when we did it at work there is a big management wheel (basically myers-briggs) print out and out lanyard photos were placed on it based on the results, someone on the team refused to take part, just read the profiles, decided on which one he liked the best, and then stuck his own (much larger) photo on the wheel. I should have done that


Yep. Whilst we’d all consider ourselves empathetic souls, this doesn’t often work in practice in a work environment. Particularly a pressurised one where you’re often left wondering with colleagues and line reports etc. “why the fuck have they done that?” or “why are they like this??” and the rest. Tests like this can really help understand others and structure your work and relationships accordingly. It’s really helped me.


also really hate all the training stuff around this, nice idea of encouraging people to understand each others preferences, but ends up directly contradicting that by forcing introverts way out of their comfort zones with role play and whatnot (no doubt because HR is driven my extrovert people persons)


It’s fine to take stuff from the test as an opportunity for self reflection, the issue is when people use it prescriptively as though your results define who you are, which is pretty awful to do when it’s been so roundly dismissed by the academic psychology community


the five factor model is considered legit I think, don’t know why that hasn’t replaced myers-briggs


I don’t know if I can even get on board with that, I think I have traits of both, sometimes I really want to socialise, sometimes I crave nothing more than being left alone, sometimes I feel really energised from time spent with nice people, sometimes it’s draining…


Fair points. I recall using Belbin for teamwork stuff and that seemed a bit more useful, maybe because the questions were differently setup or maybe it’s just easier when you’re 20ish than 40ish to answer?


This is why I find Myers-Briggs so hard to answer I think.


You can’t put me in a box, man!


they need to add a third category, ‘introvert’, ‘extrovert’, ‘depends’


They could, but then they’d have to have depend alternatives for all the categories, and you wouldn’t be able to place anyone.


everyone in one giant group called ‘depends’ would reflect the reality


That’s true




This… is bad practice. You’re right that Heads of HR and HR Business Partners tend towards extroverted, dominant personality types (although you’d be surprised how many are actually just putting on that front in order to do their job more effectively) but this sort of bullshit tends to be the fault of the external training companies that get brought in. I’ve seen it loads, these people who LOVE standing up and talking to rooms full of people completely failing to understand that not everyone is like that. When it’s this kind of training, there’s a painful level of irony involved.


The value with the Big 5 Model or whatever you want to call it comes from identifying when people have high or strong tendencies to certain traits. From the above I’d deduce that you’re probably more temperamentally extroverted but that sometimes you can’t be arsed. That’s totally cool. It’s identifying where people are strongly tended in traits like openness, conscientiousness and neuroticism that is practically useful.


Hopefully the era of one-size-fits-all workplace training will be on its way out. It is inefficient. I am one of those wrong’uns who actively enjoys public speaking (seminars/conferences etc.) Get in me in a training session where you’ve got to stand up and do something or feedback to the group etc. etc. and you can’t get me away from it quick enough.


I’m exactly the same. The larger the crowd, the more comfortable I am talking in front of it. Small room of people who I actually know? Get to fuck


It’s a combination of that and the juvenility and pointlessness of the whole thing that gets me.


Ours was internal people, I nearly raised a grievance with HR, in our training session we had do loads of role play, go up to colleagues and tell them what we admired about them, our group discussions were judged by the ratio of the person who spoke the most to the person who spoke the least (before and after what we had learned), any group with me in is going lose that one. if I had known about the content in advance I would have objected on reasonable adjustment grounds