Jung Typology Profiler™ Model for the Workplace
- Summary
- Jung's Typology and Workplace
- Jungian Dimensions in the JTPW™ Instrument
- The Additional Personality Dimensions in the JTPW™ instrument
- Personalized Behavioral Descriptions
- Key Behavioral Qualities for the Workplace. JTPW™ Personality Radar™
- Personality Assessment vs. Actual Behavior
- The Responses Reliability Indicator
- Conclusion
- Additional Resources
- References
Summary
This article describes the model implemented in the Jung Typology Profiler for Workplace™ assessment. It describes Humanmetrics' extensions of the traditional Jungian approach to personality. These extensions were specifically developed to more accurately assess and understand an individual's behavior in the workplace and to extend practical application of Jungian typology to workplace-related areas such as career development, leadership, team building, job and organization fit.
Jung's Typology and Workplace
According to the famous approach to psychological types introduced by Carl Jung 1 in the early years of the twentieth century, and later popularized by Isabel Briggs Myers 2 and other practitioners and researchers, an individual’s personality type characteristics are influenced by:
- two pairs of mental functions:
- the opposite functions of perception (sensing vs. intuition, or SN), and
- the opposite functions of judging (thinking vs. feeling, or TF),
- general attitude (extraversion vs. introversion or EI),
with the assumption that one of the mental functions is primary, whereas a function from a complementary pair is secondary but still “relatively determining” 1, and this relationship (judging vs. perceiving or JP) is also influencing the characteristics of the type.
The 4 areas of opposite preferences (the 4 dichotomies) - extraversion vs. introversion, sensing vs. intuition, thinking vs. feeling, and judging vs. perceiving – make 16 possible combinations representing which of the opposites in each of the 4 areas dominate in a person, thus defining 16 different personality types. Click here for more information about Jung’s personality typology theory.
The framework of the 16 personality types has become popular outside of behavioral science and academia, due to its apparent simplicity and thanks to the efforts of Briggs Myers to offer personality type descriptions that are straightforward and relevant enough to ordinary people. However, such basic approach to personality type has considerable practical limitations when applied to workplace-related issues. It produces the same, static cliché-like descriptions for different individual realizations of the same personality type, and the descriptions have a general focus rather than a workplace-specific one. In reality, however, Jungian personality types realize themselves in the workplace in a multitude of ways. Each of the Jungian dichotomies may reveal itself in various ways.
In order to effectively apply Jungian typology to workplace, the descriptions of an individual’s traits should focus on aspects that are relevant in the workplace, and factor in the specifics of realization of personality type in an individual. In other words, two individuals sharing the same four-letter personality type acronym in terms of the four dimensions above may have substantial differences in how this personality type is realized, and these differences may directly affect work-related aspects.
Further, many behavioral aspects are particularly important in understanding and assessing the workplace-related behavioral preferences but lie outside of or cannot be directly explained by the Jungian dichotomies. Examples of such workplace-related aspects include leadership potential, ability to establish and understand strategic vision, assurance, resourcefulness, conscientiousness, rationality, empathy, and communication style.
The Jung Typology Profiler for Workplace™ (JTPW™) assessment instrument was designed to effectively overcome these limitations. JTPW™ instrument uses methodology, questionnaire, scoring, dynamic descriptions and software that are proprietary to Humanmetrics. Not only does it identify the expressiveness of an individual’s preferences in the above mentioned four Jungian dimensions of personality type, it goes beyond by evaluating several additional dimensions that make it possible to apply Jungian typology in order to effectively assess the behavioral preferences of an individual in the context of the workplace, and to recognize the important differences within the same Jungian type dimensions. The JTPW™ instrument features several assessment reports that are focused on various behavioral aspects in the workplace and are dynamically personalized based on multiple factors. Another unique feature of the JTPW™ instrument is the JTPW™ Personality Radar™ graph that visually represents the strengths of the key workplace-related behavioral qualities, and offering a comprehensive, yet easy to use, “snapshot” of an individual’s personality in the workplace.
[top]
Dimensions in the JTPW™ Instrument
Among many parameters evaluated by the JTPW™ instrument, it determines the expressiveness of each of the four personality type dimensions - Extraversion vs. Introversion, Sensing vs. Intuition, Thinking vs. Feeling, and Judging vs. Perceiving.
