Limitations and Opportunities

Limitations and Opportunities

“All of man’s troubles have arisen from the fact that we do not know what we are and do not agree on what we want to be.”

                                Jean Bruller, You Shall Know Them

Self-awareness and personal insights create an opportunity for looking at your behavior patterns and for exploring new behaviors that can enhance effectiveness.  At a minimum, discovery about your typical behavior patterns and the impact of those patterns on the world around you invite a look at how to approach your relationships in the future.  It can be easily asserted that the millions of individuals who have taken the MBTI® assessment have been given a picture of themselves that provides a degree of self-awareness.  An additional gain with the use of the MBTI® tool has been the invitation to acknowledge and work constructively with differences.  These are worthy outcomes with the use of the assessment and theory on which it is built.

There has been much confusion with the assessment and the theory on which it is based, with many individuals unable to discern the difference between the two.  There are many talented professionals who are so reliant on the tool that they aren’t too open to considering the limitations of both tool and theory.  If we want to avoid causing psychological harm, we need to consider the limitations of the assessment and the model that are used to explain the basis of the supposed insights they offer.  Mary McCauley, the right hand researcher for Isabel Myers, said to me twenty years ago that we really needed to be fully aware that all psychological frames (assessments and tools) present a double edged sword or we are doomed to contribute to the abusive use of this knowledge.

Reputable publishers of assessments want to support tools with high degrees of reliability.  This means that scores have a consistency which facilitate interpretations.  And while the MBTI® assessment has internal consistency and test-retest statistics that are admirable, those were achieved in part by repeating items.  More than 30% of the items are repeated which increases reliability indices—-and this is a strategy many test publishers use.  There is a loss, however, of information about the attribute that is being measured.  For example, an Introvert selecting the descriptive of “Quiet” twice does not yield the same information as selecting “Quiet” one time and indicating a “preference for thinking things through before taking action.”  In this second case, we have two data points about introversion.  This is important to think about when considering the nature of the scores and the kind of information that is being suggested when looking at a report.  Introversion (and for that matter any of the preferences) are no uni-dimensional.

The MBTI® assessment has been routinely criticized because the items are dichotomous—meaning, you have to select one response or another.  There are no ratings, no indications of discrete differences, which by contrast both professionals and thoughtful individuals report that they experience behaviors on a continuum in everyday life.  While the MBTI tool is based on the proposition of dichotomous variables, and the items of the assessment are consistent with that proposition, this doesn’t mean that in fact Extraversion or Introversion, for example, are dichotomous qualities or realities.  This fact presents a serious interpretation problem, especially when an individual has a report with low scores.  A score of Extraversion score of 3 means that of the 21 E/I questions on the assessment, the individual selected 9 or 10 questions for Introversion and 11 or 12 for Extraversion.  The standard four letter code report, however, does not give you information about what kind of or the nature of Introversion for that individual.

For each scale of the MBTI tool, the number of questions are as follows:  E/I—21, S/N—26 , T/F—-24, J/P—-22 which means that the assessment essentially has four areas of limitations.  Your report shows four preferences and gives you no useful information about the other patterns in your voting on these main dimensions. Presumably if self-awareness is valuable, knowledge about how an individual votes in each area holds promise which is essentially denied with this report. Even the use of the Step II report is problematic in that the sub scales are only somewhat related to the four main dimensions.  Those sub scales give information about the probable use of the preference rather than insight about the way the opposite of a selected preference may be operating in an individual’s psychology.  Far too often, though, these subscales are misinterpreted as if they are interchangeable with the preference to which they are aligned. 

