I don’t know how many workplaces still have water-coolers, and whether water-cooler moments really exist in their original form—but recently I introduced the team to the Myers-Briggs test and it was nothing short of a hoot.
I really enjoy the 16 personalities quiz, as well of some of the other ‘big brands of personality quiz’ such as Enneagram, DISC, and StrengthsFinder… but what’s the point of them? Are they purely entertainment? From experience people love reading positive things about themselves and their supposed personality type, but nothing comes of the test results. They may well have just read about what Harry Potter house they should get sorted into.
From a psychology point of view, there’s certainly an academic school of thought that disregards these tests as similar to horoscopes. From a behavioural science point of view we may look sceptically at the results as confirmation bias, overconfidence effect, or the Dunning-Kruger effect. And from a practicality point of view, we should certainly proceed with caution before making any actual decisions based on the outcome of such a test. As much as it’s a great experiment to build a team based on MBTI personality types… it’s a huge gamble filled with variables and flaws, not to mention potential discrimination cases.
So what’s the place for personality tests, and why bring them up?
Well, they are enjoyable, and I do think there’s value in them. In fact, a modern test caught my attention in particular.
While working in Cambodia for Mad.co as Head of Communications, I was introduced to a new client called ‘Multiple Natures’. They wanted us to build them a new website, with strategic copy to improve their visibility and ultimately attract more clients (both b2b and b2c). Performing the customary deep dive of new clients, I discovered that it was a form of personality test with some seemingly unique selling points. The creator had been a teacher in India for years, and had wanted to combine Eastern philosophies with modern Western practices to create learning curriculums that lead to successful and happier lives for young students. To do this, he had developed a test of sort, that helped determine both the skills of a person (dubbed multiple intelligences) but also a person’s ‘natures’. Then, the two results would be displayed and overlaid with ‘ideal’ career/activity results to map out potential perfect choices for careers and hobbies… essentially gearing people up for a life of purpose learning and achieving in what they care about, in a way that resonates with them.
I had an hour guided session to try the test, and in my results I was shown my scores (pink) overlaid with examples of jobs (blue). The idea is the closer the match on the intelligence, the more likely it is that I’d excel and be competent in the role—and the closer the match on the natures the more likely it is that I’d feel fulfilled, purposeful, and happy.
As much as I love the concept, and find more value from these results than typical personality quizzes, it’s still subject to a lot of bias, irrationality, and subjectivity. My mood and self confidence would largely have dictated my results, as well as cultural influences (like the British being more cynical, modest, and non-committal than other nationalities). Additionally, the safe-guard of a practitioner mediating to help more accurately place the scores didn’t feel fully rounded as they’d need more of a true understanding about me to actually gauge the truthfulness, false ideas, or exaggerations that I may have in comparison to how I live my life.
Yet I do think there’s something intriguing about the system. Even more so as I watched the founder of the company fully embrace the AI revolution via daily LinkedIn, YouTube, and podcast updates. If the majority of personality tests of this ilk are based on crunching numbers to categorize people on scales and in boxes, then who better than mathematical whizz-kid robots to assist the process? With highly powerful generative chatbots able to engage participants on each and every question, probing deeper on potential outcomes at a pace and language style that suits the participant, results could indeed become more rounded. And whilst I’m still sat as a hopeful skeptic, keen to try and use results in a creative manner or at least give recommendations a test to discover if there’s value to be gained, I wouldn’t discount the opportunity that self-assessment tools can play to aid an increasingly troubled workforce population.
Perhaps the zeitgeist of modern working is filled with well-being discussions due to our evolution passed more fundamental struggles but there’s no denying that burnout, boreout, and loss or lack of purpose are plaguing discussions in recent years. Could personality tools help individuals find the right roles for them, and help teams foster cultures of inclusivity and diversity by better understanding the needs and wants of individuals in a more transparent manner?
Frazer MacRobert 