Today was the final day of training for the MBTI Step III. After 2 days of studying the theoretical underpinnings of the instrument as well as the construction and validity, today we practiced using it under the watchful eye of our esteemed instructors. We examined 3 different cases of people who had donated their Step III report for the purposes of training. Therefore, these were real people who had answered inventory questions and received a report that was based on the rules they triggered resulting in specific statements about their current behavior and accompanying suggestions for personal growth. Everyone had the opportunity to play the role of the client, the coach and/or counselor, and the observer. Final questions and answers about our own reports or any other topic were also discussed.
The first thing I noticed about using the Step III report in a real life setting was even though it was rich with information and feedback, there was infinite flexibility in how this information could be used to promote a discussion. Because the report is not a diagnosis or a final rendering of an individual’s personality, a statement contained in the report could be discussed in any number of ways. For example, a statement might read: “You seem to be indifferent to or ignore logical consequences in matters that are of immediate concern to you, perhaps because other things are more important to you at the time.” From there, a client might say, “Well yes. I don’t tend to worry too much about what I consider small stuff.” Or, “You know, I am just not myself these days. I usually pay my bills on time but lately, they have been piling up on my desk. My mother broke her hip 3 months ago and it seems all I do is tend to her needs.” For one individual, ignoring certain things that are of immediate concern is simply a reflection of their laid back attitude. For another, it is recognized as an important problem that requires further discussion.
Another observation I had about the report is that it is important to keep an individual’s known type as well as dominant function in mind when evaluating the data. For example, an INFP and an ENTJ might both receive the following statement in his Step III report: “You find it hard to deal with situations that require you to take a detached and logical approach in making a decision.” Well, for INFP who is a dominant introverted feeler (and whose inferior or least preferred function is logical, detached thinking, this statement might no raise any special concerns only to point out that many INFP’s do not tend to use “detached, logical thinking” when approaching a situation. They are more likely to think of people or values first. They may add logical thinking into their cognitive mix but it is likely to require a little extra mental energy. An ENTJ, on the other hand, IS a dominant thinker and should therefore be using detached, logical thinking competently and with relative ease. If this is not the case, it may be important to probe for some sort of stress that might be compromising optimal functioning which is often the case when someone is not using his dominant function well.