Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

daily.jstor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 251 posts

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#231

Post by __derek__ »

PartiallyTyped wrote: post #198
__derek__ wrote: post #64

A previous company used Real Colors, an MBTI knock-off, and it was striking how attached people got to those results. People openly stereotyped whole groups of people because they appeared to cluster in one sector (e.g., SDEs must be Green). They disregarded all counter-examples because they conflicted with these biases. It was weird.

You'd be surprised how common that is with MBTI. Check out the subreddit r/mbti, and specific ones like r/intp etc etc.

Those are opt-in communities, though, so there's selection bias. AFAIK, there wasn't anything in the company's hiring practices that self-selected for folks who would embrace this kind of stuff.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#232

Post by biomcgary »

trhway wrote: post #120
biomcgary wrote: post #36

When I was managing, I informally typed people during the interview process, which was very helpful in predicting both how they would interact with other team members and how they would do at particular tasks. However, I learned not to rely on self-reported personality types or tests, which are often answered aspirationally, not realistically. To me, MBTI or Big 5 (not the actual tests, but their framing of aspects o…

>As a manager, I've found them incredibly helpful for avoiding problems (i.e., assigning the wrong task to a person). it sounds like you're assigning tasks based on prejudicial categorization of genetic traits (as MTBI claims to be) instead of actual demonstrated job performance.

Some problems are very detail oriented, others are much more vaguely defined. As a manager, I assigned vague problems to one person because they weren't worried about the lack of structure to the problem. The devil-in-the-details problems I assigned to another person. Both people were happier and clearly more productive. Could I have made the same decisions without an explicit personality framework in my mental toolkit? Yes, but it would probably have required more experience than I had.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#233

Post by nocsi »

JohnFen wrote: post #72
themodelplumber wrote: post #2

> And that’s it—there’s simply very little data on how well the Myers-Briggs (and other type-based personality tests) measures personality and even less on how it might predict job performance. I was surprised there wasn't any mention of a very interesting issue here, i.e. MBTI and other typological instruments come with user manuals, training, etc., and those materials specifically say "do not use this for hiring".…

> if you are concerned your employer is going to misuse your MBTI type somehow A potential employer will never know what my MBTI type is, so they can't misuse it.

Umm, three-letter agencies in the US will send you through personality/mental testing & psych evaluation. They don't want treasonous thinkers after-all.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#234

Post by nocsi »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #122
greedo wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The list of technologies the CIA has evaluated since it's inception is long and full of quackery.

Without commenting on Meyers-Briggs, the CIA/FBI still use polygraphs during their interviews despite widespread acceptance that it’s useless.

Polygraphs are a deterrence against weak-willed people. If you're so weak to crack to a machine that measures sweat, heart rate and breathing - you'd probably break some foreign actors. It's basically govt LARPing, but for interrogating hires. The vast majority of people that do polygraphs believe it works, so it's not so useless.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#235

Post by nocsi »

vlod wrote: post #226
colejohnson66 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without commenting on Meyers-Briggs, the CIA/FBI still use polygraphs during their interviews despite widespread acceptance that it’s useless.

For those that are interested, here's [0] where he talks about polygraph tests. [0] https://youtu.be/T3FC7qIAGZk?t=5941 He says it's not a lie detector test, but a variance detector. /shrug I expect the CIA polygraph detectors are super skilled and can detect if you're messing them around. Also I think there's a difference if you're trying to mess with a civilian polygraph detector (to cause confusion for a crime), v…

Here's a secret. They don't really care about any readings. It's just a tool for interrogation and gaslighting you. If you're doing stuff like squeezing your sphincter, yea they have sensors on the chairs to detect that.

Polygraphers are skilled at reading people & telling stories. But them reading the machines? It's kinda nonsense - they'd only read results to find excuses to gaslight you. They pretend to rip off the polygraph sheets and yell. Playing good cop/bad cop and making up stories to try to build a rapport. It's really just an interrogation. If you can handle being yelled at for a week, then you'd pass.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#236

Post by slothtrop »

runarberg wrote: post #185
heliodor wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To put it more mathematically, personality traits lie on a normal distribution. Most people are in the middle. Myers-Briggs turns traits into binary options, which does not match reality.

