Just to finish up this little series on Barbara Ehrenreich's book,
Bait and Switch, (see
Ehrenreich and Poll on Job Loss and
Barbara Ehrenreich and the Politics of White Collar Unemployment) I had a few words to say about the standardized tests she encountered while looking for a white collar job. She took both the Enneagram and the Myers-Briggs tests, but says:
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has zero predictive value even in its own terms. In one study, undertaken by proponents of Myers-Briggs, only 47 percent of people tested fell into the same category on a second administration of the test. (Page 34)
I guess I must be cursed, because the two times I took the test my scores came out roughly the same and my type was the same.
Do these tests really help anyone? I'll explore that in a moment.
It's hard to evaluate a test if you start out by not taking it seriously. Here's Ehrenreich on the test:
The other ... assignment is to take yet another personality test, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which is marginally craftier than the [Wagner Enneagram Personality Style Scales] WEPSS, in that I am not asked simply to choose the attributes that fit me, but am given somewhat more roundabout questions, such as "Do you usually get along better with (A) imaginative people, or (B) realistic people?" Once again, the only sensible approach is a random one. (Page 31)
In other words, she answered the questions at random. Thus she becomes an ENTJ. But this creates problems when she has to face her coach, who professes to be excited about the results.
If 53% of the people taking the Myers-Briggs are as dedicated to accuracy as Ehrenreich, I can understand why it's only about 47% replicable!
This isn't to say that the Myers-Briggs and the Enneagram are well used in business. As Ehrenreich points out:
In 1993, the Myers-Briggs test was administered to three million Americans; eighty-nine of the Fortune top 100 companies use it to help slot their white-collar employees into the appropriate places in the hierarchy. (Page 32)
She points out that the Enneagram is also widely used, citing a long list of major corporations that supposedly use it.
Why are these tests so widely used? Ehrenreich speculates that "one attraction must be that the tests lend a superficial rationality to the matching of people with jobs.... They serve more as underpinnings of corporate etiquette, allowing employers to rationalize rejection or dismissal in terms of an inadequate `fit.'" (Pages 34-35)
But is that all there is to the tests? Not really. One of the important aspects of the tests is for people to understand their general tendencies. Knowing your tendencies you can stop fighting against them and use them to your advantage. Specifically, neither the Enneagram nor the Myers-Briggs evaluates characteristics in terms of good and bad attributes. All personality attributes are advantageous in some situations, a hindrance in others.
The biggest mistake I think people make with types is to think that one type is the best for a particular job. There are many approaches to any job, and so people of many different types could probably do it. That's not to say that a strong introvert is going to have an easy go of a sales job. But, even there, with the proper approach an introvert may be a top sales rep.
Another thing I've found (as an INTP) is that some types are more common than others. INTPs only represent about 1% of the population. Suddenly, it's a lot more understandable why I feel so different from others, why they just don't seem to think the same.
Finally, it has been shown that groups of like types tend to do less well on team tasks than groups with variety. Groups with like types tend to reinforce the characteristics that hinder them in the task, but groups with a variety of types have built-in compensation for weaknesses. This argues for diversity in work groups.
My suggestion is that if you are faced with one of these tests in your job search that you are better off to go into it with a positive attitude and see what you get out of it. You may find it meaningless for you, but equally, you may find it very valuable. I think Ehrenreich set a bad example by answering the questions on these tests at random. I think she tried to outthink the tests and maybe ended up outthinking herself.
I'm still interested in how many people are suffering from white collar layoffs. You can take that poll ("Have you been laid off and unemployed for more than three months from a white collar job?") at Barbara Ehrenreich and the Politics of White Collar Unemployment). Also, don't forget to check out the page in dKosopedia for Frameshop: White Collar Unemployment.
[You can find more information about the Myers-Briggs test at http://www.myersbriggs.org/my%5Fmbti%5Fpersonality%5Ftype/mbti%5Fbasics/. I have no personal interest in the tests or Ehrenreich's book.]