relationships of mbti types and hbdi preferences in a

Western Michigan University Western Michigan University

ScholarWorks at WMU ScholarWorks at WMU

Dissertations Graduate College

6-1989

Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in a Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in a

Population of Student Program Managers Population of Student Program Managers

Ruth Elizabeth DeWald Western Michigan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

Part of the Curriculum and Social Inquiry Commons, and the Educational Assessment, Evaluation, and

Research Commons

Recommended Citation Recommended Citation DeWald, Ruth Elizabeth, "Relationships of MBTI Types and HBDI Preferences in a Population of Student Program Managers" (1989). Dissertations. 2125. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/2125

This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected].

http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/


https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/grad

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2125&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/1038?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2125&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages



https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/2125?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F2125&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]



RELATIONSHIPS OF MBTI TYPES AND HBDI PREFERENCES IN A POPULATION OF

STUDENT PROGRAM MANAGERS

by

Ruth E l i z a b e th DeWald

A D i s s e r t a t i o n Subm itted t o the

F a c u l ty o f The G raduate C o llege in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e

r e q u i re m e n ts f o r the Degree o f D octor o f E duca tion

Department o f E d u c a t io n a l L e a d ersh ip

W estern M ichigan U n iv e r s i ty Kalamazoo, M ichigan

June 1989

R e p ro d u c e d with perm iss ion of th e copyright ow ner. F u r th e r reproduction prohibited without perm iss ion .

RELATIONSHIPS OF MBTI TYPES AND HBDI PREFERENCES IN A POPULATION OF

STUDENT PROGRAM MANAGERS

Ruth Elizabeth DeWald, Ed.D.

W estern M ichigan U n iv e r s i ty , 1989

The purpose o f t h i s s tu d y was t o e x p lo re r e l a t i o n s h i p s be tw een

two r e c o g n iz e d p e r s o n a l i t y a s se s s m e n t in s t r u m e n ts , the M yers-B riggs

Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) and th e H e r rm a n n B r a in D om inance I n s t r u m e n t

(HBDI), b o t h d e v e lo p e d f o r n o r m a l , h e a l t h y a d u l t s . The e x t e n t and

d i r e c t i o n o f t h e MBTI-HBDI r e l a t i o n s h i p s w e re d e t e r m i n e d t h r o u g h

a n a ly s e s o f d a ta from a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f bo th in s t r u m e n ts to th e same

p o p u la t io n , 800 s tu d e n t program m anagers a t t e n d in g the Defense Sys

tem s Management C o llege (DSMC), F o r t B e lv o i r , V i r g in i a , d u r in g 1986-

1987.

The r e s e a r c h h y p o th e s i s , fo rm u la te d from p s y c h o lo g ic a l th e o ry ,

b r a i n dominance r e s e a r c h , and e m p i r i c a l l i t e r a t u r e s o u r c e s , p o s t u

l a t e d s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s among th e 16 MBTI ty p es and HBDI quad

r a n t s . In a d d i t io n , s i x r e s e a r c h q u e s t io n s ad d re s se d th e s i m i l a r i t y

o f th e s tu d y p o p u la t io n to o t h e r m a n a g e r ia l p o p u la t io n s and i n v e s t i

g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e MBTI and HBDI t o d e m o g r a p h ic c a t e g o

r i e s : sex o f p a r t i c i p a n t s , b ranch o f governm en ta l s e r v i c e , m i l i t a r y

o r c i v i l i a n s t a t u s , and management rank.

A ll ex p ec ted r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f th e r e s e a r c h h y p o th e s i s were sub

s t a n t i a t e d . The m a j o r i t y o f th e s tu d y p o p u la t io n were MBTI s e n s in g ,


t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s , who were no t o n ly double dom inant in HBDI Q uadran ts

A and B, b u t m a n i f e s te d "superdom inance" (HBDI s c o re s > 100) in t h e s e

q u a d ra n ts . The r e l a t i v e l y few MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s d e m o n s t ra te d

dominance i n HBDI Q uadrant C. MBTI i n t u i t i v e s and p e r c e p t i v e s were

a l i g n e d w i th HBDI Q uadrant D and were AD doub le dom inan t.

An u n a n t i c i p a t e d f i n d i n g was t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a s i g n i f i c a n t

r e l a t i o n s h i p be tw een th e MBTI e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n d im en s io n and

th e i n t e r p e r s o n a l HBDI Quadrant C. High r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f th e m ost

p r e v a l e n t MBTI ty p e , ISTJ, and th e p redom inan t t h in k i n g - j u d g e r func

t i o n a l g r o u p c o n f i r m e d e x p e c t e d s i m i l a r i t y w i t h o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l

p o p u la t io n s . Fem ales d e m o n s t ra te d much g r e a t e r thaii ex p ec ted s i m i

l a r i t y to m ales w i th r e g a r d to MBTI ty p e and HBDI q u a d ra n t r e p r e s e n

t a t i o n , a f i n d i n g a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e n o n s t e r e o t y p i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e

fem a le s tu d e n t m anagers . No d i f f e r e n c e s in th e MBTI and HBDI d i s t r i

b u t i o n s w e re fo u n d among t h e b r a n c h e s o f t h e a rm e d s e r v i c e s n o r

b e tw e e n m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n p a r t i c i p a n t s , a l t h o u g h h i g h - r a n k e d

c i v i l i a n MBTI i n t u i t i v e s t e n d e d to w a rd HBDI Q uadrant D r e p r e s e n t a

t i o n .

The f i n d i n g s e s s e n t i a l l y c o n f i r m e d t h o s e f ro m o t h e r s t u d i e s

r e g a r d i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e tw e e n t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI, t h u s

p r o v i d i n g s u p p o r t f o r t h e t h e o r e t i c a l fo u n d a t io n s f o r bo th i n s t r u

ments .


INFORMATION TO USERS

The most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. These are also available as one exposure on a standard 35mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

U niversity M icrofilms International A Bell & H owell Information C o m p a n y

3 0 0 North Z e e b R oad , Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 U SA 3 1 3 /7 6 1 -4 7 0 0 8 0 0 /5 2 1 -0 6 0 0


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

O rder N u m b er 8921867

Relationships o f M BT I types and H BD I preferences in a population o f student program managers

DeWald, Ruth Elizabeth, Ed.D.

Western Michigan University, 1989

Copyright © 1989 by DeW ald, R uth E lizabeth. A ll rights reserved.

300 N. Zeeb Rd.Ann Arbor, MI 48106


Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

C opyrigh t by Ruth E l i z a b e th DeWald

1989


DEDICATION

Behind th e sc e n e s , b u t e q u a l ly s u p p o r t iv e o f t h i s endeavor , have

been loved ones who have sh a re d my t r i a l s and t r i b u l a t i o n s and k e p t

t h e f a r m and b u s i n e s s o p e r a t i o n s r u n n i n g s m o o th ly so t h a t I c o u ld

d e v o t e my t i m e t o c o m p l e t e t h i s s t u d y . W ith p r o f o u n d g r a t i t u d e I

w ish to d e d ic a t e my d i s s e r t a t i o n to my e x ten d ed fa m ily :

Mrs. E l i z a b e th Reid S e a r l e , my 93 y e a r o ld m other ;

D au g h te r , Sue Cook, and th e Ronald Lee Cook, J r . , f a m i ly ;

The Ronald Cook, S e n io r , f a m i ly ;

D augh te r , Diana B e c k e t t , and th e S ta n to n B e c k e tt f a m ily ;

My s i s t e r , G lo r i a S e a r l e P u r e r , and th e F r e d e r i c k F u re r fam ily ,

My h u s b a n d 's b r o t h e r , George F. DeWald;

and Dr. John E. DeWald, my d e v o te d , p a t i e n t husband.



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A d o c to r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n i s n o t th e p ro d u c t o f o n ly one p e rs o n 's

e f f o r t s . Many peop le c o n t r i b u t e to th e ach ievem en t o f th e a u th o r 's

g o a l . While i t would be f i t t i n g and p ro p e r to r e c o g n iz e a l l o f th e s e

p e o p le , i t i s p r a c t i c a l l y im p o s s ib le to do so. A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e few

have been s e l e c t e d i n to k en o f my deep a p p r e c i a t i o n to a i l f u r t h e i r

g u id an c e , encouragem ent, and s u p p o r t .

Dr. Edgar A. K e l le y , D i s s e r t a t i o n Committee C h a ir , and Committee

Member Dr. Kenneth D ic k ie , o f th e D epartm ent o f E d u c a t io n a l L eader

s h ip , W estern M ichigan U n iv e r s i ty , and Committee Member Dr. H erbe rt

H. Dobbs, r e g i s t e r e d p r o f e s s i o n a l e n g in e e r , r e c o g n ize d th e v a lu e o f

t h i s s tu d y and c o n t r i b u t e d t h e i r e x p e r t i s e tow ard i t s c o m p le t io n . My

g r a t i t u d e i s ex tended to my i n t e r i m cha irm en , Dr. Carol S h e f f e r and

Dr. R i c h a r d M u n s te rm a n , f o r m e r l y o f t h e E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p

D epartm ent, f o r t h e i r p a t i e n t p r e p a r a to r y work; to Dr. Lana J. Ford,

o f th e WMU O c cupa tiona l Therapy D epar tm en t, f o r s h a r in g h e r e x te n s iv e

k n o w le d g e o f t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI a s a q u a l i f i e d a d m i n i s t r a t o r o f

b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s ; and t o Dr. J e r r y H a m e l in k , o f t h e WMU M e c h a n ic a l

E n g i n e e r i n g D e p a r tm e n t , f o r h i s h e l p i n th e u s e o f t h e HBDI w i t h

e n g in e e r in g p e rs o n n e l . Mrs. Siham F a res o f The G raduate C o llege gave

p r a c t i c a l gu idance i n t o th e i n t r i c a c i e s o f t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n f o r m a t

r e q u i r e m e n ts d u r in g r e g u l a r l y sc hedu led se m in a rs .

Access to th e d a ta from th e Defense Systems^ Management C o llege

(DSMC) was a u th o r iz e d on December 3, 1986, by Navy C ap ta in George K.

i i


C oyne , J r . , Dean o f t h e D e p a r tm e n t o f R e s e a r c h and I n f o r m a t i o n , i n

r e s p o n s e t o a s u g g e s t i o n by A i r F o r c e B r i g a d i e r G e n e r a l C h a r l e s P.

C a b e l l , J r . , Com m andant o f t h e DSMC d u r i n g 1 9 8 6 -1 9 8 8 . A i r F o r c e

o f f i c e r s , L t . C o lo n e l J o s e p h L aM arca and C a p t a i n J o h n W ard, j o i n e d

w i th Dr. G erry Weichmann to r e v ie w a l l d a ta p r i o r to r e l e a s e in o rd e r

t o g u a r a n t e e p a r t i c i p a n t a n o n y m i ty . The o p p o r t u n i t y t o u s e s u c h a

l a r g e number (800) o f p a r t i c i p a n t s in c r e a s e d the l i k e l i h o o d o f suc

c e s s im m easurab ly .

P r o f o u n d a d m i r a t i o n and a p p r e c i a t i o n i s due r e t i r e d A i r F o r c e

L t . C o lo n e l G eorge J . E l l i s , J r . , p s y c h o l o g i s t and i n s t r u c t o r , who

f i r s t in t ro d u c e d the concept o f i n d iv i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s to th e C o llege

d u r in g th e e a r l y 1980s by a d m in i s t e r in g th e MBTI and th e HBDI t o th e

s tu d e n t s , f a c u l t y , and s t a f f o f th e DSMC. His v i s i o n and i n i t i a t i v e

i n r e c o g n i z i n g t h e v a l u e o f b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s aw akened me t o t h e

p o t e n t i a l o f th e MBTI and HBDI used in c o n c e r t .

S i n c e c o m p l e t i o n o f a q u a l i f i c a t i o n t r a i n i n g c o u r s e i s now a

r e q u i r e m e n t b e fo r e a s tu d e n t may a d m i n i s t e r e i t h e r th e MBTI o r the

HBDI, I had t h e p r i v i l e g e o f i n s t r u c t i o n f ro m b o t h Dr. Mary H.

M c C a u l l e y , p r e s i d e n t o f t h e C e n t e r f o r t h e A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P s y c h o

l o g i c a l Type (CAPT) and c o -a u th o r o f th e MBTI Manual (1985), and from

Mr. Ned H e r rm a n n , d e v e l o p e r o f t h e HBDI. The i n s i g h t g a in e d f rom

t h e i r t u t e l a g e h as proved in v a lu a b le .

At long l a s t , I am a b le to pay a deb t o f g r a t i t u d e to two l a d i e s

w i t h o u t w hose s t e a d y , d e p e n d a b l e , d a i l y w ork t h i s s t u d y w o u ld n o t

have been f i n i s h e d . As o f f i c e manager fo r th e E d u c a t io n a l L e a d e rsh ip

D epar tm en t , Mrs. N e l l i e S t e l l has c h e e r f u l l y m a in ta in e d c o n t i n u i t y i n

i i i

R e p ro d u c e d with p e rm iss ion of th e copyright owner. F u r th e r reproduction prohibited without perm iss ion .

t h e f a c e o f a p r o c e s s i o n o f d e p a r t m e n t a l c h a i r s and t h e a t t e n d a n t

d i s r u p t i o n in h e r e n t i n f r e q u e n t command changes. Mrs. Lee Pakko i s

t h e d i s s e r t a t i o n t y p i s t " p a r e x c e l l e n c e . " I c o n s i d e r m y s e l f e x

t r e m e ly f o r t u n a t e t h a t she was a b le t o produce h ig h ly re a d a b le t a b l e s

and t e x t from a s m a l l m oun ta in o f rough d r a f t s .

My h e a r t f e l t th an k s to a l l .


iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................... i i

LIST OF T A B L E S ........................................................................................................... x i

LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................ x i i i

CHAPTER

I . INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

Purpose o f th e S t u d y ...................................................................... 1

R a t io n a l e f o r th e S t u d y ................................................................. 1

Assum ptions and L im i ta t io n s o f the S t u d y ........................ 3

The S p e c i a l i z e d P o p u la t io n ................................................... 3

The A ssessm ent In s t ru m e n ts ................................................... 4

G e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f F in d in g s .............................................. 5

D i s s e r t a t i o n Overview ...................................................................... 5

I I . MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AT THE DEFENSE SYSTEMSMANAGEMENT COLLEGE .................................................................................... 6

The Role o f th e Program M a n a g e r .............................................. 6

Impact o f th e Program M anager 's P e r so n a l S k i l l s . . . 7

Program Management Course ............................................................ 8

Course O u t l in e ............................................................................... 8

C r i t i c i s m o f B u s in ess School T r a in in g ....................... 8

C u rr icu lum Adjustm ent by th e D S M C ................................. 9

I n t e r p e r s o n a l S k i l l s Development ..................................... 10

Sum m ary ...................................................................................................... 10

v


Table of Contents— Continued

CHAPTER

I I I . LITERATURE REVIEW OF PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIPTHEORIES.................................................................................................. 12

O u t l in e o f th e L i t e r a t u r e S earch .......................................... 12

L e a d e rsh ip and P e r s o n a l i t y Theory I n t e r a c t i o n . . . . 13

L e a d e rsh ip T h e o r ie s ................................................................. 13

L e a d e rsh ip Expressed Through P e r s o n a l i t y ................... 15

P e r s o n a l i t y Theory and A ssessm ent .......................................... 15

Freud and His P s y c h i a t r i c o r C l i n i c a lI n t e r v i e w ................................................................................ 16

R o rs c h a c h 's P r o j e c t iv e T es t .............................................. 16

Jung and His P s y c h o lo g ic a l Type T h e o r y ................ 19

Eysenck and His P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r i e s ................... 20

Thematic A p percep tion T e s t (TAT) ..................................... 20

E dw ards 's P e r so n a l P r e fe r e n c e Schedule (EPPS) . . 21

Study o f Values ( S V ) ......................................................... 22

B e n d e r -G e s ta l t In s t ru m e n t ................................................... 22

C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o lo g ic a l In v e n to ry (CPI) . . . . . 22

S ix te e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c to r Q u e s t io n n a i re( 1 6 P F Q ) .................................................................................... 23

M inneso ta M u lt ip h a s ic P e r s o n a l i t y In v en to ry(MMPI) ......................................................................................... 23

Maslow . . . . . .......................................................................... 24

E v a lu a t io n o f H igh-F requency-o f-U se In s t ru m e n ts . . . 24

S e le c te d Assessment In s t ru m e n ts .............................................. 26

M yers-B riggs Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) ................................ 26

v i



CHAPTER

Herrmann B ra in Dominance In s t ru m e n t (HBDI) . . . . 30

Using th e MBTI in O r g a n iz a t io n a l S e t t i n g s ....................... 36

S tu d ie s o f MBTI Manager T y p e s .......................................... 36

I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f th e MBTI With the H B D I ................... 41

S tudy o f I n d u s t r y P r o f e s s io n a l s ..... ..................................... 41

Study o f H e a l th Care P r o f e s s i o n a l s ................................ 43

P h y s io lo g ic a l B a s is f o r th e M B T I..................................... 46

Summary o f L i t e r a t u r e Review ................................................... 49

IV. METHODOLOGY........................................................... 52

R esearch H ypo thes is .......................................................................... 52

D i s c u s s i o n ........................................................................................ 52

S ta tem en t o f H y po thes is ....................................................... 53

R esearch Q u es t io n s .......................................................................... 54

R esearch Q u es t io n s 1 and 2 ................................................... 54

R esearch Q u es t io n s 3, 4 , 5, and 6 ................................. 55

The I n s t i t u t i o n and th e T a rg e t P o p u la t io n ....................... 57

The Assessment In s t ru m e n ts ....................................................... 58

R esearch P ro c ed u re s .......................................................................... 59

Data C o l l e c t i o n .......................................................................... 59

R esearch Design .......................................................................... 60

Data A n a l y s i s ............................................................................... 60

V. FINDINGS........................................................................................................... 62

MBTI Type D i s t r i b u t i o n ................................................................. 62

v i i



CHAPTER

HBDI P r o f i l e R e p r e s e n ta t io n ........................................................ 64

F in d in g s R e la t i n g to th e R esearch H ypo thes is . . . . 64

HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s and MBTI T y p e s ................................. 67

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTIT y p e s ................................................................................................. 68

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI E l e m e n t s ............................................................................................. 72

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidanceby MBTI E l e m e n t s .......................................................................... 75

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidanceby MBTI TJ T y p e s .......................................................................... 79

HBDI Quadrant Mean S cores f o r MBTI Types andE l e m e n t s ............................................................................................ 84

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r th e R esearch H y po thes is . 87

F in d in g s R e la t i n g to R esearch Q u es t io n 1 89

Comparison o f MBTI D i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r Two S e tso f DSMC C l - a s s e s .......................................................................... 89

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r R esearch Q ues t ion 1 . . . 89

F in d in g s R e la t i n g to R esearch Q ues t ion 2 91

MBTI Comparison f o r S tudy P o p u la t io n VersusO ther M anager ia l P o p u la t io n s ............................................... 91

MBTI Comparison o f DSMC C i v i l i a n s Versus O ther M anager ia l P o p u la t io n s ........................................................... 93

Summary o f F in d in g s fo r R esearch Q u e s t io n 2 . . . 95

F in d in g s R e la t i n g to R esea rch Q u e s t io n 3 96

MBTI Types and MBTI Elements f o r Males andF e m a l e s ............................................................................................. 96

v i i i



CHAPTER

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s fo rMales and F e m a l e s ..................................................................... 96

HBDI Dominance, Superdom inance, and Avoidancef o r Males and F e m a l e s ................................................................. 99

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r R esea rch Q ues t ion 3 . . . 99

F in d in g s R e la t in g t o R esearch Q ues t ion 4 101

D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and Elements fo rEach Branch o f S e r v i c e ................................................................ 101

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r EachBranch o f S e r v i c e ...................................................................... 103

HBDI Dominance, Superdom inance, and Avoidancef o r S e rv ic e B ranches ................................................................. 103

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r R esea rch Q ues t ion 4 . . . 103

F in d in g s R e la t i n g to R esearch Q ues t ion 5 107

D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and Elem ents f o rM i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s ............................................................ 107

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s fo rM i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s ............................................................ 109

HBDI Dominance, Superdom inance, and Avoidancef o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s ................................................... 109


F in d in g s R e la t in g to R esearch Q ues t ion 6 112

D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types, E lem en ts , and TJsf o r Each R a n k ............................................................................... 112

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r EachR a n k ...................................................................................................... 115

HBDI Dominance, Superdom inance, and Avoidancef o r Each R a n k ................................................................................... 115


i x



VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 122

Conclusions Relating to the Research Hypothesis . . . 123

Conclusions Relating to the Research Questions . . . 126

Research Question 1...... .............................................................. 126

R esearch Q u e s t io n 2 .............................................................. 127

R esearch Q u es t io n 3 .............................................................. 128



Research Q u e s t io n 6 .............................................................. 130

Recommendations ................................................................................... 131

Sum m ary ...................................................................................................... 131

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................... 133

x


LIST OF TABLES

1. M a tr ix o f P e r s o n a l i t y Assessm ent In s t ru m e n ts ............................. 17

2. The 16 MBTI Types With A s s o c ia te d C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . . . 28

3. HBDI Mean Scores f o r a Sample o f 7 ,989 Men and WomenFrom th e Herrmann Data B a n k ................................................................. 34

4. C o r r e l a t i o n M a tr ix o f HBDI Q uadrant Scores f o r a Sample o f 7 ,989 Men and Women From th eHerrmann Data B a n k ........................................................................................ 35

5. P e rc e n ta g e s o f MBTI T h in k in g -Ju d g in g Types and MBTIE lem ents i n S e le c te d M anageria l P o p u la t io n s ............................ 38

6. R e l a t i o n s h i p o f S tro n g MBTI and S trong HBDI P re fe re n c e si n a Sample o f 90 Bankers and Chemical I n d u s t r y P r o f e s s i o n a l s ......................................................................... 42

7. HBDI P r e fe r e n c e s f o r th e Most F re q u en t MBTI Types and S e le c te d MBTI E lem ents and Groups Among 51 FemaleS tu d e n t O c c u p a tio n a l T h e r a p i s t s ....................................................... 44

8. HBDI H em ispheric P r e fe r e n c e s f o r th e Most F requen tMBTI Types and S e le c te d MBTI Elem ents and GroupsAmong 51 Female S tu d en t O c c u p a tio n a l T h e r a p i s t s ................... 45

9. MBTI Type Tab le f o r a Sample o f 27 Male A tto rn e y s andCeramic A r t i s t s ............................................................................................ 47

10. Temporal Lobe Mean Alpha R a t io s f o r a Sample o f 27 A t to rn e y s and Ceramic A r t i s t s C l a s s i f i e d by th eMBTI SN and TF S c a l e 3 ............................................................................... 48

11. MBTI Type T ab le f o r 811 DSMC S tu d en t Program Managers . . 63

12. MBTI Type D i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r th e Most F req u en t HBDICoded Quadrant P r o f i l e s .......................................................................... 66

13. HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s by MBTIT y p e s .................................................................................................................... 69

14. HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s by MBTIE l e m e n t s ............................................................................................................... 73

x i


List of Tables— Continued

15. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q uadrant Dominance, Superdominance,and Avoidance by MBTI E l e m e n t s ..................................................... 76

16. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q uadrant Dominance, Superdominance,and Avoidance by MBTI TJ T y p e s ..................................................... 80

17. Mean HBDI Quadrant Scores by MBTI Types and MBTIE l e m e n t s ............................................................................................................... 85

18. Comparison o f MBTI Types and MBTI Elements f o r 1986-87 DSMC Program Manager S tu d e n ts and O ther S e le c te dM anager ia l P o p u la t io n s .................................................................................... 90

19. Comparison o f MBTI Types and MBTI Elements f o r 1986-87 DSMC C i v i l i a n Program Manager S tu d e n ts and O therC i v i l i a n Managers and A d m in is t r a to r s .................................................... 94

20. MBTI Types and MBTI Elem ents by S e x ................................................ 97

21. HBDI Dominant and A voidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s by Sex . . . 98

22. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Quadrant Dominance, Superdominance,and Avoidance by S e x ........................................................................................ 100

23. MBTI Types and MBTI E lem ents by Branch o f S e rv ic e . . . . 102

24. HBDI Dominant and A voidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s byBranch o f S e r v i c e ........................................................................................ 104

25. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Quadrant Dominance, Superdominance,and Avoidance by Branch o f S e r v i c e ....................................................... 105

26. MBTI Types and MBTI Elem ents by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a nS t a t u s ........................................................................................................................ 108

27. HBDI Dominant and A voidan t Quadrant P a t t e r n s byM i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S t a tu s ..................................................................... 110

28. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q uadrant Dominance, Superdominance,and Avoidance by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S ta tu s ................................ I l l

29. MBTI Types and MBTI E lem ents by R a n k ................................................ 113

30. HBDI Dominant and A voidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s by Rank . . . 116

31. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q uadrant Dominance, Superdominance,and Avoidance by R a n k ................................................................................... 118

x i i


LIST OF FIGURES

1. Herrmann B ra in Dominance In s t ru m e n t P r o f i l e s ............................ 32

2. Most F req u en t HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s ........................................................ 65

x i i i


CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Study

The purpose o f t h i s s tu d y i s to d e te rm in e the r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f

t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) t y p e p r e f e r e n c e s w i t h t h e

m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H e rrm a n n B r a i n D om inance I n s t r u m e n t

(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a f ro m t h r e e c l a s s e s a t t h e D e fe n s e S y s te m s

Management C o llege (DSMC) program m anager 's c o u rse (PMC) h e ld d u r in g

1986-1987.

The DSMC i s a g r a d u a t e - l e v e l , U.S. Government e d u c a t io n a l i n s t i

t u t i o n a t F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a , a few m i l e s s o u t h o f W a s h in g to n ,

DC. The c o l l e g e was fo u n d e d i n 1971 f o r t h e p r i m a r y p u r p o s e o f

t r a i n i n g f u tu r e program m anagers in the i n t r i c a c i e s o f th e a c q u i s i

t i o n and p rocurem en t p ro ce d u re s fo l lo w e d by th e U.S. Government. The

DSMC s e r v e s a l l b r a n c h e s o f t h e a rm e d s e r v i c e s a s w e l l a s t h e

m i l i t a r y - i n d u s t r i a l complex (Acker, 1986). P s y c h o lo g ic a l a s se s sm e n t

o f t h e f a c u l t y and t h e e n t i r e s t u d e n t body u s i n g t h e MBTI and t h e

HBDI i s s ta n d a rd p r a c t i c e a t th e DSMC.

R a t io n a le f o r th e Study

Both th e MBTI and th e HBDI have been used in s t u d i e s o f manage

r i a l l e a d e r s h i p in a wide v a r i e t y o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s e t t i n g s b ecau se

t h e o r i s t s h av e becom e i n c r e a s i n g l y a w a re o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f

1


p e r s o n a l i t y as an i n d i c a t i o n o f l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s (A gor , 1986;

Bass, 1981; K e r l i n g e r , 1973). The e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f l e a d e r s h ip t r a i n

in g t h e r e f o r e i s a t l e a s t somewhat dependent on th e a b i l i t y to p ro

duce u s e f u l p e r s o n a l i t y a s se s s m e n ts o f p o t e n t i a l m anagers. One way

to p ro v id e c r e d i b i l i t y f o r p s y c h o lo g ic a l in s t r u m e n ts i s th rough mea

s u r e m e n t c o n v e r g e n c e : t h a t i s , i f t h e tw o i n s t r u m e n t s u s e d i n t h i s

s tu d y p ro v id e a c o h e re n t p e r s o n a l i t y p r o f i l e o f th e i n d iv i d u a l , th e

c r e d i b i l i t y o f each in s t r u m e n t i s enhanced. Knowledge o f th e r e l a

t i o n s h i p o f th e s e two in s t r u m e n ts i s th u s e s s e n t i a l to t h e i r e f f e c

t i v e use . This does n o t im p ly t h a t one in s t ru m e n t shou ld r e p l a c e th e

o t h e r . Each p ro v id e s i t s own un ique p e r s p e c t i v e , and t o g e t h e r th ey

p roduce a c o n s i s t e n t , com plem entary a s se s sm e n t o f th e i n d iv i d u a l .

The o p p o r tu n i ty to s tu d y th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e MBTI w i th th e

HBDI may a l s o have p ro found im pact on p s y c h o lo g ic a l type th e o ry . The

c o n jo i n t m easurem ent o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l ty p e b o th e n r i c h e s and l e n d s

c re d e n c e to i t s u s e f u l n e s s as a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t .

However, v e ry few s t u d i e s have focused on th e r e l a t i o n s h i p be

tw een th e MBTI and th e HBDI. Ford (1988a) and James (1986) compared

t h e s e two in s t r u m e n ts , b u t on ly in s m a l l groups w i th h ig h ly s p e c i a l

iz e d o c c u p a t io n s . Thus t h e r e a p p e a rs to be a need fo r a s tu d y u s in g

b o t h t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI on a l a r g e enough p o p u l a t i o n t o p r o v i d e

g e n e r a l i z a b l e r e s u l t s . The 811 s tu d e n t program manager s tu d y p opu la

t i o n m e e t s t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t . M o re o v e r , t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f dem o

g ra p h ic d a ta f o r t h i s p o p u la t io n p e r m i t s th e e x p lo r a t i o n o f r e l a t i o n

s h ip s o f the HBDI and th e MBTI w i th demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .


An a n c i l l a r y b e n e f i t from t h i s s tu d y i s th e o p p o r tu n i ty to p ro

v id e a d d i t i o n a l v a l i d a t i o n f o r th e HBDI. One way to v a l i d a t e a new ly

i n t r o d u c e d i n s t r u m e n t i s t o c o m p a re i t s m e a s u re m e n t o f p a r t i c u l a r

c o n s t r u c t s w i th t h a t o f b e t t e r known in s t r u m e n ts (K e r l in g e r , 1973).

The MBTI h a s b e e n w e l l d o c u m e n te d by f a v o r a b l e r e v i e w s i n B u ro s

(1 9 7 5 , 1978) and by i t s m an u a l (M yers & M c C a u l le y , 1985) . The MBTI

A t l a s o f Type T a b l e s ( M a c d a id , M c C a u l le y , & K a in z , 1986) i n c l u d e s

type t a b l e s f o r p r o f e s s io n s and o c c u p a t io n s drawn from an e x te n s iv e

MBTI d a ta bank o f a p p ro x im a te ly 250,000 i te m s . By c o n t r a s t , th e HBDI

m a n u a l h a s j u s t b e e n r e l e a s e d (H e r rm a n n , 1988) w i t h a c o n c u r r e n t

v a l i d a t i o n s tu d y by Bunderson (1988). Thus, com parison w i th the MBTI

may p ro v id e f u r t h e r v a l i d a t i o n f o r th e HBDI. MBTI d o cu m en ta t io n w i l l

be enhanced by th e a d d i t i o n o f a s tu d e n t program manager type t a b l e

t o t h e At l a s .

Assum ptions and L im i ta t io n s o f th e Study

The S p e c ia l i z e d P o p u la t io n

A ll o f the 811 p a r t i c i p a n t s were s tu d e n t program m anagers a t th e

DSMC. Each was a mem ber o f one o f t h r e e p ro g ra m m a n a g e r c l a s s e s ,

PM C -86-2 , 8 7 - 1 , o r 8 7 -2 . A l l s t u d e n t s had b a c h e l o r ' s d e g r e e s and

a b o u t o n e - t h i r d h a d m a s t e r ' s d e g r e e s b e f o r e b e i n g a c c e p t e d by t h e

DSMC (Acker, 1986). Mos l uad l u c i j o r e d in th e p h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s , e n g i

n e e r in g , o r b u s in e s s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The p o p u l a t i o n w as v i r t u a l l y

a l l m a le w i t h o n l y a h a n d f u l o f f e m a l e s i n e a c h c l a s s . A t t e n d e e s


4i n c lu d e d b o th m i l i t a r y o f f i c e r s and d e fe n s e in d u s t r y c i v i l i a n execu

t i v e s .

The A ssessm ent In s t ru m e n ts

The M yers-B riggs Type I n d i c a t o r and th e Herrmann B ra in Dominance

In s t r u m e n t were a d m in is t e r e d to each o f the 811 p a r t i c i p a n t s as p a r t

o f th e DSMC r e g u l a r a s se s s m e n t p ro ce d u re . Both in s t r u m e n ts were s e

l e c t e d f o r use a t the DSMC because th ey were des ig n ed p r i m a r i l y f o r

p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t o f h e a l t h y , n o rm a l a d u l t s (Bunderson, 1988;

Myers & M cCaulley, 1985), in c o n t r a s t w i th o th e r w ell-know n i n s t r u

m ents which were deve loped f o r a p p l i c a t i o n to abnorm al p o p u la t io n s in

c l i n i c a l (m e d ic a l ) s e t t i n g s .

A c c e p ta b le C o n s t ru c t V a l i d i t y

The c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y o f any p e r s o n a l i t y a sse ssm e n t i n s t r u m e n t

i s d i f f i c u l t t o e v a l u a t e b e c a u s e o f t h e h i g h l y c o m p le x n a t u r e o f

human p e r s o n a l i t y m easurem ent ( K e r l in g e r , 1973). N o n e th e le s s , v a l i

d a t i o n s t u d i e s o f t h e MBTI (M yers & M c C a u l le y , 1985) and t h e HBDI

(Bunderson , 1988) p ro v id e ample e v id e n c e o f t h e i r c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y .

Minimal P e r so n a l B ias

Both in s t r u m e n ts a re s e l f - r e p o r t i n v e n t o r i e s , and th ey sh a re a

f a u l t common to a l l such i n v e n t o r i e s — the p e rs o n a l b ia s i n a d v e r t e n t l y

i n t r o d u c e d by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t (L anyon & G o o d s t e i n , 1982 ; R o r e r ,

1965). Because th e DSMC s tu d e n t s were made aware o f the v a lu e o f the

MBTI and HBDI r e s u l t s to t h e i r c a r e e r s u c c e s s , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t th e y


answ ered th e q u e s t io n s a c c u r a te l y . Thus, the r e s u l t a n t MBTI p e rso n

a l i t y type and the HBDI q u a d ra n t d a ta f o r each s tu d e n t can be c o n s id

e re d to be a c c e p ta b le p s y c h o lo g ic a l a s se s s m e n ts f o r s tu d y purposes .

