Power of Understanding Virtual Book Tour

CHAPTER 2 

History Behind the 

Myers-Brigg Type 

Indicator (MBTI) 

“Everything that irritates us about others
can lead us to an understanding of ourselves.” 

Carl Jung

__________

The tool we will explore for helping us develop a better understanding of ourselves and others is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator or MBTI. The MBTI is the oldest and most used personality assessment instrument of its type in the world. MBTI was developed by the mother/daughter team of Katharine Briggs and Isabel Myers in 1942. Their objective was to apply certain theories about human behavior in a practical way to help integrate women into a traditionally male dominated workplace. During World War II, women went into the workplace due to the shortage of workers created by men being sent overseas to fight in the war. As a result of the work of Briggs and Myers, the MBTI helped to provide a framework for better understanding personality differences in the workplace.

The theories Isabel Myers and Katharine Briggs used to develop the framework on which MBTI is built were developed by Carl Jung. 

Carl Jung’s father was a pastor, and his grandfather was a physician. He was influenced in the field of psychology by Sigmund Freud and Alfred Adler and in the field of philosophy by Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Nietzsche. These great thought leaders informed Jung’s practical psychology, and he drew from medicine, psychology, philosophy, religion, and anthropology to shape his views. However, integrating these views with what he observed in human behavior is the genius of his work. His psychology and certainly his concepts in relation to psychological types are very practical and applicable to our everyday life, and that is what this book will strive to demonstrate. 

Carl Jung did not imagine his concepts being utilized to develop a personality assessment instrument. In fact, Jung expressed these thoughts about the inappropriateness of typing people: “Even in medical circles the opinion has got about that my method of treatment consists in fitting patients into this system and giving them corresponding “advice.” My typology is far rather a critical apparatus serving to sort out and organize the welter of empirical material, but not in any sense to stick labels on people. It is not a physiognomy (way of judging character) and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization of delimiting of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”

He added: “Although there are doubtless individuals whose type can be recognized this is by no means always the case. As a rule, only careful observation and weighing of the evidence permit a sure classification. However simple and clear the fundamental principle of the (opposing attitudes and functions) may be, in factual reality they are complicated and hard to make out, because every individual is an exception to the rule.” 

We will not dive deeply into the psychological theories of Jung nor the research on the MBTI as an assessment instrument. No personality assessment instrument is perfect, and MBTI is not. However, it is the most used and most researched instrument of its type. MBTI has been used for over 70 years in the following settings: for leadership development, personal effectiveness, teambuilding and other ways in business and industry; various usages in academic settings; career counseling; marriage and family counseling; and teambuilding in athletics and other settings. MBTI is used in 115 countries and in 88% of the Fortune 500 companies. Jung’s typology and the MBTI, as an instrument, have withstood the test of time.

This book will give example after example of the value I have seen MBTI deliver in a variety of settings. However, I do want to cite a few factors that need to be considered in using the instrument and applying the concepts it measures.

The MBTI has comparable reliability (consistency of results when a person takes it again) to other instruments of its type. It also has comparable validity (measures what it says it measures). I am certified to use many personality instruments like MBTI, and they all are useful. None of them are perfect and all of them should not be treated like a dispensation from heaven about the true nature of an individual’s personality. We are too complex and too many things, both nature and nurture, contribute to defining who we are. To expect an assessment instrument to utilize our response to a series of statements or questions to tell us who we are is absurd. What a good assessment instrument can do is provide a framework for better understanding the creatures we are. I have found MBTI to be extremely helpful for me and many others over the years.

MBTI is great for helping us to better understand ourselves and others, but it should never be used to put someone in a box that might limit the way we see them. Every person is different and even people with the same personality type will do things very differently at times. This is one reason MBTI is not utilized for hiring or job placement of employees. People with diverse types can be equally successful in the same job. They will just approach things in diverse ways. 