In JTPW™, the scales of these four dimensions represent a continuum between two opposite poles, from 100 at one pole to 100 at the other pole. I.e. the Extravert-Introvert dimension is a continuum from 100 on Extraversion (i.e. a respondent is a 100% extravert) to 100 on Introversion (i.e. a respondent is a 100% introvert). In other words, the scale is 200 units long:
All possible permutations of the 4 criteria above define 16 different personality types. Each type can be assigned a name (personality type formula), as an acronym of the combination of the 4 dimensions that defines the Personality Type. For example:
Extravert [100% - - - 0% - - - 100%] Introvert
People may reveal features of both poles but typically have a preference of one way over the other. The letter indicates the preference and the percentage indicates the extent of it.
The E-I score of 0% means the respondent is on the borderline between being an extravert and an introvert. Having an Extraversion score of greater than 0 - e.g. 20% - means being 20% more slanted toward Extraversion over Introversion. Having an Introversion score of greater than 0 - e.g. 20% - means being 20% more slanted toward Introversion over Extraversion.
The same pertains to SN, TF, and JP dichotomies in the JTPW instrument, as illustrated below:
The EI dimension signifies the source and direction of a person’s energy expression:
- Extravert: The energy is mainly sourced from and directed to the outer world.
- Introvert: The source of energy is mainly their inner world.
The SN dimension represents the method by which someone perceives information:
- Sensing: A person mainly relies on the information they receive through their senses directly.
- Intuition: A person relies upon their conception about things, based on their perception of the world.
The TF dimension represents how a person processes information:
- Thinking: A person makes a decision mainly through logic.
- Feeling: A person makes a decision mainly based on emotional reasoning, i.e. based on what they feel they should do.
The JP dimension in the JTPW™ instrument is indicative of the kind of the prevailing mental function and serves to assess goal (J) vs. process (P) orientation, and reflects how a person implements the information he or she has processed:
The JP dimension in the JTPW™ instrument is indicative of the kind of the prevailing mental function and serves to assess goal (J) vs. process (P) orientation, and reflects how a person implements the information he or she has processed:
- Judging: A person thoroughly organizes their life events and, as a rule, follows their plans; a person is goal-oriented.
- Perceiving: A person is more inclined to improvise and explore alternative options; process-oriented.
[top]
Additional Personality Dimensions in the JTPW™ instrument
Besides Jungian dichotomy dimensions, the JTPW™ instrument evaluates several additional personality dimensions that make it possible to obtain a more granular and comprehensive understanding of the unique personality type realization in the context of the workplace, and to provide personalized, dynamic personality type descriptions focused on workplace-related aspects such as favorable activities, decision making style, problem solving style, creativity, change management, conflict management, communication style and more. The additional JTPW™ dimensions are:
- Sociable vs. Self-Sufficient
- Assertive vs. Submissive
- Conceptual vs. Empirical
- Innovative vs. Adaptable
- Rational vs. Emotionally Reasoning
- Empathic vs. Emotionally Detached
- Flexible vs. Rigid
- Self-Controlled vs. Impulsive
- Resourcefulness
- Communication
- Conscientiousness
- Leadership Potential (“Power” in earlier versions)
- Visionary
Dichotomy Dimensions
In the list above, the first eight personality dimensions are dichotomies, i.e. they represent a continuum between two opposite preferences, and are measured on the scale of 100% at one pole to a 100% at the opposite pole, e.g.
Flexible [100% - - - 0% - - - 100%] Rigid
The 8 additional JTPW™ dichotomies preference scores, their visual representation and the in-depth analysis and interpretation are included in the JTPW™ “Specialist” report.
[top]
The Relationship with Jungian Dimensions
The above mentioned 8 additional dichotomy dimensions evaluated by the JTPW™ instrument provide the mechanism for capturing different practical aspects of the 4 Jungian dimensions in relation to the workplace. The following is the hierarchy of the additional JTPW™ dimensions with respect to the 4 basic Jungian dimensions:
- Extraversion vs. Introversion
- sociable vs. self-sufficient
- assertive vs. submissive
- Sensing vs. Intuition
- conceptual vs. empirical
- innovative vs. adaptable
- Thinking vs. Feeling
- rational vs. emotionally reasoning
- empathic vs. emotionally detached
- Judging vs. Perceiving
- flexible vs. rigid
- self-controlled vs. impulsive
The additional JTPW™ dichotomy dimensions provide the means for comprehensive understanding of and explaining the unique realization of the Jungian dimensions in an individual. Please note that the relationship between the Jungian dimensions and the 8 additional dichotomies is not cumulative and is not necessarily direct and may be independent from each other. For example, an individual with a strong feeling preference (in terms of Jungian theory) can still score high on rational reasoning, or someone who is expressively a thinking Jungian type can still be noticeably empathic. As another example, both extraverts and introverts may be assertive.