The main four scales produce a four letter code which leads to a snapshot of an individual’s personality pattern.  This pattern is intended to provide a constructive frame for thinking about behavior tendencies.  This set of sixteen patterns has been a source of much reasonable criticism at two levels.  First, the stereotypical patterns present sixteen Procrustean beds.  Because discrete differences are ignored in the way the tool is designed, everyone is forced into one of sixteen descriptions.  The theoretical undermining is that this pattern provides a way to infer how an individual uses perceiving and judging mental processes.  Second, after more than 40 years of use, there is very little research to support the hypothetical dynamic.  There are plenty of believers in the model; in the light of scientific inquiry, there simply isn’t fully refereed independent studies to validate these proposed outcomes.  In fact, I have one of the few published studies which was based on looking at independent variables across the sixteen types using the data from the database at the Center for Creative Leadership.  And while that study provided support for the sixteen patterns as measured by the MBTI tool, there were a great many other insights which deepened an understanding of the role of such factors as flexibility on individual development.

I have been researching with the MBTI tool for more than thirty years and that work was the basis of such works as I’m Not Crazy, I’m Just Not You, Introduction to Type and Emotional Intelligence, and YOU: Being More Effective in Your MBTI Type, among other publications.  And it is this research and experience with clients which opened doors to looking at type in fresh new ways.  This research has been the basis of work that Bob Eichinger and I have embedded in iPad applications intended to provide a quick, at your fingertip consultant with TEAMOSITY, RELATE!, and CAREERFITOSITY.  In addition, Linda Berens, Dario Nardi, and I have used our research data to facilitate the creation of a comprehensive leadership learning platform with Matrix Insights (www.magtrixinsights.com)  As scientific inquiry should over time, my research has created new opportunities for thinking about Jung’s model in fresh ways.

“…some problems can never be solved, only outgrown.”  C.G. Jung

The problem of missing information from a basic type report came front and center in my awareness when clients started asking about what their answers to all of the questions might mean about their personality.  And, concurrent with these questions, was the growing awareness that when forced to choose between one or the other, it was hard to discriminate between what is true at work and at home.  No manner of explaining that the theory may suggest you are a “unity” and the your true type is where the real story is, relieves the individual’s belief that situations impact how one behaves.  When I decided to develop the Pearman Integrator, I wanted to provide a report which revealed all aspects of the use of psychological energies in the Jungian model and to honor the reality between what feels natural and what is demonstrated.  The Pearman Integrator report provides scores on what is natural and demonstrated across all eight mental resources which Jung described. Rather than providing a snap shot, I want individuals to embrace the entire system—the engine of their psychology.  I’ve come to the view that individuals are best served by seeing the whole and clarifying and gaining confidence in how their individual psychology works.

Jung was explicitly clear that his model begins with the awareness of how powerful Extraversion and Introversion are throughout the individual’s personality.  To refine the power of these forms of psychological energy, Jung proposed four extraverted mental processes (Se, Ne, Te, and Fe) and four introverted processes (Si, Ni, Ti, and Fi).  As Jung said, he wrote Psychological Types to look at the “psychology” of the types; I chose to reveal the whole system that is at work.  The Pearman Integrator provides specific information about how an individual has discreetly experienced the use of all eight mental resources described by Jung interns of what feel natural and what is demonstrated by situational requirement.  

The opportunity I want to provide is for individuals to see psychological type as a system that leads to an understanding of individual personality intelligence.  Intelligence models look at the capabilities of perceiving and judging, and Jung, gave us a very helpful frame of reference with four modes of perception and four modes of decision making as outlined in the model of psychological type.  

Myers’ frame of Jung’s theory has been popular.  There are multiple tools available now which use her frame of four scales (E/I, S/N, T/F, and J/P) based on sorting on dichotomous questions.  There is a proverbial library of books exploring how the sixteen behavior patterns potentially play out in just about every human context.  One of Myers’ propositions was that Jung had a focus on a dominant mental function.  The entire reason she developed the fourth scale, Judging and Perceiving, was to explicitly assist in inferring how the mental processes were used.  For example, the four letter code ESTJ is intended to mean Extraverted Thinking with Introverted Sensing. For some individuals, this snapshot of attributes is a useful, practical way of think about oneself.  Taken too far, it becomes a psychological prison which disinvites deeper exploration into capabilities and possibilities for development.  Many times individuals will review their results and their self discovery and inquiry simply stops, rather than prompt a deeper look at an individual’s own psychology.