You are not just one preference or the other. MBTI measures our preference for one set of behaviors or the other on four dimensions of behavior. It is comparable to the preference we have for using our left or our right hand to write. Unless we are ambidextrous, we prefer using our right or our left hand. It does not mean we cannot use the other hand. It just means we have a preference for using one hand over the other. We can all get better at using our lesser preferences with practice. In fact, Jung said as we mature it gets harder and harder to identify an individual’s preferences because we develop the ability to use our lesser preferred preferences more effectively with practice and when it is more beneficial in each situation.

Enough about the background of the MBTI, I am excited about sharing real stories of ways the knowledge and use of MBTI has helped people to better understand themselves and others in a way that enabled the transformation of people, teams, and organizations. 

It is not necessary to know your MBTI Personality Type to benefit from reading this book. However, it might make it more interesting. For information about taking the MBTI, go to the following website: 

www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/take-the-mbti-instrument.

 

CHAPTER 7 

Influence of the

Judging/Perceiving 

(J/P) Preference 

As previously mentioned, this is the preference Isabella Myers and Katherine Briggs added. The preference addresses the issue of what we are doing in relation to the world around us. During every waking hour, we are either Perceiving or Judging the world around us. When we are Perceiving the world, we are observing the world either through our five senses or through the lens of hunches and possibilities. We are gathering information about what is going on “out there.” When we are Judging the world, we are organizing it, acting upon it, or making decisions about what is going on around us. We process that information either through logic and reason or how people are being affected.

Having worked with MBTI for over forty years, I have grown to believe this might be the most influential preference. We all use both preferences, but our preference for one over the other will tell us where we invest most of our attention and this has a significant impact on the way we approach everything in our lives. Let me try to explain this belief.

 People with a preference for Judging go through life observing something and then quickly drawing a conclusion or taking action to do something about it. They want to make a decision whether it is good, bad, right, or wrong. They want to organize or clean up what they have observed so it is not the mess it currently is. They have a strong bias for action, so they want to decide what needs to be done, make a list and start checking things off that list. At times, they will realize they acted too soon and should have gathered more information through use of the Perceiving preference, but this not where they prefer to operate. They want to get it done, not watch it happen. They want to act and move on to the next thing.

People with a preference for Perceiving, on the other hand, go through life observing the world around them, and instead of quickly jumping to judging, they observe some more. Because of their curiosity and desire to gather more information, they want to take everything in because their fulfillment comes from understanding and not from acting. They only move to the use of Judging when they see the need for action because of the understanding they have gained or when someone else initiates action.

Whether two people are spouses, friends, co-workers, or manager/employee, it can be challenging when one person is in Judging mode and the other is immersed in Perceiving. The Judging person will tend to become frustrated because for them it is obvious some action needs to be taken. At the same time, the Perceiving person is still taking in information which they believe is important and needs to be considered. The Judging person might tend to see the Perceiving person as a procrastinator and someone who is lazy and not willing to get things done. The Perceiving person may see the Judging person as someone who moves too quickly without fully considering all the relevant information or too quick to draw conclusions and make judgments without adequate information. If these natural preferences are not understood and appreciated, major problems can arise.

On the other hand, when understood and valued, this difference can be a major source of synergy and effectiveness. To illustrate, I will use my relationship with my mentor, Zellie. Zellie had a clear preference for Judging, and I have a clear preference for Perceiving. At times, this difference frustrated him and at times it was frustrating for me. However, we learned to use it to our advantage. We would do major teambuilding events or leadership retreats which required months of preparation. After we developed the basic design for these events, we would identify the actions that needed to be completed to ensure we were ready for the event. Zellie wanted to get them all done immediately. We found it was best to divide preparation into three buckets. One was his to-do list that he would attack. The second was a to-do list that required both of us and we would tackle that together. Then the final list was a little less defined and required more information. That was my work which I would take on in my own way. It always got done but not in the way Zellie would have done it. On those activities, a Perceiving approach worked better.