[top]
The Effect of Extraversion-Introversion Preferences
People who score high on extraversion derive the energy for their undertakings from the outside world. The outside world is the main driver of their actions and the main motivational factor. The more often and more intensive this individual interacts with the outside world, the more fulfilling is his or her life and productive he or she is. Therefore, people of this type, as a rule, need numerous contacts with others, prefer to work in a group, and are often bold in expressing their feelings and thoughts.
People who score high on introversion derive the energy for their undertakings mainly from their inner world. The inner world is a very significant stimulus for their actions and a very important motivational factor. The more often this individual can turn to his or her inner world, the more complete is his or her perception of the world. Therefore, they often need solitude to think their ideas through and reflect on the current situation. They also consider the impacts of the outside world, evaluating their effect on them and the extent of their acceptability and accordance with their values and views. People of this type prefer working alone or in a small group, and are somewhat reserved in expressing their feelings and thoughts. As a rule, they are introspectively focused and tend to avoid social events.
In people who score low or medium on extraversion or introversion preference, the described characteristics may be just slightly expressed.
Two additional personal factors - Sociability - Self-sufficiency and Assertiveness-Submissiveness - further explain the extraversion-introversion behavior pattern.
Sociability-Self-sufficiency
People who score high on sociability are noticeably sociable. They like socializing with a group of people and attending meetings. They like participating in discussions and are always ready to express their view on any subject. As a rule, they are active supporters of social events. Quite often, they are inclined toward the group opinion.
People with a high score on self-sufficiency, however, are typically restrained. Participation in crowded social events tires them, so they try to avoid these events. They prefer doing everything on their own and making all decisions independently. As a rule, they do not need approval from others. People of this type do not look for contacts with others by their own initiative. After socializing they need to spend some time in solitude to restore their emotional energy. They are somewhat reserved and distant in communication.
Assertiveness-Submissiveness
People with a high score on assertiveness firmly and uncompromisingly assert their point of view. They have necessary arguments, even in dispute with an aggressive or well-prepared opponent. They firmly adhere to their way, even if it is against the majority. They actively assert their rights. They know how to cope with criticism.
People with a high score on submissiveness tend to give in when defending their rights, and comply with the rules imposed on them. In a conflict they avoid confrontation and tend to make concessions. They are not comfortable going against the majority and can change their mind under the pressure of the majority. Typically, they are prone to give in under pressure. Often, they do not know how to cope with criticism.
[top]
Effect of Sensing-Intuition Preferences
As a rule, people who score high on sensing are most effective in solving concrete and practical problems. They establish clearly achievable goals. The decisions they make are often based on the sense of the moment and what can be done now. They prefer to be concerned with day-to-day matters. They prefer pragmatic ways to solve the problems and are able to find simple and easy-to-use methods to reach their objective.
People with a high score on intuition, on the other hand, are most effective in solving theoretical and global problems, or where general and fundamental understanding is needed. Generally, such people tend to establish visions which would require great commitment and effort to make them come true. As a rule, they are trying to find optimal as well as new solutions. Sometimes they think so much about their projects that in their imagination they have already been implemented. This is the reason why some of their projects only exist in their mind.
In people who score low or medium on sensing or intuition, the described characteristics may be just slightly expressed and they can have a mix of pragmatism and visionary traits.
Two additional personal factors - Empirical-Conceptual and Adaptable-Innovative - further explain the Sensing - Intuition behavior pattern. Their effects on an individual are described in the next two sections.
Empirical-Conceptual
People who score high on conceptuality possess the ability to see phenomena as a part of a general whole. They constantly look for general principles and if they don't find them, they try to come up or imagine the new ones. When they are searching for these concepts, their activity seems to slow down. Once they find the new principles, then the projects begin to progress quickly and effectively.
People who score high on being empirical trust experience much more than theory. As a rule, their judgment is based on their own experience and often they look at things as independent events. Primarily, they are interested in facts and today's reality.