Jung’s model, however, opens many other opportunities for exploring individual psychology.  There is no need to create another tool that makes the same assumptions as Myers and others; the opportunities the overall framework provides are abundant.  I’ve approached Jung’s theory with fresh eyes and created an assessment and report that avoided historical limitations and looks at other important developmental opportunities.

Jung repeatedly noted that he did not write his book about psychological types to put people into categories.  He wrote in a number of letters that he was unhappy that his model had been reduced to a categorical look at human patterns and differences. He seemed to believe that the psychology of the types was reliant on three huge insights:  eight mental resources are at play in the way individuals’ adapt to their life challenges, learning to understand how powerful these psychological processes are, in his words, limitations to perceptions and judgments; finally, the vital importance of learning to flex among these processes is necessary for psychological well-being and development.  With the Pearman FlexIndex, individuals can learn about five dimensions of flexibility and how these related to personal effectiveness and development.  individuals need to know how to flex between what is natural and what is required, flex between mental processes, and flex within the mental process from simple to complex expressions of each process.

I have no interest in providing an additional snap shot or sorting into sixteen patterns.  I am greatly interested in enabling individuals to look at the whole of their psychological processes as outlined by Jung, and to facilitate an unambiguous awareness of the ways individuals can use this awareness to leverage resources that enrich their lives and maximize their opportunities.  Here are some practical outcomes and opportunities of the way I’ve approached psychological type which individuals might find useful when getting their results from the Pearman Personality Integrator.

• Scores for Natural and Demonstrated use of preferences—individuals can become aware of how much tension there may be between the degree of comfort a person has with a behavior—how natural it is, and what is demonstrated—how the situation pulls on behaviors.  This tension can be useful and it can be an energy vampire keeping an individual from have the energy needed for other things.  Through identifying this, an individual can begin to proactively plan ways to boost renewal and rejuvenation.
   
• Overall dimensions and eight mental resources—having a handle on the overall energy used with Extraversion or Introversion, Sensing or Intuiting, Thinking or Feeling, and specific use of Introverted Sensing, Introverted Intuiting, Introverted Thinking, and Introverted Feeling, Extraverted Sensing, Extraverted Intuiting, Extraverted Thinking, and Extraverted Feeling.  This means you get a broad view handle on psychological processes and specific, focused new of the four resources for perceiving and for our judging available to the individual.  In practical terms, an individual learns about the use of capabilities which may have been outside of awareness and can be made more intentional.

• Overall flex strength and five specific dimensions—being proactive, connecting with others, maintaining composure, seeking variety, and increasing rejuvenation tactics enable individuals to have the capability to flex between what is natural and what is required, shift between mental resources as needed, and develop a deeper use of each typological mental process.  There isn’t much doubt that flexibility is an ever increasing factor in effectiveness and efficacy.  Individuals need to have specific ways to enrich their flexibility because it has a global outcome on individual well-being.  

• Unique descriptors—because of the use of slide bars for indicating a response of relative strength of behaviors, discrete data are gathered that produce unique descriptors.  Rather than a set of sixteen descriptors, there is more than a million reports intended to provide developmental tips for being effective in the use of your typological mental processes. 

From an abundance perspective, building on evidence, and creating an innovative look at a rich model, the Pearman Integrator answers some old problems and invites some new pathways for development.

To explore Jung’s eight mental resources and essential aspects of flexibility more deeply, consider certification and use of the Pearman Personality Integrator.  See: https://tap.mhs.com/Pearman.aspx.  I’m happy to send a sample report if you’d like to see how to approach personality type in a new framework.   

To help your leaders become more self-aware through frameworks of Interpersonal Style, Motivators, Personality Type, Performance Five, or EQ competencies consider using the www.matrixinsights.com platform that uses mechanisms of self-awareness, applications for learning, and a development plan.  

Bob’s and my iPad applications are described at www.teamtelligent.com

Let me know how this prompts your own thinking.  More at my blog: http://pearmanpersonality.blogspot.com