The mbti® instrument in asia

The MBTI® Instrument in AsiaM i d Ob ti 20Memories and Observations over 20 years

Presented byPresented byDavid Freeman

® CPP Asia Pacific, CPPAP and the CPP Asia Pacific logo are trademarks or registered trademark of CPP Asia Pacific Pty Ltd.

WelcomeMr JEFF HAYES - President, CPP Inc.

Dr NAOMI QUENK - world expert

CPP-AP Representatives from Asia

Our Presenters from throughout Asia PacificOur Presenters from throughout Asia Pacific

Our many Participants from around the WorldOur many Participants from around the World

2® CPP Asia Pacific, CPPAP and the CPP Asia Pacific logo are trademarks or registered trademark of CPP Asia Pacific Pty Ltd.

An Amazing Journey

APP di t ib t i 1987APP - distributor since 1987Started in Australia with MBTI® instrument - 1989


Big QuestionsWould the MBTI® instrument work in Asia?

Are the MBTI® questions relevant/appropriate?

Does Culture distort the results?

Do Type distributions differ across Asian cultures?Do Type distributions differ across Asian cultures?

Is there a market for MBTI® instrument in Asia?Is there a market for MBTI® instrument in Asia?


CultureMainstream question since 1966

Landmark work of Haire, Ghiselli & Porter,Seminal work of Hofstede (1980)

Power Distance Individualism v Collectivism Masculinity v FemininityMasculinity v Femininity Uncertainty Avoidance

Two competing views:


One View of Culture:

Culture is becoming less important as values converge, through combination of globalisation and the advent of new technologies that give everyone in the world access to the same information products and services (Stening 2006)same information, products and services. (Stening, 2006)

A t i i d t i li d b KFC M D ldAs countries industrialise and embrace KFC, McDonalds, Hollywood movies and the pervasive American culture, we all slowly converge in terms of values and institutions andall slowly converge in terms of values and institutions, and come to have similar ways of managing economic entities and conducting our lives. (Harbison & Myers, 1959)g ( y , )


Another View of Culture:

Cultural values are very deeply seated and much ofCultural values are very deeply seated and much of the convergence that some people believe is being witnessed is only superficial or very limited in effect.witnessed is only superficial or very limited in effect. (Koen, 2005)


Hofstede & SingaporeFound Singapore to be:

High in deference to leaders (SJ); Collective (STJ);Neutral on Masculinity/Femininity; low avoidance of uncertainty (P)

D t i 25 ldData is now over 25 years oldSingapore has changed dramatically:

Less collective - much more individualisticFamily ties weakerG i i fflGrowing economic affluenceInfluences from abroad:

“overwhelming role of MNC’s in national economy”overwhelming role of MNC s in national economyImportance/number of expats (foreign talent)


Influence of CultureIf a country had HIGH cultural imperative everyone might come out the same on MBTI® instrumentg

JapanKorea

If not then reasonable diversity of TypeIf not, then reasonable diversity of Type


A Guinea Pig - Elaine in Hong Kong (1990)Reported Type: ESFJSelf-Estimate: ESFJSelf Estimate: ESFJVerified Type: ESFJ

The “acid test”:“My husband read the profile in Introduction To Type®

and pronounced it 100% accurate!”


So into Singapore we strode - confident of success

Small immediate problems:


MBTI® - Form G (Used until 1998)

If you were asked on a Saturday morning, what you were going to do that day would youwere going to do that day, would you…

Be able to tell pretty well, orList twice too many things orList twice too many things, orHave to wait and see?


MBTI® - Form G (Used until 1998)

Whi h d l t ?Which word appeals to you more?Foundation - spire


Establishing the right “MINDSET”

Imagine you are NOT at work.

OH REALLY - Give me a break!


The MBTI® Accreditation Program Family

“I feel really at home in this group - and it’s the first time ”time.

“Why don’t I feel this way anywhere else?”


Typical Accreditation Program Composition

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ

‘Verified Type’ Table – July 1996Pref No. ModalISTJ

1ISFJ INFJ

1INTJ

2 4

ISTP ISFP INFP INTP

TypeE 27 - 82%

EI 62 2

ESTP2

ESFP1

ENFP4

ENTP2 9

6S 13

NN 20 - 61%T2 1 4 2 9

ESTJ8

ESFJ1

ENFJ2

ENTJ7 18

T 24 - 73%TF 9

J 22 - 67%J

8

1133%

26%

721%

1339% N = 33

JP 11

48% 15% 13% 24%Expected


The Difference?In many Accreditation programs:

150% more NF’s and NT’s than in Singapore population

Half the ST’s and SF’s

WHY?


