1.4 Knowing Yourself

It is important to understand our own personality type. It allows you to understand the way you interact with people of other types and the contribution other ways of thinking can make towards your project.

The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and Kirton's Adaptor–Innovator (KAI) personality paradigms provide helpful tools with which to gain greater awareness of yourself and of others.

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

One of the most reliable and common descriptors of personality is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, the development of which was based on the typologies of Carl Jung. The MBTI uses four opposite pairs, or dichotomies, with a resulting 16 possible combinations. The dichotomies are:

Extraversion (E)	Introversion (I)
Sensing (S)	Intuition (N)
Thinking (T)	Feeling (F)
Judging (J)	Perceiving (P)

The terms used for these pairs have a specific technical meaning which can be different to everyday usage. The poles, such as Extraversion or Introversion, largely measure people’s preferences, and the preferences indicate likely behaviours. For example, a person with a preference for Extraversion (Myers–Briggs spelling) is motivated by action and if they are not active their motivation tends to decline. Conversely, those whose preference is Introversion become less energised as they act. They prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again.

Sensing–Intuition and Thinking–Feeling pairs are often called MBTI functions. Individuals tend to be biased in one dimension rather than the other, although many individuals can use both. Individuals with a preference for Sensing prefer to trust information that is in the present, tangible and concrete. They tend to distrust hunches. For them the meaning comes from the data.

Thinking and Feeling are the decision-making or judgment-producing functions. Both Thinking and Feeling types attempt to make rational choices based on the data received from their information-gathering functions (S or N). People with a preference for Feeling prefer to come to decisions by empathising with the situation, that is seeing it 'from the inside', and attempt to achieve the greatest consensus and fit by recognising the needs of the people involved. Those with Thinking preferences prefer an analytical, logical method of arriving at their conclusions.

The Judging–Perceiving pair correlates with brain-hemisphere dominance. Judging is generally associated with left-brain dominance (tendency to mathematics, science, and engineering), whereas Perceiving is associated with right-brain dominance (arts and creativity).

Effective research teams have members with preferences that range across most of these pairs, because they approach their relationships and the data in different ways. This allows for comprehensive analysis of and insight into the results. However, you can see its relevance by realising that clashes and arguments can simply occur because people are interpreting data and situations differently.

Kirton's Adaptor–Innovator

Another descriptor of personal difference is Kirton's Adaptor–Innovator (KAI). Basically, Kirton identified two descriptors of innovation style which he called the Adaptor and the Innovator. Extreme Adaptors focus on improving and perfecting one solution while Extreme Innovators keep developing potential solutions, none of which quite work. Like the MBTI, this scale has been tested on a large number of people across a range of cultures and is highly reliable.

The two extremes are:

Adaptors

Characterised by precision, reliability, efficiency, discipline, conformity
Concerned with resolving problems rather than finding them
Seeks solutions to problems in tried and conventional ways
Challenges rules rarely and cautiously
When collaborating with innovators, supplies stability, order, and continuity.

Innovator

Seen as undisciplined, thinking tangentially; approaches tasks from unexpected angles
Discovers problems as well as solutions
Queries assumptions
Often seen as unsound, impractical
Takes control in unstructured situations
When collaborating with Adaptors, provides task orientations.

Both Adaptors and Innovators are required in most research teams. Also, when an extreme innovator communicates with an extreme adaptor, they will need a person who is between them in style to interpret what is being said. Where would you sit on this scale? What implications does it have for your leadership style?

Optional activity

Reflect:

What implications do the differences in personal work preferences have for the way you lead a group?

What sort of issues might arise with people whose preferences are significantly different or who have to work in a way that is not their preferred style?

When have you adapted your style and what was the outcome?

Pursuing the topic further

Engaging with this material is optional. However, if you wish to gain a deeper understanding of the topic you may find this material useful.

While the effective use of the MBTI instrument uses a battery of questions which produces results of high reliability, you can attempt to make a judgement of your preferences on the five dichotomies. When you have done this check out the relevant description based on the four letter code on:
www.myersbriggs.org/mymbtipersonalitytype/mbtibasics/the16mbtitypes.asp
(Note that if you want to access the MBTI it will incur a fee.)

Once you have done this, speculate as to how a person on your research team, with a very different MBTI code, may see some aspects of research differently, such as the role of vision, objectives, and communication.

References

Kirton, M. (1989). Adaptors and Innovators. London: Routledge.

Lampe, J. C. (2004). Alternative personality measures. Journal of Information Systems, 18 (Spring), pp. 21–34.