My favorite story about the way J/P preferences influence every situation occurred during a community leadership retreat we did together. We were starting the retreat with a MBTI workshop. Zellie was going to do the introduction and talk about E/I. I would then talk about S/N, and he would then cover T/F. I would then finish with J/P and close out the workshop. We arrived at the venue about 30 minutes before the participants and our classroom was a large room with thirty-four chairs around tables in a U shape. At the front of the room were a screen and an overhead projector (1990 technology) which used transparent slides. The projector was on a tall table, and there was room for only one notebook of slides on the table. 

Zellie had his slides in a notebook, and I had mine. This lack of space for two notebooks threw this Judging person into panic mode. He looked at me and said: “Rick, there is not room for both of our notebooks, and it will be distracting to carry our notebooks back and forth. What are we going to do?” He wanted to try to get another table or figure out some complex solution for which we did not have the time. I said “Zellie, why don’t we just both use your notebook?” He was surprised because he could not understand how I could use his notebook. I reassured him I was familiar with his slides and had no problem using them. Adapting is easy for someone with a preference for Perceiving. He thanked me and indicated this would make it much easier for him. I knew how important going with the plan was to Zellie. 

An additional humorous illustration of the J/P difference occurred during the workshop. I did not notice it or think about it, but when Zellie started the workshop and did the first segment, he took his slides out of the rings in his notebook and put them back into the rings before he reached for another slide. This is very typical of an organized Judging person. When I got up to talk about S/N, without even thinking, I would take a slide out and after discussing it would just simply lay the slide on the notebook and reach for another slide. When I finished covering S/N, Zellie came up to talk about T/F. Before he began, he took all my slides, straightened them up, and put them back into the rings in the notebook. Knowing I would be talking about J/P, I thought this is just too good an illustration of the J/P difference. When I started my review of J/P and finished discussing the first slide, instead of placing the slide on the notebook I tossed it and it hit the notebook and went off onto the floor. Zellie was behind me, and you could hear this “huh.” I then asked the class if they heard the “huh.” I told them Zellie really wanted to say: “why don’t you put that transparency back in the binder.” We all had a good laugh at this J’s frustration with his P friend. 

This preference is operating every waking hour and understanding it can help us in many situations.

J/P Impact on Interpersonal Relationships

A young couple came to me indicating they were having some difficulties in their relationship. As they described those challenges, it became obvious they had a J/P issue. They had a good relationship. Communication was good, and they shared the same values and a lot of the same interests and loved each other very much. However, they were experiencing some major irritations with one another and were having difficulty resolving the issue.

I asked them to take the MBTI and it confirmed the husband was a clear J, and the wife was a P. He was as organized an individual as I had ever encountered. Everything had to be in its place, and he had a strict system for that. For example, his closet had slacks organized from dark to light, and they had to be hung in a very particular way. His shirts were then hung together from dark to light, and they were buttoned up in a specific way. His shoes were organized on racks. His closet was extremely organized, and he wanted the rest of his space to have the same order. He also had a strict sequence of doing things and did not like to deviate from the plan. Once a decision was made or a plan was developed, he expected everything to go as scheduled.

The wife was much more laid back and open to things changing as you went along. She saw change and adapting as part of life. She was not disturbed if things changed in mid-stream or if you changed your mind. In terms of organizing her life, she was not as particular or systematic in the way she wanted things to be around her. Her closet was not a major mess, but things were not hanging in any order, and the shoes were on the floor of the closet and not always in pairs. She was fine if there was some clutter in the rest of her space. She knew where everything was and did not find it that difficult to locate something.

The lack of organization, structure, and closure in various areas of their relationship was driving him crazy. The push for everything being in a particular place was becoming irritating for her. She was having a challenging time accepting and conforming to his expectations, and he felt like she was not considerate of his desire for more order in their shared life.

By looking at their J/P difference, they were able to make it less personal and more about natural and understandable differences in the way they preferred to invest their attention each day. He began to demand less of her in terms of doing things the way he liked them. He also accepted a part of their life being a little less organized than he would like it to be. She began to recognize it was important to invest a little more energy in doing things a specific way when it had a significant impact on him. She began to see providing more structure as simply being respectful of his preference.