Composition of an Accreditation ProgramIn most countries:

In the first few years - relatively large percentage of NF’sy y g p g

In the next few years - increasing percentage of NT’sy g p g

After about six years - increasing percentages of STJ’sAfter about six years increasing percentages of STJ s


Singapore Population Types - (Estimated)

Online Form M & Q ‘Reported’ Type, 2007N = 2906 (Bell, A, 2008)

ISTJ54819%

ISFJ 1726%

INFJ622%

INTJ1806%

E – 52%I19% 6% 2% 6% I

ISTP1385%

ISFP682%

INFP873%

INTP1304%

S – 62%N5% 2% 3% 4%

ESTP1445%

ESFP502%

ENFP1626%

ENTP1676%

T – 71%F5% 2% 6% 6%

ESTJ55719%

ESFJ1335%

ENFJ973%

ENTJ2117%

J – 67%P19% 5% 3% 7%

48% 15% 13% 24%


Singapore School (Secondary 4) Types

Form G ‘Reported’ Type, 1991N = 1733 (Male – 47.3% Female 52.7%) – Lim TK, 1994

ISTJM 17%F 16%

ISFJ M 6%F 8%

INFJM 3%F 4%

INTJM 4%F %

E – 51%IF 16% F 8% F 4% F 5% I

ISTPM 7%F 6%

ISFPM 3%F 3%

INFPM 4%F 3%

INTPM 5%F 4%

S – 65%NF 6% F 3% F 3% F 4%

ESTPM 8%F 6%

ESFPM 4%F 3%

ENFPM 5%F 6%

ENTPM 5%F 6%

T – 67%FF 6% F 3% F 6% F 6%

ESTJM 16%F 16%

ESFJM 5%F 7%

ENFJM 2%F 3%

ENTJM 6%F 5%

J – 60%*P

* M 58%F 63%F 16% F 7% F 3% F 5%

M 48%F 44%

M 18%F 20%

M 14%F 16%

M 20%F 20%


Singapore students:Less extraverted than Americans (Am:62% Si:51%)68% boys were T’s - expected65% of girls were also T - totally unexpected33% males & 32% females were STJ

Lim argues that culture plays a role here:Lim argues that culture plays a role here:Over 40 years - poor trading port to modern StateGovt played major roleJust to survive Singapore had to be practical, organised, efficient, decisive, duty-bound, conventional, detail-oriented & systematicEducation system emphasised factual learning and objectiveEducation system emphasised factual learning and objective problem-solving over imagination and creativityMales and females were treated alike and given equal opportunityAll social pressures (cultural imperatives) to be S T & JAll social pressures (cultural imperatives) to be S, T & JHofstede: Deference to Leaders (H), Collectivism (H) and preferences for Masculinity (N) and Uncertainty Avoidance (L)


An Observation (speculation?)With the passage of time and lessening of need for systematic, decisive, structured and careful ymanagement, as Singapore reaps the rewards for its diligence over many years, its been able to g y yengage in more creative and imaginative thinking and more caring approach.g pp

This seems to have been accompanied with anThis seems to have been accompanied with an increasing percentage of students in the JC’s verifying preferences for N and Fverifying preferences for N and F.


Onward throughout Asia Pacific…Chinese translations - 1993Hong Kong - first QP - 2000Hong Kong first QP 2000Shanghai - 2000B iji 2004Beijing - 2004India - 2005Taiwan - 20072007 - became CPP-AP2007 became CPP AP


Indian MBTI® Certification Program - 2006


Hong Kong Accreditation Program Types

Aggregated ‘Reported’ TypeN = 298 (Ball, R, 2008)

ISTJ36

12%

ISFJ 15%

INFJ114%

INTJ20%

E – 55%I12% 5% 4% 7% I

ISTP103%

ISFP3

1%

INFP227%

INTP176%

S N - 56%3% 1% 7% 6% 56%

ESTP6

2%

ESFP5

2%

ENFP35

11%

ENTP165%

T – 54%F2% 2% 11% 5%

ESTJ31

11%

ESFJ248%

ENFJ248%

ENTJ238%

J – 62%P11% 8% 8% 8%

28% 16% 30% 26%


Hong Kong Program:Overall an ENTJ group (like Singapore)

