Tired of Myers & Briggs? - A Critical Assessment of the Venerable MBTI - and the Case for Replacing It With Mindex

Sep 17, 2026

Uploaded by James

Tired of Myers & Briggs? presents a critical comparison between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Mindex Thinking Style Profile, arguing from the practitioner’s point of view. It outlines the MBTI’s origins and its theoretical framing as a personality profile rather than a thinking-styles instrument. The discussion highlights sustained challenges regarding psychometric weaknesses, including validity, reliability, and the treatment of dichotomies, citing concerns raised by psychologists and researchers.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages11

Reading Time28 min

AccessFree to download

Deficiencies in the MBTI: Theoretical and Practical

Theoretical Concerns

No Evidence for Dichotomies

Marketing White Paper Tired of Myers & Briggs? A Critical Assessment of the Venerable MBTI® and the Case for Replacing It With Mindex By Dr. Karl Albrecht Karl Albrecht International Latest Revision as of June 2018 © 2010 Karl Albrecht. All rights reserved. [http://www.KarlAlbrecht.com](http://www.KarlAlbrecht.com) Tired of Myers & Briggs? Maybe It’s Time to Move On to Mindex Many consultants, trainers, coaches, counselors, and learning managers are familiar with the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (widely known as the “MBTI”) as a self-assessment tool. But many are less familiar with the Mindex Thinking Style Profile, which many practitioners consider a superior instrument in a number of ways. This brief discussion compares the rather antiquated MBTI with the Mindex Profile, and promotes the advantages of the Mindex Profile from the practitioner’s point of view. Deficiencies in the MBTI: Theoretical and Practical The MBTI, developed in the 1940s by two marriage counselors, Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers, is more properly classified as a personality profile rather than a thinking styles profile. Briggs and Myers studied the work of Swiss psychologist Carl G. Jung, and his theory of psychological types. Over the many years since the MBTI was created, two parallel conversations – largely contradictory – have been going on. On one hand we have the MBTI publisher’s promotional story, reflected in statements like, “The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®) assessment is the best known and most trusted personality tool available today. Its positive approach to understanding differences is appreciated by the two million people who complete the questionnaire globally every year.” But simultaneously, psychologists and researchers have long been questioning the basic design of the assessment, its scoring mechanisms, as well as claims for validity, reliability, and internal measures of consistency. According to a report by Financial Times magazine: “In 1962 Educational Testing Service (ETS)—publishers of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), the standardised exam taken by most US teenagers heading for university—published Isabel’s test, having persuaded her to change its name to Myers-Briggs in recognition of her leading role in its creation. However, a number of ETS’s own psychologists, according to [psychologist Annie Murphy] Paul’s account,“derided [the test] as unscientific rubbish,” and sales were not pushed hard by the company. “Then in 1975, the California-based publishing company Consulting Psychologists Press—now called CPP—picked up distribution rights to the test and heavily marketed it to American businesses. Isabel died at the age of 82 in May 1980, just as sales were taking off. By 1983, 750,000 people were taking the MBTI annually. In 1993, three million took it. To this day, Myers-Briggs is CPP’s biggest earner. The privately held company, founded by two psychologists in 1956 to publish psychometric tests and career guidance tools, does not reveal financial details but reports suggest revenues related to the test are about $20m each year. “A partner firm founded in the UK in 1989, Oxford Psychologists Press, began translating the questionnaire into a dozen other languages, and continues to market translations worldwide.” Theoretical Concerns Doubts about the MBTI’s theoretical basis and practical value have dogged the product and its parent company ever since its commercial launch in 1975. According to [Wikipedia.com:](Wikipedia.com:) “Although popular in the business sector, the MBTI exhibits significant psychometric deficiencies, notably including poor validity (i.e. not measuring what it purports to measure) and poor reliability (giving different results for the same person on different occasions) . The four [polarity] scales used in the MBTI have some correlation with four of the Big Five personality traits, which are a more commonly accepted framew

FAQs

What is the main purpose of this paper?

It compares the MBTI with the Mindex Profile and argues for replacing the MBTI based on the advantages claimed from practitioners’ perspectives.

How does the paper characterize the MBTI’s theoretical foundation?

It argues that the MBTI is better classified as a personality profile than a thinking-styles profile, noting its roots in Jung’s theory and its development by Briggs and Myers.

What kinds of criticisms does the paper mention about the MBTI?

It cites concerns about psychometric deficiencies, including poor validity, poor reliability, and challenges to the theoretical basis for how scores and dichotomies are interpreted.

Sep 17, 2026

Uploaded by James