ENTP here. Taken it 2-3 times over the last 40 years, always the same. I've found the Predictive Index, however, much more useful in a Corporate environment than MB.

PI was developed by Steven Daniels Sr in WWII to help the AAC determine which pilots were to fly crewed A/C and which should be sent to fly single seat planes. Steven Daniels Jr taught and certified me as a PI trainer. Interesting tool, but people are still people.

aileron

The test was required by my current employer. Based on what I've read as many as 50 percent of people have a different result the second time they take the test. It has no scientific basis whatsoever. I think it's totally useless but HR people and others think it has some validity and I felt no need to refuse just because I think it has no meaning. In the 7 years I've been working at the company in no way has it made any noticeable difference in the way people interact with one another compared to the 5 or 6 other companies I've worked for in the last 30 years where no such test was required.

MB is junk. Not even good enough to be called "junk science" because there is zero science to it. I've taken it a few times (grad school and a couple different companies), had different results the first two or three times. Last two I was consistent.

A woman and her daughter made it up about 75 years ago based on the ideas written by Carl Jung in 1921. Thats it. It's just a parlor game that is appropriate to use as an icebreaker for discussion purposes. Researchers have learned a little more about human personalities in the last 100 years.

MB fails on so many levels:

- Not repeatable, results often vary for the same person at different times.
- Not validated by any actual research by psychological and psychiatric professionals that do research about personalities, and not supported or endorsed by ANYONE, except the MB people themselves (and they publish a lot of BS studies to support their foregone conclusions) and HR people.
- No actual basis for 16 personality types based on 4 binary parameters.
- It says there are no bad personalities, which is false. Try dealing with a malignant narcissist or a sociopath and see if they are just "different" and not "bad".
- It is based on people's self perceptions and how they think of themselves, but not actual behavior or external observation. This leads to all kinds of bias effects.

I work in a big company with a lot of engineers (and before that other big companies with lots of engineers). 6 sigma is our designated common process improvement method, and that is endorsed all the way to the CEO and is not a flavor of the month. We use data and statistics to solve problems. But HR likes to use MB, along with Strengths Finder, Forte, and some other things. I went along with those things because I never really looked into them and thought that there must be some valid basis for using them.

So I looked into it. Nope, nada, zero.

MB is no different than all of those non-validated dietary supplements and other cure-alls that are big on claims but short on any actual testing and data to confirm the claims.

The Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality

This text is a definitive work on personality theory. Written by noted Harvard Psychology Professor, Dr. Timothy Leary. This work was written in 1957 before he consumed all that acid. It is a brilliant and complex piece of work. The Meyers Briggs is seldom used by practicing professionals.

I've taken the MB several times, usually in management/training classes as opposed to in a corporate setting. I found the results very consistent from test to test and fairly reflected my personal traits.I'm a very strong ENTP.

I found it very helpful in training others and when dealing with peers to communicate in a style which best matched their learning/communication style. It isn't meant to tell you about other people, unless it is explained by an expert. What it does give you is a certain understanding of how you perceive thing and reactions...things you can work on to better communicate with others.

BTW: for those who might not be aware, If you test out as an "E" (extrovert), you can still be shy (usually a trait folks attribute to an introvert). What the "E" refers to is how you draw personal energy; how you refuel

Back in 2001, I was asked to take this test. Boss said not to worry, there are no wrong answers. When he reviewed the results with me, he said they were trying to "figure me out". I then asked how he did on his, he declined to share. The results were inconclusive in their view. Went back to work doing my best as I always do,

Total and utterly worthless waste of time, just like most of these ridiculous tests. Case in point. A peer of mine, someone I've learned from every year for the past 15 years and one of the best project managers I've 'ever' met, had to seek new employment when the company he worked for was sold and downsized and was referred for an open senior position at a competing financial services software company. He fully impressed three senior managers (no big surprise) and was ready to be employed when HR required him to take what is essentially a Wonderlic exam, one of the world's most worthless, most meaningless tests ever devised (and one PM's generally do poorly on). Long story short, he didn't score beyond the arbitrary threshold they set for the exam/position (a test that scores nothing related to financial services skills, systems skills, PM skills, or customer relationship/management skills, you know, the skills that make a person employed in the position they are seeking to fill successful). As such, a man with ~25 years of financial services project management experience, a man I actually turn to for insight and direction when I need it, was rejected. Companies HR and organizational abilities are a joke at this point, and tests like these are their bank in trade.

Time wasted on it was more fun than had we actually been working. In my case, the answer to every question is "it depends"

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
That is a misuse of that test. Is there going to be a clincal psychologist interpreting the results?

How about some lab work to go along with that to be interpreted by a nonprofessional??

Perhaps an IQ would be in order for whoever wanted to use that test.

Psychological tests are to be used in a clinical setting, not by some nonprofessional in the business world.