Majority of N’s rather than S’s

Large percentage of NF’s

Probable under-representation of ST’sProbable under representation of ST s


Hong Kong Training Program Participants

Form M ‘Reported’ Type, 2000-8N = 847 (Ball, R, 2008)

ISTJ12916%

ISFJ 668%

INFJ253%

INTJ62%

E – 52%I16% 8% 3% 7% I

ISTP364%

ISFP142%

INFP486%

INTP293%

S - 55%N 4% 2% 6% 3%

ESTP172%

ESFP283%

ENFP749%

ENTP334%

T – 56%F2% 3% 9% 4%

ESTJ11213%

ESFJ607%

ENFJ546%

ENTJ60%

J – 67%P13% 7% 6% %

35% 20% 24% 21%


Very similar to Singapore (STJ)

Includes Accreditation participantsNot sorted for genderNot sorted for genderReported type - not verified

We really DON’T have representative samples of countries other than USA and UKcountries other than USA and UK If anybody would like to donate for the research


Who Uses the MBTI® Instrument in AsiaMNC’sLarge companiesg pGovernment Departments - MinDef, MOE etcSelf-Employed ConsultantsSelf Employed Consultants

Each year 23,000 people take the MBTI in Singapore y , p p g paloneMainly used as an OD toolIn a country of 4.2 million - seems like everybody has been told to get their type done by 2010.

(Wood A 2005)(Wood,A. 2005)


What is it Mainly Used for:TeambuildingImproving intra-group communicationImproving intra group communicationImproving employee self-understandingR l i i t fli tResolving intra-group conflictsLeadership/senior management team development

Least popular uses were:Least popular uses were:Stress managementIndividual employee counsellingIndividual employee counselling

(Wood, A. 2005)


However…Only 22% of the surveyed organisations reported using the instrument:g

MNC’s with HQ in English-speaking countriesService industries - particularly banking and financep y gHigher than average proportion of expats

Of those NOT using the Instrument:Most were SME’sMost were SME sDid not know of it and its applications, orWere using other products in particular DiSCWere using other products, in particular, DiSC


Future Opportunities/ChallengesStaying abreast of updated administration guidelinesKnowing what to do after administration (applications)Ensuring MBTI® instrument is not used to stereotypeNew delivery channels New applications:pp

360 degree feedbackLinks with other theories - EQ, decision-making etc


Other InstrumentsFIRO-B® Instrument

TKI Instrument

CPI 260® Instrument

ITSA Abilities TestsITSA Abilities Tests


Questions

Political statements

Other contributions


ReferencesHaire,M., Ghiselli,E.E., & Porter, L.W. (1966) Managerial Thinking: An international study. New York: John WileyHarbison, F.H., & Myers, C.A. (1959) Management in the industrial world: An international analysis. New York: McGraw-HillHofstede, G. (1980) Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA.: SageKoen, C.I. (2005) Comparative international management. London: McGraw-HillLim, T.K. (1994) Personality types among Singapore and American students. Journal of Psychological , ( ) y yp g g p y gType, Vol 31, P.10 1994Myers, I.B.,McCaulley, M.H., Quenk,N.L., & Hammer, A.L. (1998) MBTI Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, 3rd Edn CPP Inc., Palo Alto CAStening, B.W. (2006) Cultural intelligence: Put it (High) on the Asian HRM agenda. Research and g ( ) g ( g ) gPractice in Human Resource Management 14(2), 74-84Wood, A.S. (2005) The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® as an organizational development tool: A Singapore perspective. MBA Dissertation: University of Manchester. Manchester Business School

Trademarks® FIRO-B, FIRO, CPI 260, SkillsOne and the CPP logo are registered trademarks of CPP Inc.® MBTI, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Introduction to Type and the MBTI logo are trademarks or

registered trademarks of the Myers Briggs Type Indicator Trust in the United States and other countriesregistered trademarks of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Trust in the United States and other countries.


2008 MBTI® Asia Conference - Singapore

MBTI Asia Conference 2008

The mbti® instrument in asia

Documents

Transcript of The mbti® instrument in asia