On 9 Jul 96 at 14:14, Valdis E. Krebs wrote:
> Bill Hendry wrote...
> > But I have typed hundreds of folks and have found that
> > people do
> >react to situations "true to type" more often than not Valdis, even
> >though you will always find exceptions. And I believe much
> >evidence does exist to show the MBTI to greatly increase people's
> >understanding of themselves and each other
>
> And I can cite research and experience that shows that the situation
> determines behavior, regardless of person in a particular role. We
> can all find 'proof' of our beliefs.
We've been through this discussion on the trdev list. The research that I
have seen (quite rigorous) is that the MBTI is unreliable, of questionable
validity (doesn't measure what it says it measures). There is little
evidence that I have seen to indicate that it enhances team functioning (I
have seen it allow more sophisticated stereotyping and labelling).
What it IS good at is encourage people to look at their own behaviour, and
it is seductive since most people like to take it. It's characterizations
remind me of a more sophisticated way (compared to astrology) to type
people, in a way that appears objective and scientific. BTW, it is based
on the ideas of Jung,, whose ideas have NEVER been accepted as valid in
the psychological community in general.
Robert Bacal, CEO, Institute For Cooperative Communication
dbt359@freenet.mb.ca, Located in Winnipeg, Manitoba.
(204 888-9290.
--"Robert Bacal" <dbt359@freenet.mb.ca>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>