Innovation-Adaptability
People with sensing preferences who score high on innovation are noticeably resourceful and are able to quickly find new ways to solve practical problems. They can critically look at methods that are commonly used. They easily form connections between seemingly disparate things and events.
People with intuitive preferences who score high on innovation are able to find new ways to solve theoretical problems. They are able to see a pattern where others only see a mess. They propose new approaches and think critically about established points of view.
People with sensing preferences who score high on adaptability tend to use convenient conventional methods and, as a rule, follow established rules. They don't like change and prefer "tried and true". They feel most comfortable with clear-cut definitions and instructions.
People with intuitive preferences who score high on adaptability typically select from broad information only the data that confirms accepted points of view. They tend to interpret phenomena and events in a way that conforms to the established laws.
[top]
The Effect of Thinking-Feeling Preferences
As a rule, people who score high on thinking are most effective in solving problems that require logic, clear understanding of structure, and the ability to make an unbiased analysis of the situation. In solving problems, they set a clearly defined goal, consider various ways of achieving it, and can assess the consequences. As a rule, they are unbiased in their relationships with others, sometimes distancing themselves from the emotions of others.
People who score high on feeling are generally most effective in tackling problems and managing projects which are directed toward helping people, and also where warm and friendly relationships or interactions are required. Their decisions are mainly based on emotional reasoning rather than logical analysis of the situation. Sometimes they define their goals based on moral considerations of what is good and what is evil. They are friendly with others and are ready to help. Sometimes they are subject to emotional outbursts.
In people who score low or medium on thinking and feeling, the described characteristics may be just slightly expressed and they may have a mix of objectivity and emotionality.
Two additional personal factors Rational - Emotionally Reasoning and Empathic - Emotionally Detached - further explain the Thinking-Feeling behavior pattern. Their effects on an individual are described in the next two sections.
Rational-Emotionally Reasoning
People who score high on being rational are distinguished by their rational approach to problem solving. They try to analyze situations objectively. They believe that the scientific approach, based on verification and heuristics, is the best for problem solving.
People who score high on being emotionally reasoning are able to make optimal decisions through unconscious assessment. As a rule, they avoid logical analysis of situations.
Empathic-Emotionally Detached
People who score high on being empathic are distinguished by their empathy and concern toward others. They easily understand other people's positions and feelings. They care for people and give help, asking nothing in return.
People who score high on being emotionally detached are distant from other people’s feelings. Justice and law are more important to them.
[top]
The Effect of Judging-Perceiving Preferences
As a rule, people who score high on being judging prefer to act according to established rules and want to clearly understand and accurately perform their tasks or fulfill their duties. They want to have full responsibility for the task at hand, even if it is a small job. They expect others to carry out their duties precisely.
People who score high on perceiving tend to rely upon their own perceptions and not the provided instructions. Generally, they search for an area of business that fascinates them, and they commit to it until they lose interest in it. As a rule, they do not like to be responsible for tasks requiring following instructions.
In people with a low to medium score on being judging or perceiving, the described characteristics may be only slightly expressed and they may reveal a mix of features typical for both preferences.
Two additional personal factors - Flexible - Rigid and Self-controlled - Impulsive - further explain the Judging-Perceiving behavior pattern. Their work-related effects on an individual are described in the next two sections.
Flexible-Rigid
People who score high on being flexible are ready for change and easily cope with uncertainty. At times they are not firm enough in defending their own points of view. They prefer cooperation and try to find a win-win solution.
People who score high on being rigid are firm in defending the established rules, often are against changes and oppose those who expose a different point of view or a behavior that is not a norm in their society. They hate uncertainty.
Self-Controlled-Impulsive
People who score high on being self-controlled have good control over their desires. They are highly organized in their actions, complete their undertakings, and are persistent in overcoming obstacles. They soberly evaluate their possibilities within the context of various circumstances.
People who score high on being impulsive have difficulty controlling their desires, often act spontaneously, do not finish their undertakings, and are sometimes unpredictable in their actions.
Non-dichotomy Dimensions
The additional non-dichotomy dimensions evaluated by the JTPW™ instrument include Leadership Potential, Visionary, Resourcefulness, Conscientiousness and Communication. These dimensions further explain personality type realization reflecting the aspects that often play particularly important role in the workplace. Individual’s preferences in these dimensions are evaluated on the scale of 0 to 100.
