), and we need people who can make checklists so we don't forget things (because NTs may not be bothered to finish things (my problem)) and we need people who are willing to forge ahead and try something (which NTs may not want to do because it doesn't solve the underlying problem. There are certainly NTs who can do all of the above. And, preferences are just that - preferences. But deciding to staff a project with only one type, or even a huge number of just one type seems nutso to me.
Did anyone get something useful out of the article? Maybe I was too ready to throw out the article. -- JohannaRothman 2004.06.02 I had a reaction similar to Johanna's, though perhaps not as strong ( I am a strong "I" after all). When I first encountered Myers-Briggs, my first reaction was "What? Only 16 types? I must live in a different world." I kept asking about it particularly when I found someone willing to explain rather than extol or derogate the idea. The article starts with the unspoken assumption that the 16 types and the various larger groupings are indeed pigeon holes using that as a starting point for further conclusions. I think software types, like myself, have a tendency in that direction, wanting soft information to be hard, to be able to be programmed. -- MikeMelendez 2004.06-17 It's easy to forget that the Myers-Briggs types refer to preferences rather than strengths. I am a good T, and that was what was emphasized and rewarded in my education and professional life. It was a revelation to me to discover that I had a strong preference for F. It helped me make sense of the life and work choices I have made. -- AdrianSegar 2004.06.17 I particularly liked the way Myers-Briggs was described in the Warm Up Session. It describes your preference as long as you are unconstrained by any outside influence such as one's job. NaomiKarten was very specific in saying that we can act as though we are any Myers-Briggs type. For example I do a lot of protocol work so the "ESFJ" preference type is how I act, but when I am done with the protocol stuff, I need to recharge and act very "INTP" for a while as I feel very drained -- CharlesAdams 2004.06.18 Are you folks MBTI certified? Who conduct the certification? Thanks! -- CherDevey 2004.06.21 I am not certified, but perhaps certifiable. CharlesAdams 2004.06.21 I have to agree with Esther. Many of the on-line Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) instruments have not been validated formally and the dichotomous word pairs that have been chosen have not been field tested nor have been proved to be reliable by Item Response Theory (a popular method that is used to develop and evaluate assessment instruments). I read the article by Gorla and Lam and have several comments about the validity of the data and paper. First, according to the paper they used Keirsey's Temperament Sorter. The Sorter is not the same as MBTI. They seem to get the two confused. Temperment theory gets at the why's of our behavior. MBTI identifies our basic "preferences" based on mental functions and attitudes. According to Linda Berens, a MBTI expert who worked with Keirsey, the Temperament Sorter has been correlated to MBTI at an acceptable level but no published data exists. I would have used the MBTI form M instrument instead of Keirsey's Temperament Sorter for this study. The paper seems to use a rating scale that seems to be about team performance and then they apply that rating to individual preferences. Their is no real link between the two. In response to the author's recommendations of NF's (iNtuitive Feelers) as project managers I think they have done exactly the opposite of what is taught in MBTI training, namely not to use MBTI as a sterotype by placing individuals in a particular box based on their type. The authors fail to mention that each individual has all 8 Jungian cognitive processes (such as extraverted Sensing or introverted Intuition) available to them, with one being dominant and a second being an auxilary or balancing function. A tertiary and inferior (4th) function also exist and often can be tapped into by an individual. We tend to use these other functions only under certain situations (such as stress, forced behavior). At least two MBTI codes out of the 16 types have the same dominant cognitive process. A INFJ uses introverted iNtuition as a dominant cognitive process but so does a INTJ. A ENFP uses extroverted iNtuition as a dominant process but so does a ENTP. Because of this the NFJ and NTJ as well as the NFP and NTP both might show the same ability for that dominant process. I might expect that both other types (INTJ and ENTP) could be effective project managers. From a study design perspective they seemed to ignore the principle of stratifying their sample. I am also not sure that the sample size is large enough to make the conclusions that they make. The authors attribute the low performance to a Feeling preference, when it might be that those with a Feeling preference were predominantly NF's or ENF's or something else. Although the MBTI is supposed to get to our core self it can be affected by our experiences and the environment. Context also can affect our MBTI. I have met several experienced and successful project managers who are not NFs (iNtuitive Feelers). Many successful project managers I have met are NTs (iNtuitive Thinkers). One reason this might be true is that they use their other cognitive processes to be effective leaders or have developed skill in managing and leading projects. Other factors not discussed by the authors that affect the ability of leading successful projects is the impact of interaction styles(directing vs informing, initiating vs responding) and temperament (abstract vs concrete, affilative vs pragmatic). These factors, often part of the adaptive and contextual self might have a bigger impact on the success of a project than one's MBTI code. As stated by several folks in this thread, MBTI is a preference! Also one must understand that having a preference in a certain area does not result in skill development. Practice is usually necessary to develop a skill. Being a competent and successful project manager is a skill that can be developed. There are two facets of MTBI certification. One is being qualified to administer the instrument (must pass a qualifying exam) and the other is actually being certified (must be qualified for at least one year and pass additional criteria and meet continuing education requirements in the field). Licensing of the instrument is handled by CPP, Inc. and at least 6 organizations are authorized to administer the qualifying exam and accompanying qualifying classes. I believe that there are several folks who will be attending AYE that are qualified to administer the MBTI instrument. I am not sure about those who are certified. --JohnSuzuki 2004.08.18
Updated: Sunday, October 3, 2004 |