TRUE ! Don't do it, avoid it at all costs. It could get you fired because some Dilbert shithead boss read the results and may think you need to go away. Not kidding, it's not good for use by HR, managers, supervisors, and the like, since that's not what the test is for. And when bosses start using stuff like that it only shows their own incompetence in not being able to make things go better at work. And if they're incompetent already, don't think they're going to be any smarter using psych tests designed for MDs and PhD clinicians. If you take it it will be a calculated risk on multiple fronts in a work setting, avoid it as much as is possible. You could ask me how I know but you get the picture, it's just too much potential for incompetent use by people who should be making money and providing services instead of playing psycho boss king terminator.

i read this and the mgr from dilbert comes to mind. it doesn’t take much for a competent mgr to figure out competencies.

a mgr who can’t figure out an employee’s aptitudes, attitudes, competencies, ethics has no business being a mgr.

I took one during the interview process for a sales position at a Fortune 100 company.

Without an MBA, or any degree actually, the only reason they considered me was years of field experience and numerous contacts within the tight nit local market.

They gave me a whole list of Dale Carnegie type BS to brush up on based on the MB test results supposedly. I had been successfully doing the same basic job in the local market for 20 years and didn't really plan on changing much.

I had 2 boss changes in the 1st 3 weeks, and quit by email since there was no one locally who would even take a resignation.

My record for corporate jobs is 6 days though..lol

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
Perhaps an IQ would be in order for whoever wanted to use that test.
.

IQ tests, that one got me in trouble one time...

I offered to take an IQ test for $1000/head with a bunch of Senior VP types at a vendor's hospitality suite (free drinks) after listening to them degrade some of the best people in the company for about an hour.

None of them were in my direct report chain, but it still didn't go over too well.

I'm sure all of those guys were ideal candidates by the MB test

Even further off topic, but if I had my own business, and was evaluating new hires the best piece of information (not sure if its even legal) would be a credit report.
That's one of the best indicators of making consistently good life decisions.

Myers-Briggs is like chiropractic. It has its uses and benefits, but too many people grossly overstate how useful and beneficial it is.

And yes, it is mostly junk science. It's one step removed from astrology.

Naw, man, as a Type 4 with a Type 5 wing, the Riso-Hudson Enneagram is the way to go! That's your money personality test!

quote:

Even further off topic, but if I had my own business, and was evaluating new hires the best piece of information (not sure if its even legal) would be a credit report.
That's one of the best indicators of making consistently good life decisions.

^^^^^^^
I agree. IMHO the best way to evaluate people is through an indepth interview. That is a skill that you are born with and honed with training. It is amazing what you can find out if you ask the right questions in the right way.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
That is a misuse of that test. Is there going to be a clincal psychologist interpreting the results?

How about some lab work to go along with that to be interpreted by a nonprofessional??

Perhaps an IQ would be in order for whoever wanted to use that test.

Psychological tests are to be used in a clinical setting, not by some nonprofessional in the business world.

I agree. Usually, they have some consultants to walk you through the results and it's just part of some team building process.

The end result for the test I think is just to give you a handle on your personality type and the other people's type and, in a way, it makes you understand why that person is such a dickhead. "Aaah, no wonder why."

You can also actually use it to help move your personality over. Before, I would score as an Introvert versus Extrovert. I made changes in my behavior and attitude, I was able to switch that to where I am very clearly Extrovert.

As far as my other attributes, I've always liked and am comfortable with being clearly intuitive over sensing. Clearly thinking versus feeling. and clearly Judging versus Perceiving.

I am required to take the Farnsworth color test once a year.

quote:

Even further off topic, but if I had my own business, and was evaluating new hires the best piece of information (not sure if its even legal) would be a credit report.
That's one of the best indicators of making consistently good life decisions.

And even that requires a measure of common sense when evaluating it. We once had a gentleman apply for a position we all liked and thought was a great fit, only to have HR eliminate him due to a weak credit score. Come to find out through asking questions he'd only had a bad credit score for the past couple years due to a nasty divorce. Prior to that, his credit was sterling. Again, we lost a great option for a new team member not because he wasn't a good fit for the team or because he didn't have the skills or abilities to do the job well, but because HR was unbending in their 'requirements'. IMO the biggest detriment to companies today are their worthless HR departments.

quote:

I am required to take the Farnsworth color test once a year.

^^^^^^
OK enlighten me. Does your job require superior color hue discrimination???

quote:

Originally posted by 280nosler:
Is it fair to assume that you have not taken the test, or the results were not shared among your team? It is a means for the boss to determine how teams work together, and determine how to sub manage interactions, and who to lead projects. It is more about determine strengths and weaknesses.

I will add, the way people act to the boss is not how they act to co-workers, and many employees interact more with co-workers than their superiors.

I've taken three at three different jobs, and found them all to be accurate and useful, especially when they tell you who you work best with, and how to approach certain situations.

I have for kicks and giggles. Again, if the boss is doing their job, then they know who works well together, their strengths and weaknesses, and how to put together a team to complement each others weaknesses and styles. The boss should also know with whom they need to follow up more often if they have to put people together who aren't an ideal match. They should also be having conversations with team members when they form said teams about who they're going to be working with if those people aren't familiar with each other.

I've had lots of people I work with, and that have worked under me, take those tests on their own. Not once was I ever surprised by a result.