G e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f F in d in g s

The f in d in g s o f t h i s s tu d y a re c o n s id e re d to be g e n e r a l i z a b l e to

s i m i l a r p o p u l a t i o n s i n p r o g ra m m anagem en t o f f i c e s b o t h w i t h t h e

governm ent and w i th members o f th e d e f e n s e - i n d u s t r y complex.

D i s s e r t a t i o n Overview

The many and v a r i e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f m i l i t a r y program manag

e r s (PMs) a r e o u t l i n e d in C hap te r I I . This c h a p te r has been in c lu d e d

t o e n a b l e t h e r e a d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e e s s e n t i a l r o l e o f i n t e r

p e r s o n a l s k i l l s deve lopm ent in m a n a g e r ia l l e a d e r s h i p t r a i n i n g . The

DSMC, in th e f o r e f r o n t o f th e e f f o r t to i n c o r p o r a t e th e c o n c ep ts o f

i n d i v i d u a l i t y and p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s i n i t s p r i m a r i l y b u s i n e s s -

o r i e n t e d c u r r i c u lu m , i s a model f o r such u n d e rs ta n d in g . Be.*cause th e

e d u c a t io n o f PMs i s keyed to developm ent o f l e a d e r s h i p and m a n a g e r ia l

s k i l l s , th e l i t e r a t u r e s e a r c h i n C hap te r I I I a d d re s s e s m ajo r t h e o r i e s

in th e r e l a t e d f i e l d s o f l e a d e r s h i p and p e r s o n a l i t y . Development and

use o f th e MBTI and th e HBDI a re d i s c u s s e d in d e t a i l . The d e s ig n f o r

a n a l y s i s o f th e MBTI and HBDI d a t a f o r th e DSMC s tu d e n t s i s p r e s e n te d

i n C h a p t e r IV. S tu d y f i n d i n g s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n C h a p t e r V. The

c o n c lu s io n s and recom m endations appear in C hap ter VI.


CHAPTER II

MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AT THE DEFENSE SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT COLLEGE

The m is s io n o f th e DSMC i s to e d u c a te m a n a g e r ia l l e a d e r s in th e

complex f i e l d o f d e fe n s e m a t e r i e l a c q u i s i t i o n . Upon g ra d u a t io n from

t h e P r o g ra m M a n a g e r 's C o u r s e , t h e m i l i t a r y o f f i c e r s and c i v i l i a n

m a n a g e r s r e c e i v e t h e i r a s s i g n m e n t s t o p ro g ra m m anagem en t o f f i c e s

whose m is s io n s su p p o r t D epartm ent o f D efense r e q u i r e m e n ts . These new

m a n a g e r s w i l l be e x p e c t e d t o f u n c t i o n i n a v a r i e t y o f l e a d e r s h i p

r o l e s f o c u s e d i n p a r t on t h e d e v e lo p m e n t and s t a f f i n g o f d y n a m ic ,

p r o d u c t iv e o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t can respond r e a d i l y to th e r a p id f l u c

t u a t i o n s and c o n s t a n t l y chang ing demands o f th e v o l a t i l e economic and

p o l i t i c a l c l i m a t e s w i t h in which program m anagers m ust o p e ra te .

The Role o f th e Program Manager

A m i l i t a r y program manager (PM) has been compared to th e c h i e f

e x e c u t iv e o f f i c e r o f a l a r g e i n d u s t r i a l f i r m (B a l l , 1984). He o r she

has need f o r tho rough g rounding i n th e b a s i c s o f c o n v e n t io n a l b u rea u

c r a t i c m anagem en t ( E t z i o n i , 1964; W eber , 1947) i n o r d e r t o p l a n ,

o r g a n i z e , d i r e c t , and e x e c u t e a s s i g n e d p r o g r a m s . He o r sh e m u s t

pe rfo rm th e s e a c t i v i t i e s under s t r i n g e n t s ch ed u le and b u d g e ta ry con

s t r a i n t s imposed by s u p e r i o r s in th e armed s e r v i c e s and, to an ever

i n c r e a s i n g e x t e n t , by th e U n ited S t a t e s Congress (Farm er, 1978).

6


The D e p a r tm e n t o f D e f e n s e h a s a l t e r e d th e o l d e r 1 0 - t o - 1 5 - y e a r

p r o g ra m d e v e lo p m e n t c y c l e t o a m ore s t r e a m l i n e d 8 - y e a r v e r s i o n

( A c q u i s i t i o n , 1986). The fo rm er fo u r phases o f deve lopm en t— concep t ,

a d v a n c e d d e v e lo p m e n t , f u l l - s c a l e developm ent, and p ro d u c t io n —have

been com pressed i n t o t h r e e phases . At any t im e d u r in g th e s e p h a ses ,

th e e n t i r e program can be s u b je c t e d to r a d i c a l r e d i r e c t i o n , r e a l l o c a

t i o n o f f u n d s , o r r e a s s i g n m e n t o f e x p e r i e n c e d s t a f f p e r s o n n e l t o

o t h e r p r o g ra m s o f h i g h e r p e r c e i v e d p r i o r i t y . The p o s s i b i l i t y o f

im pending change i s e v e r p r e s e n t ( P e te r s , 1987).

Impact of the Program Manager's Personal Skills

The key to a s u c c e s s f u l program management c a r e e r i s th e p e rso n

a l i t y o f t h e p r o g ra m m a n a g e r ( P a t r i c k , 1984). To b e e f f e c t i v e , t h e

PM m ust p o s s e s s th e p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s k i l l s needed bo th

t o e x t e n d h i s o r h e r l e a d e r s h i p t h r o u g h o u t t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n and to

i n t e r f a c e w i th o th e r c o r p o r a te e n t i t i e s and g o v e r n m e n ta l a g e n c i e s .

P e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as i n i t i a t i v e , f l e x i b i l i t y , c o n f id e n c e ,

e n th u s ia s m , and speak ing a b i l i t y h a v e b e e n i d e n t i f i e d a s n e c e s s a r y

f o r m a n a g e r ia l su c ce s s in th e c o r p o r a te s e t t i n g (A rch ib a ld , 1976).

The n e e d f o r t h e s e sam e p e r s o n a l a t t r i b u t e s i n t h e m i l i t a r y

e n v i r o n m e n t was a l s o r e c o g n i z e d by B a u m g a r tn e r , B row n, and K e l l e y

(1984). T h e ir i n t e r v i e w s w i th m i l i t a r y p ro g ra m m a n a g e rs i n d i c a t e d

t h a t t h e s e PMs a t t r i b u t e d t h e i r own i n d i v i d u a l s u c c e s s t o t h e i r

a b i l i t y to e x e r c i s e l e a d e r s h i p , t o r e l a t e to o th e r s , and to communi

c a t e w i th a wide v a r i e t y o f a u d ie n c e s . In o th e r w ords, th e s e o f f i

c e r s c o n s i d e r e d good i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s a n e c e s s a r y s k i l l i n


t h e i r jo b s . E x c e l l e n t o r a l com m unication a b i l i t i e s a r e a l s o im por

t a n t b e c a u s e t h e p r o g ra m m a n a g e r m u s t n o t o n l y be a b l e t o s e l l t h e

program , b u t m ust f r e q u e n t l y j u s t i f y i t s e x i s t e n c e to p ro b in g govern

m en ta l i n v e s t i g a t i v e b o d ie s and to th e p u b l ic p r e s s ( P e te r s & A u s t in ,

1985; P e t e r s & W aterman, 1982).

Program Management Course

Course Outline

The c u r r i c u l u m f o l l o w e d by t h e DSMC w as p a t t e r n e d a f t e r t h e

c o u rs e o f i n s t r u c t i o n o f f e r e d by th e Harvard B u s in e ss School (Acker,

1986). T h is focus was based on f a c u l t y o p in io n t h a t th e s o l i d e n g i

n e e r in g background p o s s e s s e d by most o f the s tu d e n t s shou ld be aug

m ented by a mix o f p e r t i n e n t b u s in e s s c o u rse s in o r d e r to deve lop th e

d e s i r e d management e x p e r t i s e . This p o s i t i o n i s s u p p o r te d by o r g a n i

z a t i o n a l m a n a g e m e n t l i t e r a t u r e (Badawy, 1982). C onsequen tly , DSMC

c o u r s e s a d d r e s s e d s p e c i f i c p r o b le m s i n d e f e n s e a c q u i s i t i o n , c o s t

a n a l y s i s , c o n t r a c t management, c o n t r a c t o r f in a n c e r e q u i r e m e n ts , i n t e

g r a t e d l o g i s t i c s u p p o r t , and p ro d u c t io n (Acker, 1986).

C r i t i c i s m o f B u s in e s s School T r a in in g

The b u s in e s s community has no t been s a t i s f i e d w i th th e l e v e l o f

i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s o f g r a d u a t e s o f a c c r e d i t e d b u s i n e s s s c h o o l s .

J e n k in s , R e i z e n s t e i n , and Rodgers (1984) found t h a t c o r p o r a te execu

t i v e s fav o re d more em phas is on developm ent o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s ,

w hereas th e b u s in e s s sc hoo l f a c u l t y c la im ed t h a t th e i n s t r u c t i o n in


p e r s o n n e l m an a g e m e n t o f f e r e d by t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n s was a d e q u a t e .

F inney and S ie h l (1985-1986) ag reed w i th th e c o n te n t io n t h a t a n a l y t i

c a l t e c h n iq u e s were b e in g em phasized a t th e expense o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l

s k i l l s deve lopm ent. Fox (1984) s t r o n g l y advoca ted t h a t DSMC s tu d e n t s

r e c e i v e s p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n and p r a c t i c e i n c o n t r a c t n e g o t i a t i o n as

a p o t e n t i a l l y e f f e c t i v e method o f c o n ta in in g th e e s c a l a t i n g c o s t s o f

d e fe n s e p rocurem en t .

C u rr icu lu m A djustm ent by th e DSMC

I n o r d e r t o be m ore r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e p e r c e i v e d n e e d s o f t h e

a c q u i s i t i o n community, th e b u s i n e s s - o r i e n t e d c u r r ic u lu m a t th e DSMC

was r e f o c u s e d tow ard a c t i v e s im u l a t io n s o f r e a l - w o r l d p ro b lem s, p r e s

s u r e s , and a c t i v i t i e s t h a t th e s tu d e n t program managers w i l l be r e

q u i r e d t o f a c e and s o l v e a f t e r t h e y e n t e r t h e i r p o s t g r a d u a t i o n

a s s ig n m e n ts . These s im u l a t io n e x e r c i s e s p e rm i t th e s tu d e n t s to be

come imm ersed in r e a l i s t i c s i t u a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g v e r s a t i l i t y in a p p ly

i n g l e a d e r s h i p p r i n c i p l e s t o p r a c t i c a l p r o b le m s . The s i m u l a t i o n s

d e a l w i th i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s , n e g o t i a t i o n s , r e s o l u t i o n o f con

f l i c t s (b o th a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and p e r s o n a l ) , and s i t u a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g

t h a t th e s tu d e n t s p e rfo rm a t d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f t e c h n i c a l and b u s i

n e s s management and s t i l l m a in ta in th e fo rw ard momentum o f the o rg a

n i z a t i o n (DSMC, 1986).

B lo o m 's (1 9 7 1 ) c o n c e p t , l e a r n i n g f o r m a s t e r y , and K n o w le s 's

(1978) r e c o g n i t i o n o f th e s p e c i a l needs o f a d u l t l e a r n e r s have been

u s e d by t h e DSMC f a c u l t y t o i d e n t i f y c o m p e te n c y o b j e c t i v e s t o be

a c h i e v e d by t h e s t u d e n t s . F a c u l t y m em b e rs , w e l l v e r s e d i n t h e


s t r i n g e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e a c q u i s i t i o n c o m m u n ity , h a v e b e e n

a s s ig n e d as m en to rs to i n d iv i d u a l s tu d e n t s to m o n ito r t h e i r manage

r i a l l e a d e r s h ip pe rfo rm ance d u r i n g t h e s i m u l a t i o n s (G adeken , 1987)

and t o a d v is e and a s s i s t them tow ard improvement.

I n t e r p e r s o n a l S k i l l s Development

Guest l e c t u r e r s a t th e DSMC, many o f whom were p r a c t i c i n g p ro

gram m anagers a t th e g e n e ra l o f f i c e r l e v e l , have r e p e a te d l y empha

s i z e d t h a t p r o g ra m o b j e c t i v e s m u s t be a c h i e v e d t h r o u g h p e o p l e . A

s p e c i a l b l o c k o f i n s t r u c t i o n was i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e PMC c u r r i c u l u m

d u r in g th e 1980s which d e a l t w i th th e "im provem ent o f l e a d e r s h i p and

m a n a g e r ia l s k i l l s by a d d re s s in g p o t e n t i a l im provem ents i n th e s t u

d e n t ' s a b i l i t y to w ork w i t h and t h r o u g h o t h e r s " (DSMC, 1986 , p. 32 ) .

E l l i s (1 9 8 3 ) , a m i l i t a r y m em ber o f t h e f a c u l t y and a p s y c h o l o g i s t ,

in t ro d u c e d th e s tu d y o f th e c o n c ep ts o f c r e a t i v i t y , i n d iv i d u a l d i f

f e r e n c e s , v a l u e s , t a l e n t s , and p r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e s t u d e n t b ody .

T h e s e p e r s o n a l a t t r i b u t e s w e re i d e n t i f i e d by two p e r s o n a l i t y a s

s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s , t h e M y e r s - B r ig g s Type I n d i c a t o r and t h e

Herrmann B ra in Dominance In s t r u m e n t . Both f a c u l t y and s tu d e n t s were

q u i c k t o a p p r e c i a t e t h e a d v a n t a g e s o f k n o w in g t h e i r p s y c h o l o g i c a l

ty p e s , th e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e i r own and o th e r p e r s o n a l i t y ty p e s ,

and th e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e i r b r a i n dominance q u a d ra n ts .

Summary

A program manager must p roduce an o p e r a t i o n a l p ro d u c t on t im e

and w i t h i n b u d g e t . The e d u c a t i o n f o r m e r l y p r o v i d e d t o a new PM a t


th e DSHC was devo ted to i n s t r u c t i o n in th e im por tance o f sc h ed u le s

and c o s t s , an approach t y p i c a l o f m ost b u s in e s s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n p ro

grams. During th e e a r l y 1980s, however, g r e a t e r em phasis was p laced

on d e v e lo p in g i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s th ro u g h r e c o g n i t i o n o f th e e x i s

t e n c e o f w id e ly v a ry in g in d iv i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s . Optim al management

o f program c o s t s , s c h e d u le s , and p ro d u c t io n can be ach ieved w i th the

e f f e c t i v e use o f m a n a g e r ia l l e a d e r s h ip ex p re s se d th rough developm ent

o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l s k i l l s and r e c o g n i t i o n o f th e e x i s t e n c e o f w id e ly

d i f f e r i n g p e r s o n a l i t i e s among a s s o c i a t e s and c o l le a g u e s .


CHAPTER III

LITERATURE REVIEW OF PERSONALITY AND LEADERSHIP THEORIES

The pu rpose o f t h i s s tu d y i s to d e te rm in e th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f

t h e M y e r s - B r ig g s Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) t y p e p r e f e r e n c e s w i t h t h e

m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H e r rm a n n B r a i n D om inance I n s t r u m e n t

(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a f ro m t h r e e c l a s s e s a t t h e D e fe n s e S y s te m s

Management C o llege program m anager 's c o u rs e h e ld d u r in g 1986-1987.

O u t l in e o f th e L i t e r a t u r e Search

The l i t e r a t u r e r e v ie w b e g in s w i th a d i s c u s s io n o f m ajo r l e a d e r

s h i p t h e o r i e s . B e c a u s e l e a d e r s h i p i s p e r c e i v e d by o t h e r s as t h e

ou tw ard e x p re s s io n o f p e r s o n a l i t y (B ass, 1981), th e m ajor t h e o r i e s o f

p e r s o n a l i t y a r e d i s c u s s e d , a s w e l l a s t h e s p e c i f i c m e a s u r e m e n t

i n s t r u m e n ts deve loped by i n d iv i d u a l t h e o r i s t s . The two in s t r u m e n ts

u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y , t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI, a r e d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l .

Ten o t h e r i n s t r u m e n ts f r e q u e n t l y used to a s s e s s p e r s o n a l i t y d i f f e r

en ces a re a l s o rev iew ed .

MBTI ty p e d a ta from p r i o r s t u d i e s o f program managers ( N i d i f f e r ,

1984) as w e l l a s a ccum ula ted ty p e d a ta on m anagers and e x e c u t iv e s i n

t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r (Macdaid, M cCaulley, & K ainz , 1986), e x e c u t iv e s i n

th e f e d e r a l governm ent ( P ic k e r in g , 1986), and m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n

e x e c u t iv e s in th e army (DeWald, 1986/1987) a re covered n e x t .

12


13

The e v i d e n c e f o r c o r r e l a t i o n b e tw e e n t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI i s

t h e n e x a m in e d . S t u d i e s by F o rd ( 1 9 8 8 a , 1 9 8 8 b ) , J a m e s (1 9 8 6 ) , and

Newman (1984/1985) a re rev iew ed .

L e a d e rsh ip and P e r s o n a l i t y Theory I n t e r a c t i o n

Through h i s w e l l-d o c u m e n ted s tu d y o f th e th e o ry o f l e a d e r s h i p ,

B ass (1 9 8 1 ) c o n c lu d e d t h a t l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s a r e p e r c e i v e d by

p e e r s and a s s o c i a t e s th ro u g h th e e x t e r n a l e x p re s s io n o f th e l e a d e r ' s

p e r s o n a l i t y . L e a d e r s h i p and i t s i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p w i th p e r s o n a l i t y

a re d i s c u s s e d in th e f o l lo w in g s e c t i o n s .

L e a d e r s h ip T h e o r ie s

C a r ly l e (1858) fo rm u la te d h i s " g r e a t man" th e o r y o f l e a d e r s h i p

on th e p re m ise t h a t th e acco m p lish m en ts o f a few e x c e p t io n a l i n d i v i d

u a l s had d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d t h e c o u r s e o f h i s t o r y . I n o t h e r w o r d s ,

th e s e o u t s t a n d in g l e a d e r s w ere b e l i e v e d t o p o s s e s s superhuman q u a l i

t i e s n o t a v a i l a b l e to o r d in a r y human b e in g s . C a r ly l e j u s t i f i e d h i s

th e o ry th ro u g h s e l e c t e d h i s t o r i c a l r e c o r d s .

The c o n c e p t o f t h e " g r e a t man" h a s c o n t i n u e d t o s u r f a c e and t o

be i n v e s t i g a t e d by r e s e a r c h e r s . S imonton (1984) c la im e d to have been

s u c c e s s f u l in r e p l i c a t i n g Woods's (1913) s tu d y o f E urope 's h e r e d i t a r y

r u l e r s , w h ic h r a t e d t h e r u l e r s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e i r l e a d e r s h i p

q u a l i t i e s and t h e i r i n t e l l i g e n c e . Simonton r e p o r t e d a h ig h p o s i t i v e

c o r r e l a t i o n be tw een l e a d e r s h i p and i n t e l l i g e n c e .

W h e th e r o r n o t t h e r e w e re i d e n t i f i a b l e l e a d e r s h i p t r a i t s l e d

S m i th and K r u e g e r (1933 ) t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e l e a d e r s h i p l i t e r a t u r e .


They l i s t e d s e v e r a l m en ta l and p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which they

c o n s i d e r e d t o be a t t r i b u t e s o f l e a d e r s . T h e se a t t r i b u t e s i n c l u d e d

i n t e l l i g e n c e , knowledge, i n i t i a t i v e , im a g in a t io n , o r i g i n a l i t y , e n th u

s i a s m , d e d i c a t i o n t o p u r p o s e , and t h e a b i l i t y t o make d e c i s i o n s

q u ic k ly .

I f l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s and p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s w e r e , i n f a c t ,

i n t e r r e l a t e d , S t o g d i l l (1948 ) b e l i e v e d t h a t he c o u ld , t h r o u g h a

s e a rc h o f th e e x te n s iv e l i t e r a t u r e on b o th s u b j e c t s , develop a l i s t

o f l e a d e r s h i p t r a i t s which would d i s t i n g u i s h l e a d e r s from f o l lo w e r s .

S t o g d i l l d id i d e n t i f y s e v e r a l q u a l i t i e s o r p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s

t i c s which were m a n i f e s te d by l e a d e r s . What he cou ld no t do was to

d e te rm in e t h a t t h e s e l e a d e r s h i p q u a l i t i e s w ere d e m o n s tra ted o n ly by

d e s ig n a te d l e a d e r s . I n s t e a d , S t o g d i l l found t h a t l e a d e r s h ip q u a l i

t i e s were e x p re s s e d i n v a ry in g d e g re e s a t a l l m a n a g e r ia l l e v e l s . The

th e o r y t h a t l e a d e r s h i p a b i l i t y was th e p r o p e r ty o f a chosen few was

n o t s u b s t a n t i a t e d .

S i t u a t i o n a l l e a d e r s h i p t h e o r y e m p h a s iz e d th e in f lu e n c e o f th e

env ironm en t on th e b e h a v io r o f th e l e a d e r . The env ironm ent in c lu d e d

t h e s i t u a t i o n , t h e t a s k t o be a c c o m p l i s h e d , and t h e p e r s o n n e l i n

v o l v e d , a s w e l l a s t h e g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e l e a d e r and t h e

o r g a n i z a t i o n . F i e d l e r ' s (1967) c o n tin g e n cy l e a d e r s h i p model r e l a t e d

th e l e a d e r ' s a c t i o n s b o th to i n t e r a c t i o n s w i th h i s o r h e r f o l l o w e r s

and t o t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e t a s k t o be a c c o m p l i s h e d . L a t e r ,

F i e d l e r and Chemers (1974) p o s tu l a t e d t h a t no s in g l e l e a d e r s h ip s t y l e

would be a p p r o p r i a t e in a l l c a s e s . The a d a p t iv e l e a d e r would tend to

m odify h i s o r h e r m a n a g e r ia l s t y l e to f i t th e needs o f th e p a r t i c u l a r


s i t u a t i o n .

The l i f e - c y c l e , t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l , s i t u a t i o n a l l e a d e r s h ip model

d e v e lo p e d by H e rs e y and B l a n c h a r d (1972) was an a t t e m p t t o r e s o l v e

t h e i s s u e o f p o l a r i z a t i o n i n l e a d e r s h i p t h e o r y . T h i s p o l a r i z a t i o n

took th e form o f d iv id in g l e a d e r s o r m anagers i n to one o f two c a te g o

r i e s : t a s k - o r i e n t e d o r p e o p l e - o r i e n t e d . Thornton and Byham (1982)

d e c r i e d th e tendency f o r management to s e p a r a te th e two o r i e n t a t i o n s ,

t a s k and p e o p le , when r e a l w o r ld s i t u a t i o n s in c lu d e i n t e g r a t i o n o f

b o th v ie w p o in t s (H erzberg , 1982).

L e a d e r s h ip E xp ressed Through P e r s o n a l i t y

L e a d e rsh ip i s p e rc e iv e d o u tw a rd ly as th e c o l l e c t i v e a t t r i b u t e s

o f a l e a d e r ' s p e r s o n a l i t y ( B a s s , 1981) . B ass n o t e d f u r t h e r t h a t a

l e a d e r ' s i n n e r q u a l i t i e s — v a l u e s , d r i v e t o a c h i e v e g o a l s , s e n s e o f

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e , p a t i e n c e , v e r s a t i l i t y , and h i g h

t o l e r a n c e f o r u n c e r t a i n t y and a m b ig u i ty — a re a l s o g e n e r a l l y communi

c a t e d t o t h e o u t s i d e w o r l d t h r o u g h h i s o r h e r p e r s o n a l i t y . M a jo r

p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r i e s and th e m ost f r e q u e n t l y used p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s

ment i n s t r u m e n ts w i l l each be rev ie w e d in th e n ex t s e c t io n .

P e r s o n a l i t y Theory and Assessment

The m ajor p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r i e s have been e n u n c ia te d by dominant

f i g u r e s in th e f i e l d s o f m ed ic in e , p s y c h ia t r y , and psychology. Seven

o f t h e m o s t o u t s t a n d i n g a r e F r e u d , J u n g , E y s e n c k , M u rra y , M aslow ,

A l l p o r t , and C a t t e l l (Hergenhahn, 1980, 1984). P e r s o n a l i t y m easure

m en t i n s t r u m e n t s w e re d e v e lo p e d e i t h e r by t h e m a jo r t h e o r i s t s


th e m s e lv e s o r by t h e i r s tu d e n t s in o r d e r to a s s e s s i n d iv id u a l d i f f e r

ences and i d e n t i f i a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c e r t a i n t a r g e t p o p u la t io n s .

T ab le 1 l i s t s 12 p e r s o n a l i t y a s se s sm e n t in s t r u m e n ts , th e f i r s t 10 o f

which a r e th o se m ost f r e q u e n t l y used t o a s s e s s p e r s o n a l i t y d i f f e r

e n c e s . The r a n k i n g i s b a s e d on t h e f r e q u e n c y o f u s e r e p o r t e d by

Buros (1975, 1978) and by th e Buros I n s t i t u t e (1985). None o f th e 10

was s e l e c t e d f o r u s e a t t h e DSMC b e c a u s e m o s t w e re d e v e lo p e d t o

e v a l u a t e a b n o rm a l i n d i v i d u a l s i n c l i n i c a l s e t t i n g s i n s u p p o r t o f

m e d ic a l d iag n o se s o r p s y c h i a t r i c a n a ly s e s . Both in s t r u m e n ts used a t

t h e DSMC, t h e MBTI and t h e HBDI, w e re d e v e lo p e d f o r a p p l i c a t i o n t o

p o p u la t io n s o f n o rm al , h e a l t h y a d u l t s .

F reud and H is P s y c h i a t r i c o r C l i n i c a l I n te r v ie w

Freud was a p h y s ic ia n t r a i n e d i n p s y c h ia t r y . Though Freud was

th e f i r s t m ed ic a l p r o f e s s i o n a l to r e c o g n iz e th e e x i s t e n c e and im por

t a n c e o f th e u n c onsc ious m ind, he c o n s id e re d h i s p a t i e n t s a n i m a l i s t i c

i n n a tu r e . Freud v iew ed an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l i t y as a f u n c t io n o f

i n s t i n c t i v e d r iv e s which p ro g re s s e d from ch ild h o o d to a d u l t s t a t u s .

He was conv inced t h a t a human b e in g reached maximum m en ta l c a p a c i ty

s i m u l t a n e o u s l y w i t h s e x u a l m a t u r i t y (L a u z a n , 1962; Munn, 1966) .

Freud used th e c l i n i c a l i n t e r v i e w a s h i s p r e f e r r e d method o f p a t i e n t

t r e a t m e n t .

R o r s c h a c h 's P r o j e c t i v e T e s t

R orschach c o n s id e re d h i m s e l f an a d h e re n t o f th e F re u d ia n sc hoo l

o f p s y c h o lo g y . He d e v i s e d a p r o j e c t i v e t e s t , t h e R o r s c h a c h ( I t e m 4


Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further

reproduction prohibited

without

permission.

M a tr ix o f P e r s o n a l i t y A ssessm en t I n s t r u m e n ts

I te m P e r s o n a l i t yin s t r u m e n ts

Number o f r e f e r e n c e s 1965—197l a

Rank3Number o fr e f e r e n c e s1977-1984b

Rankb D ev e lo p m en ta lb ase

A reas o f a p p l i c a t i o n

Rem arks

I . M in n eso ta M u lt ip h a s ic P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n to r y (MMPI), 19A3

772 1 339 1E m p ir ic a l , p s y c h i a t r i c ; H athaw ay & M cK inley (1 9 5 1 )

P r im a r i l y c l i n i c a l

C o m p u te r ize d s c o r in g by C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o lo g i s t s P re s s

2 . S ix te e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c to r Q u e s t io n n a i r e (16PFQ ), 19A9

370 2 67 1 3 .5E m p ir ic a l , F re u d & Ju n g ; C a t t e l l , E b e r , & T a tsu o k a (1 9 7 0 )

C l i n i c a l and n orm al

One o f 2 p e r s o n a l i t y i n v e n t o r ie s w i th so u n d p s y c h o lo g ic a l b a s e Lanyon & G o o d s te in (1 9 8 2 )

3. Edw ards P e r s o n a l i t y P r e fe r e n c e S c h e d u le (E P P S ), 1953

33A 3 16 >50M u rra y 's P e r so n o lo g y ; Edw ards (1 9 5 3 )

Normal M inim al u se

4 . R o rs c h a c h , 1921 329 4 79 9 .5 F re u d ia n P sy c h o lo g y ; R o rsc h ac h (1 9 8 5 )

C l i n i c a l ;p e r s o n a l i t y

P r o j e c t i v e

5 . C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o lo g ic a l I n v e n to ry (C P I ) , 1956

281 5 61 1 6 .5 E m p ir i c a l ; Gough (1 9 6 8 )

N orm al and c l i n i c a l

C o m p u te r iz e d s c o r i n g by C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o lo g i s t s P r e s s

6 . B e n d e r - G e s t a l t , 1938 220 6 65 15 G e s t a l t P sy c h o lo g y ; B e n d e r -G e s ta l t T e s t (1 9 8 5 )

C h ildp s y c h o lo g y

P r o j e c t i v e

7 . E y senck P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to ry ( E P I ) , 1963

217 7 91 8 E m p ir ic a l ;E y se n c k 6 E y sen ck (1 9 6 8 )

C l i n i c a l Used m o s t ly i n G re a t B r i t a i n ; r e p l a c e d M au d sley

8 . T h em atic A p p e rc e p tio n T e s t (TAT), 1935

188 8 51 20 M u r r a y 's P e r s o n o lo g y ; M urray (1 9 3 8 )

Norm al and c l i n i c a l

P r o j e c t i v e ; u s e h a s d e c l in e d ; e v a l u a t i o n d i f f i c u l t

9 . S tu d y o f V a lu e s (S V ), 1931

162 9 7 >50 H u m a n is tic P sy c h o lo g y ; A l l p o r t e t a l . ( 1 9 6 0 )

ho rm a l M in im al u s e

10. M au d sley P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to r y (M P I), 1959

153 10 32 3 6 .5 E m p ir ic a l , F re u d & J u n g : E y sen ck & E y sen ck (1 9 6 8 )

C l i n i c a l N e u r o t ic is m an d E x t r a v e r s io n s c a l e s o n l y ; r e p l a c e d b y E y se n c k P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n to r y

11. M y e rs -B rig g s Type I n d i c a t o r (M BTI), 1962

73 2 2 .5 19 50 Ju n g ia n T heory ; M yers (1 9 6 2 )

P e r s o n a l i t y ty p e One o f 2 p e r s o n a l i t y i n v e n t o r i e s w i th so u n d p s y c h o lo g ic a l b a s eLanyon 6 G o o d s te in (1 9 8 2 )

12. H errm ann B ra in Dom inance In s t r u m e n t (HBDI), 1976

Not l i s t e d Not l i s t e d P h y s io lo g ic a l m e ta p h o r; H errm ann (1 9 8 8 )

R i g h t - l e f t b r a i n dom inance

M e ta p h o r ic b r a i n dom inance

a D a ta a r e from P e r s o n a l i t y T e s t s and R eview s I I t by 0 . K. B u ro s ( E d . ) , 1975 , H ig h lan d P a rk , N J: G ryphon P r e s s .

b D a ta a r e from The N in th M en ta l M easurem en ts Y earbook ( V o ls . 1**2), by th e B uros I n s t i t u t e o f M e n ta l M e asu re m e n ts , 1985 , L i n c o ln : U n iv e r s i ty o f N e b r a s k a - L in c o ln .

i n Table 1), to t a p th e unco n sc io u s mind o f th e p a t i e n t . E v a lu a t io n

o f th e t e s t r e s u l t s r e q u i r e s th e e x p e r t i s e o f a c l i n i c a l p s y c h o lo g i s t

(Buros, 1975, 1978). A lthough i t s f requency o f use has d e c l in e d , th e

R o r s c h a c n c o n t i n u e s t o be u s e d p r i m a r i l y i n c l i n i c a l s e t t i n g s

(R o rschach , 1985).

Jung and His P s y c h o lo g ic a l Type Theory

L ike Freud , Jung was a p h y s ic i a n w ith p s y c h i a t r i c t r a i n i n g . In

a d d i t i o n , J u n g 's e d u c a t i o n p r o v i d e d h im w i t h an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f

p h i l o s o p h y , t h e c l a s s i c s , and E a s t e r n r e l i g i o n s . H is f u n d a m e n ta l

work, P s y c h o lo g ic a l Types (Jung, 1921/1971), l a i d th e groundwork f o r

r e c o g n i t i o n o f th e v a lu e o f i n d iv i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s and the wide range

o f i n d iv i d u a l ty p e s i n u n d e rs ta n d in g norm al p e r s o n a l i t y , r a t h e r th an

c o n c e n t r a t i o n on th e p rob lem s o f n e u r o t i c s and th e m e n ta l l y i l l .

Jung 's th e o ry o f p e r s o n a l i t y p o s tu l a t e d t h a t p e o p le 's a t t i t u d e s

to w ard l i f e depend upon w h e th e r th e y draw t h e i r m en ta l e n e rg y from

th e i n n e r w or ld o f i d e a s ( i n t r o v e r s i o n ) o r r e c e iv e g r e a t e r s t i m u l a

t i o n from i n t e r a c t i o n w i th o t h e r i n d iv i d u a l s and th e e x t e r n a l e n v i

ronm ent ( e x t r a v e r s io n ) . He p r o p o s e d f o u r m e n t a l f u n c t i o n s , r e p r e

s e n te d on two p o l a r d im e n s io n s : s e n s in g v e rs u s i n t u i t i o n and t h i n k

in g v e r s u s f e e l i n g . P r a c t i c a l , s e n s i n g i n d i v i d u a l s o b t a i n t h e i r

i n f o r m a t i o n f ro m t h e w o r ld a ro u n d th em p r i m a r i l y t h r o u g h t h e f i v e

p h y s i c a l s e n s e s . I n t u i t i v e s t e n d t o i n t e g r a t e known f a c t s w i t h

memory and p r i o r e x p e r ie n c e to produce a b ro ad e r o u t lo o k em bracing

f u tu r e p o s s i b i l i t i e s .