Most importantly, they began to really value what the other brought to the relationship and realized how they complemented each other in some important ways. She recognized life needs structure, and he brought that to their relationship. She depended on him for the organization they needed. He recognized his difficulty adapting when things did not go as planned, and he depended on her to find a way to make things work when the plan failed. Instead of resenting the differences in each other, they came to value what the other brought to the relationship.

J/P Impact on Working Relationships

I recall a good working relationship that could have been quite a challenge. She was an ISTJ, and I am an ENFP. We were opposite on all four preferences. We saw the world very differently and functioned in the world in diverse ways. Fortunately, we knew about those differences and made every effort to respect and value those differences. The J/P difference was the one that we learned to appreciate the most. 

We worked together on a few significant projects. At the beginning of those projects, we would get together and develop a project plan. This was at her request, and as a J, beginning with a plan is what you would expect her to do. As we would develop that plan, we would consider MBTI and particularly our J and P as we assigned those responsibilities. She loved and wanted all the logistical, specific, and time sequenced activities because she would develop her list and check those things off. This brought her a great deal of satisfaction, and she was good at getting things done. The activities which were less specific and dependent on things that might happen over the course of the project or required gathering more input were things I was assigned. The ambiguity or uncertainty of those activities was not a problem for me, and in fact, I found them invigorating. She would look at my assignments and say: “Thank goodness I don’t have to do those things.” I felt the same way about her assignments. 

By playing to our preferences and our strengths, we were able to do the things each did best and the things that we enjoyed most. I was not taking advantage of her nor her of me. The project was completed successfully, and it was a much more satisfying and rewarding experience for both of us. We grew to have a great deal of trust in each other. She knew I would do the parts of the project that fit my strengths in my way, and I knew she would do her part of the project that better fit her strengths in her way. The projects were done well, and we loved working together. This was a mutually beneficial win-win outcome.

 J/P Impact on Teamwork

While doing some teambuilding work with a manufacturing team, we did an MBTI team profile. Their profile showed all members of this nine-member team were Js. As we looked at the characteristics of Js, they confirmed those characteristics described their team very well, and they shared some funny stories about the extremes to which they would go to ensure everything was done “in turn and in order.”

As we talked about how their J was a strength, particularly in manufacturing, I asked them if, at times, they made decisions and then later discovered something which created problems with those decisions. They indicated this was not unusual. We discussed how being an all J-team created a strong bias for decisiveness and action which served them well in most circumstances. However, we discussed how it could result in them making some decisions too quickly to move on to the next item. They recognized the benefits of exploring some decisions more thoroughly and in some cases gathering more input from outside the team.

One of their improvement actions they began taking was to ask the following questions when their team faced significant decisions: when do we have to make this decision, and who will be responsible for gathering more information related to the decision and providing that information to the team? In response to those questions, they would place the decision on a later agenda and assign one person to be primarily responsible for gathering and sharing relevant information related to the decision. Everyone, of course, was responsible for giving the question more thought prior to the meeting at which they would make the decision.

I followed up with the team months later to see how the changes in their decision-making process were working. The division head indicated the team believed the quality of their decisions had improved significantly, and they were not getting blindsided later by information they had not considered.

 J/P Impact on Organizations

I have worked with Company B for 16 years, and all the employees eventually go through an MBTI workshop. The workshop helps them gain a basic understanding of the concepts related to personality types and preferences and identify ways to apply that understanding to their working relationships with co-workers and their interaction with members. As I began compiling MBTI preferences and types for their employees, I observed two major trends when comparing their employee population to the general population. They tended to have more F employees than the general population. This was understandable since they had a higher percentage of females in their employee population than the general population and about 65% of females are F on the T/F preference. It could also have been influenced by the fact Company B places so much attention on serving members and developing strong employee relationships. Company B hires people who have a strong service mindset. Fs would be naturally drawn to this type of work culture.

