What is it about?
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is reputed to be the most popular personality assessment in the world. However, is it also harshly criticised. This paper examines and responds to the key criticisms, and in doing so puts forward the idea that the validity criteria for personality assessments need to differ according to the intended application of the results. There are simply different criteria for assessments intended for development, as opposed to selection. In particular, the concept of 'experiential validity' is proposed as a way of systematically measuring the assessment experience from the perspective of the test-taker.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
For decades the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has been heavily criticised in the academic literature. Responding to these criticisms has been very difficult, as the peer review process has tended to reject automatically papers of this kind. This article provides a well-referenced and considered review of the debate, putting forward the distinction between the appropriate validity criteria for assessments intended for different purposes. One size does not fit all, and it is irrational to judge the validity of assessments such as the MBTI against the criteria that are appropriate for assessments used in employee selection.
Perspectives
I personally find the Myers-Brigg Type Indicator incredibly helpful for employee development, an experience shared by thousands of MBTI practitioners and millions of end-users. It's strong theoretical underpinnings, combined with a wealth of positively-focused resources make it my starting place when it comes to personality assessment for employee development. Unlike more detailed, trait-based measures, it is easy for busy people to learn quickly and easily apply to their own situation for more effective communication, better decision-making, understanding and developing resilience, creating high performing teams etc. So I have been frustrated over the years with the unnecessary polemic between those 'for' and 'against' the MBTI. This paper is my attempt both to respond to the criticisms, and also to reframe the question of validity when it comes to assessment for development.
Dr Penny Moyle
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Personality Assessment for Employee Development: Ivory Tower or Real World?, Journal of Personality Assessment, June 2018, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2018.1481078.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