The t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g d ichotom y r e f e r s to the method o f d e c i s io n

making. The th in k in g in d iv i d u a l a r r i v e s a t d e c i s io n s th rough a s t e p -

b y - s t e p , l o g i c a l l y p r o g r e s s iv e p ro c e s s based on e v id e n t f a c t s . The

f e e l i n g p e rso n i s more concerned w i th th e p ro b ab le im pact o f h i s o r

h e r d e c i s i o n s on o t h e r s and t r i e s t o m in im iz e p o s s i b l e a d v e r s e r e

a c t i o n s . The f e e l i n g p e r s o n t e n d s t o be m ore p e o p l e - o r i e n t e d ,

w hereas th e t h in k in g i n d iv i d u a l i s more concerned w i th th e r e q u i r e

m e n ts o f t h e t a s k a t hand t h a n w i t h t h e p e o p le i n v o l v e d . Ju n g d i d

n o t produce an in s t r u m e n t to accompany h i s th eo ry . He, l i k e F reud,

used th e i n t e r v i e w as h i s c u s tom ary method o f t r e a t i n g h i s c l i e n t s .

Eysenck and His P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r i e s

The M a u d s le y P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y ( I t e m 10 i n T a b le 1) was

d e v e lo p e d f ro m E y s e n c k 's w ork w i t h B r i t i s h s o l d i e r s h o s p i t a l i z e d

a f t e r W orld War I I f o r n e u r o t i c and p s y c h o t i c t e n d e n c i e s . The

M a u d s le y p r o v i d e s s c o r e s on o n l y tw o s c a l e s : e x t r a v e r s i o n v e r s u s

i n t r o v e r s i o n , s i m i l a r t o J u n g 's t h e o r y , and n e u r o t i c i s m , c l o s e l y

a l l i e d w i th F reud 's v iew s . The Eysenck P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to ry ( I tem 7

i n T a b le 1) i s a r e v i s i o n o f t h e M a u d s le y w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n o f a

p s y c h o t ic is m s c a l e , p lu s a s p e c i f i c s c a l e d e v ise d to d e t e c t w he the r

t h e r e s p o n d e n t i n c l u d e d l i e s among h i s a n s w e r s (E y s e n c k & E y s e n c k ,

1968). Both i n s t r u m e n ts a re s u i t a b l e on ly fo r c l i n i c a l use .

Thematic A p p e rc ep t io n T e s t (TAT)

M u rra y (M organ & M u rra y , 1935) o r i g i n a l l y d e v e lo p e d th e TAT

( I t e m 8 i n T a b le 1 ) , a p r o j e c t i v e i n s t r u m e n t , t o i n v e s t i g a t e


f a n t a s i e s o r w a k in g d r e a m s . When t a k i n g t h e TAT, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t

v iew s a s e r i e s o f ambiguous p i c t u r e s and i s asked to d e s c r ib e e i t h e r

v e r b a l l y o r i n w r i t i n g h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s c e n e . M u rra y

b e l i e v e d t h a t th e p a r t i c i p a n t would i n j e c t h i m s e l f i n to th e r o l e o f

th e p i c t u r e d c h a r a c t e r and would c o n s i s t e n t l y f o l lo w h i s own p e r s o n a l

p r e f e r e n c e s i n f o r e c a s t i n g th e outcome o f th e s to r y . Murray and h i s

m i l i t a r y c o l l e a g u e s ( p s y c h i a t r i s t s and p s y c h o lo g i s t s ) r e p o r t e d a h ig h

r a t e o f s u c c e s s in u s in g th e TAT to a s s e s s th e p o t e n t i a l p e rfo rm ance

o f a g e n t s d u r i n g W o rld War I I (U.S. O f f i c e o f S t r a t e g i c S e r v i c e s ,

1948) .

M u r r a y ’s e d u c a t i o n a t t h e d o c t o r a l l e v e l i n t h e t h r e e p r o f e s

s i o n a l d i s c i p l i n e s o f m e d i c i n e , b i o c h e m i s t r y , and p s y c h o lo g y

(Hergenhahn, 1980) p ro v id ed him w i th an u n u s u a l ly b road background on

w h ic h t o b a s e h i s e v a l u a t i o n s . When M u rra y r e t i r e d f ro m a c t i v e

p s y c h o lo g ic a l p r a c t i c e , th e use o f th e TAT g r a d u a l ly d e c l in e d . More

o v e r , th e TAT i s s u b je c t t o th e m ajo r d i s a d v a n ta g e o f a l l p r o j e c t i v e

t e s t s — i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s i s h e a v i l y d e p e n d e n t on t h e

e v a l u a t i v e s k i l l o f th e t e s t a d m i n i s t r a t o r .

E d w ard s 's P e r s o n a l P r e fe r e n c e Schedule (EPPS)

E d w ard s (1953 ) d e v i s e d t h e EPPS ( i t e m 3 i n T a b le 1) t o a d d r e s s

M urray 's (1938) p e r s o n a l i t y th e o ry th ro u g h th e use o f a n o n p r o je c t iv e

i n s t r u m e n t , r a t h e r th a n w i th th e p r o j e c t i v e TAT. F i f t e e n c o n s t r u c t s

w ere r e f e r e n c e d , i n c lu d in g a c h ie v e m e n t , a f f i l i a t i o n , dom inance, n u r -

t u r a n c e , and a g g re s s io n . The EPPS began to lo s e i t s p o p u l a r i t y a f t e r


1970 when Edwards r a d i c a l l y r e v i s e d h i s p s y c h o lo g ic a l base and em

b ra c e d newer p e r s o n a l i t y t h e o r i e s .

S tudy o f V alues (SV)

A l l p o r t ( A l l p o r t , V e rn o n , & L in d z e y , 1960) d e v e lo p e d th e SV

( I te m 9 in Table 1) to im plem ent h i s h u m a n is t ic p e r s o n a l i t y th eo ry .

The SV a d d re s s e s s i x g e n e ra l v a lu e c a t e g o r i e s : t h e o r e t i c a l ( se a rch

f o r t r u t h ) , economic ( p r a c t i c a l ) , a e s t h e t i c ( a r t i s t i c ) , s o c i a l (human

r e l a t i o n s h i p s ) , p o l i t i c a l (p o w e r b a s e ) , and r e l i g i o u s ( h a r m o n io u s

a c t i o n ) . A l l p o r t e m p h a s i z e d t h e u n i q u e n e s s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l . He

p r e f e r r e d to s tu d y a s i n g l e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p e r s o n a l i t y in d e p th , r a t h e r

th a n t o a t t e m p t g e n e r a l i z a t i o n to g roups (Kergenhahn, 1984), The SV

i s i n f r e q u e n t l y u s e d a s a r e s e a r c h i n s t r u m e n t (B u ro s I n s t i t u t e ,

1985).

B e n d e r -G e s ta l t T e s t

T h i s p r o j e c t i v e t e s t ( I t e m 6 i n T a b le 1) h a s had w id e a p p l i c a

t i o n f o r a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e m o to r , c o g n i t i v e , e m o t i o n a l , and s o c i a l

f u n c t i o n i n g o f young c h i l d r e n , r a n g i n g i n age f ro m 4 t o 14 ( B e n d e r -

G e s t a l t T e s t , 1985).

C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o lo g ic a l In v e n to r y (CPI)

Gough (1968) deve loped th e CPI ( I te m 5 in Table 1) p r i m a r i l y as

an i n s t r u m e n t to p r e d i c t s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n and b e h a v io r among norm al

i n d i v i d u a l s , r a t h e r th an to m easure p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s , pe r se. The

v a lu e o f th e CPI as a c l i n i c a l t o o l a p p l i c a b l e to a d o le s c e n t p rob lem s


has been r e c o g n iz e d by Baucom (1985), who has compared i t s u se fav o r

a b ly w i th t h a t o f th e w ell-know n M inneso ta M u l t ip h a s ic P e r s o n a l i t y

In v e n to ry .

S ix te e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c to r Q u e s t io n n a i re (16PFQ)

C a t t e l l ( C a t t e l l , Eber , & Tatsuoka , 1970) used th e tec h n iq u e o f

f a c t o r a n a ly s i s on d a t a from l i t e r a l l y thousands o f p a r t i c i p a n t s in

o r d e r t o d e v e l o p t h e 16PFQ ( I t e m 2 i n T a b le 1 ) , w h ic h he b e l i e v e d

c a p a b le o f i d e n t i f y i n g s e c o n d -o rd e r p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s . Lanyon and

G o o d s t e in (1 9 8 2 ) h a v e a s s e s s e d t h e 16PFQ a s b e i n g one o f o n l y two

p e r s o n a l i t y i n s t r u m e n t s w h ic h a r e b a s e d on sound p s y c h o l o g i c a l

t h e o r y . The M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r i s t h e o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t

acco rded t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n .

M inneso ta M u l t ip h a s ic P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to ry (MMPI)

The MMPI ( i te m 1 in T ab le 1) c o n t in u e s to be th e in s t r u m e n t w i th

t h e h i g h e s t f r e q u e n c y o f u s e . I t i s r a n k e d f i r s t b y B u ro s i n 1975

and a g a i n by t h e B u ro s I n s t i t u t e i n 1985. C l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t s

Hathaway and McKinley (1951) deve loped th e MMPI as a d i a g n o s t i c to o l

to a id in p a th o l o g ic a l a s se s s m e n t o f m e d ic a l p a t i e n t s w i th p robab le

m en ta l d i s o r d e r s . The MMPI i s c o n s i d e r e d t h e p r e f e r r e d d i a g n o s t i c

t o o l i n c l i n i c a l s e t t i n g s f o r m e n t a l p a t i e n t s . H o w e v er , t h e s u i t

a b i l i t y o f th e MMPI to a s s e s s th e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f norm al peop le has

been q u e s t io n e d (King, 1978).


Maslow

W h ile he d i d n o t d e v e lo p a s p e c i a l i z e d a sse ssm e n t in s t r u m e n t ,

Maslow succeeded A l lp o r t and Murray as th e acknowledged l e a d e r o f th e

h u m a n is t ic schoo l o f psycho logy (Hergenhahn, 1984). A lthough Maslow

(1954) i s p r o b a b l y b e s t known f o r h i s h i e r a r c h y o f n e e d s , h i s l a t e r

c o n t r i b u t i o n s to th e f i e l d o f p e r s o n a l i t y focused on c r e a t i v i t y and

g o a l a c h i e v e m e n t . M aslow (1970) r e d i s c o v e r e d and r e a r t i c u l a t e d

Jun g 's (1939) o r i g i n a l concep t o f s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , th e in n e r d r iv e

by w h ic h e a c h i n d i v i d u a l c a n becom e m o t i v a t e d to w a r d s u c c e s s f u l

accom plishm en t o f g o a ls .

E v a lu a t io n o f H igh-F requency-o f-U se In s t ru m e n ts

The p o p u l a t i o n u n d e r s t u d y c o n s i s t s o f young t o e a r l y m i d d l e -

ag ed a d u l t men and women t e c h n i c a l l y e d u c a t e d i n e n g i n e e r i n g , t h e

p h y s i c a l s c i e n c e s , o r b u s i n e s s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The s e l e c t i o n o f a

p e r s o n a l i t y a s se s sm e n t in s t r u m e n t had to be made w i th r e g a rd to i t s

s u i t a b i l i t y to th e p o p u la t io n under s tudy .

T h re e o f t h e 12 i n s t r u m e n t s l i s t e d i n T a b le 1 a r e p r o j e c t i v e .

T h is m eans t h a t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e s t r e s u l t s w i l l be h e a v i l y

dependen t upon the e x p e r ie n c e and judgment o f th e t e s t a d m i n i s t r a t o r .

R e p l i c a t i o n w i l l no t be r e a d i l y a c h ie v a b le because a change o f admin

i s t r a t o r s can c h a n g e t h e t e s t r e s u l t s , e v e n w i t h t h e same p a r t i c i

p a n t s and th e same i n s t r u m e n t s . B e c a u s e t h e R o r s c h a c h ( I t e m 4 i n

Table 1), th e B e n d e r -G e s ta l t ( I tem 6), and th e Them atic A ppercep tion

T e s t ( I t e m 8) a r e a l l p r o j e c t i v e t e s t s , t h e y w e re n o t c o n s i d e r e d


s u i t a b l e f o r u se i n t h i s s tudy .

T h re e o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t s l i s t e d i n T a b le 1 h a v e b e e n u s e d p r i

m a r i l y in c l i n i c a l (m e d ic a l ) s e t t i n g s and th u s r e q u i r e th e e x p e r t i s e

o f a c l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t t o c o m p l e t e t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f t e s t r e

s u l t s . The M inneso ta M u l t ip h a s ic P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to ry ( I te m 1) and

b o th Eysenck in s t r u m e n ts , th e Eysenck P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n to ry ( I te m 7)

and th e M audsley P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to ry ( I te m 10), a re c l a s s i f i e d a s

c l i n i c a l in s t r u m e n ts . Thus, th e y a re no t a p p r o p r i a t e f o r th e p opu la

t i o n u n d e r s tu d y . A n o th e r o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t s i n T a b le 1, t h e

C a l i f o r n i a P e r s o n a l i t y In v e n to r y ( I te m 5), i s a l s o f r e q u e n t l y used i n

c l i n i c a l s e t t i n g s , a l th o u g h i t was o r i g i n a l l y deve loped f o r a s s e s s

ment o f no rm a l , h e a l t h y a d u l t s .

Even though C a t t e l l ' s S ix te e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c to r Q u e s t io n n a i r e ,

l i s t e d as I te m 2 i n Tab le 1, i s h ig h ly r e g a rd e d as a p s y c h o lo g i c a l ly

based in s t r u m e n t , i t cou ld n o t be used because o f th e u n a v a i l a b i l i t y

o f q u a l i f i e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s . The Edwards P e r so n a l P r e fe r e n c e Schedule

( I t e m 3) and t h e S tu d y o f V a lu e s ( I t e m 9) w e re n o t c h o s e n f o r t h i s

s tu d y because t h e i r u se as r e s e a r c h in s t r u m e n ts has become m in im al .

The two in s t r u m e n ts used in t h i s s tu d y a re th e M yers -B r iggs Type

I n d i c a t o r and th e H e r rm a n n B r a i n D om inance I n s t r u m e n t . They w e r e

s e l e c t e d b ecau se b o th i n s t r u m e n ts were deve loped to a s s e s s th e p e r

s o n a l i t i e s o f no rm a l , h e a l th y a d u l t s and because o f th e e x i s t e n c e o f

a f a i r am oun t o f l i t e r a t u r e c o n c e r n i n g t h e i r u s e on v a r i o u s m ana

g e r i a l p o p u la t io n s . The n e x t s e c t i o n w i l l be devo ted to a d e t a i l e d

a n a l y s i s o f each o f th e s e two in s t r u m e n t s — t h e i r deve lopm en t, a p p l i

c a t i o n , v a l i d i t y , and i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n .


26

S e le c te d A ssessm ent In s t ru m e n ts

M yers-B riggs Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI)

Development o f th e In s t ru m e n t

The need f o r an i n s t r u m e n t to im plem ent th e Ju n g ia n concep t of

p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s was m et when B r i g g s and M yers (M y e rs , 1962)

deve loped th e MBTI, l i s t e d in T ab le 1 as I te m 11. The MBTI p ro v id e s

a means o f i d e n t i f y i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s r e l a t i v e p r e f e r e n c e f o r e i t h e r

e x t r a v e r s i o n o r i n t r o v e r s i o n i n h i s o r h e r a t t i t u d e tow ard l i f e , f o r

e i t h e r s e n s in g o r i n t u i t i o n as a means o f r e c e iv i n g in fo r m a t io n from

t h e w o r l d , f o r e i t h e r t h i n k i n g o r f e e l i n g a s a m eans o f d e c i s i o n

making, and f o r e i t h e r judgm ent o r p e r c e p t io n in becoming aware o f

th e o u t s i d e w or ld and d raw ing c o n c lu s io n s from t h i s aw areness . The

a r t i c u l a t i o n o f th e ju d g m e n t- p e rc e p t io n p r e f e r e n c e i s th e m ajor con

t r i b u t i o n m ade by B r i g g s and M yers t o t h e f i e l d o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l

ty p o lo g y (Myers & M cCaulley, 1985).

D e s c r i p t i o n o f th e MBTI Form G

Form 6 o f t h e MBTI c o n s i s t s o f a s e r i e s o f p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s

p h rase d i n s im p le , s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d , n o n th re a te n in g language . F o llow

i n g f o r c e d c h o i c e p r o t o c o l , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s e l e c t s one o f t h e two

p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s b e l i e v e d more n e a r l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f h i s o r h e r

own p o i n t o f v iew . The i n d i v i d u a l ' s s c o re s i n d i c a t e p r e f e re n c e fo r

one o f t h e tw o p o s s i b l e i n d i c e s i n e a c h o f t h e f o u r d i c h o t o m i e s i n


Ju n g 's th e o ry . The MBTI m ust be a d m in is t e r e d and scored by q u a l i f i e d

p e r s o n n e l .

MBTI Type D e s c r ip t io n

J u n g ' s p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e t h e o r y , a s e x te n d e d by B r i g g s and

Myers (Myers & M cCaulley, 1985), p o s t u l a t e s the e x i s t e n c e o f fou r d i

c h o to m ies w i th r e s p e c t to m en ta l a t t i t u d e and f u n c t io n : e x t r a v e r s io n

(E) v e r s u s i n t r o v e r s i o n ( I ) , s e n s in g (S) v e rs u s i n t u i t i o n (N), th in k

in g (T) v e r s u s f e e l i n g (F ) , and ju d g m e n t ( J ) v e r s u s p e r c e p t i o n (P).

The MBTI s c o r e s i n d i c a t e w h ic h f o u r o f t h e e i g h t i n d i c e s a r e p r e

f e r r e d by t h e i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a n t . The f o u r p r e f e r r e d i n d i c e s

t r a n s l a t e i n t o t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e (M y e rs , 1962). F o r e x a m p le ,

t h e MBTI t y p e d e s i g n a t e d IST J r e p r e s e n t s an i n d i v i d u a l who i s an

i n t r o v e r t ( I ) c o n c e n t r a t in g on th e i n n e r w orld o f id e a s ; who p r e f e r s

p r a c t i c a l , d o w n - t o - e a r t h , s e n s i n g (S) a p p ro a c h e s , l o g i c a l th in k in g

(T), and judgm ent (J ) based on f a c t u a l d a ta . In Table 2, a l l 16 MBTI

p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s h a v e b e e n o r g a n i z e d i n to th e fo rm at d e v is e d by

Myers and r e p r i n t e d by Myers and M cCaulley (1985, pp. 20-21).

V a l i d i t y o f th e MBTI C o n s t ru c t s

L anyon and G o o d s t e in (1 9 8 2 ) r e c o g n i z e d th e sound t h e o r e t i c a l

b a s e o f t h e MBTI, fo u n d e d on J u n g 's (1 9 2 1 / 1971) p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e

t h e o r y . C a r ly n (1 9 7 7 ) h a s show n t h a t t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e MBTI c o n

s t r u c t s com pares f a v o ra b ly w i th s i m i l a r p e r s o n a l i t y v a r i a b l e s m ea

s u r e d by o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t s . C a r l s o n and Levy (1973) p r o p o s e d t h a t

o b s e r v e d b e h a v i o r be u se d t o v a l i d a t e p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n s t r u c t s .


Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

28

Table 2

The 16 MBTI Types With Associated Characteristics

29

C haracteristics frequently a sso c ia te d with each type

S e n s in g T y p e s In tu itive T y p es

I5TJSerious qu>et. e a rn s u c c e s s by concentra tion a n a th o ro u g h n es s P ractica l, orderly, matter-of- lac t. logical, realistic, a n d d e p e n d a o 'e S e e to •! that every th ing is well o rg an iz ed Take responsibility M ake u p tneir ow n m inds a s to w nal sh o u ld o e a c c o m p lish e d a n d work tow ard <t steadily, re g a rd le s s o< p ro te s ts or distractions

ISFJQ uiet, fnendiy. resp o n sib ;e a n d conscientious Work devoted ly to m eet the* obligations te n d stat>M> to any projeet or g roup Thorough, p a instak ing , a c c u ra te Tr-eir in te rests a re usually no t technical C an b e pa tien t witn ne ce ssa ry d e ta J s Loyal, co nsidera te pe rcep tive, c o n c e rn e d witn now otner p e o p le leel

INFJS u c c ee d by p e rse v eran c e , ongm at ty a n d desire lo d o wnatever is n e e d e d or w anted Put tneir b e s t e llorts mlo tneir work Quietly lorcetul. conscien tious, c o n ce rn e d tor o thers R e sp e c te d for their firm principles Likely to be honored and followed tor their c te s t convictions a s lo how b e s t to se rve the com m on good

INTJUsually have ong 'na l m inds a n d g re a t drive for then ow n id e as an d p u rp o se s In fie 'd s tn a i a p p e a l to them, tney have a line pow er to o r g a n z e a job a n d carry it th rough with or w ithout ne ip 5kepticai. critical, in dep en den t, d e term ined , som etim es s tu b b o rn M u s tte a m to yie’d le s s im portant po in ts in o rd e r lo * m the m ost vnportant

ISTPC o d onlookers— qm ei. rese rv e d , obse rv ing and analyzing hie with d e ta c h e d curiosity a n d u n e x p ec ted f lash es ol original hum or Usually in te rested in c a u s e a n d e tfect. how a n d why m echan ica l th ings work, a n d m o rgan iz ing tac ts usm g log ical princip les.

ISFPRetiring, quietly friendly, sensitive, kmd m odest a bo u t tneir abilities Shun d isag reem en ts , d o not fo rce their o p m « n s or va 'u es o n o tn e rs U Suaty d o no t c a r e to read bu t a re often toyat followers O ften relaxed about ge tting th ings done, b e c a u se they enjoy the p rese n t m om ent a n d do no t w ant to spoil it by un d u e h a s te or e x e n o n

INFPPut) of en thusiasm s a n d loyalties, but se ld o m talk of th e se until they know you well Care about ■earning, ideas, la nguage a n d independent p ro jec ts ol their ow n Tend to undertake too m uch, then som ehow ge l it d o n e Fr<ndiy. bu t o tten too a b so rb e d « w hat iney a re dom g to b e soc iab le im ie co n ce rn e d with p o sse ss io n s or p h y sc a f Surrounom gs

INTPQ uiet a n d rese rved E specially enjoy theoretical or scientific pursu its Like solving pro b lem s with lo g c a n d analysis U sually in te res te d ma>nty m id e as , witn iitne Mung for pa rties o r sm all talk Tend lo have sharp ly de fined in te re s ts N eed c a re e rs w here so m e strong in te rest c a n b e u se d a n d usefu l

ESTPG ood a t on -th e -sp o t p rob lem solving D o not worry, en joy w hatever c o m e s a long Tend to ik e m e chan ica l th ings a n d sp o rts , with friends on tne Side A dap tab le , toleran t, generally conservative m values Dislike long ex p ia n a to n s A re b e s t with rea l tnrfigs th a t c a n b e w orked, h a n d led , taken apart, o r p u t toge ther

ESFPO utgoing easygo ing a c c ep tin g fnendiy enjoy every th ing a n d m ake th ings m ore tun for others b y then enjoym ent Like sp o n s a n d making irvngs h a p p e n Know what s gom g on a n d jc*n m e ag e rly Fm d rem em bering fac ts eas-er than m a s te n n g theories Are b e s t in v iu a to n s thai n e e d so u n d com m on se n s e a n d p rac tical at>My with p e o p le a s weu a s with th ings

ENFPWarmly enthusiastic , h-gh-spirited, a -g e n o u s . im aginative Able to do alm ost anything that in te rests them OuiCk witn a solution for any difl-cutty a n d rea d y 13 he lp anyone with a prob lem O tten rely u t their ability lo im provise m siead of prepa rm g in ad v an c e C an usually find com pelling rea so n s for w hatever they want

ENTPQu»ck. ingenious, g o o d a t m any th ings Stimulating com pany, alert a n d ou tsp o k e n May a rg u e lor fun on either Side o t a qu e stio n R esourceful m solving new a n d challeng ing p rob lem s, bu t m ay n e g lec t routine a ssig n m e n ts A pt to turn to o n e new in terest a fter ano ther SkiMul n finding logical re a so n s tor w hat tney w ant

ESTJPrachcaJ. rea listic . m atier-of-tact. with a natural h e ad lor b u s in e s s o r m e ch a rv c s Not in te rested n su b jec ts they s e e n o u se lor, bu t c a n apply them se lves w hen n e c e s sa ry U ke to o rgan ize a n d ru i activities M ay m ake go o d adm inistra tors, e spec ia lly ■> they rem e m o e r to consider o th e rs ' fee lings a n d po in ts of view

ESFJW arm -hearted , talkative, popular, conscien tious, bo rn co o p era to rs , active com m ittee m em bers N e e d harm ony an d m ay b e go o d a t creating it A lways dom g som ething n ice Icr so m eone WOtk b e s t with enco u rag e m en t a n d pra ise Main m e re s t ■$ m th ings m at anec ity a n d visibly atiec t p e o p le s lives

ENFJR esponsive a n d responsib le G enerally leel rea l c on ce rn for w hat o th jr s itvnk or w an . a n d try to handle things with d u e reg a rd lor the other pe rson s fee lings C an p rese n t a proposal or le ad a g roup d isc u ssio n with e a s e and lact Sociab le, popular, sy m p a m e tc Responsive to pra ise a n d criticism

ENTJHearty, frank, decisive, le a d e rs m activities U sually go o d in anything tha t req u ire s reasoning a n d intelligent ta * . su c h a s pub lic sp e ak in g Are usually well inform ed a n d enjoy a d d in g to their fund ol know ledge May so m e tim es a p p e a r m ore positrve a n d confident th a n their e x p e r ien c e «n a n a re a w arrants

N o te . R e p r o d u c e d b y s p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e P u b l i s h e r , C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P r e s s , I n c . , P a l o A l t o , CA 9 4 3 0 6 , f ro m M y e r s - B r ig g s T y p e I n d i c a t o r b y K a t h a r i n e B r i g g s / I s a b e l M y e r s , c o p y r i g h t 1977 . F u r t h e r r e p r o d u c t i o n i s p r o h i b i t e d w i t h o u t t h e P u b l i s h e r ' s c o n s e n t .

Introverts E

xtraverts

Follow ing t h i s gu id an ce , Carskadon (1979) i n v e s t i g a t e d th e d i f f e r e n t

k in d s o f b e h a v io r w hich, on th e b a s i s o f Ju n g ia n type th e o ry , would

be m a n i f e s te d by i n d iv i d u a l s who had been i d e n t i f i e d as i n t r o v e r t s o r

e x t r a v e r t s by t h e MBTI. He fo u n d t h a t p e o p l e , e v e n th o u g h u n

i n s t r u c t e d i n ty p e th e o ry , a r e c o n s i s t e n t l y a b le to i d e n t i f y o t h e r s

h a v in g th e same MBTI type as t h e i r own (Carskadon & Cook, 1982).

Herrmann B r a in Dominance In s t ru m e n t (HBDI)

Development o f th e In s t ru m e n t

The HBDI was d e v e lo p e d by H e r rm a n n (1981 ) t o p r o d u c e a m e t a

p h o r ic model o f th e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e f e r e n c e f o r one o r more o f fo u r

ways o f t h in k in g and b e h a v io r . These fo u r modes appear to c o rre sp o n d

g e n e r a l l y to th e m en ta l f u n c t io n s a s s o c i a t e d w i th th e l e f t and r i g h t

c e r e b r a l and l im b ic c o r t i c e s o f th e human b r a i n (S pe rry , 1964). The

c e r e b r a l l e f t c o r t e x (A q u a d ra n t) a p p e a rs to c o rre sp o n d to l o g i c a l ,

m a th e m a t ic a l , and h ig h ly s t r u c t u r e d th in k in g . T h is type o f th in k in g

i s m a n i f e s t e d by such p r o f e s s i o n a l s a s a c c o u n t a n t s , b a n k e r s , e n g i

n e e r s , and l a w y e r s . The lo w e r o r l i m b i c l e f t c o r t e x (B q u a d r a n t )

em braces th e t y p i c a l l y b u r e a u c r a t i c (Weber, 1947) m en ta l a c t i v i t i e s

o f p la n n in g , o r g a n iz in g , and c o n t r o l l i n g . F i r s t - l i n e s u p e r v i s o r s and

m id d le m anagers a r e r e p r e s e n te d in th e B q u a d ra n t . S o c ia l w o rk e rs ,

t e a c h e r s , n u r s e s , and th e c l e r g y tend to be r e p r e s e n te d in th e l im b ic

r i g h t c o r t e x (C q u a d r a n t ) . T h e se p r o f e s s i o n s a r e known f o r t h e i r

i n t e r p e r s o n a l , e m o t i o n a l , and s p i r i t u a l a t t r i b u t e s . The c e r e b r a l

r i g h t c o r t e x (D q u a d r a n t ) i s t h e d o m in a n t p r e f e r e n c e f o r c r e a t i v e ,


a r t i s t i c , and h o l i s t i c p eo p le whose ran k s a r e f i l l e d w i th i n v e n t o r s ,

e n t r e p r e n e u r s , r i s k - t a k e r s , and s t r a t e g i c p la n n e r s . They a re c h a ra c

t e r i z e d by i n t u i t i v e and a l t e r n a t i v e t h o u g h t p a t t e r n s l e a d i n g t o

r a d i c a l l y new deve lopm en ts in t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d o f endeavor.

D e s c r i p t i o n o f th e HBDI

The HBDI i s "an i n v e n t o r y o f 120 q u e s t i o n s , e a c h w i t h a d o m i

nance t i l t i n t o one o f t h e fo u r q u a d ra n ts r e p r e s e n t i n g b r a i n s p e c i a l

i z a t i o n " (Herrmann, 1981, p. 4). The q u e s t io n s h i g h l i g h t th e a d je c

t i v e s t h a t b e s t d e s c r i b e th e p a r t i c i p a n t ' s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a l s o

p ro v id e a s e l f - r a t i n g on th e p e rfo rm a n c e o f th e t a s k s r e q u i r e d by h i s

o r h e r employment. O ther q u e s t i o n s a r e r e l a t e d to e d u c a t io n a l l e v e l ,

o c c u p a t i o n , and h o b b i e s , a s w e l l a s t h e p h y s i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s o f

h an d ed n ess , ene rgy l e v e l , and s u s c e p t i b i l i t y to m o tion s ic k n e s s . The

p h ra s e o lo g y o f th e q u e s t io n s has been c a r e f u l l y c o n s id e re d th ro u g h 21

r e v i s i o n s i n o r d e r t h a t th e a p p r o p r i a t e in fo r m a t io n may be o b ta in e d

to c o m p le te th e i n d i v i d u a l ' s b r a i n dominance p r o f i l e . L ike t h e MBTI,

t h e HBDI m ust be a d m in i s t e r e d and sc o re d by q u a l i f i e d p e rso n n e l .

HBDI P r o f i l e D e s c r i p t i o n

HBDI f in d in g s may be g raphed as a q u a d r i l a t e r a l , th e c o rn e r s o f

w h ic h i n d i c a t e t h e l e v e l o f a c t i v i t y w i t h i n e a c h o f t h e f o u r HBDI

q u a d r a n t s , as i l l u s t r a t e d i n F ig u re 1. The s in g l e dominance p r o f i l e s

o f a c c o u n t a n t s (A q u a d r a n t ) , m id d l e m a n a g e rs (B q u a d r a n t ) , s o c i a l

w o rk e rs (C q u a d ra n t ) , and e n t r e p r e n e u r s (D q a a d ra n t ) a re p r e s e n te d i n

F ig u re 1. A lthough th e dom inant q u a d ra n t r e f l e c t s th e i n d i v i d u a l ' s


32

0 . 3 CEREBRAL LEFT logoi Analyzer Mathematical Technical Problem Solver

J331y \ 2 2 2 2 / \ s1221>□ w i Q i r a Q r a

CEREBRAL

LEFTMODE

O l 7 ConwoUed Ccnservsiive Planner Organization Adminisirairve LOWER

□ L 8 LEFT

CEREBRA L * 0 RIGHTCreairve

Synthesizer Ariiabe Holistic _

ConcepluaUzer r ^ I |

V '

RIGHTMODE

r s D

rb O

Af s>.1 " 0C> 0N% c?

DOMINANCE. PROFILE

LIMBIC

Inleipoaonal c 7 r ~ | Emotional M' L- 1

Spiritual Talker

LOWER RIGHT R 8 D

r i q D ,

F ig u re 1. Herrmann B ra in Dominance In s t ru m e n t P r o f i l e s .From H e rrm a n n B r a in Dominance In s t ru m e n t (HBDI) C e r t i f i c a t i o n W o rk sh o p M a t e r i a l s ( u n n u m b e r e d h a n d o u t ) b y N. Herrmann, 1987, Lake Lure , NC: Author.

N o te . R e p r o d u c e d b y s p e c i a l p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e p u b l i s h e r , N. Herrmann, B ra in Books, Lake L ure , NC.


most p r e f e r r e d way o f t h in k in g , t h a t i n d iv id u a l may have a second, o r

e v e n a t h i r d , d o m in a n t mode. F o r e x a m p l e , e n g i n e e r s , a r c h i t e c t s ,

i n v e n t o r s , and e n t r e p r e n e u r s a re o f t e n dom inant in b o th th e A and D

q u a d r a n t s . T h ese i n d i v i d u a l s c o m b in e t h e i r l o g i c a l , m a t h e m a t i c a l

p r e f e r e n c e s w i th t h e i r c r e a t i v e , i n t u i t i v e , and h o l i s t i c m en ta l func

t i o n s in o rd e r to develop new b u s in e s s e s o r new v e n tu re s .