There is no proof that personality traits have any identifiable distribution, let alone normal distribution. Heck we don’t even know what personalty is, or if it is even a useful scientific term. Evidence suggests that peoples behavior varies wildly between situations, way more then any preconceived notion of behavior dictated by personality. If tests show a normal distribution of a personality trait, it is most like…

Good thing it's not a measure of behavior, but of preference.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#237

Post by mdcds »

themodelplumber wrote: post #110
mdcds wrote: post #60

Myers-Briggs and Big 5 aren't the same thing. Knowing my MB category was amusing but not useful. Knowing my Big 5 percentiles - very useful. Understanding where I land on disagreeableness and openness to ideas made my life a lot easier (both at home and work). At least because I have a framework to understand personality differences when dealing with teammates and what frustrates me (like people being close-minded or…

That's funny. One of the biggest complaints about Big 5 is that it's too wishy-washy and doesn't have much to offer behind the scenes in soft theory. For example the "generally people flip all their letters at the end of the work day" principle with four-letter type, or the way you can extract cognitive functionality from the four letters to explore potential cognitive gifts and blind spots. I've arranged groups like…

I can share personal experiences.

My MB letters tentatively are INTJ. I say tentatively because I took a couple of free online tests. Those might not be very accurate. Knowing those letters never aided me in anything. The only interesting that has come out of it is that I discovered a weird subculture of people who wish their MB letter were exactly those. Some kind of a weird obsession.

Big 5 - I took Jordan Peterson's paid test. Discovering that I was more disagreeable and more open to ideas than roughly 90% of population was helpful with self awareness and managing expectations when dealing with others. For example, I don't expect most of my colleagues to be as critical of the company leadership or company policies as I am. And I fully expect some of my colleagues to shut down my ideas for deviating too much from existing patterns.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#238

Post by runarberg »

slothtrop wrote: post #236
runarberg wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no proof that personality traits have any identifiable distribution, let alone normal distribution. Heck we don’t even know what personalty is, or if it is even a useful scientific term. Evidence suggests that peoples behavior varies wildly between situations, way more then any preconceived notion of behavior dictated by personality. If tests show a normal distribution of a personality trait, it is most like…

Good thing it's not a measure of behavior, but of preference.

If preference does not correlate with behavior, you are effectively measuring nothing.

However it does correlate with behavior, otherwise personality traits would be completely dead as a science. But the effect is very weak next to the effect of the situation. Diverse personality traits will cheat if the environment is conducive to cheating behavior.

I would put personality in the same camp as religious believes or political leanings. An effect that mildly alters behavior, but not enough to actually matter in most circumstances.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#239

Post by chefandy »

nomel wrote: post #81
chefandy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're content to work within your network or and only care about the craft rather than the overall purpose of your company and tasks, then sure. Jobs your friends and colleagues get you don't require a cover letter.

I've been involved in hiring at several tech companies, including two top 5. Cover letters were never considered in any part of the interview process. Our recruiters didn't even include them in the candidate packet. So, there definitely isn't any uniformity in the way cover letters are perceived.

I never said you couldn't get a very prestigious job without a cover letter. In fact, I'm positive top 5 companies are far less likely to care about cover letters than many organizations. They want to hire people who are mostly excited about the code and solving exciting problems that come up while the company does its thing. Get a stack of resumes, sort by pedigree and experience, put them in front of a whiteboard to make sure they weren't lying, get them in some interviews to make sure they aren't total jerks, and you're off to the races.

If you want to work with a think tank, a nonprofit doing exciting and important work, a startup with an amazing idea that really captures your imagination, or any other org where the big picture needs to matter as much or more to everybody involved than the content of the PRs, then the cover letter likely matters more than the resume.

No judgement. I use those top 5 products. It's just pretty myopic to deem cover letters as unnecessary when that's only true for people with very specific goals and ideas about what matters in a job, even if they happen to be very common.

Re: Why companies are interested in Myers-Briggs types

#240

Post by EvenThisAcronym »

snapdaddy wrote: post #129

I feel like I am the odd one out in that I don't hate MBTI. I would not use them as a measurement of performance or individual worth, but I do think they might have some value as a team-building exercise. Imagine everyone on a team does a (free, found online, not 'legitimate') test and then spends an hour or two discussing the results. Everyone learns that the developers are not very agreeable (joking! Lighten up!) a…

I think the cognitive function model is fine and useful, which is why Dr. John Beebe's model is so appealing.

My main issue with Meyers-Briggs is the use of a questionnaire to type people - I'm an ESFP, but every time I've taken an MBTI test I've gotten back INTJ or ISTP. I never felt that either of those were completely accurate, or that I was an introvert. It's far, far more accurate to type people based on their preferred styles of interaction and thinking (e.g., as an ESFP I have an informative, initiating, movement-based interaction style and I think in concrete, pragmatic, interest-based terms).

Post reply on HN