The second trend I observed was the high percentage of Judging in the employee population. Company B had a much higher percentage of Judging than the general population. As I began to observe this pattern, I shared the information with the VP of Human Resources, and we discussed whether this higher percentage of the Judging preference in Company B made sense considering the nature of Company B’s business. As a financial institution, we concluded having a higher percentage of Js made sense. Financial institutions are highly regulated and have strict and well-defined processes for operating. They need people who are effective and comfortable working in that type of highly structured environment and people who have the J preference would be a good fit.

We also discussed how the targeted selection process was designed to find employees who would be effective working in a structured environment. The high percentage of employees with the preference for J was in some ways a validation that the targeted selection process was selecting employees who would be a good fit for the type of work Company B did. 

This conversation with the VP of HR and then other members of senior leadership began a dialogue about how to best manage this J dominance. They wanted to ensure it did not become a potential pitfall. One way too much Judging and not enough Perceiving could create problems would be for the organization to lack flexibility when needed. Management assessed whether they were adaptive and willing to change when change was needed. We will look at a few things Company B does to build adaptability and flexibility into a corporate culture which might not naturally have those characteristics.

All managers go through two 4-day leadership development courses. Each of those courses has a module on change management. The first course explores the inevitability of change and transition in the workplace and considers how change impacts employees. The training shares ways to coach and help employees through change with the goal of minimizing the personal stress for them and increasing the probability the change will be successful for the company.

The second course looks at how to lead groups of people through transitions by having good change management practices. In this material, we talk about the following: providing a compelling case for why the change is in the best interest of the employees and the company; defining a clear vision of where the change will lead us; providing a clear plan for the things that will lead to a successful change; ensuring leadership is on board with the change; communicating continuously through the change; and celebrating when you have successfully achieved the desired change.

By building the capability of all leaders to help employees and the organization to deal with change, we are building organizational adaptability. People with a preference for P are naturally adaptable. By being intentional in teaching people ways to be adaptable, we can improve the flexibility of an organization dominated by Js.

At an organizational management level, one process that Company B utilizes as well as any organization is scenario planning. The definition of scenario planning includes the following: a strategic planning process used to create flexible long-term plans. Many organizations get locked into a plan based on certain assumptions, and when those assumptions do not prove to be true, these organizations find themselves scrambling to adjust. Scenario planning involves developing plans based on different assumptions so you will be prepared to adapt when a change of direction is needed.

I believe this organization’s understanding of the value of all MBTI preferences has contributed to their excellence in scenario planning. They as a natural J organization are exceptional at developing and executing plans. I have seen some strongly J organizations have a challenging time accepting the fact their plan is not working and there is a need to adapt and move in a different direction. Scenario planning has enabled Company B to develop a great deal of adaptability because it is part of their planning process.

One additional factor has contributed to the dominant J not becoming problematic for Company B. The senior leadership of this organization have a wonderful grasp of the way MBTI influences our decisions and behaviors. They use it to understand and inform situations that occur each day. I have often heard them acknowledge how a decision or plan did not work. They then utilize what they have learned to guide future decisions and actions. Humility is critical in using MBTI effectively because we all have strengths and weaknesses. I can never compensate for my weaknesses unless I own them. Many organizations are not willing to confront the brutal facts. Things do not always go as planned and it is critical to have the ability to adjust to that failure. The leaders and employees of Company B know the strengths and pitfalls associated with each preference. They utilize that knowledge to help them adapt when their preference may not be achieving the desired results. 

What: Judging and Perceiving impacts how we approach every situation of life.

So What: The daily activities of life present situations involving either Judging activities like organizing and making a decision about something or Perceiving activities like adapting to a situation or taking in more information. Understanding how our natural preferences fit some of the situations well and others not so well is important to our effectiveness. 

Now What: I will seek out situations where my natural J/P preference works well and develop my lesser preferred preference or seek out others or processes to assist me in situations where my natural preference does not work.