V a l i d i t y o f th e HBDI C o n s t ru c t s

Bunderson 's (1988) e x te n s iv e v a l i d a t i o n s tu d y o f the HBDI i n t e

g r a t e d th e r e s u l t s o f e a r l i e r s t u d i e s , th e m ost im p o r ta n t o f which i s

Ho's (1988) d o c to r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , which a d d re s se d th e d im e n s io n a l i t y

and d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power o f t h i s i n s t r u m e n t . Ho used f a c t o r a n a l y s i s

t o a n a l y z e HBDI s c o r e s f ro m a s a m p le o f 5 ,619 men and 2 ,370 women

(1* = 7,989) from th e Herrmann d a ta bank.

T a b l e 3 p r e s e n t s t h e HBDI m ean s c o r e s f o r H o 's s a m p l e

( B u n d e r s o n , 1988) . T hese d a t a show t h a t men a c h ie v e d h i g h e r mean

s c o re s f o r l e f t - b r a i n dom inance, w h i le women were s t r o n g e r in r i g h t

b r a i n dom inance. The mean s c o re d i f f e r e n c e s f o r men and women were

v e r y l a r g e f o r Q u a d r a n ts A and C. Men s c o r e d s u b s t a n t i a l l y h i g h e r

t h a n women in Q u a d ra n t A, w h i l e t h e wom en's mean in Q u a d ra n t C

g r e a t l y exceeded t h a t o f th e men. Mean s c o re s fo r men and women were

e s s e n t i a l l y th e same in Q uadrants B and D.

T a b le 4 p r e s e n t s t h e c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x o f t h e HBDI q u a d r a n t

m ean s c o r e s f o r Ho's s a m p le ( B u n d e r s o n , 1988). The tw o l e f t q u a d

r a n t s (A and B) were no t c o r r e l a t e d , w hereas the two r i g h t q u a d ra n ts

(C and D) w e re m o d e r a t e l y c o r r e l a t e d . The o v e r a l l c o r r e l a t i o n


34

Table 3

HBDI Mean S co res f o r a Sample o f 7 ,989 Men and Women From Che Herrmann Data Bank

HBDI mean scores

HBDI metaphor

(NMen

= 5,619) (NWomen= 2,370) (N

Total = 7,989)

Left hemisphereA na ly tica l , mathematical Sequential time focus

95.2 81.0 91.0

Right hemisphere S p a t ia l , h o l i s t i c Simultaneous time focus

86.0 102.3 91.0

Quadrant AMathematical, a n a ly t ic a l , lo g ic a l Sequential time o r ie n ta t io n

75.1 53.3 68.6

Quadrant BOrganized, planned, r i s k avoidant P resent o rien ted

68.1 68.8 68.3

Quadrant CBnotional, in te rp e rso n a l , persuasive Past o r ien ted

55.5 74.9 61.2

Quadrant DI n tu i t i v e , innovative, en trep ren eu ria l Future o r ien ted

73.9 79.1 75.5

Note. From "The V a l id a t io n o f th e Herrmann B ra in Dominance I n s t r u m e n t" by C. V. B u n d e r s o n , 1988. In N. H e r rm a n n , The C r e a t i v e B r a i n ( T a b le s A - l t h r o u g h A -5 , pp. 3 4 8 - 3 4 9 ) . Lake L u r e , NC: B r a i n Books.

R e p ro d u c e d with p e rm iss ion of th e copyright ow ner. F u r th e r reproduction prohibited without perm iss ion .

35

Table 4

C o r r e l a t i o n M a tr ix o f HBDI Quadrant Scores f o r a Sample o f 7,989 Men and Women

From th e Herrmann Data Bank

Quadrant A B C D

A 1.00

B .08 l.CO

C - .7 7 - .2 0 1.00

D - .5 3 - .6 8 .38 1.00

L e f t - r i g h t hem isphere c o r r e l a t i o n = - .9 1

Note. From "The V a l id a t io n o f th e Herrmann B ra in Dominance I n s t r u m e n t" b y C. V. B u n d e r s o n , 1988. In N. H e r rm a n n , The C r e a t i v e B r a i n (T ab le A-17, p. 3 73 ) . Lake L u r e , NC: B r a i n Books.

b e tw een th e l e f t and r i g h t h e m isp h e re s was found to be - .91 , a f i n d

ing which im p l i e s t h a t doub le dominance i s much more l i k e l y to occur

w i t h i n h e m isp h e re (e .g ., A and B o r C and D) th a n a c ro s s hem isp h e res

( e . g . , A and D o r B and C). T h i s f i n d i n g i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e

n e g a t iv e c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r th e A and D q u a d ra n ts (- .54 ) and f o r the B

and C q u a d r a n t s ( - . 2 0 ) . T hese n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s i m p ly t h a t

i n d i v i d u a l s a r e u n l i k e l y t o be d o u b le d o m in a n t i n t h e A and D q u a d

r a n t s o r t h e B and C q u a d r a n t s . F o r t h i s s a m p le , a n . i n d i v i d u a l

d o m in a n t i n t h e A q u a d r a n t ( m a t h e m a t i c a l and l o g i c a l ) i s v e r y u n

l i k e l y t o a l s o be dom inan t in th e C q u a d ra n t ( i n t e r p e r s o n a l , p e r s u a

s iv e ) s in c e s c o re s f o r th e s e two q u a d ra n ts were n e g a t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d

a t - . 7 7 . S i m i l a r l y , t h e n e g a t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f t h e B and D


q u a d ra n ts (- .68 ) r e f l e c t s th e v e ry low l i k e l i h o o d t h a t doub le domi

n a n c e i n p l a n n e d r i s k a v o id a n c e (3) and e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l i n n o v a t i o n

(D) w i l l occu r i n the same in d iv i d u a l .

B u n d e r s o n (1 9 8 8 ) c o n c lu d e d t h a t t h e c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y o f t h e

HBDI had been con firm ed . In a d d i t i o n , he em phasized the v a lu e o f th e

H e r rm a n n c o n c e p t o f t h e " w h o l e - b r a i n e d . . . a s a key f o r p e r s o n a l

g r o w th " (p . 31) b e c a u s e e a c h i n d i v i d u a l ' s d o m in a n c e q u a d r a n t i s an

i n d i c a t i o n o f p r e f e r e n c e , r a t h e r t h a n o f f i x e d d e t e r m i n a t i o n , and

t h e r e f o r e can be re s p o n s iv e to change. F u r th e rm o re , Bunderson p ro

p o s e d t h a t an " i n d i v i d u a l c a n b e n e f i t f ro m r e c o g n i z i n g a r e a s o f

avo id a n c e " (p. 32) and can th e n c o n s c io u s ly m odify h i s o r h e r behav

i o r by p r a c t i c i n g " l e s s p r e d i c t a b l e and l e s s s t e r e o t y p e d m odes o f

t h o u g h t , d e p e n d in g upon t h e s i t u a t i o n " (p. 32 ) . The i n d i v i d u a l c a n

th u s deve lop f a c i l i t y w i th p r e v i o u s ly unaccustomed s t r e n g t h s , such as

i n t e r p e r s o n a l n e g o t i a t i o n s k i l l s .

Using th e MBTI in O r g a n iz a t io n a l S e t t i n g s

S tu d ie s o f MBTI Manager Types

In h i s a s se s sm e n t o f th e MBTI f o r th e N in th M ental M easurements

Yearbook, DeVito (1985) recommended t h a t th e p s y c h o lo g ic a l community

r e c o g n iz e th e v a lu e o f t h i s i n s t r u m e n t fo r s i t u a t i o n s in which p e r

so n a l i n t e r a c t i o n s , p e rs o n n e l c o u n s e l in g , team b u i ld in g , and o r g a n i

z a t i o n a l developm ent were m ajo r concerns .

The f o l lo w in g fo u r s t u d i e s have r e p o r t e d th e r e s u l t s o f a p p ly in g

t h e MBTI t o s p e c i f i c m an a g e m e n t p o p u l a t i o n s . N i d i f f e r (1 9 8 4 )


i d e n t i f i e d th e MBTI ty p es f o r program m anagers. DeWald (1986/1987)

a n a ly z e d th e MBTI ty p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r m atched p a i r s o f m i l i t a r y

and c i v i l i a n army e x e c u t iv e s d i r e c t i n g a d e fe n s e i n s t a l l a t i o n . Myers

and M cCaulley (1985) r e p o r t e d th e MBTI ty p es f o r a sample o f managers

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n g e n e ra l b u s in e s s a s s ig n m e n ts . P ic k e r in g (1986)

d e te rm in e d th e MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r a p o p u la t io n o f s e n io r govern

m en t e x e c u t i v e s . The p e r c e n t a g e s o f e a c h o f t h e MBTI t h i n k i n g -

j u d g i n g (T J) t y p e s , t o t a l T J s , and MBTI e l e m e n t s f o r e a c h o f t h e s e

fo u r s tu d i e s a re p r e s e n te d in Tab le 5.

Program Manager MBTI Types

The purpose o f N i d i f f e r ' s (1984) s tu d y was to i d e n t i f y th e MBTI

ty p e s l i k e l y to be m a n i f e s te d by program m anagers. N i d i f f e r ' s a n a ly

s i s o f t h r e e p r o g ra m m a n a g e r c l a s s e s (1982 t o 1984) i n d i c a t e d t h a t

60% o f t h e s e f u t u r e PMs w ou ld m a n i f e s t o n l y 4 o f t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s .

T h e s e 4 t y p e s a r e IS T J , ESTJ, INTJ, and ENTJ. They h a v e b e e n c a l l e d

" th e l o g i c a l d e c i s i o n m akers" (p. 36) by Myers and McCaulley (1985),

who h a v e d e s i g n a t e d t h e s e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs) as " tough-m inded ,

e x e c u t iv e , a n a l y t i c a l , and i n s t r u m e n ta l l e a d e r s " (p. 36).

The s e n s in g t h in k i n g - j u d g e r s (STJs), a p p ro x im a te ly 40% o f th e PM

s a m p l e , c o u ld be e x p e c t e d t o be r e s p o n s i v e t o p r o p o s a l s p h r a s e d i n

te rm s o f f a c t s , l o g i c , and a n a l y s i s , th e r e s u l t s o f which would show

m e a s u r a b l e b e n e f i t t o t h e PM's o r g a n i z a t i o n . The 20% o f PMs who

m ig h t be i n t u i t i v e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (NTJs) would a l s o be f a v o ra b ly

i n c l i n e d tow ard l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b e n e f i t s . T h e ir

a d d i t i o n a l s t r e n g t h l i e s i n t h e i r i n t u i t i v e r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e


38Table 5

Percentages o f MBTI Thinking-Judging Types and MBTI Elements in Selected Managerial Populations

MBTItype

1982-1984 DSMC c la s s e s 8

N - 595

M il i ta ry and c i v i l i a n army

executives*’N - 60

Managers and a d m in is t ra to rs0

N - 7,463

Federal execu tives4*

N - 1,394

ISTJ 27.22 30.02 14.92 26.32

ESTJ 13.3 23.3 17.0 12.3

INTJ 11.1 10.0 5.6 14.9

ENTJ 8 .4 16.7 10.1 10.6

T o ta l TJs 60.02 80.02 47.62 64.12

MBTIelement

E 37.52 51.72 56.72 37.02

I 62.5 48.3 43.3 63.0

S 59.2 61.7 56.3 51.1

N 40.8 38.3 43.7 48.9

T 83.7 98.3 61.6 86.4

F 16.3 1.7 38.4 13.6

J 69.4 81.7 69.3 71.9

P 30.6 18.3 30.7 28.1

aFrom "The P e rs o n a l i ty F ac to r: Software Technology and the 'Thinking S ty le s 'o f Program Managers" by R. E. N id i f fe r , 1984, Program Manager, 13(4), 10-18.

^From "Executive P e rs o n a l i ty Types: A Comparison of M i l i t a ry and C iv i l i a nL ea d e rs in a S in g le O rg a n iz a t io n " by J . E. DeWald, 1987, D i s s e r t a t i o n Abs t r a c t s I n t e r n a t io n a l , 47, 2954A.

c From Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs TypeI n d i c a t o r by I . B. Myers & M. H. M cC aulley , 1985, P a lo A l to , CA: C o n s u l t in gP s y c h o lo g is t s P ress.

^Frora "Managers: Federal Executives" by R. T. P ickering in Myers-Briggs TypeI n d i c a t o r : A t l a s o f Type T ab le s by C. P. M acdaid , M. H. M cCaulley, & R. IKainz, 1986, G a in e sv i l le , FL: Center for A pplica tions o f Psychological Type.


p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r g row th , p r o g r e s s , and expansion which may r e s u l t

from th e id e a s p r e s e n te d to them. These NTJs cou ld be ex p ec ted to be

m o re r e c e p t i v e t o t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f new m e th o d s and p r o c e d u r e s ,

e s p e c i a l l y when combined w i t h d e m o n s t ra te d p o t e n t i a l b e n e f i t s t o th e

o r g a n i z a t i o n .

P a i r e d M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n E x e c u t iv e s

DeWald (1986/1987) a d m in i s t e r e d th e MBTI to 30 matched p a i r s o f

m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n army e x e c u t iv e s in a l a r g e d e fe n se i n s t a l l a

t i o n . The m a j o r i t y o f th e o f f i c e r s w ere f u l l c o lo n e l s , w h i le t h e i r

m atched c i v i l i a n d e p u t i e s h e ld th e c i v i l s e r v i c e g rade o f GM-15. The

d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e MBTI t y p e s and t h e t y p e p r o c e s s e s f o r t h e tw o

k in d s o f e x e c u t iv e s w ere compared. No d i f f e r e n c e was found be tw een

th e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r th e m i l i t a r y p a r t i c i p a n t s and th o se f o r t h e i r

c i v i l i a n c o u n t e r p a r t s , a l t h o u g h an i d e n t i f i a b l e d i f f e r e n c e in MBTI

ty p e had b e e n h y p o t h e s i z e d . The p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e m i l i t a r y e x e c u

t i v e s who were t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs) was i d e n t i c a l to t h a t f o r th e

c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s a t 80%. As c a n be s e e n i n T a b le 5, t h e t y p e

d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e DeWald s t u d y r o u g h l y p a r a l l e l e d t h a t i n t h e

N i d i f f e r (1S84) s t u d y . T h e se f i n d i n g s s u p p o r t t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t

t h e g r e a t m a j o r i t y o f m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s i n p r o g ra m

management a s s ig n m e n ts w i l l be t h in k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs).

MBTI Types o f Managers and A d m in is t r a to r s

Myers and M cCaulley (1985) p u b l is h e d th e MBTI ty p e d i s t r i b u t i o n

o f a sam ple o f m anagers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s (If = 7,463) from th e d a t a


bank m a in ta in e d by th e C en te r f o r A p p l i c a t io n s o f P sy c h o lo g ic a l Type.

The sam ple c o m prised 56% fem a le s and 44% m ales , th e m a j o r i t y o f whom

w e re i n t h e 18 t o 40 age g r o u p . A bout one t h i r d had e a r n e d c o l l e g e

d e g re e s . A l l w ere employed in g e n e ra l b u s in e s s a s s ig n m e n ts . Each o f

th e 16 MBTI ty p es was r e p r e s e n t e d among th e m anagers in t h i s sam ple ,

i n c lu d in g r e l a t i v e l y h ig h p e rc e n ta g e s o f i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) a t 44%, and

f e e l i n g , c a r in g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) a t 38%. T h is i s th e on ly c i t e d MBTI

s t u d y w h e re t h e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) d i d n o t c o n s t i t u t e a c l e a r

m a j o r i t y , b u t o n l y 48% o f t h e g r o u p , a s c a n be s e e n i n T a b le 5. The

s m a l l e r p e rc e n ta g e o f TJs can p ro b a b ly be e x p la in e d by th e f a c t t h a t

t h i s sam ple was 56% fem a le . In W estern c u l t u r e s , more fem a les th a n

m ales ten d to be i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and f e e l i n g , c a r in g in d iv i d u a l s (Fs)

(A g o r , 1986).

F e d e ra l E x e c u t iv e MBTI Types

The MBTI ty p e s o f s e n io r f e d e r a l c i v i l i a n e x e c u t iv e s (it = 1,394)

w e re a n a l y z e d by P i c k e r i n g (1 9 8 6 ) . T h e se e x e c u t i v e s w e r e 90% m a le

and 10% fem ale . N i n e ty - s ix p e rc e n t w ere c o l l e g e - e d u c a t e d , and 75% o f

t h e s e had p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g in law , b u s in e s s , p h y s ic a l s c ie n c e ,

o r e n g i n e e r i n g . F e d e r a l s e r v i c e t i m e r a n g e d f ro m 10 t o 30 y e a r s ,

i n c l u d i n g s u p e r v i s o r y e x p e r i e n c e . Age r a n g e d f rom 35 t o 55 y e a r s .

T h i s p o p u l a t i o n c a n be a s su m e d t o i n c l u d e n o t o n l y c i v i l s e r v i c e

g r a d e s o f GM-15, b u t a l s o m em bers o f t h e s e n i o r e x e c u t i v e s e r v i c e ,

th e h i g h e s t s a l a r i e d f e d e r a l l y g raded em ployees.

S i x ty - f o u r p e rc e n t o f t h i s sa m p le w e re t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) .

E ach o f t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s was r e p r e s e n t e d . As c a n be s e e n f rom


Tab le 5, t h e t h i n k e r s (Ts) p redom ina te d a t 86%, w h i l e the p e rc e n ta g e

o f f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) was nom ina l a t 14%. The number o f s ens

i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (S s ) a t 51% was v e r y c l o s e t o t h e num ber o f i n t u i

t i v e s (Ns) a t 49%. The r e l a t i v e l y h i g h n u m b er o f i n t u i t i v e s g i v e s

s u p p o r t t o A g o r ' s (1986) c o n t e n t i o n t h a t m ore i n t u i t i v e s w i l l be

found among top e x e c u t i v e s , as compared to m id d le managers , because

o f t h e i n t u i t i v e ' s i n n o v a t i v e a b i l i t y t o a d j u s t t o c h a n g i n g c o n d i

t i o n s . The p e r c e n ta g e o f i n t u i t i v e s among t h e t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (26%

NTJs) i n t h i s sample i s s i m i l a r to t h o se found by N i d i f f e r (1984) and

DeWald (1986/1987) .

I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f the MBTI With t h e HBDI

S tudy o f I n d u s t r y P r o f e s s i o n a l s

J a m e s (19 8 6 ) r e p o r t e d p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s o f a l o n g i t u d i n a l

s t u d y o f a s p e c i a l p o p u l a t i o n o f b a n k e rs and chem ica l i n d u s t r y p r o

f e s s i o n a l s (1J = 90). Each o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been a d m i n i s t e r e d

b o th t h e MBTI and th e HBDI so t h a t each i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e f e r e n c e s were

known i n t e r m s o f bo th i n s t r u m e n t s . James s e l e c t e d o n ly t hose i n d i

v i d u a l s w i t h s t r o n g p r e f e r e n c e s f o r t h e i r MBTI f u n c t i o n a l e l e m e n t s

(E v s . I , S v s . N, T v s . F, and J v s . P) and s t r o n g p r e f e r e n c e s f o r

one o r more o f t h e HBDI q u a d ra n t s .

As can be seen from Table 6, James (1986) found t h a t t h e s t r o n g

MBTI e x t r a v e r t was m o s t f r e q u e n t l y d o m i n a n t i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t B,

a l t h o u g h Q u a d r a n t s A and D w e r e o n l y s l i g h t l y l e s s f r e q u e n t . The

MBTI e l e m e n t s o f i n t r o v e r s i o n ( I ) , s e n s i n g (S ) , t h i n k i n g (T), and


42

Table 6

R e l a t i o n s h i p o f S t rong MBTI and S trong HBDI P r e f e r e n c e s i n a Sample o f 90 Bankers and Chemical

I n d u s t r y P r o f e s s i o n a l s

MBTIelement

Number with

s trong preference

for MBTI element

Strong dominance in HBDI quadrant

A B C D

N % N % N % N %

E 20 12 60.0 14 70.0 8 40.0 12 60.0

I 27 22 81.5 24 88.9 5 18.5 7 25.9

S 45 37 82.2 43 95.6 12 26.7 7 15.6

N 18 8 44.4 6 33.3 10 55.6 18 100.0

T 47 37 78.7 40 85.1 12 25.5 24 51.1

F 10 5 50.0 8 80.0 8 80.0 3 30.0

J 51 44 86.3 47 92.2 11 21.6 15 29.4

P 10 4 40.0 3 30.0 5 50.0 9 90.0

Note. From "The Herrmann, M yers -Br ig gs Connect ion" by U. James , 1986, I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a in Dominance Review, J3(2), 32-35.

N o t e . The sum o f t h e q u a d r a n t c o u n t s f a a row may e x c e e d t h e t o t a l number o f i n d i v i d u a l s f o r t h a t row because some i n d i v i d u a l s d i s p l a y m u l t i p l e dominance. S i m i l a r l y , the row p e r c e n t s may n o t sum t o 100%.


j u d g in g (J) showed h i g h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n bo th the A and B HBDI quad

r a n t s ( i . e . , d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e i n A and B). About 70% o f t h e IS T J s

were double dominan t on t h e HBDI A and B q u a d ra n t s . The m a j o r i t y o f

t h e MBTI i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps ) w e re a s s o c i a t e d w i t h

th e HBDI Quadrant D. The MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) showed h i g h

e s t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t h e HBDI C q u a d r a n t , as expe c te d , bu t t ended to

show d o m i n a n c e i n t h e B q u a d r a n t a s w e l l , r e s u l t i n g i n p r o b a b l e

doub le dominance i n b o t h t h e B and C q u a d r a n t s .

Study o f H e a l t h Care P r o f e s s i o n a l s

Ford (1988a) conduc ted an a n a l y s i s o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p be tween

the MBTI and t h e HBDI on a sample o f 51 fe m a le s tu d e n t o c c u p a t i o n a l

t h e r a p i s t s . The f o u r most r e p r e s e n t a t i v e MBTI types were ENFJ, ESTJ,

ENFP, and INFP. T h e s e f o u r t y p e s a c c o u n t e d f o r 61% o f t h e s a m p l e .

According t o type t h e o r y , t h e MBTI t h i n k i n g - f e e l i n g (TF) d ichotomy i s

a m e a s u r e o f j u d g m e n t and t h e s e n s i n g - i n t u i t i o n (SN) s c a l e i s a

measure o f p e r c e p t i o n . Thus, Ford i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f

t h e f o u r MBTI f u n c t i o n s (S, N, T, and F) and t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g

f u n c t i o n a l groups (ST, SF, NT, and NF) t o HBDI h e m i s p h e r i c dominance.

Fo rd 's r e s u l t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Table 7 and summarized i n Table 8.

As c a n be s e e n f r o m T a b l e 8 , F o r d ( 1 9 8 8 a ) fou n d t h a t i n t u i t i o n

(N), f e e l i n g (F ) , a n d , t o a l e s s e r e x t e n t , t h i n k i n g (T) a p p e a r t o be

a l i g n e d w i t h t h e r i g h t h e m is p h e re , w h i l e s e n s i n g (S) i s somewhat more

s t r o n g l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the l e f t hemisphere . The NF c om bina t ion , i n

p a r t i c u l a r , i s s t r o n g l y o r i e n t e d to t h e r i g h t h e m is p h e re , w i t h more

th an t w i c e as many dominan t i n t h e r i g h t than i n the l e f t and w i t h 14


44

Table 7

HBDI P r e f e r e n c e s f o r the Most F re quen t MBTI Types and S e l e c t e d MBTI E lem en ts and Groups Among

51 Female S tude n t O c c u p a t io n a l T h e r a p i s t s

MBTI HBDI dominance

Type N %

L e f themisphe re

A B AB ABCD BC BCD

Righthemisphere

C D CD

ENFJ 10 19 .6 1 9

ESTJ 8 15.7 2 1 1 4

ENFP 7 13.7 1 1 2 3

INFP 6 11 .8 1 1 1 1 2

Element A B AB ABC ABCD BC BD ACD BCD C D CD

S 20 39 .2 3 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 4

N 31 6 0 .8 1 1 2 1 3 5 1 2 15

T 16 25 .0 2 1 1 1 6 5

F 35 68 .6 1 2 4 2 6 1 1 1 1 2 14

Group A B AB ABC ABCD BC BD ACD BCD c D CD

ST 11 21 .6 2 1 1 1 2 4

SF 9 17 .6 1 2 1 3 1 1

NF 26 51 .0 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 2 14

NT 5 9 .8 4 1

N o t e . D a ta a r e f rom " C o g n i t i v e P r e f e r e n c e s and P e r s o n a l i t y Type: F u r t h e r E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " by L. J . F o r d , 1988, I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a in Dominance Review, 5(2) , 15-21.


45

Table 8

HBDI Hemispheric P r e f e r e n c e s f o r the Most Frequen t MBTI Types and S e l e c t e d MBTI Elements and Groups

Among 51 Female S tude n t O ccupa t iona l T h e r a p i s t s

MBTI HBDI dominance

Type N %

L e f themisphere

N %

Righthemisphere

N %

ENFJ 10 19.6 1 10.0 9 90.0

ESTJ 8 15 .7 4 50.0 5 62.5

ENFP 7 13.7 1 14.3 7 100.0

INFP 6 11 .8 4 66.7 4 66.7

Element

S 20 39 .2 15 75.0 13 65.0

N 31 60 .8 13 41 .9 27 87.1

T 16 25 .0 10 62.5 12 75.0

F 35 68 .6 18 51 .4 28 80.0

Group

ST 11 21 .6 7 63.6 8 72.7

SF 9 17 .6 9 100.0 6 66.7

NF 26 51 .0 9 34.6 22 84.6

NT 5 9 .8 4 80 .0 5 100.0

N o t e . D a t a a r e f ro m " C o g n i t i v e P r e f e r e n c e s and P e r s o n a l i t y Type: F u r t h e r E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " by L. J . F o r d , 1988 I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a in Dominance Review, 5(2) , 15-21.

N o t e . The l e f t and r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e c o u n t s may e x c e e d t h e t o t a l n u m b e r o f i n d i v i d u a l s f o r e a c h row b e c a u s e some i n d i v i d u a l s a r e c r o s s - h e m i s p h e r i c d o u b l e d o m i n a n t . S i m i l a r l y , t h e l e f t and r i g h t h e m isphe re p e r c e n ta g e s may n o t sum t o 100%.


o f t h e 26 NFs d o u b l e d o m i n a n t i n Q u a d r a n t s C and D. The m a j o r i t y

(58%) o f p a r t i c i p a n t s who were among the f o u r most r e p r e s e n t e d MBTI

ty p e s showed double dominance i n the HBDI C and'D q u a d ra n t s .

On t h e b a s i s o f h e r r e s e a r c h , F o rd (1988a ) c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e

MBTI and the HBDI measure s i m i l a r phenomena. She has s ugges ted th e

p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e two m o d e l s m i g h t be i n t e g r a t e d t o t h e e x t e n t

t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y i t s e l f c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a p a r t o f c o g n i t i o n ,

r a t h e r t h a n a s e p a r a t e p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n c e p t . F o r d h a s f u r t h e r

s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e HBDI q ua d ra n t s m ig h t be s u b t i t l e d w i t h MBTI func

t i o n a l e l e m e n t s .

Physiological Basis for the MBTI

Newman's (1984/1985) d o c t o r a l r e s e a r c h c o n s i s t e d o f a s tu d y o f

the c o r r e l a t i o n o f e l e c t r o e n c e p h a l o g r a p h i c (EEG) a c t i v a t i o n o f t h e

b r a i n ' s c o r t i c e s w i t h m e n ta l a c t i v i t y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r MBTI c o g n i t i v e

f u n c t i o n s . His s u b j e c t s c o n s i s t e d o f 27 male r i g h t - h a n d e d p a r t i c i

p a n t s , i n c l u d i n g 9 p r a c t i c i n g a t t o r n e y s and 18 c e ram ic a r t i s t s . The

MBTI t y p e t a b l e f o r t h i s g r o u p i s shown i n T a b l e 9. The MBTI t y p e s

most r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f the 27 p a r t i c i p a n t s were INTJ and INFP.

EEG d a t a were r e c o r d e d from s c a l p e l e c t r o d e s p l a c e d a t c e n t r a l ,

p a r i e t a l , and t em p o ra l e x t e r n a l l o c a t i o n s on the l e f t and r i g h t s i d e s

o f each p a r t i c i p a n t ' s head wh i le he per fo rmed a s e t o f t a s k s . These

t a s k s c o n s i s t e d o f a n e u t r a l t a s k ( a t t e n t i o n to b r e a t h i n g ) used as a

base r e f e r e n c e , f o l l o w e d by f i v e c o g n i t i v e t a s k s : two v e r b a l (copy

ing t e x t and w r i t i n g - f r o m - m e m o ry ) ; two s p a t i a l ( m i r r o r d raw ing and

b l o c k d e s i g n ) ; and one t e s t , a w o r d - s h a p e - s o r t i n g t e s t (WSST),


47Table 9

MBTI Type Tab le f o r a Sample o f 27 Male A t t o rn e y s and Ceramic A r t i s t s

SENSING TYPES INTUITIVE TYPESwith THINKING with FEELING with FEELING with THINKING

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJN = 2 %= 7 .4

N = 1 %= 3 .7

N = 1 %= 3.7

N = 5 % = 18.5

ISTP ISFP INFP INTPu - 0 % = 0 . 0

N = 0 % = 0 . 0

N = 5 % = 18 .5

N = 4 % a 14 . 8

ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTPN = 0 % = 0 . 0

N = 1 % = 3 .7

N = *% = 14 .8

N = 3

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJN = 0 %= 0 . 0

N * 0 %« 0 . 0

N * 1 3 .7

N > 0% a 0 . 0

Coozo

o<m3D(/»

302

<

30nmTJ

mX

><

coozo

E 9 33 .31 18 66 .7

S 4 14 .8N 23 8 5 .2

T 14 51 .9F 13 48 .1

J 10 37 .0P 17 6 3 .0

1 J 9 33 .31 P 9 3 3 .3EP 8 2 9 .6EJ 1 3 .7

ST 2 7 . 4SF 2 7 . 4NF 11 4 0 .7NT 12 4 4 .4

SJ 3 11.1SP 1 3 .7NP 16 59 .3NJ 7 2 5 .9

TJ 7 2 5 .9TP 7 2 5 .9FP 10 37 .0FJ 3 11 .1

1 N 15 55 .6EN 8 2 9 .61 S 3 11 .1ES 1 3 .7

Note. Data a r e f rom "Hemisphere S p e c i a l i z a t i o n and J u n g ia n Typology: E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " (p. 107 , T a b l e 5, m o d i f i e d ) by J . B. Newman, 1985, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 46, 761B-762B.

R e p ro d u c e d with p e rm iss ion of th e copyrigh t ow ner. F u r th e r rep roduction prohibited w ithout perm iss ion .

48

s p e c i a l l y d e s i g n e d f o r Newman's ( 1 9 8 4 / 1 9 8 5 ) r e s e a r c h , t o i n d i c a t e

e i t h e r a v e r b a l o r a s p a t i a l approach to problem s o lv i n g .

The mean a lp h a asymmetry r a t i o s ( r i g h t over l e f t ) f o r the tempo

r a l l o b e s a r e shown i n Table 10. As can be seen , t h e r e i s a c o n s i s t

e n t d i r e c t i o n o f e f f e c t f o r a l l t a s k s f o r bo th t h e SN and TF p r e f e r

e n c e s —h i g h e r r a t i o s f o r the i n t u i t i v e and t h i n k i n g groups and lower

r a t i o s f o r the s e n s i n g and f e e l i n g groups. Th is t r e n d was a l s o found

f o r t h e p a r i e t a l and c e n t r a l EEG a l p h a r a t i o s , b u t was much l e s s

pronounced .

Table 10

Temporal Lobe Mean Alpha R a t io s f o r a Sample o f 27 A t t o rn e y s and Ceramic A r t i s t s C l a s s i f i e d

by th e MBTI SN and TF Sca le s

I n d i v i d u a l t a s k s

MBTIelement N

Base Verbal S p a t i a lProblems o l v i n g

B r e a th i n g Copy Wri teM ir ro r

drawing Blocks WSST

N 23 0.97 0 .9 4 1.38 0.96 0.91 0.83

S 4 0.75 0.78 1.03 0.68 0 .6 4 0 .5 3

T 14 0 .99 0.97 1.24 0 .94 0.86 0 .86

F 13 0 .8 6 0 .88 1.08 0.88 0 .9 0 0 .7 0

N o t e . From " H e m i s p h e r e S p e c i a l i z a t i o n and J u n g ia n Typology: E v i d e n c e f o r a R e l a t i o n s h i p " (p. 120, T a b l e 6, m o d i f i e d ) , by J . B. Newman, 1985, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 46, 761B-762B.


R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s p e r f o r m e d on t h e t e m p o r a l a l p h a r a t i o s

showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r r a t i o s f o r N over S on t h e t h r e e t a s k s of

b r e a t h i n g , w o r d - s h a p e - s o r t i n g , and m i r r o r d r a w i n g . A h i g h e r r a t i o

f o r T ove r F was found o n ly f o r t h e m i r r o r d raw ing t a sk .

S i n c e a l p h a i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be i n d i c a t i v e o f a r e s t i n g s t a t e

and t h e b l o c k i n g o f a l p h a an i n d i c a t i o n o f a r o u s a l , h i g h e r a l p h a

asymmetry r a t i o s shou ld r e f l e c t r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r l e f t h e m i s p h e r e

a c t i v a t i o n , w h i l e l o w e r r a t i o s i n d i c a t e r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r r i g h t

h em isphe re a c t i v a t i o n (Newman, 1984/1985). Thus, t h e h i g h e r r a t i o s

f o r N ove r S and T over F i n d i c a t e r e l a t i v e l y g r e a t e r l e f t hemisphere

a c t i v a t i o n f o r Ns and Ts on th e t h r e e s i g n i f i c a n t t a s k s .

