28 February 2011

Are you my type?

Sometimes it's fun to take a look at how people tick, even when those people are, well, myself.

I've taken the online Myers Briggs Type Indicator a few times over the years, and typically seem to wind up with INTP.

Beyond telling me that I'm slightly out-of-touch with the reality of day-to-day living, I don't know how much life-altering significance there is in this type of thing beyond explaining why I'm always first in the meeting to shout "Bingo!"

There are a few good sites explaining what the various personality types are.  PersonalityPage has a pretty good INTP overview.

Here is the description that Myers Briggs provided, which, aside from saying I should be a master designer of all kinds of theoretical systems, also gives me credit for being pragmatic - about ideas, so it's not quite completely contradictory.

Rational Portrait of the Architect (INTP)
Architects need not be thought of as only interested in drawing blueprints for buildings or roads or bridges. They are the master designers of all kinds of theoretical systems, including school curricula, corporate strategies, and new technologies. For Architects, the world exists primarily to be analyzed, understood, explained - and re-designed. External reality in itself is unimportant, little more than raw material to be organized into structural models. What is important for Architects is that they grasp fundamental principles and natural laws, and that their designs are elegant, that is, efficient and coherent.

Architects are rare - maybe one percent of the population - and show the greatest precision in thought and speech of all the types. They tend to see distinctions and inconsistencies instantaneously, and can detect contradictions no matter when or where they were made. It is difficult for an Architect to listen to nonsense, even in a casual conversation, without pointing out the speaker's error. And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage. Architects regard all discussions as a search for understanding, and believe their function is to eliminate inconsistencies, which can make communication with them an uncomfortable experience for many.

Ruthless pragmatists about ideas, and insatiably curious, Architects are driven to find the most efficient means to their ends, and they will learn in any manner and degree they can. They will listen to amateurs if their ideas are useful, and will ignore the experts if theirs are not. Authority derived from office, credential, or celebrity does not impress them. Architects are interested only in what make sense, and thus only statements that are consistent and coherent carry any weight with them.

Architects often seem difficult to know. They are inclined to be shy except with close friends, and their reserve is difficult to penetrate. Able to concentrate better than any other type, they prefer to work quietly at their computers or drafting tables, and often alone. Architects also become obsessed with analysis, and this can seem to shut others out. Once caught up in a thought process, Architects close off and persevere until they comprehend the issue in all its complexity. Architects prize intelligence, and with their grand desire to grasp the structure of the universe, they can seem arrogant and may show impatience with others who have less ability, or who are less driven.

Have you found these types of evaluations to be useful?  Do certain types work better together on different projects, or does it all depend on how each type is manifested?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

The evaluation did a great job of describing you. I could see where different types working a project could be beneficial, e.g., having one of those 'E' people to get up in front of the crowd to show off the team's work, but also where it could be detrimental, e.g., one of those 'E' people being thrown out a window for not having any detailed information:).