4 ms·
Indeed, they undermine their own argument that it has utility: "People naturally try to sort themselves into work that they are good at, where how they think wo
by raisin_churn 4y ago
Indeed, they undermine their own argument that it has utility: "People naturally try to sort themselves into work that they are good at, where how they think works best." So why then would an employer need to know your allegedly accurate MBTI, when your application for the job and presumably effort in developing and maintaining the necessary skills already indicates that you're applying to the work you're good at?
- ncmncm 4y agoWho said it was a thing for employers? You only prove my point.
- raisin_churn 4y agoThe linked article is about the use of Myers-Briggs in a workplace context, and the staggering lack of evidence of its efficacy for making useful predictions in that context. If Myers-Briggs is useful in your marriage, or your local PTA meetings or whatever, maybe there is evidence for its usefulness in that context, I don't know. As "a thing for employers," which is what this thread is about, there is no evidence that MBTI rises above the level of phrenology or other pseudo-scientific claptrap. Anyways, you're just missing my point. You just don't get what my point is for. You don't understand it either.