N e w m a n ' s . ( 1 9 8 4 / 1 9 8 5 ) r e s e a r c h c o n f i rm e d h i s g e n e r a l h y p o t h e s i s

t h a t i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) would show a b r a i n hem isphe re p a t t e r n d i f f e r e n t

f ro m t h a t o f s e n s i n g (S s ) i n d i v i d u a l s . H i s f i n d i n g s showed t h a t

i n t u i t i v e s d i s p l a y e d g r e a t e r l e f t , r a t h e r t h a n t h e e x p e c t e d r i g h t ,

h e m is p h e re a c t i v i t y . Thi s f i n d i n g a ppe a r s t o c o n t r a d i c t t h e Herrmann

(1988) metaphor o f i n t u i t i o n be ing a dominant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f the D

o r upper r i g h t c e r e b r a l HBDI quad ran t .

Newman (1984/1985) advoca ted t h e s e f i n d i n g s as j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r

a "broad n e u r o l o g i c a l b a s i s f o r Jung 's t h e o r y o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l types"

(p. x i ) . He recommended t h a t a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h be conducted to i n

v e s t i g a t e t h e p o s t u l a t e d n e u r o l o g i c a l - J u n g i a n i n t e g r a t e d base.

Summary of Literature Review

The review begins with a discussion of the most popular theories

of leadership. Because leadership is perceived as the outward


e x p r e s s i o n o f p e r s o n a l i t y (Bass, 1981), t h e major p e r s o n a l i t y t h eo

r i e s a r e a l s o p r e s e n t e d .

N e x t f o l l o w s a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e m os t p o p u l a r p e r s o n a l i t y

a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s . Ranking o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t s shown i n Table 1

h a s c h a n g e d o v e r t h e d e c a d e b e t w e e n 1975 and 1985. I n g e n e r a l , t h e

c h a n g e s i n r a n k h a v e r e s u l t e d f ro m r e d u c e d f r e q u e n c y o f u s e f o r

p r o j e c t i v e and c l i n i c a l i n s t r u m e n t s , because the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of

r e s u l t s r e q u i r e s p r o f e s s i o n a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l e x p e r t i s e . Emphasis has

s h i f t e d t o a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s s p e c i f i c a l l y des igned f o r use w i t h

n o r m a l , h e a l t h y a d u l t s , s u c h a s t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r

(MBTI) and t h e H e r rm a n n B r a i n D om inance I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI), b o t h o f

which a r e used in t h i s s tudy .

P r i o r s t u d i e s u s i n g t h e s e two i n s t r u m e n t s a r e d e s c r i b e d i n

d e t a i l . Four s t u d i e s o f MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a

t i o n s i n v a r i o u s s e t t i n g s a r e d i s c u s s e d . The most p rominen t r e s u l t

f o r t h e s e m a n a g e r i a l g r o u p s i s t h e p r e v a l e n c e o f t h i n k i n g - j u d g i n g

t y p e s ( T J s ) , e s p e c i a l l y i n g r o u p s w h i c h a r e p r e d o m i n a n t l y m a l e .

N i d i f f e r (1984) found 60% TJs i n a group o f program manager s t u d e n t s

i n 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 8 4 DSMC c l a s s e s . D e W a ld ' s ( 1 9 8 6 / 1 9 8 7 ) s t u d y o f p a i r e d

m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n male e x e c u t i v e s showed 80% TJs , i d e n t i c a l f o r

b o t h m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n p a r t i c i p a n t s . The g e n e r a l m a n a g e r i a l

g r o u p i n t h e M yers and M c C a u l l e y (1985) s t u d y c o n s i s t e d o f 48% T Js .

T h i s g r o u p was t h e o n l y one o f t h e f o u r s t u d i e s w h i c h was p r e

d o m i n a n t l y f e m a l e . P i c k e r i n g (1986) fo u n d 64% T J s i n h i s s t u d y o f

f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s .


Evidence f o r c o r r e l a t i o n be tween the MBTI and th e HBDI i s exam

ined . S t u d ie s by Ford (1988a) , James (1986), and Newman (1984/1985)

s u p p o r t the a s su m p t io n t h a t a h igh deg re e o f c o r r e l a t i o n appears t o

e x i s t be tween the p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s p e r t i n e n t t o i n d i v i d u a l

HBDI q u a d r a n t s and p a r t i c u l a r MBTI t y p e s and t y p e f u n c t i o n s . F o r d

r e p o r t e d t h a t MBTI t h i n k i n g , f e e l i n g , and i n t u i t i o n co r responded w i t h

HBDI r i g h t - h e m i s p h e r i c dominance, w h i l e MBTI s e n s i n g was s o m e w h a t

more a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l e f t - h e m i s p h e r i c d o m i n a n c e . J a m e s r e p o r t e d

double dominance i n HBDI Quadrants A and B f o r i n t r o v e r s i o n , s e n s i n g ,

t h i n k i n g , and j u d g i n g ; d o u b l e d o m in a n c e i n Q u a d r a n t s B and C f o r

f e e l i n g . J a m e s fo u n d t h a t e x t r a v e r s i o n was d o m i n a n t i n t h e HBDI B

q u a d r a n t , w h i l e i n t u i t i o n and p e r c e p t i o n were dominan t i n t h e HBDI

Q u a d r a n t D. F i n a l l y , Newman's r e s e a r c h p r o v i d e s s u p p o r t f o r a

p h y s i o l o g i c a l b a s i s f o r MBTI t y p o l o g y and a p o t e n t i a l l i n k t o t h e

HBDI b r a i n q u a d ra n t metaphor .

The specific hypothesis to be tested, some additional research

questions to be investigated, and the methodology to be used are

outlined in Chapter IV.


CHAPTER IV

METHODOLOGY

The purpose o f t h i s s t u d y i s t o d e t e r m i n e the r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f


m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H e r rm a n n B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t

(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a f ro m t h r e e c l a s s e s a t t h e D e f e n s e S y s t e m s

Management Co l l ege (DSMC) program manager ' s c o u rs e h e l d d u r in g 1986-

1987.

Research H ypo thes i s

D i s c u s s i o n

For an a l l - m a l e sample o f 90 bankers and ch e m ica l i n d u s t r y p r o

f e s s i o n a l s , James (1986) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e MBTI f u n c t i o n a l e l e m e n t s

o f i n t r o v e r s i o n , s e n s i n g , t h i n k i n g , and ju d g in g were a l i g n e d s t r o n g l y

w i t h t h e HBDI A and B q u a d r a n t s i n t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , and t h a t

i n t u i t i o n and p e r c e p t i o n r e l a t e d h i g h l y t o the HBDI D quad ran t i n t h e

r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e . Only e x t r a v e r s i o n and f e e l i n g showed c r o s s -

h e m i s p h e r i c dominance. E x t r a v e r t s were r e p r e s e n t e d i n Quadrants A,

B, and D ( th e l e f t and upper r i g h t h e m is p h e re s ) , and f e e l i n g i n d i v i d

u a l s w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d i n t h e HBDI B and C q u a d r a n t s ( t h e l o w e r l e f t

and low e r r i g h t h e m is p h e re s ) .

F o r d ' s (1 9 8 8 a ) s a m p l e o f 51 f e m a l e o c c u p a t i o n a l t h e r a p i s t s

showed a somewhat g r e a t e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f s e n s i n g i n d i v i d u a l s i n

52


t h e l e f t hem isphe re , b u t a m a j o r i t y o f the MBTI i n t u i t i v e , t h i n k i n g ,

and f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s were a l i g n e d w i t h the HBDI r i g h t hem isphe re .

Newman ( 1 9 8 4 / 1 9 8 5 ) p o s t u l a t e d t h a t MBTI i n t u i t i v e s w o u ld show a

d i f f e r e n t b r a i n hemisphere p a t t e r n o f a c t i v i t y f rom t h a t o f s e n s o r s .

His s a m p l e o f 27 l a w y e r s and a r t i s t s , 85% o f whom w e r e i n t u i t i v e s ,

showed s t r o n g l e f t , r a t h e r th an r i g h t , hemisphere a c t i v i t y .

Both p s y c h o lo g i c a l type t h e o r y and b r a i n dominance t h e o r y would

d i c t a t e HBDI l e f t - h e m i s p h e r i c dominance f o r MBTI s e n s in g , t h i n k i n g ,

and j u d g i n g t y p e s , and HBDI r i g h t - h e m i s p h e r i c d o m in a n c e f o r MBTI

i n t u i t i v e , f e e l i n g , and p e r c e p t i v e t y p e s . The som ew hat m ixe d and

c o n t r a t h e o r e t i c a l f i n d i n g s from t h e l i t e r a t u r e a r e l i m i t e d by v e r y

s m a l l and e x t r e m e l y homogeneous samples .

Thus, w h i l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s e x i s t , t h e i r e x t e n t and d i r e c t i o n need

t o be c l a r i f i e d . T h e r e f o r e , t h e m a i n f o c u s o f t h i s s t u d y i s t h e

i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e t h e o r e t i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s among MBTI t y p e s and

HBDI q u a d ra n t s .

S t a te m e n t o f H ypo thes i s

The MBTI e l e m e n t s o f s e n s i n g , t h i n k i n g , and j u d g i n g w i l l be

a l i g n e d w i t h t h e HBDI l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h a h i g h i n c i d e n c e o f

d o u b l e d o m in a n c e f o r b o t h Q u a d r a n t A and Q u a d r a n t B. G i v e n t h i s

h y p o t h e s i s , t he MBTI e le m e n t s o f i n t u i t i o n , f e e l i n g , and p e r c e p t i o n

shou ld be a l i g n e d w i t h the HBDI r i g h t he m isphe re , w i t h i n t u i t i v e s and

p e r c e p t i v e s dominant in Quadrant D, and the f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , i n

Q u a d r a n t C.


54

Research Ques t io ns

I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the MBTI-HBDI r e l a t i o n s h i p ,

t h i s s tu d y a l s o p r o v id e s a means to c o n f i r m some e a r l i e r f i n d i n g s i n

t h e l i t e r a t u r e . Because each o f the e a r l i e r s t u d i e s used a s p e c i f i c

p o p u l a t i o n , the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y o f t h e s e f i n d i n g s t o t h e group unde r

s t u d y i s open t o q u e s t i o n . The a d d i t i o n a l q u e s t i o n s a d d r e s s e d by

t h i s s tu d y a r e d e t a i l e d i n the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s .

Research Q u e s t ions 1 and 2

Discussion

The l i t e r a t u r e r e f e r e n c e s ha v e shown t h a t m a n a g e r s t e n d t o be

MBTI t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (TJs). DeWald (1986/1987) found 80% TJs i n a

group o f 30 matched p a i r s o f m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n , u p p e r - l e v e l , U.S.

Army e x e c u t i v e s . M yers and M c C a u l l e y (1985) r e p o r t e d 48% TJs i n a

g r o u p o f 7 ,4 63 b u s i n e s s m a n a g e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . P i c k e r i n g

(1986) found 64% TJs i n h i s s tu d y of 1,395 c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e

U.S. G o v e r n m e n t . M o r e o v e r , N i d i f f e r (1984) found t h a t 60% o f i n d i

v i d u a l s i n p r i o r DSMC c l a s s e s were TJs . Although the ev idence sug

g e s t s t h a t t h e p o p u l a t i o n under s tu d y w i l l a l s o be s t r o n g l y c h a ra c

t e r i z e d by TJ r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , the f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s have

been f o r m u la t e d to c o n f i r m t h i s e x p e c t a t i o n .

S ta tem en t o f Resea rch Q u e s t io n 1

Are t h e MBTI type d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r the 1986-1987 DSMC program

m a n a g e r c l a s s e s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y d i f f e r e n t f ro m t h o s e f o r t h e


1982-1984 DSMC program manager c l a s s e s ( N i d i f f e r , 1984)?

S ta tem en t o f Resea rch Q u e s t io n 2

Are t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e DSMC p r o g r a m m a n a g e r

c l a s s e s i n t h i s s t u d y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h o s e f o r o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l

p o p u l a t i o n s i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e (DeWald, 1986/1987; Myers & McCaulley,

1985; P i c k e r i n g , 1986)?

R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n s 3, 4 , 5, and 6

D i s c u s s i o n

The demographic d a t a a v a i l a b l e i n t h i s s tu d y in c l u d e th e sex o f

t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s , t h e b r a n c h o f t h e m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e s o r f e d e r a l

agency to which th ey be long , t h e i r a c t i v e m i l i t a r y or c i v i l i a n s t a

t u s , and t h e i r management l e v e l i n d i c a t e d by t h e i r m i l i t a r y r ank o r

c i v i l i a n g rade . None o f the l i t e r a t u r e r e f e r e n c e s has a d d re s s e d a l l

o f t h e s e v a r i a b l e s , b u t r e l a t i o n s h i p s may be i n f e r r e d from the spe

c i f i c p o p u l a t i o n s used.

The p r i m a r i l y m a l e m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s (DeWald, 1986/1987;

N i d i f f e r , 1984; P i c k e r i n g , 1986) a l l had 60% o r h i g h e r TJ r e p r e s e n t a

t i o n . The o n ly m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n t h a t was no t domina ted by TJs

was t h a t o f M yers and M c C a u l l e y ( 1 9 8 5 ) , a m a j o r i t y o f w h i c h was

f em a le . Moreover , James (1986) found t h a t ove r h a l f o f h i s a l l - m a l e

sample o f 90 ba nke rs and c h e m ic a l i n d u s t r y p r o f e s s i o n a l s combined a

s t r o n g MBTI TJ p r e f e r e n c e w i t h s t r o n g dominance in HBDI Quadrants A

and B. T h i s e v i d e n c e , w h i c h l e a d s t o R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 3, s t r o n g l y


suggests that a higher percentage of males than of females will

manifest the MBTI TJ types and will exhibit preference for HBDI

Quadrants A and B.

No ev idence w i t h r e g a r d t o p o s s i b l e MBTI type d i f f e r e n c e s among

t h e b r a n c h e s o f t h e U.S. Armed S e r v i c e s i s a v a i l a b l e i n t h e l i t e r a

t u r e . Thus, R esea rch Q u e s t io n 4 i s in c lu d e d p r i m a r i l y to d e te r m in e

w he the r any d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t .

The o n l y s t u d y w h i c h d i r e c t l y c o m p a r e s m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n

e x e c u t i v e s a t t h e same l e v e l i s t h a t o f DeWald (1986/1987) . C on t r a ry

t o e x p e c t a t i o n , t h e MBTI ty p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s e m i l i t a r y and

c i v i l i a n Army e x e c u t i v e s w e r e v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l . T h i s f i n d i n g

forms th e b a s i s f o r Resea rch Q ue s t io n 5.

The r e l a t i v e l y h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f i n t u i t i v e s i n t h e P i c k e r i n g

(1986) s tu d y can p r o b a b l y be a t t r i b u t e d to t h e f a c t t h a t h i s popu la

t i o n i n c l u d e d s e n i o r e x e c u t i v e s a s w e l l a s m i d d l e m a n a g e r s . Agor

(1986) found t h a t to p e x e c u t i v e s m a n i f e s t a much g r e a t e r p e rc e n ta g e

o f i n t u i t i v e s t h a n do g r o u p s o f m i d d l e o r l o w e r l e v e l m a n a g e r s .

Thus, Resea rch Q ues t ion 6 i s based on the f i n d i n g t h a t t h e p e rc e n ta g e

o f i n t u i t i v e s i s r e l a t e d t o the l e v e l o f the m a n a g e r i a l h i e r a r c h y .

S ta tem en t o f R esea rch Q u e s t io n 3

Are males and females different in their representation by the

MBTI functions and by dominance in the HBDI quadrants?


Sta tem en t o f Resea rch Q ue s t ion 4

Are t h e r e MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e

b ranches o f t h e armed s e r v i c e s ?

S ta temen t o f Resea rch Q ue s t ion 5

Are t h e r e MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s be tween i n d i

v i d u a l s based on t h e i r m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l i a n s t a t u s ?

S ta tem en t o f Resea rch Q ue s t io n 6

Are t h e r e MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s be tween i n d i

v i d u a l s based on t h e i r m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l ; t h a t i s , whe ther they a r e a t

the h ig h o r t h e m id d le manager l e v e l ?

The I n s t i t u t i o n and the Targe t P o p u l a t i o n

The p o p u l a t i o n used in t h i s s t u d y c o n s i s t s o f 811 s t u d e n t s f rom

t h r e e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r c l a s s e s (PMCs 8 6 - 2 , 8 7 - 1 , and 8 7 - 2 ) a t t h e

Defense Systems Management Co l lege i n F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a . The

DSMC i s a g r a d u a t e - l e v e l , U.S. G o v e r n m e n t e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n

founded i n 1971 f o r the purpose o f t r a i n i n g f u t u r e program managers

i n a c q u i s i t i o n and p rocurem en t p ro ce d u re s .

A l l DSMC s t u d e n t s have b a c h e l o r ' s d e g re e s i n e n g in e e r i n g , p h y s i

c a l s c i e n c e , o r b u s i n e s s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . About o n e - t h i r d have mas

t e r ' s d e g r e e s i n t h e s e d i s c i p l i n e s . Mos t ha v e s e v e r a l y e a r s o f

e x p e r i e n c e i n de fe n s e a c q u i s i t i o n . Of t h e t o t a l number o f s t u d e n t s ,

72% were un i fo rm ed m i l i t a r y p e r s o n n e l , 21% were c i v i l i a n employees o f


d e fe n s e segments o f the f e d e r a l government , and the r em a in ing 7% were

c i v i l i a n s f ro m t h e i n d u s t r i a l s e c t o r . M i l i t a r y r a n k r a n g e d f ro m

company g rade t o f i e l d g rade (0-3, c a p t a i n , t o 0-6, c o lo n e l ) . C i v i l

i a n g rade l e v e l s were comparab le , r a n g i n g from m idd le t o upper man

a g e m e n t (GS-12 t h r o u g h GM-15). The d i s t r i b u t i o n by s e x was h i g h l y

skewed, w i t h women c o n s t i t u t i n g o n l y about 6% o f t h e t o t a l group.

The Assessment In s t r u m e n t s

The two i n s t r u m e n t s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y a r e t h e MBTI and t h e

HBDI. They w e r e s e l e c t e d by a DSMC f a c u l t y p s y c h o l o g i s t ( E l l i s ,

1983) b e c a u s e b o t h w e r e d e v e l o p e d t o a s s e s s t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s o f

n o r m a l , h e a l t h y a d u l t s . D e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e MBTI and t h e

HBDI h a v e b e e n g i v e n i n C h a p t e r I I I u n d e r t h e h e a d i n g , S e l e c t e d

Assessment I n s t r u m e n t s . A b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n o f the mechanics o f each

i n s t r u m e n t i s p r e s e n t e d below.

The MBTI was deve loped p r i m a r i l y as an i n s t r u m e n t f o r i d e n t i f y

i n g J u n g ' s ( 1 9 2 1 / 1 9 7 1 ) p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s . Form G o f t h e MBTI

c o n s i s t s o f 126 p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s , ph rased i n s im p le , n o n t h r e a t e n i n g

language . Fo l low ing f o r c e d - c h o i c e p r o t o c o l , the p a r t i c i p a n t s e l e c t s

one o f t h e two p a i r e d s t a t e m e n t s as more n e a r l y d e s c r i p t i v e o f h i s o r

h e r own p o i n t o f view. The i n d i v i d u a l ' s s c o r e s i n d i c a t e p r e f e r e n c e

f o r one o f the two p o s s i b l e i n d i c e s i n each o f t h e f o u r d i c h o to m ie s

i n J u n g ' s t h e o r y , t h u s g e n e r a t i n g an MBTI t y p e . The MBTI m u s t be

a d m i n i s t e r e d and sc o re d by q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n n e l .

The HBDI was d e v e l o p e d t o i d e n t i f y an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p r e f e r e n c e

f o r one o r more o f f o u r ways o f t h i n k i n g and b e h a v i o r , w h i c h


c o r r e s p o n d to Herrmann's m e t a p h o r i c m ode l o f t h e m e n t a l a c t i v i t i e s

a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e l e f t and r i g h t c e r e b r a l and l i m b i c c o r t i c e s o f

t h e human b r a i n . The HBDI c o n t a i n s 120 i t e m s w h i c h a r e k e y e d t o

d e t e r m i n e the p a r t i c u l a r q u a d ra n t and l e v e l o f b r a i n s p e c i a l i z a t i o n

which the p a r t i c i p a n t e x p r e s s e s th ro u g h h i s o r h e r answers (Herrmann,

1988). Other q u e s t i o n s a r e r e l a t e d t o e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l , o c c u p a t io n ,

and h o b b i e s , a s w e l l a s t h e p h y s i o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s o f h a n d e d n e s s ,

ene rgy l e v e l , and s u s c e p t i b i l i t y t o motion s i c k n e s s . Like t h e MBTI,

t he HBDI must be a d m i n i s t e r e d and sc o re d by q u a l i f i e d pe r s o n n e l .

Resea rch P rocedures

Da ta C o l l e c t i o n

As p a r t o f t h e r e g u l a r DSMC a s s e s s m e n t p r o c e d u r e , t h e MBTI and

the HBDI were a d m i n i s t e r e d on s u c c e s s iv e days t o each s t u d e n t d u r i n g

t h e f i r s t week o f t h e PMC c o u r s e . The d a t a f ro m t h e t h r e e c l a s s e s

c o n s i s t e d o f t h e s t u d e n t ' s MBTI t y p e , HBDI c o d e d q u a d r a n t s c o r e s ,

a c t u a l HBDI q u a d ra n t s c o r e s , sex, m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l i a n s t a t u s , b ranch

o f s e r v i c e , and m i l i t a r y r a n k o r c i v i l i a n g r a d e l e v e l . MBTI and

demographic d a t a were a v a i l a b l e f o r a l l 811 s t u d e n t s ; HBDI d a t a were

a v a i l a b l e f o r only 800 o f t h e s e s t u d e n t s . The d a t a were s t r i p p e d o f

a l l m eans o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n (name, s o c i a l s e c u r i t y n u m b e r , d a t e o f

b i r t h , e t c . ) b e f o r e they were r e l e a s e d f o r a n a l y s i s .


R e s e a rc h Des ign

T h i s ex p o s t f a c t o r e s e a r c h was d e s i g n e d t o e x a m i n e t h e MBTI-

HBDI r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n t h e 1986 -1 9 8 7 PMC c l a s s e s and t o c o m p a r e t h e

MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e s e s t u d e n t s w i t h t h o s e i n o t h e r p u b

l i s h e d m a n a g e r i a l da ta .

Da ta A n a l y s i s

Both q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e d a t a were used i n t h i s s tudy .

The i n t e r v a l d a t a w e r e a n a l y z e d by t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e . F o r

s t a t i s t i c a l p r o c e s s i n g o f t h e c a t e g o r i c a l d a t a , the c h i - s q u a r e t e s t

o f a s s o c i a t i o n was used.

To a d d r e s s t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s , two t y p e s o f a n a l y s i s were

pe r fo rm e d . F i r s t , c r o s s t a b u l a t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s and type f u n c t i o n s

w i t h HBDI dominan t q u a d ra n t s were a n a ly z e d by the c h i - s q u a r e t e s t o f

a s s o c i a t i o n . S e c ond , an a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was p e r f o r m e d , u s i n g

t h e a c t u a l HBDI q u a d ra n t s c o re as t h e dependen t v a r i a b l e and the MBTI

t y p e s and t y p e f u n c t i o n s as t h e i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s . Fo r b o t h

a n a l y t i c app ro a c h e s , a s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l o f £ < .05 was used in t h e

d e c i s i o n r u l e f o r r e j e c t i o n o f t h e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s . T h i s i s c o n

s i s t e n t w i t h r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t e s t i n g e s t a b l i s h e d i n s t r u m e n t s

( K e r l i n g e r , 1973) .

To a d d r e s s Resea rch Q u e s t ions 1 and 2, MBTI type d i s t r i b u t i o n s

f o r t h e 1986-1987 DSMC c l a s s e s were compared w i t h those f o r the 1982-

1984 DSMC c l a s s e s ( N i d i f f e r , 1984), f o r the managers and a d m i n i s t r a

t o r s i n t h e Myers and M c C a u l l e y (1985 ) s t u d y , f o r t h e m i l i t a r y and


c i v i l i a n e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e DeWald ( 1 9 8 6 /1 9 8 7 ) s t u d y , and f o r t h e

f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s i n t h e P i c k e r i n g (1986) s tudy . A c h i - s q u a r e t e s t

was used t o d e t e r m i n e th e d eg ree o f s i m i l a r i t y o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n s .

To a d d re s s Research Q u e s t ions 3 through 6, each o f which d e a l s

w i t h a demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , c h i - s q u a r e t e s t s were c a r r i e d ou t

f o r t h e demographic v a r i a b l e s v e r s u s MBTI types o r type f u n c t i o n s and

HBDI dominant q u a d ra n t s .

The f i n d i n g s from t h i s s tu d y a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Chapter V.


CHAPTER V

FINDINGS

The purpose o f t h i s s tu d y was to d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f


m e t a p h o r i c q u a d r a n t s o f t h e H e r rm a n n B r a i n D om inance I n s t r u m e n t

(HBDI), b a s e d on d a t a f ro m t h r e e c l a s s e s a t t h e D e f e n s e S y s t e m s

Management Co l lege program manager 's cou rse h e ld d u r in g 1986-1987.

W h i l e b o t h i n s t r u m e n t s m e a s u r e p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ,

t h e i r p r o t o c o l s d i f f e r . The MBTI i d e n t i f i e s each p a r t i c i p a n t as one

o f 16 MBTI t y p e s , based on Ju n g ia n p s y c h o l o g i c a l type t h e o r y , w h i l e

t h e HBDI u s e s f o u r m e t a p h o r i c a l q u a d ra n t s d e r i v e d from b r a i n domi

nance th e o r y , the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f which p e r m i t p a r t i c i p a n t s t o be

d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n t o one o r more qua d ra n t c o n f o r m a t io n s , which r e s u l t

i n a c o d e d p r o f i l e f o r e a c h i n d i v i d u a l . The f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y

a r e p r e s e n t e d below.

MBTI Type Distribution

The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e 16 MBTI t y p e s and t h e e i g h t MBTI e l e

m e n t s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n i s shown i n T a b l e 11, w h i c h i s p r e

s e n t e d i n t h e s t a n d a r d MBTI t y p e t a b l e f o r m a t . The f o u r t h i n k i n g -

j u d g i n g (TJ) t y p e s a c c o u n t e d f o r 65.6% o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n .

These fou r t ypes i n c l u d e the ISTJ (28.2%), t h e ESTJ (18.0%), t h e INTJ

(10.2%), and t h e ENTJ (9.1%). The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s

62


63

Table 11

MBTI Type Table f o r 811 DSMC S tu d e n t Program Managers

SENSING TYPES INTUITIVE TYPESwith THINKING with FEELING with FEELING with THINKING N X

ISTJ ISFJ INFJ INTJ E 342 4 2 .21 469 . 5 i . 8

N 3 229 N = 23 N = 9 N = 83 c

%= 28 .2 %= 2 . 8 %= 1 .1 % = 10 .2 oo S 507 6 2 .52 N 304 3 7 .5O

T 717 8 8 .42•g F 94 11 .6o

ISTP ISFP INFP INTP <m>99 J 591 72 .9U\ P 220 2 7 .1

N = 51 N » 6 N = 10 N r 58 -oVI

%= 6 .3 % = 0 . 7 %= 1 .2 % r 7 . 2 m20 1 J 344 4 2 .4nm 1 P 125 15 .4

EP 95 11 .7<m EJ 247 3 0 .5

ST 458 5 6 .5ESTP ESFP ENFP ENTP SF 49 6 . 0

NF 45 5 . 6N * 32 N r 4 N » 1 5 N r 44 •um NT 259 3 1 .9% = 4 . 0 % = 0 . 5 % r 1 .9 %= 5 .4

JOnm•D-H SJ 414 5 1 .0<m SP 93 11 .5

m NP 127 15 .7X NJ 177 2 1 .8>

ESTJ ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ <m30

TJ 532 6 5 .6(/) TP 185 2 2 .8

N 3 146 N r 16 N * 11 N r 74 FP 35 4 . 3% = 18 .0 % = 2 . 0 % r 1 .4 %= 9 .1 Co

FJ 59 7 . 3o2 1 N 160 19 .7o EN 144 17 .8

1 S 309 38 .1ES 198 24 .4

Note. Data c o l l e c t e d by the Defense Systems Management C o l l ege i n 1986 and 1987. P a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s t u d e n t s a t t h e DSMC. T h e s e d a t a a r e u s e d w i t h p e r m i s s i o n and h a v e n o t b e e n p u b l i s h e d e l s e w h e r e to d a te .


c o n f i r m s t h e h i g h p e r c e n t a g e o f T J s i n t h i s p o p u l a t i o n . The TF

d im e n s io n i n c lu d e d 88.4% t h i n k e r s (Ts), t h e h i g h e s t p e r c e n ta g e r e p r e

s e n t a t i o n o f any o f the e i g h t MBTI e l e m e n t s , w h i l e the 72.9% j u d g e r s

( J s ) on th e JP d im ens ion were t h e second most f r e q u e n t e le m en t . On

t h e E l d i m e n s i o n , 57.8% w e r e i n t r o v e r t s ( I s ) . On t h e SN d i m e n s i o n ,

62.5% w e r e s e n s o r s (Ss).

HBDI Profile Representation

F i g u r e 2 i s a s t a n d a r d HBDI g r a p h i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s i x

most f r e q u e n t HBDI coded p r o f i l e s i n t h i s s tudy . These s i x p r o f i l e s

a c c o u n t e d f o r 70.1% o f t h e s t u d y p a r t i c i p a n t s ( s e e T a b l e 12) . HBDI

p r o f i l e s a r e n u m e r i c a l l y coded q u a d ra n t s c o re s . By c o n v e n t io n , the

fou r coded HBDI q u a d r a n t s a r e p r e s e n t e d c o u n t e r c l o c k w i s e i n a l p h a

b e t i c a l o r d e r , t h a t i s , A, B, C, D, w i t h t h e c o d e s f o r e a c h q u a d r a n t

s e p a r a t e d by d a s h e s . A c o d e o f 1 i n d i c a t e s d o m i n a n c e ; a c ode o f 2

t r a n s l a t e s i n t o m o d e r a t e p r e f e r e n c e ; a code o f 3 i s i n t e r p r e t e d as

a v o i d a n c e . I n F i g u r e 2, t h e r e l a t i v e s t r e n g t h o f e a c h o f t h e q u a d

r a n t p r e f e r e n c e s i s d e p i c t e d by t h e d i s t a n c e o f t h e q u a d r a n t s c o r e

p o i n t f r o m t h e p e r i p h e r y o f t h e c i r c l e . A d o m i n a n t q u a d r a n t s c o r e

p o i n t appears i n t h e o u t e r m o s t c o n c e n t r i c r i n g . A m odera te q u a d ra n t

p r e f e r e n c e s c o r e p o i n t i s l o c a t e d i n t h e m i d d l e r i n g . An a v o i d a n t

q u a d ra n t s c o re p o i n t i s l o c a t e d i n t h e i n ne rm os t c o n c e n t r i c r i n g .

Findings Relating to the Research Hypothesis

The statement of the research hypothesis anticipated that sen

sing (S), thinking (T), and judging (J) individuals would be dominant


65

Limbic

F i g u r e 2. Most F re quen t HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s .


66

Table 12

MBTI Type D is tr ib u tio n s fo r the Most Frequent HBDI Coded Quadrant P ro file s

HBDIMBTI type d is trib u tio n * 1

codedp ro f ileA-B-C-D N Za ISTJ ISTP ESTP ESTJ INTJ INTP ENTP ENTJ

Combined F types

1-1-1-2 35 4.4 14.3 5.7 14.3 25.7 8.5 0.0 2.9 2.9 25.7

1-1-2-1 86 10.7 12.8 8.1 5.8 16.3 17.4 5.8 7.0 16.3 10.5

1-1-2-2 229 28.6 30.6 7.0 3.5 27.1 7.8 2.2 2.2 7.4 12.2

1-1-2-3 35 4 .4 65.7 2.9 0 .0 22.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 0 .0 5.7

1-1-3-2 84 10.5 57.1 6.0 0.0 20.2 7.1 2.4 3.6 3.6 0.0

1-2-2-1 92 11.5 13.1 5 .4 4 .4 7.6 15.2 19.6 14.1 13.0 7.6

Subto ta l 561 70.1 30.1 6 .4 3.9 20.9 10.2 5.3 5.0 8 .4 9.8

Other 239 29.9 24.7 6.3 3.8 11.7 10.4 10.9 6.7 10.4 15.1

T otal 800 100.0 28.5 6 .4 3.9 18.1 10.2 7.0 5.5 9.0 11.4

aEach percent in th is column i s the HBDI coded p ro f ile percent o f the to ta l group o f 800 p a r tic ip a n ts .

bEach row con ta ins the MBTI (percentage) d is t r ib u tio n fo r the HBDI coded p ro f ile in th a t row.

Note. HBDI quadrant scores are coded to provide a convenient re p re se n ta tio n o f quadrant p ro f i le s . By convention, the coded quadrants are presented in alphab e t ic a l o rd e r, th a t i s , A, B, C, D, w ith the codes fo r each quadrant separated by dashes. The conversion tab le fo r the coding appears below.

HBDI code

1

2

3

HBDI score range

67 or more

34 to 66

33 or le ss

In te rp re ta t io n

Dominant

Moderate

Avoidant


p r i m a r i l y i n Q u a d r a n t s A and B i n t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h h i g h

in c i d e n c e o f AB dominance e xpe c te d t o t ake p l ac e . A r e l a t e d e x p e c t a

t i o n was t h a t i n t u i t i v e (N), f e e l i n g (F), and p e r c e p t i v e (P) i n d i v i d

u a l s w ou ld be d o m i n a n t i n t h e C and D q u a d r a n t s o f t h e HBDI r i g h t

hemisphere . F e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) were expec ted to show p r e f e r

ence f o r Quadrant C, w h i l e i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) were

l i k e l y t o show p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D.

The r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s was f u l l y suppo r ted by the d a t a i n t h i s

s t u d y . A d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e f i n d i n g s r e l a t i n g t o t h i s

h y p o t h e s i s i s p r e s e n t e d below.

