Typing Without Stereotyping

posted by agammy

I think one of the challenges MBTI® practitioners face when presenting the idea of type is finding ways to make the dichotomies easy to remember while avoiding stereotyping the people who fall into each of them. This is an idea I first started thinking about when I saw this article about what personality types would fill which roles on a reality TV show. The author suggests that all ESTJs are bossy “nags,” that ENTPs are the narcissist egomaniacs (me??) and that INFPs are “tree-hugging members of PETA.”

This particular website isn’t validated or anything like that, but as I thought about some of my type-practitioner friends, I realized I had seen this type of generalizing from some of them as well, and began wondering if this is a positive or negative trend. For example, I have friends who automatically assign every friendly and talkative person they know an “F” and assign all jerks, techies and introverts a “T” because that’s how the Thinking/Feeling preference makes sense to them, or how they tend to generalize it in their workshops. As a friendly and outgoing “T” that tends to get on my nerves.

On one hand, generalizing in articles or discussions can be a fun ways to get people thinking about type, and I think the prevalence of such sites on the internet speaks to the MBTI’s ability to get people excited and involved with personality type and individual growth. On the other hand, it also suggests there are a lot of people out there who think they understand personality type, but don’t quite understand that within type, there is individuality and complexity that needs to be respected.

Why is it important for people to understand that while Judgers prefer schedules and can meet deadlines, they can be fun-loving and easy going as friends? That you don’t have to have a feeling preference to feel things or a thinking preference to make logical decisions? In my opinion, the goal of understanding your type isn’t to become totally polarized into your own, eventually becoming an ENFP or ISTJ caricature of yourself - the idea is to learn what your type is so that you can flex the strengths of it, and learn how to move to the middle when needed so you can work well with people who are different from yourself. I think there are some out there who forget this, and who spend more time coming up with stereotypes that box people in, than looking for ways to find common ground among the different types.

Of course I am guilty of this myself, and I do think there is a place where generalizing and sharing type characteristics is extremely helpful and necessary - especially for beginners who are just making sense of the idea of “type” in the first place. We just need to be careful as practitioners that we remember the ultimate goals of using the MBTI - producing well rounded people who have a more complete understanding of their own preferences, the preferences of others, and who can embrace individuality, growth, change, and become a more effective and cooperative person in the world (or in the workplace.)

To conclude, I just searched Type Stereotypes online and found this hilarious website - reinforcing my belief that in the right context, generalizations can be a fun way to introduce aspects of the different dichotomies. Just remember - it’s also important to administer the MBTI in a way that truly represents the function of each dichotomy, and allows participants to be seen above all, as an individual within their type.