Why MBTI Persists Despite the Evidence
- Dr Austin Tay
.png/v1/fill/w_320,h_320/file.jpg)
- Apr 7
- 1 min read
created using Envato
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has zero predictive validity for job performance.
Yet it generates $20 million annually and remains one of the most popular workplace assessments.
How did this happen?
→ Appealing narrative (16 distinct types feel personalised)
→ Positive framing (no "bad" types)
→ Low threat (people enjoy the results)
→ Simplicity (easy to remember and discuss)
→ Cultural momentum (organisations invest for decades)
Here's what troubles me as an I-O psychologist: MBTI actively harms evidence-based practice.
When CHROs use invalid tools, it:
1. Wastes budget that could fund a valid assessment
2. Teaches employees that "psychometrics" means personality typing
3. Creates false confidence in non-predictive data
4. Crowds out better alternatives
For HR leaders: Your team development can be both engaging and evidence-based.
Consider: CliftonStrengths, HEXACO, Hogan assessments, or even properly used Big Five instruments.
What would it take for your organisation to move beyond MBTI?
Comments