HBDI Coded P r o f i l e s and MBTI Types

The s i x most f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g HBDI coded quad ran t p r o f i l e s

and t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d in g MBTI types a r e shown i n Table 12. The a s s o

c i a t i o n o f p a r t i c u l a r HBDI coded p r o f i l e s w i t h g iven MBTI types was

s i g n i f i c a n t (j> < .0001 ) by t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t . The s i g n i f i c a n t

r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e d e t a i l e d below.

The HBDI coded p r o f i l e 1 -1 -2 -2 (double dominant i n Quadrants A

and B, and m odera te i n Quadrants C and D) was the most common p r o f i l e

(28.6%) among a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s and was fo u n d m o s t l i k e l y t o c o r r e

s pond t o t h e MBTI t y p e s ISTJ and ESTJ, and l e a s t l i k e l y t o be a s s o

c i a t e d w i t h the MBTI ty p es INTP and ENTP.

The o t h e r two AB dominan t p r o f i l e s , 1 -1 -3 -2 (double dominant i n

Q u a d r a n t s A and B, a v o i d a n t i n C, and m o d e r a t e i n D) and 1 - 1 - 2 - 3

(double dominan t i n Quadrants A and B, m odera te i n C, and a vo idan t i n

D), were p r e f e r r e d by a lm o s t 15% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s and were s i m i l a r


t o t h e 1 - 1 - 2 - 2 p r o f i l e i n MBTI r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Both were h i g h e r than

e x p e c t e d f o r t h e two m o s t f r e q u e n t MBTI t y p e s , IS T J and ESTJ, w i t h

v i r t u a l l y no r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n any o t h e r MBTI type.

The HBDI p r o f i l e 1 -1 -2 -1 ( t r i p l e dominan t in Quadrants A, B, and

D, and m odera te i n Quadrant C) was p r e f e r r e d by 10.7% o f the p a r t i c i

p a n t s and was more f r e q u e n t than e x p e c t e d f o r NTJs and l e s s f r e q u e n t

t h a n e x p e c t e d f o r STJs. The HBDI p r o f i l e 1 -2 -2 -1 (double dominant i n

Q u a d r a n t s A and D, and m o d e r a t e i n Q u a d r a n t s B and C) was p r e f e r r e d

by 11.5% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 62% o f t h o s e w i t h t h e

1 - 2 - 2 - 1 p r o f i l e w e re among t h e f o u r MBTI i n t u i t i v e - t h i n k i n g (NT)

ty p e s , i n c l u d i n g 33.7% NTPs v e r s u s 12.5% i n the t o t a l group.

The HBDI p r o f i l e 1 - 1 -1 - 2 ( t r i p l e dominan t in Quadrants A, B, and

C, and m o d e r a t e i n Q u a d r a n t D), t h e o n l y one o f t h e s i x m o s t common

p r o f i l e s t o i n c l u d e dominance in Quadrant C, was ove r t w ic e as f r e

q u e n t f o r t h e c o m b i n e d F t y p e s a t 25.7% as f o r t h e t o t a l s t u d y

p o p u l a t i o n a t 11.4%.

I n summary, the AB dominance p a t t e r n was the most p r e v a l e n t f o r

STJ c o m b i n a t i o n s , w h i l e F t ypes showed a p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant C,

and i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) p r e f e r r e d Quadrant D.

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI Types

Table 13 p r e s e n t s t h e HBDI dominance and avo idance p a t t e r n s f o r

the MBTI types . S in g le q u a d ra n t dominance p a t t e r n s were r e l a t i v e l y

i n f r e q u e n t (7.2%), w h i l e d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e p a t t e r n s w e r e fo u n d f o r

69.6% o f t h e s t u d y p a r t i c i p a n t s , and o t h e r m u l t i q u a d r a n t p a t t e r n s ,

f o r 23.2%. The most f r e q u e n t dominance p a t t e r n s were AB (46.2%), AD


Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

T a b l e 13

1©DI Dominant and A v o id a n t Q u a d ra n t P a t t e r n s by MBTI T y p e s

MBTI t y p e s

HBDId o m in a n t ISTJ IKTP ESTJ ESTP INTJ INTP ENTJ ENTP

Combined F t y p e s T o t a l

q u a d r a n tp a t t e r n N X N X N % N X N X N X N X N X N X U X

A 13 5 . 7 3 5 . 9 3 2.1 1 3 . 2 10 12 .2 2 3 . 6 3 4 . 2 0 0 . 0 3 3 . 3 38 4 . 8

B 3 1 .3 0 0 . 0 3 2 .1 1 3 .2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 4 4 . 4 11 1 .4

C 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 3 .2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1

D 1 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 2 3 .6 2 2 . 8 0 0 . 0 1 1.1 6 0 . 8

AB 157 6 8 . 9 24 4 7 .1 89 6 1 .4 9 2 9 . 0 26 3 1 .7 7 1 2 .5 20 2 7 . 8 8 1 8 .2 30 3 3 . 0 370 4 6 . 2

AC 1 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 .2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1.1 3 0 . 4

AD 17 7 . 5 8 15 .7 10 6 . 9 4 1 2 .9 19 2 3 . 2 24 4 2 . 9 15 2 0 . 8 13 2 9 .6 7 7 . 7 117 1 4 .6

BC 5 2 .2 2 3 .9 7 4 . 8 3 9 .7 1 1 .2 1 1 .8 3 4 . 2 0 0 . 0 5 5 .5 27 3 . 4

BD 8 3 .5 2 3 . 9 4 2 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 .8 2 2 . 8 3 6 . 8 2 2 . 2 22 2 . 8

CD 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 2 1 .4 0 0 . 0 1 1 .2 4 7.1 1 1 .4 4 9 .1 6 6 . 6 18 2 . 2

ABC 5 2 . 2 3 5 . 9 9 6 . 2 5 16.1 3 3 . 7 0 0 . 0 1 1 .4 1 2 . 3 9 9 . 9 36 4 . 5

ABD 16 7 . 0 8 1 5 .7 - 16 1 1 .0 5 16.1 20 2 4 . 4 7 1 2 .5 17 2 3 . 6 7 1 5 .9 10 1 1 .0 106 13 .3

ACD 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 2 3 . 6 1 1 .4 3 6 . 8 4 4 . 4 10 1 .2

BCD 1 0 . 4 1 2 . 0 2 1 .4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 4 7.1 6 8 . 3 4 9.1 7 7 . 7 25 3.1

ABCD 1 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 2 6 . 5 1 1 .2 2 3 . 6 1 1 .4 1 2 . 3 1 1.1 9 1 .1

None 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1.1 1 0 .1

HBDIa v o i d a n tq u a d r a n tp a t t e r n

A 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 .2 0 0 . 0 1 1 .4 0 0 . 0 2 2 . 2 4 0 . 5B 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 .1 2 0 . 2C 59 2 5 .9 10 1 9 .6 22 15 .2 1 3 .2 23 2 8 .1 8 1 4 .3 10 1 3 .9 4 9 .1 1 1.1 138 17 .3

D 24 1 0 .5 2 3 . 9 8 5 . 5 1 3 . 2 1 1 . 2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 3 3 . 3 39 4 . 9

BC 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 8 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 .1

CD 17 7 . 5 2 3 . 9 2 1 .4 1 3 . 2 1 1 .2 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 23 2 . 9

ABCD 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1.1 I 0 . 1

None 128 5 6 .1 37 7 2 . 6 113 7 7 .9 28 9 0 . 3 56 6 8 . 3 46 8 2 .1 61 8 4 . 7 40 9 0 . 9 83 9 1 . 2 592 7 4 . 0

T o t a l 228 100 .0 51 1 0 0 .0 145 1 0 0 .0 31 1 0 0 .0 82 1 0 0 .0 56 1 0 0 .0 72 1 0 0 .0 44 1 0 0 .0 91 1 0 0 . 0 800 10 0 .0

(14.6%), and ABD (13.3%). The o n l y a v o i d a n c e p a t t e r n w i t h any s i g

n i f i c a n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n was t h a t f o r Quadrant C (17.3%).

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e most f r e q u e n t dominance p a t t e r n s were

s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t (j> < .0001) by c h i - s q u a r e t e s t f o r t h e MBTI

types . The s p e c i f i c d i f f e r e n c e s a r e d i s c u s s e d below.

Two MBTI t y p e s , ISTJ and ESTJ, showed th e l a r g e s t in c id e n c e o f

AB d o m in a n c e (68.9% o f t h e IS T J s and 61.4% o f t h e ESTJs ) . When

combined w i t h the t h r e e o t h e r m u l t i q u a d r a n t p a t t e r n s which in c l u d e AB

d o m i n a n c e (ABC, ABD, and ABCD), o v e r 78% o f t h e s e two MBTI t y p e s

showed AB d o m i n a n c e . W h i l e AB was t h e m o s t p r e v a l e n t d o m in a n c e

p a t t e r n f o r ISTP (47.1%) and ESTP (29.0%), AD r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r

t h e s e two MBTI types was double t h a t f o r t h e i r J c o u n t e r p a r t s (15.7%

f o r ISTP v e r s u s 7.5% f o r ISTJ and 12.9% f o r ESTP v e r s u s 6.9% f o r

ESTJ) .

Among t h e fou r MBTI i n t u i t i v e (N) t ypes i n Table 13, AD p a t t e r n

d o m i n a n c e r a n g e d f ro m 20.8% t o 42.9%, much s t r o n g e r t h a n i t was f o r

t h e i r s e n s i n g (S) c o u n t e r p a r t s (6.9% t o 15.7%). F o r INTP and ENTP,

t h e two NP c o m b i n a t i o n s i n T a b l e 13, AD was a c t u a l l y t h e m o s t f r e

quent dominance p a t t e r n (42.9% and 29.6%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , much l a r g e r

than t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e AB p e r c e n ta g e s of 12.5% and 18.2%.

Although a lm o s t t h r e e - q u a r t e r s o f the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n showed no

avo id ance tendency toward any q u a d ra n t , where avo idance d i d occur , i t

was p r i m a r i l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h Quadrant C (17.3%). The h i g h e s t l e v e l

o f avo id ance f o r Quadrant C o c c u r r e d f o r the MBTI ty p es ISTJ (25.9%)

and INTJ (28.1%).


72

In summary, t h e STJ c o m b in a t io n s were most h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d

by AB dominance, w h i l e AD dominance was r e l a t i v e l y more f r e q u e n t f o r

the P and N c o m b in a t io n s , w i t h NPs showing g r e a t e s t AD dominance.

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s by MBTI Elements

The r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the HBDI d o m in a n c e and a v o i d a n c e p a t

t e r n s and t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d in g MBTI e le m e n t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Tab le

14. The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e m o s t f r e q u e n t d o m in a n c e p a t t e r n s a r e

s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f o r e a c h MBTI s c a l e (j£ < .002 f o r t h e E l

s c a l e ; £ < .0001 f o r t h e SN, TF, and JP s c a l e s ) . The d e t a i l s o f

t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e p r e s e n t e d below.

The AB d o m in a n c e p a t t e r n was t h e m o s t p r e v a l e n t f o r a l l MBTI

e l e m e n t s e xc ep t i n t u i t i o n (N) and p e r c e p t i o n (P), where AD dominance

was abou t e q u a l l y common. AB dominance was s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r f o r

MBTI i n t r o v e r t s ( I s ) a t 50.6% t h a n f o r e x t r a v e r t s (Es) a t 40.2%, f o r

s e n s o r s (Ss) a t 60.3% th an f o r i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) a t 22.7%, f o r t h i n k e r s

(Ts ) a t 48.0% t h a n f o r f e e l e r s (Fs ) a t 32.9%, and f o r j u d g e r s ( J s ) a t

54.4% t h a n f o r p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps ) a t 24.2%.

I n t u i t i v e s (Ns) show ed g r e a t e r AD d o m in a n c e t h a n s e n s o r s ( S s )

(26.1% v e r s u s 7.8%) as w e l l as g r e a t e r ABD d o m in a n c e (19.4% v e r s u s

9.6%). P e r c e p t i v e s (Ps ) showed g r e a t e r AD d o m in a n c e t h a n j u d g e r s

( J s ) (24.6% v e r s u s 10.9%).

In summary, AB dominance was more l i k e l y f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s

I , S, T, and J t h a n f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s E, N, F, and P, w h i l e AD

d o m i n a n c e was more l i k e l y f o r t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s N and P t h a n f o r S

and J .


Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

73 74

T a b l e 14

HBDI D o m i n a n t a n d A v o i d a n t Q u a d r a n t P a t t e r n s b y MBTI E l e m e n t s

MBTI e l e m e n t s

HBDId o m i n a n t T o t a l E I S N T F J Pq u a d r a n tp a t t e r n N X N Z N X N X N X N X N X N X N X

A 38 4 . 8 7 2 . 1 31 6 . 7 22 4 . 4 16 5 . 4 35 4 . 9 3 3 . 3 30 5 . 1 8 3 . 7

B 11 1 . 4 6 1 . 8 5 1.1 10 2 . 0 1 0 . 3 7 1 . 0 4 4 . 4 9 1 . 5 2 0 . 9

C 1 0 . 1 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 5D 6 0 . 8 3 0 . 9 3 0 . 7 1 0 . 2 5 1 .7 5 0 . 7 1 1 . 1 3 0 . 5 3 1 . 4

AB 3 70 4 6 . 2 135 4 0 . 2 235 5 0 . 6 302 6 0 . 3 68 2 2 . 7 3 4 0 4 8 . 0 30 3 2 . 9 318 5 4 . 4 52 2 4 . 2

AC 3 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 6 1 0 . 2 2 0 . 7 2 0 . 3 1 1 .1 3 0 . 5 0 0 . 0

AD 117 1 4 . 6 4 4 1 3 . 1 73 1 5 . 7 39 7 . 8 78 2 6 . 1 11 0 1 5 . 5 7 7 . 7 64 1 0 . 9 53 2 4 . 6

BC 27 3 . 4 16 4 . 8 11 2 . 4 20 4 . 0 7 2 . 3 22 3 . 1 5 5 . 5 21 3 . 6 6 2 . 8

BD 22 2 . 8 10 3 . 0 12 2 . 6 16 3 . 2 6 2 . 0 20 2 . 8 2 2 . 2 16 2 . 8 6 2 . 8

CD 18 2 . 2 11 3 . 2 7 1 . 5 2 0 . 4 16 5 . 4 12 1 .7 6 6 . 6 5 0 . 9 13 6 . 1

ABC 36 4 . 5 22 6 . 5 14 3 . 0 30 6 . 0 6 2 . 0 27 3 . 8 9 9 . 9 25 4 . 3 U 5 . 1

ABD 106 1 3 . 3 51 1 5 . 2 55 1 1 . 8 4 8 9 . 6 58 1 9 . 4 9 6 1 3 . 6 10 1 1 . 0 73 1 2 . 5 33 1 5 . 3

ACD 10 1 . 2 6 1 . 8 4 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 10 3 . 3 6 0 . 9 4 4 . 4 2 0 . 3 8 3 . 7

BCD 25 3 . 1 18 5 . 3 7 1 . 5 6 1 . 2 19 6 . 4 18 2 . 5 7 7 . 7 13 2 . 2 12 5 . 6

ABCD 9 1 . 1 5 1 . 5 4 0 . 9 3 0 . 6 6 2 . 0 8 1 .1 1 1 .1 3 0 . 5 6 2 . 8

None 1 0 . 1 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 1 1 .1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 5


A 4 0 . 5 3 0 . 9 1 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 3 2 2 . 2 3 0 . 5 1 0 . 5B 2 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 7 I 0 . 1 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 9C 13 8 1 7 . 3 37 1 1 . 0 101 2 1 . 8 93 1 8 . 6 45 1 5 .1 13 7 1 9 . 3 1 1 . 1 114 1 9 . 5 24 1 1 . 1

D 39 4 . 9 9 2 . 7 30 6 . 5 38 7 . 6 1 0 . 3 36 5 . 1 3 3 . 3 36 6 . 2 3 1 . 4

BC 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 3 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 5CD 23 2 . 9 3 0 . 9 20 4 . 3 22 4 . 4 1 0 . 3 23 3 . 2 0 0 . 0 20 3 . 4 3 1 . 4

ABCD 1 0 . 1 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 5

Non e 5 9 2 7 4 . 0 28 3 8 4 . 2 30 9 6 6 . 6 348 6 9 . 4 24 4 8 1 . 6 5 0 9 7 1 . 8 83 9 1 . 2 4 1 2 7 0 . 4 180 8 3 . 7

T o t a l 8 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 33 6 1 0 0 . 0 4 6 4 1 0 0 . 0 501 1 0 0 . 0 299 1 0 0 . 0 7 0 9 1 0 0 . 0 91 1 0 0 . 0 5 8 5 1 0 0 . 0 21 5 1 0 0 . 0

A v o i d a n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r (jj < .001) f o r t h e MBTI

e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J t h a n f o r t h e E, N, F, and P e l e m e n t s . Where

avo id ance d i d oc c u r , i t was a lm o s t a lways a s s o c i a t e d w i th Quadrant C.

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance by MBTI Elements

The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e HBDI code c a t e g o r i e s —dominant (Code 1),

m o d e r a t e (Code 2 ) , and a v o i d a n t (Code 3 ) — and t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g

MBTI e l e m e n t s a r e shown i n T a b l e 15. The t o t a l d o m i n a n t g r o u p was

d i v i d e d i n t o " s u p e r d o m i n a n t s " (HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e

r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s (67 <= HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e <= 100) . The t o t a l

dominan t group f o r Quadrant A was abou t e q u a l l y d i v i d e d be tween the

supe rdom inan t and dominan t subgroups. For Quadrants B, C, and D, the

dominan t group g r e a t l y exceeded the supe rdom in an t group. Over 8 6 % o f

t h e s t u d y p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t A and o v e r 75% on

Q u a d r a n t B, w h i l e o n l y 16% w e r e d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t C, and 39% on

Q uadran t D.

O n ly i n Q u a d r a n t C w e r e t h e r e r e l a t i v e l y h i g h p e r c e n t a g e s o f

a v o i d a n t s — f ro m 22.7% t o 26.3% f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J , and

f ro m 2.2% t o 16.0% f o r e l e m e n t s E, N, F, and P. P e r c e n t a g e s o f

a v o i d a n t s on Q u a d r a n t s A and B w e r e a l l u n d e r 4%. On Q u a d r a n t D,

p e r c e n t a g e s o f a v o id a n t s ranged from 1.0% to 4.4% f o r MBTI e le m en ts

E, N, F, and P, and f ro m 8.3% t o 12.0% f o r e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J .

The q u a d ra n t d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e MBTI e le m e n t s r e i n f o r c e the

f i n d i n g s a l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d . The d i f f e r e n c e s d e t a i l e d below a re a l l

s i g n i f i c a n t (j> < .005, u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e no ted ) by th e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t

of a s s o c i a t i o n .


Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

76 77

T a b l e 15

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , S u p e r d o m i n a n c e , a n d A v o i d a n c e b y MBTI E l e m e n t s

HBDIq u a d r a n t

T o t a l

MBTI e l e m e n t s

E I s N T F J P

N X N X N X N X N X N X N X N X N X

A

T o t a l d o m in a n t 689 8 6 . 1 270 8 0 . 3 419 9 0 . 3 445 8 8 . 8 244 8 1 . 6 624 8 8 . 0 65 7 1 .4 518 8 8 . 6 171 7 9 .6

S u p e rd o m in a n t [346 4 3 . 2 ] [117 34 .8 ] [229 4 9 .3 1 [241 4 8 . 1 ] [105 3 5 . 1 ] (336 4 7 . 4 ] [ 10 11 .0 ] [ 279 4 7 . 7 ] I 67 3 1 . 2 ]

Dominan t [343 4 2 . 9 ] [153 4 5 . 5 ] [190 4 1 . 0 ] [204 4 0 . 7 ] [139 4 6 . 5 ] [288 4 0 . 6 ] I 55 6 0 . 4 ] [239 4 0 . 9 ] [104 4 8 . 4 ]

M o d e ra t e 106 1 3 . 3 62 18 .5 44 9 . 5 56 11 .2 50 1 6 .7 83 1 1 .7 23 2 5 . 3 64 1 0 .9 42 1 9 .5

A v o i d a n t 5 0 . 6 4 1 .2 1 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 5 1 . 7 2 0 . 3 3 3 . 3 3 0 . 5 2 0 . 9

B

T o t a l d o m in a n t 606 7 5 .7 263 7 8 .3 343 7 3 .9 435 8 6 . 8 171 5 7 . 2 538 7 5 . 9 68 7 4 .7 47 8 8 1 . 7 128 5 9 .5

S u p e rd o m in a n t [138 1 7 .2 ] ( 61 18 .2 ] [ 77 1 6 . 6 ] [123 2 4 . 5 ] [ 15 5 . 0 ] [124 1 7 . 5 ] [ 14 1 5 . 4 ] [123 2 1 . 0 ] [ 15 7 . 0 ]

Dominan t [468 5 8 . 5 ] [202 6 0 . 1 ] [266 5 7 . 3 ] [312 6 2 . 3 ] [156 5 2 . 2 ] [414 5 8 . 4 ] [ 54 5 9 . 3 ] [355 6 0 . 7 ] [113 5 2 . 5 ]

M o d e ra t e 190 2 3 . 8 72 2 1 .4 118 2 5 . 4 66 1 3 .2 124 4 1 . 5 169 2 3 . 8 21 2 3 .1 107 1 8 .3 83 3 8 .6

A v o i d a n t 4 0 . 5 1 0 . 3 3 0 . 7 0 0 . 0 4 1 . 3 2 0 . 3 2 2 . 2 0 0 . 0 4 1 . 9

C

T o t a l d o m in a n t 129 16 .1 79 2 3 .5 50 1 0 .8 63 1 2 .6 66 2 2 . 1 96 1 3 . 5 33 3 6 . 3 72 1 2 .3 57 2 6 . 5

S u p e rd o m in a n t [ 13 1 . 6 ] [ 8 2 .4 ] [ 5 1 . 1 ] [ 4 0 . 8 ] [ 9 3 . 0 ] [ 8 1 . 1 ] I 5 5 . 5 ] [ 9 1 .5 ] [ 4 1 . 9 ]

Dominant [116 1 4 . 5 ] [ 71 2 1 . 1 ] [ 45 9 . 7 ] f 59 1 1 .8 ] [ 57 1 9 . 1 ] [ 83 1 2 . 4 ] [ 28 3 0 . 8 ] [ 63 1 0 . 8 ) ( 53 2 4 . 6 ]

M o d e ra t e 508 6 3 . 5 216 6 4 .3 292 6 2 . 9 323 6 4 .5 185 6 1 . 9 452 6 3 . 8 56 6 1 . 5 379 6 4 . 8 129 6 0 . 0

A v o i d a n t 163 2 0 . 4 41 12 .2 122 2 6 . 3 115 2 2 . 9 48 1 6 . 0 161 2 2 . 7 2 2 . 2 134 2 2 . 9 29 1 3 .5

D

T o t a l d om in an t 313 3 9 .1 148 4 4 . 0 165 3 5 .5 115 2 3 . 0 198 6 6 . 2 275 3 8 . 8 38 4 1 . 8 179 3 0 . 6 134 6 2 . 3

Su p e rd o m in a n t [ 62 7 . 8 ] [ 27 8 . 0 ] [ 35 7 . 5 ] [ 11 2 . 2 ] I 51 1 7 . 1 ] 1 54 7 . 6 ] I 8 8 . 8 ] [ 24 4 . 1 ] [ 38 1 7 . 7 ]

Dominant [251 3 1 . 3 ] [121 3 6 . 0 ] [130 2 8 . 0 ] [104 2 0 . 8 ] [147 4 9 . 1 ] [221 3 1 . 2 ] [ 30 3 3 . 0 ] [155 2 6 . 5 ] [ 96 4 4 . 6 ]

M o d e ra t e 424 5 3 . 0 175 52 .1 249 5 3 . 7 326 6 5 . 0 98 3 2 . 8 375 5 2 . 9 49 5 3 . 8 350 5 9 . 8 74 3 4 . 4

A v o id a n t 63 7 . 9 13 3 . 9 50 1 0 .8 60 1 2 .0 3 1 . 0 59 8 . 3 4 4 . 4 56 9 . 6 7 3 . 3

T o t a l 800 1 0 0 . 0 336 10 0 .0 464 1 0 0 .0 501 10 0 .0 299 1 0 0 . 0 709 1 0 0 . 0 91 1 0 0 .0 585 1 0 0 .0 215 10 0 .0

N o t e . B r a c k e t e d ( s u p e r d o m i n a n t a n d d o m i n a n t ) v a l u e s a r e i n c l u d e d i n t o t a l d o m i n a n t v a l u e .

The Quadrant A t o t a l dominant p e r c e n ta g e s f o r e l e m e n t s I , S, T,

and J ( r a n g i n g f ro m 88.0% t o 90.3%) w ere a l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r

t h a n t h o s e f o r E, N, F, and P ( r a n g i n g f ro m 71.4% t o 81.6%). A l s o ,

Quadrant A p e r c e n ta g e s o f s upe rdom inan t s were g r e a t e r than th o s e f o r

d o m i n a n t s f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s I (49.3% v s . 41.0%), S (48.1% v s . 40.7%),

T (47.4% v s . 40.6%), and J (47.7% v s . 40.9%), w h i l e t h e r e v e r s e was

t r u e f o r MBTI e l e m e n t s E (34.8% v s . 45.5%), N (35.1% v s . 46.5%), F

(11.0% v s . 60.4%), and P (31.2% v s . 48.4%).

The Quadrant B t o t a l dominant p e r c e n ta g e d i f f e r e n c e s f o r S ove r

N ( 8 6 . 8 % v s . 57.2%) and f o r J o v e r P (81.7% v s . 59.5%) w e re b o t h

s i g n i f i c a n t . While Quadrant B superdominance p e r c e n ta g e s were low e r

t h a n t h e d o m in a n c e p e r c e n t a g e s f o r a l l e l e m e n t s , t h e r e was s t i l l a

s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n ta g e o f superdominan t Ss (24.5%) th an o f

Ns (5.0%) and o f s u p e r d o m i n a n t J s (21.0%) t h a n o f Ps (7.0%). T h e r e

w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s on Q u a d r a n t B f o r t h e E l o r TF

s c a l e s .

F e w e r t h a n 36% o f a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s f o r any MBTI e l e m e n t w e r e

d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t C, w i t h b e t w e e n 60% and 65% b e i n g m o d e r a t e on

t h i s q u a d ra n t . However, t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r the

p e r c e n t a g e s o f t o t a l d o m i n a n t s f o r E (23.5%) o v e r I (10.8%), N

(22.1%) o v e r S (12.6%), F (36.3%) o v e r T (13.5%), and P (26.5%) o v e r

J (12.3%). The E, N, F, and P e l e m e n t s a l s o had s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w e r

p e r c e n t a g e s o f a v o id a n t s ( r a n g in g from 2.2% to 16.0%) than d i d t h e I ,

S, T, and J e l e m e n t s ( r a n g i n g f ro m 22.7% t o 26.3%).

Q u a d r a n t D p e r c e n t a g e s o f t o t a l d o m i n a n t s w e r e t w i c e as l a r g e

f o r N and P (66.2% and 62.3%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) as f o r S and J (23.0% and


30.6%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , and w e r e s o m e w h a t g r e a t e r f o r E t h a n f o r I

(44.0% v s . 35.5%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ; j> < . 0 1 5 ) . The p e r c e n t a g e s o f Quad

r a n t D s u p e r d o m i n a n t s f o r N and P (17.1% and 17.7%, r e s p e c t i v e l y )

w e r e a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r t h a n t h o s e f o r S and J (2.2% and

4.1%, r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . The p e r c e n ta g e s of m odera te s and a v o i d a n t s f o r

N and P were a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y low e r than t h o se f o r S and J . There

were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s on Quadrant D f o r t h e TF s c a l e .

In summary, the MBTI e le m e n t s I , S, T, and J a l l showed s i g n i f i

c a n t l y h i g h e r dominance and supe rdom inance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on Quadrant

A t h a n d i d t h e e l e m e n t s E, N, F, and P. For Quadrant B, t h e e l e m e n t s

S and J were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more l i k e l y t o be dominant and supe rdom i

n a n t t h an were e l e m e n t s N and P. By c o n t r a s t , t h e e l e m e n t s E, N, F,

and P showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and l o w e r

avo idance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on Quadrant C than d i d t h e e l e m e n t s I , S, T,

and J . On Quadrant D, the e l e m e n t s N and P were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r

on dominance and superdominance than the e l e m e n t s S and J .

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance by MBTI TJ Types

The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e HBDI co d e c a t e g o r i e s f o r t h e MBTI TJ

t y p e s ( I S T J , INTJ, ESTJ, ENTJ) i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 16, w i t h t h e

t o t a l dominant group d i v id e d i n t o s u p e rdom ina n t s and t h e r e m a in in g

do m in a n t s , as d e s c r i b e d above. Because TJs c o n s t i t u t e d t h e l a r g e s t

p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , t h e f i n d i n g s f o r t h e TJs w e r e

s i m i l a r t o t h e g e n e r a l t r e n d s d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r f o r the e n t i r e popu

l a t i o n .


Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

8 0 81

T a b l e 16

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , S u p e r d o m i n a n c e , a n d A v o i d a n c e b y MBTI T J T y p e s

HBDIq u a d r a n tp a t t e r n

I S T J

MBTI T J

INTJ

t y p e

ESTJ ENTJ T o t a l T J s T o t a l in o n - T J s T o t a l

N X N Z N Z N Z N Z N % N Z

A

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 21 0 9 2 . 1 80 9 7 . 6 127 8 7 . 6 58 8 0 . 6 4 7 5 9 0 . 1 21 4 7 8 . 4 68 9 8 6 . I

S u p e r d o m i n a n t 1138 6 0 . 5 ] [ 42 5 1 . 2 ] I 65 4 4 . 8 ] [ 27 3 7 . 5 ] [2 7 2 5 1 . 6 ] [ 74 2 7 . 1 ] [ 3 4 6 4 3 . 2 ]

D o m i n a n t [ 72 3 1 . 6 ] [ 38 4 6 . 4 ] [ 62 4 2 . 8 ] [ 31 4 3 . 1 ] [2 0 3 3 8 . 5 ] [ 1 4 0 5 1 . 3 ] [3 4 3 4 2 . 9 ]

M o d e r a t e 18 7 . 9 1 1 . 2 18 1 2 . 4 13 1 8 . 0 50 9 . 5 56 2 0 . 5 106 1 3 . 3

A v o i d a n t 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 2 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 4 2 0 . 4 3 1 .1 5 0 . 6

B

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 196 8 6 . 0 51 6 2 . 2 130 8 9 . 7 50 6 9 . 4 42 7 8 1 . 0 179 6 5 . 6 60 6 7 5 . 7

S u p e r d o m i n a n t 1 59 2 5 . 9 ] [ 4 4 . 9 ] I 41 2 8 . 3 ] t 6 8 . 3 ] [ 1 1 0 2 0 . 9 ] [ 28 1 0 . 3 ] [ 1 3 8 1 7 . 2 ]

D o m i n a n t [ 1 3 7 6 0 . 1 ] [ 47 5 7 . 3 ] [ 89 6 1 . 4 ] [ 4 4 6 1 . 1 ] [ 3 1 7 6 0 . 1 ] [151 5 5 . 3 ] [ 4 6 8 5 8 . 5 ]M o d e r a t e 32 1 4 . 0 31 3 7 . 8 15 1 0 . 3 22 3 0 . 6 100 1 9 . 0 90 3 3 . 0 190 2 3 . 8

A v o i d a n t 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 4 1 . 4 4 0 . 5

C

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 13 5 . 7 7 8 . 5 20 1 3 . 8 13 1 8 . 1 53 1 0 . 1 76 2 7 . 9 129 1 6 . 1

S u p e r d o m i n a n t I 2 0 . 9 ] I 0 0 . 0 ] I 1 0 . 7 ] [ 3 4 - 2 ] I 6 1 . 2 ] [ 7 2 . 6 ] E 13 1 . 6 ]D o m i n a n t [ 11 4 . 8 ] f 7 8 . 5 ] [ 19 1 3 . 1 ] [ 10 1 3 . 9 ] [ 47 8 . 9 ] ( 69 2 5 . 3 ] [ 1 1 6 1 4 . 5 ]

M o d e r a t e 139 6 1 . 0 51 6 2 . 2 101 6 9 . 7 4 9 6 8 . 0 3 4 0 6 4 . 5 168 6 1 . 5 50 8 6 3 . 5A v o i d a n t : 76 3 3 . 3 24 2 9 . 3 24 1 6 . 5 10 1 3 . 9 13 4 2 5 . 4 29 1 0 . 6 163 2 0 . 4

D

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 4 4 1 9 . 3 41 5 0 . 0 34 2 3 . 4 4 5 6 2 . 5 164 3 1 . 1 149 5 4 . 6 31 3 3 9 . 1S u p e r d o m i n a n t [ 7 3 . 1 ] [ 6 7 . 3 ] I o 0 . 0 ] [ 8 1 1 . 1 ] ( 21 4 . 0 ] [ 41 1 5 . 0 ] [ 62 7 . 8 ]

D o m i n a n t [ 37 1 6 . 2 ] [ 35 4 2 . 7 ] [ 34 2 3 . 4 ] I 37 5 1 . 4 ] [ 1 4 3 2 7 . 1 ] [ 1 0 8 3 9 . 6 ] [ 2 5 1 3 1 . 3 ]M o d e r a t e 143 6 2 . 7 39 4 7 . 6 101 6 9 . 7 27 3 7 . 5 3 10 5 8 . 8 114 4 1 . 7 4 2 4 5 3 . 0A v o i d a n t 41 1 8 . 0 2 2 . 4 10 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 53 1 0 . 1 10 3 . 7 63 7 . 9

T o t a l 2 28 1 0 0 . 0 82 1 0 0 . 0 145 1 0 0 . 0 72 1 0 0 . 0 5 27 1 0 0 . 0 2 73 1 0 0 . 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 . 0


Over 80% o f each TJ type was dominant on Quadrant A, w i t h su p e r

d o m i n a n t s e x c e e d i n g t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s f o r a l l b u t t h e ENTJ

t y p e . P e r c e n t a g e s o f m o d e r a t e s on Q u a d r a n t A w e r e a l l u n d e r 20%,

w i t h a v o i d a n t s u n d e r 2%. The TJs a s a g r o u p showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y

h i g h e r Q u a d r a n t A d o m i n a n c e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h a n d i d n o n - T J s , w i t h

90.1% t o t a l d o m i n a n t s f o r TJs v e r s u s 78.4% f o r n o n - T J s . M o r e o v e r ,

51.6% o f t h e T J s w e r e s u p e r d o m i n a n t v e r s u s 27.1% o f t h e n o n - T J s ,

w h i l e 38.5% o f TJs were r em a in in g dom inan ts v e r s u s 51.3% o f non-TJs.