Personalized Behavioral Descriptions
The Jung Typology Profiler for Workplace™ instrument provides personalized, dynamically generated descriptions of personality type, focused on the workplace-related aspects such as preferred activities, decision making, problem solving, creativity, change management, conflict management, and interpersonal style.
These descriptions take into account the unique behavioral preferences of the respondent and are driven by the strengths of an individual's preferences in a total of 17 behavioral dimensions evaluated by the JTPW™ instrument.
The descriptions are included in JTPW™ reports.
[top]
Key Behavioral Qualities for the Workplace. JTPW™ Personality Radar™
For the purpose of practical convenience and ease of interpretation in the workplace, the JTPW™ assessment often operates with a subset of dimensions that consist of only 11 key dimensions (out of the 17 total dimensions evaluated by the JTPW instrument), particularly useful in applications in the workplace, and transposed, if applicable, from their original dichotomy scale of 100..100 to a more intuitive scale of 0...100. These 11 dimensions are often referred as “behavioral qualities” or “behavioral indices”, and are the ones that are presented on the Personality Radar diagram. The JTPW™ Personality Radar is a graph that visually represents and summarizes the strengths of an individual’s preferences in each of the behavioral qualities.
To assist in interpretation of the behavioral indices, the indices can be grouped into four areas based on the area of soft skills they represent: leadership skills, interpersonal relations, diligence, and rationality/analyticity, as shown on the following diagram:
Each index and area is represented by a distinct or a related color.
The potential strengths of preferences of an individual in each of the behavioral qualities are measured on the scale of 0-100.
The scores of the behavioral qualities and Personality Radar™ graph are available in all JTPW™ assessment reports.
The Leadership Potential (or the "Power index") is indicative of the drive to take a lead, win and be in charge. The higher the index, the higher the likelihood that the individual has natural leadership skills and takes leadership roles.
The Visionary index is indicative of the ability to shape and/or understand strategic vision and goals, see new opportunities, bring fresh approaches, and understand how things and events may develop.
The Assurance index refers to the ability to defend your point of view and the ability to accept criticism, as well as the ability to take responsibility for an action.
The Resourcefulness index reflects the ability to deal creatively and effectively with difficult or unanticipated situations and/or find unconventional solutions.
The Communication index reflects the ability to communicate effectively, i.e. the ability to bring your point across to others, as well as the ability to listen and comprehend other people's opinions.
The Extraversion index reflects the extent of the respondent's value and interest in the outside world, i.e. their interest in and involvement with people and things outside the self. People who score high on extraversion derive the energy for their undertakings from the outside world. The outside world is the main driver of their actions and the main motivational factor.
The Sociability index reflects your expectation of engagement with others, i.e. the need and eagerness to seek company, engage in and be open to direct interaction with many people.
The Empathy index reflects the ability to understand and identify with other people’s feelings or concerns.
The Conscientiousness index refers to conscientious application to work.
The Self-Control index reflects the ability to control own actions, desires, or emotions.
The Rationality index reflects the ability to think rationally, i.e. operating with values, beliefs, and techniques based on logical, explicable principles.
[top]
Personality Assessment vs. Actual Behavior
The results of the JTPW™ assessment and information in all JTPW™ reports provide an indication of the likely behavioral preferences of the respondent based on the responses provided by the respondent and on the assessment methodology. The results of personality assessment do not constitute a description of the respondent’s actual behaviors. The actual behaviors may be different from the one indicated in the assessment reports. It is the users’ responsibility to validate and monitor the relevance and applicability of the information contained in the reports for what it is being used for.
The Responses Reliability Indicator
Among various factors affecting the dependability of results is consistency (or lack thereof) in respondent's responses. All JTPW™ reports feature the Responses Reliability Indicator that takes into account these factors. The Responses Reliability Indicator value ranges from 0% to 100%. 80% and higher indicates a reliable input, 70% to79% is still moderately reliable, and under 70% is not reliable.
Conclusion
The JTPW™ instrument enables a deeper and more accurate understanding of the behavioral preferences of an individual in the workplace. It extends the application of the Jungian typology to workplace-related areas such as candidate assessment, team building, leadership and career development.
Additional Resources
For more in-depth information on using Jung Typology for workplace-related problems, please read the following articles and resources:
Effective Teaming, Team Building
Candidate Selection, Best Fit
Counseling and Coaching
References
- Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (Collected works of C. G. Jung, volume 6, Chapter X)
- Myers, I. (1980, 1995) Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type
[top]