 

Op-Ed on Use of Non-preferred Preference

In many stories I have shared ways to help better understand how the preferences influence our decisions and actions. I have shared how individuals, teams and even organizations have learned to: develop their lesser preferred preference over time; compensate for weaknesses associated with their preferences by doing things with intentionality; and/or, find others to help them with their non-preferred preferences. It is important for an Extravert to stop and reflect at times. An Introvert at times needs to get their ideas out into the external world to be effective. Some situations in life require a Sensing person to stop hanging onto the past and embrace the future. People who have a preference for Intuition need to consider how the practical realities of a situation might make their hunch impossible to pursue. Thinking people need to recognize that sometimes the concerns of people will overwhelm the logic of the decision. Feeling people must realize there are rational factors in many decisions which make it impossible to please everyone.

Using the other preference is hard if we have a clear preference for the opposite preference, but life is hard at times. Jung recognized a major dimension of maturity is learning to use the opposite preference even though it is not natural or easy. We need to be aware that at times we encounter things in life where we do not need to depend only on what is natural and what we are best at doing. At times, we need to use the other hand. We can do this through practice, with help from others, and utilizing processes or tools to help us.

This is even more critical as we consider the J/P preference. Remember, we are using one of these preferences every moment of every day. We are either: making decisions, organizing our ideas or things in the world, and acting on something with the intention of completing the task; or, observing the world around us, seeking to understand something, discovering something new, and adjusting to a changing environment. Our J/P preference determines which of those areas receive most of our attention. 

I have seen a lot of people with a preference for Judging get things done which had to be redone and drawing conclusions which were ill-informed, because they jumped to conclusions without gathering enough information. On the other hand, I have seen so many people with a preference for Perceiving miss opportunities because they did not recognize the need to act. They stayed in the gathering of information mode until it was too late to act on something which could have benefited them and others. 

I believe recognizing the need to utilize our lesser preferred J/P preference at certain points in our lives is a key success factor in life. I want to share two situations where leaders had a sense for the need to do this and took actions either consciously or unconsciously to make sure there was a good balance between the J and P.

Over a period of 13 years, I worked with a small company of about one hundred employees, and they had a real estate development company, a construction company, and a property management company. The primary focus of my work with them was strategic and annual business planning. As a part of that work, we did MBTI in about the third year with all the employees who participated in the annual planning process. 

When I got the MBTI results, it included about forty-four employees, and I was amazed at the results. I had already been able to observe some interesting dynamics within the company. The owner/CEO was in his early thirties and had taken over the leadership of the company from his father. The owner/CEO was an ENTP and was a visionary and dynamic leader. The company had grown significantly under his leadership. Much of the growth was due to his creativity, willingness to tackle a lot of new things, and ability to find a way to overcome any barriers. It was interesting that the forty-three other employees were all Js. When I got the results, I contacted the owner/CEO and shared with him that he had balanced his extreme P with a group of J employees. He was the change agent, explorer of all possibilities, and researcher of all the things that touched their businesses. He surrounded himself unconsciously with people who could implement his ideas and provide the structure needed.

My second example is a senior leader who led a part of an organization that included about 3,000 employees and over $3B of business. This leader led a high performing J team which had a strong bias for action. They placed a high priority on treating employees well, but their strong business focus and the fact they were all Ts resulted in them making decisions at times without fully considering the impact of those decisions upon employees. I was the facilitator for this leadership team. In addition, I am an F with a psychology and ministerial background. This senior leader wanted me to focus on “observing them do their work and let them know before they screwed something up in relation to people.” In other words, he wanted me to use my P to help them compensate for their very dominant J. That is what I did, and it worked. In addition, it was rewarding for me. They recognized the value I brought to the team because they understood MBTI and knew the strengths and pitfalls of each preference. When I shared those people concerns with them, I also had a deep respect both for their T perspective and the need to move on at times driven by their J and the situation. It was less about right or wrong and more about understanding the need to consider all perspectives.