For Quadrant B, t h e TJs formed two d i s t i n c t g roups , t h e STJs and

t h e NTJs. The STJs w e r e h i g h e r i n t o t a l d o m i n a n t s (86.0% f o r ISTJ

and 89.7% f o r ESTJ) t h a n t h e NTJs (62.2% f o r INTJ and 69.4% f o r

ENTJ), a d i f f e r e n c e due to t h e l a r g e r p e r c e n ta g e s o f s upe rdom inan t s

f o r t h e STJs (25.9% f o r ISTJ and 28.3% f o r ESTJ) compared w i t h those

f o r t h e NTJs (4.9% f o r INTJ and 8.3% f o r ENTJ). The p e r c e n t a g e s f o r

t h e r e m a in i n g dom inan ts were s i m i l a r f o r a l l TJs , r a n g in g from 57.3%

to 61.4%. The TJs as a group were h i g h e r i n t o t a l dom in an ts a t 81.0%

t h a n t h e n o n - T J s a t 65.6%, and l o w e r i n m o d e r a t e s a t 19.0% t h a n t h e

n o n - T J s a t 33.0%.

F o r Q u a d r a n t C, t h e TJs a g a i n f o r m e d two d i s t i n c t g r o u p s , t h e

ETJs and t h e I T J s . The d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e r e f l e c t e d c h i e f l y i n t h e

p e r c e n t a g e s o f t o t a l dom in an ts and a v o id a n t s . The ITJs were lower i n

t o t a l d o m i n a n t s (5.7% f o r IS T J and 8.5% f o r INTJ) t h a n t h e ETJs

(13.8% f o r ESTJ and 18.1% f o r ENTJ), w h i l e t h e ETJs w e r e l o w e r i n

a v o i d a n t s (16.5% f o r ESTJ and 13.9% f o r ENTJ) t h a n t h e I T J s (33.3%

f o r ISTJ and 29.3% for INTJ). The TJs as a group were s i g n i f i c a n t l y

l o w e r i n t o t a l d o m i n a n t s a t 10.1% t h a n t h e n o n - T J s a t 27.9%, w h i l e


the non-TJs were lower i n a v o id a n t s a t 10.6% than the TJs a t 25.4%.

For Quadrant D, the TJs formed th e same two groups as f o r Quad

r a n t B, t h e NTJs and t h e ST Js , b u t w i t h e s s e n t i a l l y o p p o s i t e o u t

c o m e s . The NTJs w e re h i g h on t o t a l d o m i n a n t s (50.0% f o r INTJ and

62.5% f o r ENTJ) and low on m o d e r a t e s (47.6% f o r INTJ and 37.5% f o r

ENTJ) and a v o i d a n t s (2.4% f o r INTJ and 0% f o r ENTJ). The STJs w e re

low on dom inan ts (19.3% f o r ISTJ and 23.4% f o r ESTJ), h igh on moder

a t e s (62.7% f o r IS T J and 69.7% f o r ESTJ) , and r e l a t i v e l y h i g h on

a v o i d a n t s (18.0% f o r IS T J and 6.9% f o r ESTJ) . As a g r o u p , t h e TJs

were low e r a c r o s s the board on dom inan ts (31.1% t o t a l dom inan ts , 4.0%

s u p e r d o m i n a n t s , and 27.1% r e m a i n i n g d o m i n a n t s ) t h a n t h e n o n - T J s

(54.6% t o t a l d o m i n a n t s , 15.0% s u p e r d o m i n a n t s , and 39.6% r e m a i n i n g

dom in an ts ) . The TJs were a l s o h i g h e r on modera te s a t 58.8% th an the

n o n - T J s a t 41.7%, and h i g h e r on a v o i d a n t s a t 10.1% t h a n t h e n o n - T J s

a t 3.7%.

I n summary, MBTI TJ types were more l i k e l y t o be bo th dominant

and supe rdom inan t on Quadrant A than were non-TJs. The TJ types were

a l s o more h i g h l y r e p r e s e n t e d by dominance on Quadrant B and were l e s s

l i k e l y t o be dominan t on Quadrants C and D than were non-TJs. While

the d i f f e r e n c e s be tween the TJs and non-TJs were s t r i k i n g , t h e r e were

a l s o some s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among the TJ types t h em se lve s . In

Quadrant A, superdominance was g r e a t e r than dominance fo r a l l b u t the

ENTJ t y p e . F o r Q u a d r a n t s B and D, t h e T J s d i v i d e d i n t o two g r o u p s ,

d e p e n d i n g on w h e t h e r t h e y w e r e f o r m e d w i t h N o r S. F o r Q u a d r a n t B,

t h e STJs w e r e g r e a t e r t h a n t h e NTJs on b o t h d o m in a n c e and s u p e r

d o m i n a n c e . F o r Q u a d r a n t D, t h e NTJs w e r e h i g h e r on d o m in a n c e and


low e r on avo idance th an were t h e STJs. For Quadrant C, t h e TJs were

d i v i d e d i n t o two groups based on w he the r t h e y were formed w i t h E o r

I . The ETJs w e r e h i g h e r on d o m i n a n c e and l o w e r on a v o i d a n c e t h a n

were t h e IT Js .

HBDI Quadrant Mean Scores f o r MBTI Types and Elements

HBDI q u a d ra n t mean s c o r e s f o r t h e MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , TJs , and

n o n - T J s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 17. An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e o f t h e

s c o r e s f o r each q u a d ra n t d e m o n s t r a t e d s e v e r a l s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s

among t h e s e means.

Quadrant A means f o r ISTJ, ISTP, ESTJ, and INTJ were a l l g r e a t e r

th an 95 and were a l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than t h o se f o r the r e m a in

i n g t y p e s . The mean o f 103.0 f o r t h e IS T J t y p e was i n t h e s u p e r -

d o m i n a n t r a n g e ( g r e a t e r t h a n 1 0 0 ) , and c o n f i r m s t h e f i n d i n g ( s e e

Table 16) t h a t a lm o s t t w i c e as many ISTJs were supe rdom in an t as were

i n t h e n o r m a l r a n g e (67 t o 100) f o r d o m i n a n t s i n Q u a d r a n t A. M o re

o v e r , t h e means f o r ISTP, ESTJ, a nd INTJ w e r e c l o s e t o t h e s u p e r -

dominan t l e v e l and were t h e o n ly o t h e r mean v a lu e s f o r any q u a d ra n t

even to r each the 90 range . ENTP and combined F - ty p e s were l o w e s t on

Q uadran t A.

The Quadrant A d i f f e r e n c e s f o r t h e MBTI e le m e n t s were j u s t what

would be e xpe c te d from t h o se found f o r the t ypes . Quadrant A means

f o r I , S, T, and J , a l l c l o s e t o t h e s u p e r d o m i n a n t l e v e l , w e r e

g r e a t e r t h a n t h o s e f o r t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o p p o s i t e s , E, N, F, and P.

The TJ mean, a l s o a p p ro a c h in g th e superdom in an t l e v e l , was g r e a t e r

t h a n t h a t f o r non-TJs.


85Table 17

Mean HBPI Quadrant Scores by MBTI Types and MBTI Elements

MBTItype

HBDI quadrant mean score

N Quadrant A Quadrant B Quadrant C Quadrant D

ISTJ 228 103.0 *** 87.6 *** 41.8 * 51.8 *ISTP 51 96.7 *** 79.7 ** 46.7 * 62.5 *ESTJ 145 95.2 *** 89.1 *** 48.8 * 55.4 *ESTP 31 89.1 ** 81.5 ** 57.5 ** 61.9 *INTJ 82 9 9 . 9 *** 73.1 * 43.8 * 70.3 **INTP 56 89.4 ** 64.3 * 53.3 * 8 6 . 2 ***ENTJ 72 89.6 ** 73.3 * 51.1 * 76.6 **ENTP 44 83.9 * 69.1 * 57.0 ** 86.3 ***

Combined F types 91 77.4 * 80.1 ** 63.9 ** 6 8 . 2 **

*** > ** > * £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1

MBTIelement

E 336 8 8 . 8 81.4 53.7 66.7I 464 98.1 80.5 45.9 61.8

E vs . I £ < . 0 0 0 1 n . s . £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < .0005

S 501 97.3 87.2 46.9 55.0N 299 88.9 70.3 53.1 78.6

S vs . N £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1

T 709 96.4 81.0 47.3 63.3F 91 77.4 80.1 63.9 6 8 . 2

T vs . F £ < . 0 0 0 1 n . s . £ < . 0 0 0 1 n . s .

J 585 96.6 84.2 47.0 59.2P 215 87.7 71.7 55.0 76.4

J vs . P £ < .0006 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1

TJ 527 98.5 83.8 45.3 59.1Non-TJ 273 85.9 75.2 56.7 73.0TJ vs . non-TJ £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1 £ < . 0 0 0 1


The Q u a d r a n t B means f o r t h e two SJ t y p e s , ISTJ and ESTJ, w e r e

s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than th o s e f o r t h e r e m a in in g t y p e s , a f i n d i n g

c o n f i r m e d by the f a c t t h a t Quadrant B means were g r e a t e r f o r e l e m e n t s

S and J t h a n f o r N and P. A l t h o u g h t h e Q u a d r a n t B mean f o r TJs was

g r e a t e r than t h a t f o r non-TJs, t h i s f i n d i n g was due e n t i r e l y to t h e

d i f f e r e n c e be tween J and P ( the T and F means were no t d i f f e r e n t ) .

The Quadrant C means were h i g h e s t f o r the combined F - ty p e s and

the two EP t y p e s , ENTP and ESTP, and were g r e a t e r f o r e l e m e n t s E, N,

F, and P t h a n f o r t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o p p o s i t e s , I . S, T, and J . As

would be ex p e c t e d , the TJ mean f o r Quadrant C was lower than t h a t f o r

n o n - T J s .

The Q u a d r a n t D means f o r t h e tw o NP t y p e s , INTP and ENTP, w e r e

s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than th o s e f o r t h e r em a in ing types . Quadrant D

means were a l s o g r e a t e r f o r e l e m e n t s E, N, and P than f o r e l e m e n t s I ,

S, a nd J . The TJ mean f o r Q u a d r a n t D was l o w e r t h a n t h a t f o r n o n -

T Js .

In summary, t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f i n d i n g s f o r the q u a d ra n t s

c o n f i r m t h o s e fo u n d f o r t h e c h i - s q u a r e a n a l y s e s d i s c u s s e d a b o v e .

Q u a d r a n t A mean s c o r e s w e r e g r e a t e r f o r t h e I , S, T, and J c o m b i n a

t i o n s , w i t h TJ a s t h e s t r o n g e s t f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p , and ISTJ as t h e

s t r o n g e s t MBTI t y p e . Q u a d r a n t B mean s c o r e s w ere g r e a t e r f o r SJ

c o m b i n a t i o n s , w h i l e Q u a d r a n t C was s t r o n g e s t f o r Fs and EPs, and

Quadrant D, f o r t h e NP f u n c t i o n a l group.


Summary o f F in d in g s f o r t h e Resea rch Hypothes is

87

Each o f t h e t a b l e s a n a l y z e d f o r t h e r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s shows

e s s e n t i a l l y the same r e s u l t s , a l l i n accordance w i t h t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s

p r o v i d e d by t h i s h y p o t h e s i s — t h a t s e n s i n g ( S ) , t h i n k i n g (T) , and

j u d g in g (J) i n d i v i d u a l s would be d o m i n a n t p r i m a r i l y i n Q u a d r a n t s A

and B i n t h e l e f t h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h h i g h i n c i d e n c e o f AB d o m i n a n c e ,

and t h a t f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) would show p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant

C, w h i l e i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) would show p r e f e r e n c e

f o r Quadrant D.

The STJ c o m b i n a t i o n s w e re m o s t h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e AB

d o m i n a n c e p a t t e r n , a s e x h i b i t e d by b o t h t h e MBTI t y p e a n a l y s i s and

the MBTI e le m e n t a n a l y s i s . Moreover , a p p ro x im a te ly 89% o f the I , S,

T, and J i n d i v i d u a l s and 90% o f the TJs were dominant on Quadrant A,

and o v e r h a l f o f t h o s e w e r e s u p e r d o m i n a n t . F o r Q u a d r a n t B, t h e

e l e m e n t s S and J w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y more l i k e l y t o be d o m i n a n t and

s u p e r d o m i n a n t t h a n w e r e e l e m e n t s N and P. The TJ t y p e s w e re a l s o

more h i g h l y r e p r e s e n t e d by dominance on Quadrant B. The a n a l y s i s o f

v a r i a n c e f i n d i n g s f o r Quadrants A and B c on f i rm those found f o r the

c h i - s q u a r e a n a l y s e s d i s c u s s e d above . Q u a d r a n t A mean s c o r e s w e r e

g r e a t e r f o r the I . S, T, and J c o m b i n a t i o n s , w i th TJ as t h e s t r o n g e s t

f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p , and I S T J a s t h e s t r o n g e s t MBTI t y p e . Q u a d r a n t B

mean s c o r e s w e r e g r e a t e r f o r SJ c o m b i n a t i o n s . Thus , t h e HBDI l e f t

h e m i s p h e r i c dominance o f MBTI s e n s i n g , t h in k i n g , and ju d g ing i n d i v i d

u a l s was s t r o n g l y suppo r ted .


F - t y p e s showed a p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant C, w i th the e l e m e n t s E,

N, F, and P showing s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and

lo w e r avo idance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n than d i d t h e e l e m e n t s I , S, T, and J .

H o w e v e r , t h e E, N, F, P p r e f e r e n c e f o r Q u a d r a n t C was n o t so s t r o n g

a s was t h e I , S, T, and J p r e f e r e n c e f o r Q u a d r a n t s A o r B. A s i g

n i f i c a n t , bu t n o t h y p o t h e s i z e d , d i f f e r e n c e f o r the El s c a l e was a l s o

fo u n d f o r Q u a d r a n t C, w i t h ETJs h i g h e r on d o m in a n c e and l o w e r on

a v o i d a n c e t h a n I T J s . N on-TJs w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y more l i k e l y t o be

d o m i n a n t t h a n w e r e T Js . From t h e a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e , t h e mean

s c o r e s f o r Quadrant C were g r e a t e s t f o r E, N, F, and P c o m b in a t io n s ,

p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r Fs and EPs. Thus , t h e HBDI Q u a d r a n t C p r e f e r e n c e

f o r MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s was s u p p o r t e d .

I n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) p r e f e r r e d Quadrant D, w i t h

AD dominance more f r e q u e n t than any o t h e r dominance p a t t e r n . A lso ,

the e l e m e n t s N and P were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on superdominance th an

w e r e t h e e l e m e n t s S and J . TJs w e r e l e s s l i k e l y t o be d o m i n a n t on

Q u a d r a n t D t h a n w e r e n o n - T J s . Q u a d r a n t D mean s c o r e s w e re h i g h e s t

f o r t h e NP f u n c t i o n a l g r o u p , c o n f i r m i n g t h e c h i - s q u a r e f i n d i n g s .

Thus, t h e h y p o t h e s i z e d p r e f e r e n c e o f MBTI i n t u i t i v e s and p e r c e p t i v e s

f o r HBDI Quadrant D was suppo r ted .

In summary, a l l r e l a t i o n s h i p s s p e c i f i e d by the r e s e a r c h hypo the

s i s b e t w e e n t h e HBDI and t h e MBTI w e r e s u p p o r t e d by t h e d a t a f ro m

t h i s s tu dy .


F in d in g s R e l a t i n g t o Research Ques t io n 1

R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n 1 a s k s w h e t h e r t h e r e w e re MBTI d i f f e r e n c e s

b e t w e e n t h e 1986 -1 9 8 7 DSMC p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s t u d e n t s i n t h e s t u d y

p o p u l a t i o n and a group o f DSMC s t u d e n t s f rom th e 1982-1984 program

manager c l a s s e s ( N i d i f f e r , 1984).

Comparison o f MBTI D i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r Two S e t s o f DSMC C l a s s e s

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s and MBTI e le m e n t s f o r the 1986-

1987 DSMC c l a s s e s ( s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n ) and the 1982-1984 DSMC c l a s s e s

( N i d i f f e r , 1984) a r e p r e s e n t e d i n c o l u m n s 2 and 3 o f T a b l e 18, r e

s p e c t i v e l y . There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tween the MBTI

type d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r the two s e t s o f c l a s s e s . The most f r e q u e n t l y

o c c u r r i n g type i n b o th groups was ISTJ, which accoun ted f o r ove r 25%

o f each group.

No d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e f o u n d f o r t h e E l , SN, o r JP s c a l e s , b u t

t h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( £ < .0 1 1 ) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Ts and a

c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y s m a l l e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Fs i n the 1986-1987 group th an

i n t h e 1982-1984 group, though T was much more f r e q u e n t i n each group

t h a n was F. This i n c r e a s e i n t h e p e r c e n ta g e o f Ts was a l s o found in

t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j3 < .047) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f TJs i n t h e s t u d y

p o p u l a t i o n t h a n i n t h e 1982-1984 c l a s s e s .

Summary o f F i n d in g s f o r R e se a rc h Q u e s t io n 1

The f i n d i n g s f o r R esea rch Q ue s t ion 1 i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e two s e t s

o f DSMC c l a s s e s were q u i t e s i m i l a r i n t h e i r MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s , w i t h


90Table 18

Comparison of MBTI Types and MBTI Elements for 1986-87 DSMC Program Manager Students and Other Selected Managerial Populations

W O T 'T U U 4 J.type

1986-1987 DSMC classes N - 811

1982-1984 DSMC classes8 N - 595

M ilitary and c iv ilian army executives"

N - 60Managers and

administrators11 N - 7,463

Federal . executives0 N - 1,394

ISTJ 28.2Z 27.2Z 30.0Z 14.9Z 26.3ZISFJ 2.8 3.9 0.0 6.3 2.7INFJ 1.1 1.3 1.7 3.1 1.8INTJ 10.2 11.1 10.0 5.6 14.9ISTP 6.3 5.9 1.7 2.7 5.4ISFP 0.7 1.3 0.0 2.5 0.4INFP 1.2 2.9 0.0 4.6 2.4INTP 7.2 8.9 5.0 3.6 9.1ESTP 4.0 3.9 6.7 2.7 2.0ESFP 0.5 0.7 0.0 2.8 0.6ENFP 1.9 2.0 0.0 6.9 2.4ENTP 5.4 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.8ESTJ 18.0 13.3 23.3 17.0 12.3ESFJ 2.0 3.0 0.0 7.3 1.4ENFJ 1.4 1.2 0.0 4.9 1.9ENTJ 9.1 8.4 16.7 10.1 10.6

MBTIelement

E 42.2Z 37.5X 51.7Z 56.7Z 37.0ZI 57.8 62.5 48.3 43.3 63.0

S 62.5 59.2 61.7 56.3 51.1N 37.5 40.8 38.3 43.7 48.9

T 88.4 83.7 98.3 61.6 86.4F 11.6 16.3 1.7 38.4 13.6

J 72.9 69.4 81.7 69.3 71.9P 27.1 30.6 18.3 30.7 28.1

TJs 65.6Z 60.0Z 80.0Z 47. 7Z 64.1Z

aFrom "The Personality Factor: Software Technology and the 'Thinking Styles' of ProgramManagers" by K. E. N idiffer, 1984, Program Manager, 13(4), 10-18.

^From "Executive Personality Types: A Comparison of M ilitary and Civilian Leaders in aSingle O rganization” by J. E. DeWald. 1987, D isse rta tio n A bstracts In te rn a tio n a l, 47, 29S4A. !cFrom Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myera-Briggs Type Indicator byI. B. Myers & M. H. McCaulley, 1985, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

dFrom "Managers: Federal Executives" by R. T. P ickering , in C. P. Macdaid, M. H.McCaulley, & R. I. Kainz, 1986, Myers-Bngf.a TyP° In d ica to r: A tlas of Type Tables(unnumbered pages), Gainesville, FC: Center for Applications ot Psychological Type.

R e p ro d u c e d with p e rm iss ion of th e copyright ow ner. F u r th e r rep roduction prohibited w ithout perm iss ion .

the most f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r i n g types (TJs) becoming even, more f r e q u e n t

o v e r t h e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 - y e a r i n t e r v a l b e t w e e n t h e two s e t s o f

c l a s s e s .

F in d in g s R e l a t i n g t o Research Q ues t ion 2

Research Q ues t ion 2 asks w he the r t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s be tw een

t h e MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and t h o s e f o r

t h r e e o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s f ro m t h e l i t e r a t u r e (DeWald,

1986/1987; Myers & McCaulley, 1985; P i c k e r i n g , 1986).

MBTI Comparison f o r Study P o p u l a t i o n Versus O the r Manager ia l P o p u l a t i o n s

The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and f o r t h e

t h r e e o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s from th e l i t e r a t u r e a r e p r e s e n t e d

i n c o l u m n s 2, 4 , 5, and 6 , r e s p e c t i v e l y , o f T a b l e 18.

There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tw een the MBTI d i s t r i b u

t i o n s f o r DeWald's (1986/1987) Army e x e c u t i v e s and the s tu d y popu la

t i o n . In b o th groups, ISTJ was the most f r e q u e n t l y o c c u r r in g ty p e ,

f o l l o w e d by t h e o t h e r t h r e e TJ t y p e s . The d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e

MBTI s c a l e d i s t r i b u t i o n s were a l s o n o n s i g n i f i c a n t , excep t t h a t t h e r e

was a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Ts (j) < . 017 ) and o f TJs (j3 < .06) among

th e Army e x e c u t i v e s than i n the s tu d y p o p u la t io n .

The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r the Myers and McCaulley (1985) man

a g e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s w e re d i f f e r e n t (£_ < . 0 0 1 u n l e s s o t h e r w i s e

n o t e d ) f ro m t h o s e f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n . The m os t f r e q u e n t l y

o c c u r r i n g type f o r the managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s was ESTJ, w i th t h e


ISTJ p e r c e n ta g e on ly about h a l f t h a t f o r t h e s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n . Most

o f t h e t y p e d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e r e l a t e d t o t h e TF s c a l e . I n g e n e r a l ,

t h e F t y p e s w e r e more h i g h l y r e p r e s e n t e d among t h e m a n a g e r s and

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s than i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , w h i l e t h e r e v e r s e was

t r u e f o r t h e T t y p e s .

The MBTI s c a l e d i s t r i b u t i o n s were a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t

f o r t h e two groups. The managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s showed g r e a t e r

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r E t h a n f o r I , w h i l e I was more p r e v a l e n t i n t h e

s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n . W h i l e S, T, a n d J w e r e m ore f r e q u e n t t h a n t h e i r

r e s p e c t i v e o p p o s i t e s i n bo th g roups , they were s i g n i f i c a n t l y more so

(j^ < .036) f o r J i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n t h a n i n t h e Myers and

McCaulley (1985) group. Moreover , t h e p e rc e n ta g e o f TJs was s i g n i f i

c a n t l y lower f o r the managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , the o n ly group f o r

which i t was under 50%, than f o r the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n .

The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e P i c k e r i n g (1986) f e d e r a l execu

t i v e s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f rom t h o se f o r the s tu d y popu la

t i o n . Al though ISTJ was the modal type i n b o th groups , f o l l o w e d by

t h e o t h e r t h r e e TJ t y p e s , t h e r e were some s m a l l bu t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f

f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e two d i s t r i b u t i o n s . I n g e n e r a l , MBTI N t y p e s

( e . g . , INTJ and INTP) w e r e more f r e q u e n t l y (j> < .001) r e p r e s e n t e d

among t h e f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s , w h i l e t h o s e f o r m e d w i t h S ( e . g . , I S T J

and ESTJ) w e re more f r e q u e n t i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n . F o r t h e f e d

e r a l e x e c u t i v e s , t h e S and N p e r c e n t a g e s were about e q u a l , w h i l e over

62% o f the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n were Ss, a d i f f e r e n c e s i g n i f i c a n t a t j> <

.0001. Almost t w o - t h i r d s o f the f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s were I combina

t i o n s , c o m p a r e d w i t h j u s t o v e r h a l f o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n


( £ < . 0 1 7 ) . T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s on t h e TF o r JP

d im e ns ions o r f o r the TJ d i s t r i b u t i o n .

MBTI Comparison o f DSMC C i v i l i a n s Versus O the r M anager ia l P o p u l a t i o n s

Because c i v i l i a n managers were h e a v i l y r e p r e s e n t e d i n two o f the

m a n a g e r i a l g r o u p s f r o m t h e l i t e r a t u r e (Myers & M c C a u l l e y , 1985;

P i c k e r i n g , 1 986 ) , t h e c i v i l i a n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n w ere com

pared s e p a r a t e l y w i t h t h e s e two groups. The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r

t h e c i v i l i a n p o r t i o n o f the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n and the two groups from

th e l i t e r a t u r e a r e p r e s e n t e d i n Table 19.

F o r t h e c i v i l i a n s i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , p e r c e n t a g e s o f Ns,

P s , and Fs h a v e i n c r e a s e d s l i g h t l y o v e r t h o s e f o r t h e e n t i r e s t u d y

p o p u l a t i o n , b r i n g i n g t h e i r MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s s o m e w h a t c l o s e r t o

t h o se f o r t h e Myers and McCaulley (1985) group, enough c l o s e r i n t h e

c a s e o f t h e Ns and Ps t o c o m p l e t e l y r em ove t h e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r

e n c e s t h a t w e r e f o u n d when t h e t o t a l s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n was u s e d f o r

the compar ison .

N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e r e a r e s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tween the

MBTI type d i s t r i b u t i o n s . Both groups were more l i k e l y t o be STJ th an

any o t h e r t y p e g r o u p i n g , b u t t h e m a n a g e r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s w e r e

m o s t l i k e l y t o be EST Js , w h i l e t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s w e re

m o s t l i k e l y t o be I S T J s . The F.I d i f f e r e n c e i s s i g n i f i c a n t (j> <

.0 0 1 ) , w i t h I s c o n s t i t u t i n g more t h a n h a l f o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n

c i v i l i a n s w h i l e Es c o n s t i t u t e a m a j o r i t y o f the managers and a d m i n i s

t r a t o r s . Though t h e m a j o r i t y o f b o t h g r o u p s w e r e Ts, T t y p e s w e r e

more p r e v a l e n t among th e s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s , w h i l e F t ypes


Table 19Comparison of MBTI Types and MBTI Elements for 1986-87

DSMC C iv i l i an Program Manager Students and Other C iv i l i an Managers and Adminis t ra tors

MBTItype

1986-1987 DSMC c i v i l i a n s

N - 230Managers and

admin is t ra to rs N - 7,463

Federal h execut ives0 N =■ 1,394

ISTJ 22.62 14.92 26.32ISFJ 3.0 6.3 2.7INFJ 1.3 3.1 1 . 8

INTJ 1 2 . 6 5.6 14.9ISTP 5.7 2.7 5.4ISFP 1.3 2.5 0.4INFP 1.3 4.6 2.4INTP 1 0 . 0 . 3.6 9.1ESTP 4.4 2.7 2 . 0

ESFP 0 . 0 2 . 8 0 . 6

ENFP 3.5 6.9 2.4ENTP 8.3 4.9 5.8ESTJ 15.2 17.0 12.3ESFJ 1.7 7.3 1.4ENFJ 3.0 4.9 1.9ENTJ 6 . 1 1 0 . 1 1 0 . 6

MBTIelement

E 42.22 56.72 37.02I 57.8 43.3 63.0

S 53.9 56.3 51.1N 46.1 43.7 48.9

T 84.8 61.6 86.4F 15.2 38.4 13.6

J 65.7 69.3 71.9P 34.3 30.7 28.1

TJs 56.52 47.72 64.12

aFrom Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-BrieesType Ind ica to r by I.TTI Myers & M. H. McCaulley, 198b, Palo Alto, CAT Consult ing Psychologis ts Press .

From "Managers: F e d e r a l E x e c u t i v e s " by R. T. P i c k e r i n g , in C. P.Macdaid, M. H. McCaulley, & R. I . Kainz, 1986, M yers -Br ipes Type Ind ica to r : Atlas of Type Tables (unnumbered pages,), Gainesv i l le , FL:Center fo r Applicat ions of Psychological Type.


were more f r e q u e n t l y r e p r e s e n t e d among the managers and a d m i n i s t r a

t o r s . TJ t y p e s s t i l l d o m i n a t e b o t h g r o u p s , b u t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s

a lm o s t 1 0 p e r c e n ta g e p o i n t s l e s s t h an i t was be tween the t o t a l s tu d y

p o p u l a t i o n and the managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . N o n e th e le s s , the TJ

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s s t i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j> < . 0 0 1 ) g r e a t e r f o r t h e

s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s than f o r t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s .

The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s and

th e P i c k e r i n g (1986) f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s show no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r

e n c e s f o r t y p e , e l e m e n t , o r T J s . The l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e i s f o r t h e

JP s c a l e ( £ < . 0 5 4 ) , w h e r e t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f Ps f o r

the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s has r e s u l t e d i n a l a r g e r p e rc e n ta g e o f

Ps t h an i s found f o r the f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s .

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r R e se a rc h Q u e s t io n 2

While t h e r e a r e s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tween the MBTI d i s t r i

b u t i o n s f o r t h e s tudy p o p u l a t i o n on th e one hand and the t h r e e mana

g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s on the o t h e r , the d i f f e r e n c e s appear to be j u s t o f

d e g r e e . A l l f o u r g r o u p s a r e d o m i n a t e d by TJ t y p e s and ha ve g r e a t e r

p e r c e n t a g e s o f S, T, and J i n d i v i d u a l s t h a n o f N, F, and P i n d i v i d

u a l s . The E l s c a l e i s t h e o n l y one f o r w h i c h t h e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e

d i r e c t i o n a l . More t h a n h a l f o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n and o f t h e

f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s a re I s , w h i l e ove r h a l f o f the Army e x e c u t i v e s and

t h e managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e Es. Even the ve ry s t r o n g F - ty p e

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r the managers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , much h i g h e r t h a n

t h a t f o r any o f the o t h e r p o p u l a t i o n s , c o n s t i t u t e d a m i n o r i t y i n t h a t

g r o u p . Thus , t h e g e n e r a l p a t t e r n o f h e a v y TJ r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , w i t h


m a j o r i t i e s o f S, T, and J i n d i v i d u a l s , p r e v a i l s i n a l l p o p u l a t i o n s .

The g e n e r a l s i m i l a r i t y o f t h e MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r the s tu d y

p o p u l a t i o n and t h e t h r e e m a n a g e r i a l g r o u p s i s s t r e n g t h e n e d by t h e

com pa r i sons be tween the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n c i v i l i a n s and the two mana

g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s which were l a r g e l y c i v i l i a n , where the d i f f e r e n c e s

a r e a t t e n u a t e d in t h e one case and c o m p l e t e l y removed in the o t h e r .

F in d in g s R e l a t i n g t o Research Q ues t ion 3

R esearch Q ues t ion 3 asks w he the r t h e r e were MBTI or HBDI d i f f e r

ences be tween males and fem a les .

MBTI Types and MBTI Elements f o r Males and Females

Tab le 20 d i s p l a y s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and

TJ ty p es f o r m ales and f o r f em a le s . A p prox im a te ly t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e

m a l e a w e r e TJ t y p e s a s c o m p a r e d w i t h l e s s t h a n h a l f o f t h e f e m a l e s

( £ < .007), a d i f f e r e n c e d e m o n s t r a t e d p r i m a r i l y f o r ISTJs, where t h e

p e r c e n ta g e o f m ales was more t h an t w i c e t h a t o f f em a les . Almost t w o -

t h i r d s o f t h e m a l e s w e r e Ss , a s c o m p a r e d w i t h l e s s t h a n h a l f o f t h e

f e m a le s (ja < .013). Al though bo th males and f e m a le s i n t h i s popu la

t i o n were p r e d o m i n a n t l y Ts, f em a les showed g r e a t e r F r e p r e s e n t a t i o n

t h a n d i d m a l e s (ja < . 0 5 5 ) . T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s

be tw een males and f em a le s on the El o r JP d im e ns ions .

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r Males and Females

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI dominance and avo idance p a t t e r n s f o r

m a l e s and f o r f e m a l e s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 21. M a le s w e r e


97Table 20

MBTI Types and MBTI Elements by Sex

Male Female To t a l

MBTIty p e N % N % N %

ISTJ 2 2 2 29 .2 7 14.0 229 28 .2

ISTP 47 6 . 2 4 8 . 0 51 6 .3ESTP 30 3 .9 2 4 ,0 32 4 . 0

ESTJ 138 18.1 8 16.0 146 . 18 .0

INTJ 78 10 .3 5 1 0 . 0 83 1 0 . 2

INTP 53 7 .0 5 1 0 . 0 58 7 .2

ENTP 39 5 .1 5 1 0 . 0 44 5 . 4

ENTJ 70 9 .2 4 8 . 0 74 9 .1

Combined F t y p e s 84 1 1 . 0 1 0 2 0 . 0 94 1 1 . 6

T o t a l 761 1 0 0 . 0 50 1 0 0 . 0 811 1 0 0 . 0

MBTIe le m en t

E 317 41 .7 25 50 .0 342 4 2 .2

I 444 58 .3 25 50 .0 469 5 7 .8

S 484 63 .6 23 46 .0 507 62 .5

N 277 36 .4 27 54 .0 304 37 .5

T 677 89 .0 40 80 .0 717 8 8 .4

F 84 1 1 . 0 1 0 2 0 . 0 94 1 1 . 6

J 559 73 .5 32 64 .0 591 72 .9

P 2 0 2 26 .5 18 36 .0 2 2 0 27 .1

TJs 508 6 6 . 8 24 48 .0 532 65 .6

Non-TJs 253 33 .2 26 52 .0 279 3 4 .4


98

HBDI Dominant

Table

and Avoidant

2 1

Quadrant P a t t e r n s by Sex

HBDIdominantq u a d ra n tp a t t e r n

Male Female To ta l

N % N % N %

A 35 4 .7 3 6 . 1 38 4 .8B 1 1 1.5 0 0 . 0 11 1.4C 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1

D 6 0 . 8 0 0 . 0 6 0 . 8

AB 356 4 7 .4 14 28 .6 370 46 .2AC 3 0 .4 0 0 . 0 3 0 .4AD 1 1 2 14.9 5 1 0 . 2 117 14.6BC 2 2 2 .9 5 1 0 . 2 27 3.4BD 2 2 2 .9 0 0 . 0 2 2 2 . 8

CD 14 1.9 4 8 . 2 18 2 . 2

ABC 32 4 . 3 4 8 . 2 36 4 .5ABD 1 0 2 13.6 4 8 . 2 106 13.3ACD 6 0 . 8 4 8 . 2 1 0 1 . 2

BCD 2 0 2.7 5 1 0 . 2 25 3.1

ABCD 8 1 . 1 1 2 . 0 9 1 . 1

None 1 O.i 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1

HBDIa v o id a n tq u a d ra n tp a t t e r n

A 3 0 .4 1 2 . 0 4 0 .5B 2 0 .3 0 0 . 0 2 0 . 2

C 138 18.4 0 0 . 0 138 17.3D 37 4 . 9 2 4 .1 39 4 .9

BC 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1

CD 23 3.1 0 0 . 0 23 2 .9

ABCD 1 0 . 1 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1

None 546 72.7 46 93 .9 592 74.0

T o t a l 751 1 0 0 . 0 49 1 0 0 . 0 800 1 0 0 . 0


r e p r e s e n t e d more f r e q u e n t l y ( £ < . 0 0 0 1 ) among the t h r e e most f r e q u e n t

p a t t e r n s , AB, AD, and ABD, a t a b o u t 76% t h a n w e re f e m a l e s a t 47%.

F e m a l e s , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on p a t t e r n s

t h a t i n c lu d e d Quadrant C dominance.

O n ly 6 % o f t h e f e m a l e s showed a v o i d a n c e t o a ny q u a d r a n t , and

none o f t h o se t o Quadrant C, w h i l e ove r a q u a r t e r o f the males showed

a v o i d a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y t o Q u a d r a n t C, a d i f f e r e n c e s i g n i f i c a n t a t

£ < . 0 0 2 .

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance f o r Males and Females

Table 22 c o n t a i n s the d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d ra n t s f o r males

and f e m a l e s , w i t h t h e t o t a l d o m i n a n t s d i v i d e d i n t o t h o s e who w ere

s u p e r d o m i n a n t (HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e r e m a i n i n g d o m i

n a n t s , who sc o re d in the normal dominance range (67 to 100).

Quadrant A showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r ( £ < .002) r e p r e s e n t a

t i o n f o r m ales t h an f o r f em a les . F u r th e r m o r e , over h a l f o f the male

dom inan ts were s u p e rdom ina n t s , compared w i t h l e s s than a q u a r t e r o f

t h e f e m a l e d o m i n a n t s (j> < .001) . S i g n i f i c a n t l y (j^ < .0001) more

fem a le s than males were dominant on Quadrant C, w h i l e males showed a

g r e a t e r t endency to avo idance on Quadrant C th an d id f em a les . There

were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s be tween males and fem a les on Quad

r a n t s B and D.

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r Resea rch Q u e s t io n 3

M a le s show ed g r e a t e r TJ , T, and S r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h a n d i d

f e m a le s , who showed g r e a t e r p e r c e n ta g e s o f Ns and Fs. Only f o r the


100

Table 22

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Quadrant Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance by Sex

HBDIq u a d ra n t

Male Female T o t a l

N % N % N %

AT o t a l dominant 654 87 .1 35 71 .4 689 86 .1

Superdominant [338 45 .0] [ 8 16.3] [346 43 .2 ]Dominant [316 42 .1 ] [ 27 55 .1 ] [343 42.9]

Moderate 93 12 .4 13 26.5 106 13.3Avoidant 4 0 .5 1 2 .0 5 0 .6

BT o t a l dominant 573 76 .3 33 67 .3 606 75.7

Superdominant [133 17.7] [ 5 10 .2] [138 17.2]Dominant [440 58 .6] [ 28 57 .1 ] [468 58.5]

Moderate 174 23 .2 16 32.7 190 23 .8Avoidant 4 0 .5 0 0 .0 4 0 .5

CT o t a l dominant 106 14.1 23 4 6 .9 129 16.1

Superdominant [ 9 1.2] [ 4 8 .1] [ 13 1 .6 ]Dominant [ 97 12.9] [ 19 38 .8] [116 14.5]

Moderate 482 64 .2 26 53.1 508 63.5Avoidant 163 21 .7 0 0 .0 163 20 .4

DT o t a l dominant 290 38 .6 23 4 6 .9 313 39.1

Superdominant [ 55 7.3] [ 7 14.3] I 62 7 .8 ]Dominant [235 31 .3] [ 16 32.6] [251 31 .3]

Moderate 400 53 .3 24 49 .0 424 53.0Avo idant 61 8 .1 2 4 .1 63 7 .9

T o t a l 751 100.0 49 100.0 800 100.0

Note. Bracke ted ( supe rdom inan t and dominant) v a lu e s a r e i n c l u d e d in t o t a l dominant va lu e .


SN d i m e n s i o n , h o w e v e r , was t h e d i f f e r e n c e one o f d i r e c t i o n r a t h e r

t h a n d e g r e e . I n t u i t i v e s (Ns) w ere i n t h e m a j o r i t y among f e m a l e s ,

w h i l e males were p r e d o m i n a n t ly s e n s o r s (Ss).

Males were much more f r e q u e n t l y dominant and even supe rdom inan t

on Quadrant A t h a n were f em a les . Females showed a s t r o n g dominance

p r e f e r e n c e f o r Q u a d r a n t C, w h i l e m a l e s w e r e more i n c l i n e d t o be

m odera te o r a v o id a n t on t h i s quad ran t .

F in d in g s R e l a t i n g t o Research Q ue s t ion 4

Research Q ue s t ion 4 a sks w h e th e r t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e

MBTI o r HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n s among the b ranches o f t h e armed s e r v i c e s .

D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and Elements f o r Each Branch o f S e rv ic e

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and TJs a r e shown i n

Table 23. Although the f o u r TJ types were the most f r e q u e n t f o r a l l

s e r v i c e b r a n c h e s and f o r t h e n o n s e r v i c e g o v e r n m e n t m a n a g e r s , TJ

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n was s t r o n g e r (p̂ < .0 8 9 ) f o r t h e Army t h a n f o r t h e

managers i n t h e o t h e r b ranc he s o r i n government o f f i c e s . Managers in

a l l t h r e e b ran c h e s o f the armed s e r v i c e s were r e p r e s e n t e d s i g n i f i

c a n t l y ( £ < .049) more t h a n were t h e government managers on the ISTJ

t y p e . A s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p_ < .0001) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f g o v e r n m e n t

m a n a g e r s , on t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e re i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) t h a n was t h e c a s e

f o r t h e armed f o r c e s manage rs , who were p r e d o m i n a n t ly s e n s o r s (Ss).


102T able 23

MBTI Types and MBTI Elements by Branch of Service

Army Air Force NavyGovernment

and industry Total

MBTItype N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z

ISTJ 83 33.9 57 23.1 79 31.0 10 15.6 229 28.2

ISTP 17 6.9 16 6.5 16 6.3 2 3.1 51 6.3

ESTP 9 3.7 11 4.4 10 3.9 2 3.1 32 4.0

ESTJ 54 22.0 42 17.0 40 15.7 10 15.6 146 18.0

INTJ 17 6.9 32 12.9 25 9.8 9 14.1 83 10.2

INTP 18 7.3 19 7 .; 15 5.9 6 9.4 58 7.2

ENTP 7 2.9 14 5.7 15 5.9 8 12.5 44 5.4

ENTJ 20 8.2 20 8.1 25 9.8 9 14.1 74 9.1

Combined F types 20 8.2 36 14.6 30 11.7 8 12.5 94 11.6

Total 245 100.0 247 100.0 155 100.0 64 100.0 811 100.0

MBTIelement

E 99 40.4 106 42.9 102 40.0 35 54.7 342 42.2

I 146 59.6 141 57.1 153 60.0 29 45.3 469 57.8

S 175 71.4 146 59.1 159 62.4 27 42.2 507 62.5

N 70 28.6 101 40.9 96 37.6 37 57.8 304 37.5

T 225 91.8 211 85.4 225 88.2 56 87.5 717 88.4

F 20 8.2 36 14.6 30 11.8 8 12.5 94 11.6

J 188 76.7 174 70.5 185 72.6 44 68.8 591 72.9

P 57 23.3 73 29.5 70 27.4 20 31.2 220 27.1

TJs 174 71.0 151 61.1 169 66.3 38 59.4 532 65.6

Non-TJs 71 29.0 96 38.9 86 33.7 26 40.6 279 34.4


103

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r Each Branch o f S e r v ic e

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e HBDI dominance and avo idance p a t t e r n s

f o r each b ranch o f s e r v i c e and f o r t h e government managers a r e p r e

s e n t e d i n Table 24. There a r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n p a t t e r n

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , e i t h e r f o r dominance o r f o r avoidance , among managers

i n t h e t h r e e b ranches o f s e r v i c e and o t h e r government a g e n c i e s .

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance f o r S e r v i c e Branches

T a b l e 25 c o n t a i n s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d r a n t s f o r t h e

m a n a g e r s i n e a c h b r a n c h o f s e r v i c e and i n t h e g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s ,

w i t h the t o t a l dom inan ts d i v i d e d i n t o t h o se who were superdom inan t

(HBDI q u a d ra n t s c o re > 100) and the r em a in ing dom inan ts , who sco red

i n t h e n o r m a l d o m i n a n c e r a n g e (67 t o 100) . M a n a g e r s i n t h e Army

sh o w e d a s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j> < .01) g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Q u a d r a n t B

dominance th an d i d t h o s e i n t h e o t h e r b ranches o r i n the government

a g e n c i e s . M a n a g e r s i n t>»\? g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s w e r e s o m e w ha t more

(j> < .056) i n c l i n e d t o be d o m i n a n t on Q u a d r a n t D t h a n w e r e t h o s e i n

any o f the armed s e r v i c e s b ranches . There were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f

f e r e n c e s among th e s e r v i c e b ran c h e s and government a g e n c i e s on Quad

r a n t s A o r C.

Summary o f F in d in g s f o r Resea rch Q u e s t io n 4

The MBTI d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r a l l s e r v i c e b ranches were e s s e n t i a l l y

a l i k e , e xc ep t f o r the s t r o n g p r e s e n c e o f i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) among man

a g e r s i n the government a g e n c i e s , as compared w i t h the m a j o r i t y o f


104

Table 24

HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant Patterns by Branch of Service

HBDIdominant

Army Air Force NavyGovernment

and industry Totalquadrantpattern N Z N X N Z N Z N Z

A 10 4.1 12 5.0 14 5.5 2 3.3 38 4.8B 5 2.0 2 0.8 4 1.6 0 0.0 11 1.4C 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1D 2 0.8 4 1.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 6 0.8

AB 121 49.4 109 45.0 115 45.6 25 41.0 370 46.2AC 1 0.4 2 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 0.4AD 22 9.0 40 16.5 42 16.7 13 21.3 117 14.6BC 9 3.7 6 2.5 11 4.4 1 1.6 27 3.4BD 9 3.7 8 3.3 4 1.6 1 1.6 22 2.8CD 4 1.6 3 1.2 9 3.6 2 3.3 18 2.2

ABC 14 5.7 6 2.5 14 5.5 2 3.3 36 4.5ABD 37 15.1 32 13.2 30 11.9 7 11.5 106 13.3ACD 2 0.8 5 2.1 1 0.4 2 3.3 10 1.2BCD 7 2.9 7 2.9 6 2.4 5 8.2 25 3.1

ABCD 2 0.8 5 2.1 1 0.4 1 1.6 9 1.1

None 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 1 0.1

HBDIavoidantquadrantpa tte rn

A 1 0.4 1 0.4 1 0.4 1 1.6 4 0.5B 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.4 1 1.6 2 0.2C 38 15.5 43 17.8 48 19.0 9 14.8 138 17.3D 14 5.7 15 6.2 9 3.6 1 1.6 39 4.9

BC 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.1CD 11 4.5 5 2.1 7 2.8 0 0.0 23 2.9

ABCD 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.4 0 0.0 1 0.1

None 181 73.9 177 73.1 185 73.4 49 80.3 592 74.0

Total 245 100.0 242 100.0 252 100.0 61 100.0 800 100.0

R e p ro d u c e d with perm iss ion of th e copyright ow ner. F u r th e r rep roduction prohibited w ithout perm iss ion .

Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

105 106

T a b l e 25

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , S u p e r d o m i n a n c e , a n d A v o i d a n c e b y B r a n c h o f S e r v i c e

HBDIq u a d r a n t

Army A i r F o r c e NavyG o v e r n m e n t

a n d i n d u s t r y T o t a l

N Z N X N Z N X N X

A

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 209 8 5 . 3 211 8 7 . 2 217 8 6 . 1 52 8 5 . 3 6 8 9 8 6 . 1

S u p e r d o m i n a n t [ 98 4 0 . 0 ] [ 1 1 7 4fc.4 ] [107 4 2 . 4 ] [ 24 3 9 . 3 ] [ 3 4 6 4 3 . 2 ]

D o m i n a n t m i 4 5 . 3 ] ( 94 38 8] [ 1 1 0 4 3 . 7 ] [ 28 4 5 . 9 ] [ 3 4 3 4 2 . 9 ]

M o d e r a t e 35 1 4 . 3 30 1 2 . 4 33 1 3 . 1 8 1 3 . 1 106 1 3 . 3

A v o i d a n t 1 0 . 4 1 0 . 4 2 0 . 8 1 L . 6 5 0 . 6

BT o t a l d o m i n a n t 20 4 3 3 . 3 175 7 2 . 3 185 7 3 . 4 42 6 8 . 9 6 0 6 7 5 . 7

S u p e r d o m i n a n t [ 57 2 3 . 3 ] [ 34 1 4 .0 1 [ 42 1 6 . 7 ] [ 5 8 . 2 ] [ 1 3 8 1 7 . 2 ]

D o m i n a n t [ 1 4 7 6 0 . 0 ] [141 5 8 . 3 ] [ 1 4 3 5 6 . 7 ] [ 37 6 0 . 7 ] [ 4 6 8 5 8 . 5 ]

M o d e r a t e 41 1 6 . 7 66 2 7 . 3 65 2 5 . 8 18 2 9 . 5 190 2 3 . 8

A v o i d a n t 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 4 2 0 . 8 1 1 . 6 4 0 . 5

C

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 39 1 5 . 9 35 1 4 . 5 42 1 6 . 7 13 2 1 . 3 12 9 1 6 . 1

S u p e r d o m i n a n t [ 3 1 . 2 ] I 4 1 . 7 ] I 4 1 . 6 ] [ 2 3 . 3 ] I 13 1 . 6 ]

D o m i n a n t [ 36 1 4 . 7 ] [ 31 1 2 . 8 ] f 38 1 5 . 1 ] [ 11 1 8 . 0 ] [ 1 1 6 1 4 . 5 ]

M o d e r a t e 157 6 4 . 1 158 6 5 . 3 154 6 1 . 1 39 6 3 . 9 5 0 8 6 3 . 5

A v o i d a n t 49 2 0 . 0 49 2 0 . 2 56 2 2 . 2 9 1 4 . 8 163 2 0 . 4

D

T o t a l d o m i n a n t 85 3 4 . 7 104 4 3 . 0 93 3 6 . 9 31 5 0 . 8 31 3 3 9 . 1

S u p e r d o m i n a n t [ 13 5 . 3 ] [ 22 9 . 1 ] [ 18 7 . 1 ] [ 9 1 4 . 7 ] I 62 7 . 8 ]

D o m i n a n t [ 72 2 9 . 4 ] [ 82 3 3 . 9 ] I 75 2 9 . 8 ] [ 22 3 6 . 1 ] [ 2 5 1 3 1 . 3 ]

M o d e r a t e 135 5 5 . 1 118 4 8 . 8 142 5 6 . 4 29 4 7 . 5 4 2 4 5 3 . 0

A v o i d a n t 25 1 0 . 2 20 8 . 2 17 6 . 7 1 1 . 6 6 3 7 , 9

T o t a l 245 1 0 0 . 0 242 1 0 0 . 0 25 2 1 0 0 . 0 61 1 0 0 . 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 . 0


s e n s o r s ( S s ) among t h o s e i n t h e a rm e d s e r v i c e s . W h i l e t h e r e was

s u b s t a n t i a l l y g r e a t e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Quadrant B dominan ts among

Army managers than among t h e o t h e r s and a s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n ta g e

o f Quadrant D dom in an ts among managers i n government a g e n c i e s than

among t h e o t h e r s , t h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e

b r a n c h e s o f t h e a rm e d s e r v i c e s and t h e g o v e r n m e n t a g e n c i e s i n t h e

d i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI dominance o r avo idance p a t t e r n s .

F in d in g s R e l a t i n g to Research Ques t ion 5

Research Q ues t ion 5 a sks w he the r t h e r e were MBTI o r HBDI d i f f e r

ences be tween c i v i l i a n and m i l i t a r y managers .

D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types and Elements f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and TJs a r e p r e s e n t e d

i n T a b l e 26. More t h a n t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e m i l i t a r y m a n a g e r s a r e TJ

t y p e s , as compared w i t h j u s t over h a l f o f the c i v i l i a n managers <

.001), a d i f f e r e n c e borne o u t by the f a c t t h a t the most f r e q u e n t MBTI

t y p e s f o r t h e c i v i l i a n s a r e n o t a l l TJ t y p e s — F t y p e s a r e t i e d w i t h

ESTJ f o r t h e second most f r e q u e n t type . ISTJ, ESTJ, and ENTJ a r e a l l

s i g n i f i c a n t l y (jd < .004) g r e a t e r f o r t h e m i l i t a r y managers , w h i l e the

F t y p e s , INTJ, INTP, and ENTP a re a l l g r e a t e r f o r the c i v i l i a n manag

e r s .

While I , S, T, and J a r e a l l r e p r e s e n t e d i n g r e a t e r numbers than

t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o p p o s i t e s f o r bo th m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n managers ,

t h e r e i s a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Ss (j) < . 0 0 1 ) , Ts


108

Table 26

MBTI Types and MBTI Elements by M i l i t a r y or C i v i l i a n S t a t u s

M i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o t a l

MBTItype N % N % N %

ISTJ 177 30 .5 52 2 2 .6 229 28.2

ISTP 38 6 .5 13 5 .7 51 6.3

ESTP 22 3 .8 10 4 .3 32 4 . 0

ESTJ 111 19.1 35 15.2 146 18.0

INTJ 54 9 .3 29 12 .6 83 10.2

INTP 35 6 .0 23 10.0 58 7 .2

ENTP 25 4 .3 19 8 .3 44 5 .4

ENTJ 60 10.3 14 6 .1 74 9.1

Combined F ty p e s 59 10 .2 35 15.2 94 11.6

T o t a l 581 100.0 230 100.0 811 100.0

MBTIelemen t

E 245 4 2 .2 97 42 .2 342 42 .2

I 336 57 .8 133 57 .8 469 57 .8

S 383 65 .9 124 53 .9 507 62.5

N 198 34.1 106 46 .1 304 37 .5

T 522 89 .9 195 84 .8 717 88 .4

F 59 10.1 35 15.2 94 11.6

J 440 75.7 151 65.7 591 72.9

P 141 24 .3 79 34 .3 220 27.1

TJs 402 6 9 .2 130 56 .5 532 65 .6

Non-TJs 179 30 .8 100 43 .5 279 34 .4


109

(j^ < . 0 4 2 ) , and J s (j> < .004) f o r t h e m i l i t a r y m a n a g e r s t h a n f o r t h e

c i v i l i a n s .

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f the HBDI dominance and avoidance p a t t e r n s

f o r t h e m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s a r e c o m p a red i n T a b l e 27.

There a r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n e i t h e r dominance o r avo id ance

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n be tween the m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n managers .

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance f o r M i l i t a r y and C i v i l i a n s

Tab le 28 c o n t a i n s the d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI qu a d ra n t s f o r m i l i

t a r y and c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s , w i t h t h e t o t a l d o m i n a n t s d i v i d e d i n t o

t h o s e who w e r e s u p e r d o m i n a n t (HBDI q u a d r a n t s c o r e > 100) and t h e

r e m a in i n g dom inan ts , who sc o re d in the normal dominance range (67 t o

100) . T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r Q u a d r a n t A. F o r

Quadrant B, t h e r e was g r e a t e r (j> < .025) dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o r

m i l i t a r y managers than f o r c i v i l i a n s , a d i f f e r e n c e t h a t c a r r i e d ove r

i n t o g r e a t e r (j>_ < .014) superdominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n as we l l .

On th e o t h e r hand, c i v i l i a n managers showed g r e a t e r dominance

p r e f e r e n c e ( ^ < . 068) and g r e a t e r s u p e r d o m i n a n c e p r e f e r e n c e (j3 <

.006) on Quadrant C, w h i l e m i l i t a r y managers showed g r e a t e r avo idance

f o r t h i s q u a d r a n t . C i v i l i a n s w e r e a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j> < .019 )

h i g h e r on Quadrant D dominance than were m i l i t a r y managers .


Table 27HBDI Dominant and Avoidant Quadrant P a t t e r n s

by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S t a t u s

HBDIdominantq u a d ra n tp a t t e r n

M i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o t a l

N % N % N Z

A 29 5.1 9 4 .0 38 4 . 8B 9 1 .6 2 0 .9 11 1 .4C 1 0 .2 0 0 .0 1 0 .1D 5 0 .9 1 0 .4 6 0 .8

AB 275 47 .9 95 42 .0 370 4 6 .2AC 3 0.5 0 0 .0 3 0 .4AD 77 13.4 40 17.7 117 14 .6BC 19 3 .3 8 3 .5 27 3 .4BD 20 3 .5 2 0 .9 22 2 .8CD 7 1 .2 11 4 .9 18 2 .2

ABC 23 4 .9 8 3 .5 36 4 .5ABD 75 13.1 31 13.7 106 13.3ACD 5 0 .9 5 2 .2 10 1 .2BCD 14 2.4 11 4 .9 25 3 .1

ABCD 7 1 .2 2 0 .9 9 1 .1

None 0 0 .0 1 0 .4 1 0 .1

HBDIa v o id a n tq u a d ra n tp a t t e r n

A 1 0 .2 3 1.3 4 0 .5B 0 0 .0 2 0 .9 2 0 .2C 108 18.8 30 13.3 138 17.3D 30 5 . 2 9 4 . 0 39 4 .9

BC 1 0 .2 0 0 .0 1 0 .1CD 17 3 .0 6 2 .7 23 2 .9

ABCD 0 0 .0 1 0 .4 1 0 .1

None 417 72.6 175 77 .4 592 74 .0

T o t a l 574 100 .0 226 100.0 800 100.0


Ill

Table 28

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Quadrant Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance by M i l i t a r y o r C i v i l i a n S t a t u s

HBDIM i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o ta l

q u a d ra n tN % N % N %

AT o t a l dominant 499 86 .9 190 84.1 689 8 6 .1

Superdominant [255 44 .4 ] [ 91 40.3] [346 4 3 .2 ]Dominant [244 42 .5 ] [ 99 43.8] [343 42 .9 ]

Moderate 74 12.9 32 14.1 106 13.3Avoidant 1 0 .2 4 1 .8 5 0 .6

BT o t a l dominant 447 77.9 159 70.4 606 75 .7

Superdominant [113 19.7] [ 25 11 .1] [138 17.2]Dominant [334 58 .2 ] [134 59 .3 ] [468 58.5]

Moderate 126 22 .0 64 28.3 190 23 .8Avoidant 1 0 .2 3 1.3 4 0 .5

CT o t a l dominant 84 14.6 45 19.9 129 16.1

Superdominant [ 4 0 .7 ] [ 9 4 .0 ] [ 13 1 .6 ]Dominant [ 80 13.9] [ 36 15.9] [116 14.5]

Moderate 364 63 .4 144 63.7 508 63.5Avoidant 126 22 .0 37 16 .4 163 2 0 .4

DT o t a l dominant 210 36 .6 103 45 .6 313 39 .1

Superdominant [ 38 6 .6] [ 24 10.6] [ 62 7 .8 ]Dominant [172 30 .0 ] [ 79 35.0] [251 31 .3]

Moderate 317 55.2 107 47 .3 424 53 .0Avoidant 47 8 .2 16 7.1 63 7 .9

T o t a l 574 100.0 226 100.0 800 100 .0

N o t e . B ra c ke te d ( superdominan t and dominant) v a lu e s a r e i n c lu d e d in t o t a l dominant v a l u e .


Summary o f F in d in g s f o r R esea rch Q u e s t io n 5

The m i l i t a r y - c i v i l i a n d i f f e r e n c e s found a r e l a r g e l y j u s t a m a t

t e r o f d e g r e e . The l a r g e r p e r c e n t a g e s o f Ss , Ts , J s , and TJs among

th e m i l i t a r y managers do n o t change the f a c t t h a t the c i v i l i a n s a r e

a l s o p r e d o m i n a n t ly Ss, Ts, J s , and TJs. Moreover , the g r e a t e r r e p r e

s e n t a t i o n among m i l i t a r y managers on Quadrant B dominance and t h a t

among c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s on Q u a d r a n t s C and D d o m in a n c e a r e m i n o r

d i f f e r e n c e s , r e l a t i v e t o t h e v e r y h i g h l e v e l o f d o m i n a n c e on Quad

r a n t s A and B i n b o t h g r o u p s and t h e r e l a t i v e l y l o w e r l e v e l o f

dominance on Quadrants C and D i n bo th groups.

F in d in g s R e l a t i n g t o Research Ques t io n 6

R esearch Ques t io n 6 asks w he the r t h e r e were MBTI or HBDI d i f f e r

e nces be tw een i n d i v i d u a l s a t h i g h e r m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l s ( m i l i t a r y r ank

0-5 o r 0 -6 ; c i v i l i a n g rade GM-14 or GM-15) and those in m idd le man

agement ( m i l i t a r y r ank 0-4 or be low; c i v i l i a n grade GM-13 or below).

D i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI Types, E lem en ts , and TJs f o r Each Rank

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f MBTI t y p e s , e l e m e n t s , and TJs f o r h i g h - and

m i d d l e - r a n k e d managers a r e shown i n Table 29. The d i s t r i b u t i o n s a r e

p r e s e n t e d s e p a r a t e l y f o r m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s a t e a c h

l e v e l , a s w e l l a s f o r t o t a l h i g h - r a n k e d m a n a g e r s and t o t a l m i d d l e -

r a n k e d m a n a g e r s . H i g h - r a n k m a n a g e r s a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y ( ^ < .0 4 8 )

h i g h e r on ISTJ and l o w e r on ESTJ t h a n a r e m i d d l e - r a n k e d m a n a g e r s .

T h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s a l s o a p p a r e n t i n t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j^ < .0 1 5 )


MBT

I Ty

pes

and

MBT

I E

lem

ents

by

R

ank


higher E representation for the middle managers than for the high-

level managers.

There i s some ev id ence o f i n t e r a c t i o n be tw een rank and m i l i t a r y

o r c i v i l i a n s t a t u s . H ig h - ra nk ing c i v i l i a n managers showed a g r e a t e r

(j> < .01 ) p e r c e n t a g e o f TJs t h a n d i d m i d d l e - r a n k i n g c i v i l i a n s , b u t

t h i s d i f f e r e n c e d i d n o t e x i s t f o r the m i l i t a r y managers . There was

a l s o a s l i g h t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n ta g e o f h i g h - r a n k e d m i l i t a r y managers

who were i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) t h an t h e r e was f o r t h e m id d le - r an k e d m i l i

t a r y m a n a g e r s , a d i f f e r e n c e t h a t d i d n o t e x i s t f o r t h e c i v i l i a n

m a n a g e r s .

HBDI Dominance and Avoidance P a t t e r n s f o r Each Rank

The d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI dominance and avoidance p a t t e r n s f o r

h i g h - and m i d d l e - r a n k e d m a n a g e r s , s e p a r a t e l y f o r c i v i l i a n and f o r

m i l i t a r y a s w e l l a s c o m b i n e d , a r e g i v e n i n T a b l e 30. T h e r e a r e no

s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b a s e d on r a n k , e i t h e r f o r m i l i t a r y o r f o r

c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s , i n t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e HBDI d o m i n a n c e and

a v o i d a n c e p a t t e r n s .

HBDI Dominance, Superdominance, and Avoidance for Each Rank

Table 31 c o n t a i n s the d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f HBDI q u a d ra n t s f o r each

rank , s e p a r a t e l y f o r m i l i t a r y and f o r c i v i l i a n as w e l l as combined,

w i t h t h e t o t a l dom in an ts d i v id e d i n t o t h o s e who were supe rdom in an t

(HBDI q u a d ra n t s c o re > 100) and th e r e m a in i n g dom inan ts , who s c o re d

i n t h e normal dominance range (67 to 100). There were no s i g n i f i c a n t

d i f f e r e n c e s f o r Q u a d r a n t A. F o r Q u a d r a n t B, t h e r e w a s a

R e p ro d u c e d with perm iss ion of the copyright ow ner. F u r th e r reproduction prohibited without perm iss ion .

Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

116 117

T a b l e 30

HBDI D o m i n a n t a n d A v o i d a n t Q u a d r a n t P a t t e r n s b y Ran k

H ig h r a n k M i d d l e r a n k

HBDId o m i n a n t

M i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o t a l M i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o t a li n d u s t r y c i v i i i a n T o t a l

q u a d r a n tp a t t e r n N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N Z N X

A 11 4 . 3 1 1 . 6 12 3 . 7 18 5 . 7 6 5 . 8 24 5 . 7 2 3 . 4 38 4 . 8

B 5 2 . 0 0 0 . 0 5 1 . 6 4 1 . 3 2 1 . 9 6 1 . 4 0 0 . 0 11 1 . 4

C 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 I 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 2 0 0 . 0 L 0 . 1

D 3 1 .1 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 9 2 0 . 6 1 1 . 0 3 0 . 7 0 0 . 0 6 0 . 8

AB 119 4 6 . 3 28 4 3 . 8 147 4 5 . 8 156 4 9 . 2 43 4 1 . 8 199 4 7 . 4 24 4 0 . 7 37 0 4 6 . 2

AC 3 1 .1 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 3 0 . 4

AD 34 1 3 . 2 14 2 1 . 9 48 1 5 . 0 43 1 3 . 6 13 1 2 . 6 56 1 3 . 3 13 2 2 . 0 117 1 4 . 6

BC 9 3 . 5 2 3 . 2 11 3 . 4 10 3 . 2 6 5 . 8 16 3 . 8 0 0 . 0 27 3 . 4

BD 6 2 . 3 . 0 0 . 0 6 1 . 9 14 4 . 4 1 1 . 0 15 3 . 6 1 1 . 7 22 2 . 8

CD 3 1 .1 7 1 0 . 9 10 3 . 1 4 1 . 3 2 1 . 9 6 1 . 4 2 3 . 4 18 2 . 2

ABC 13 5 . 1 1 1 . 6 1 14 4 . 4 15 4 . 7 5 4 . 9 20 4 . 8 2 3 . 4 36 4 . 5

ABD 40 1 5 . 6 7 1 0 . 9 47 1 4 . 6 35 1 1 . 0 17 1 6 . 5 52 1 2 . 4 7 1 1 . 9 106 1 3 . 3

ACD 1 0 . 4 2 3 . 1 3 0 . 9 4 1 . 3 1 1.0 5 1 . 2 2 3 . 4 10 1 . 2

BCD 5 2 . 0 1 1 . 6 6 1 . 9 9 2 . 8 5 4 . 9 14 3 . 3 5 8 . 5 25 3 . 1

ABCD 5 2 . 0 0 0 . 0 5 1 . 6 2 0 . 6 I 1 . 0 3 0 . 7 1 1 . 7 9 1 . 1

None 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 6 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 1


A 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 6 1 0 . 3 1 0 . 3 1 1 . 0 2 0 . 5 1 1 . 7 4 0 . 5B 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 6 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 7 2 0 . 2C 51 1 9 . 8 10 1 5 . 6 61 1 9 . 0 57 1 8 . 0 11 1 0 . 7 68 1 6 . 2 9 1 5 . 3 138 1 7 . 3D 11 4 . 3 1 1 . 6 12 3 . 7 19 6 . 0 7 6 . 8 26 6 . 2 1 1 . 7 39 4 . 9

BC 1 0 . 4 0 0 . 0 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 I 0 . 1

CD 6 2 . 3 4 6 . 2 10 3 . 1 11 3 . 5 2 1 . 9 13 3 . 1 0 0 . 0 23 2 . 9

ABCD 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 6 1 0 . 3 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 *1 0 . 1

None 18 8 7 3 . 2 46 7 1 . 9 2 3 4 7 2 . 9 22 9 7 2 . 2 82 7 9 . 6 311 7 4 . 0 47 7 9 . 7 59 2 7 4 . 0

T o t a l 257 1 0 0 . 0 64 1 0 0 . 0 321 1 0 0 . 0 31 7 1 0 0 . 0 103 1 0 0 . 0 4 2 0 1 0 0 . 0 5 9 1 0 0 . 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 . 0

Reproduced

with perm

ission of the

copyright ow

ner. Further


without

permission.

118 ' 119

T a b l e 31

D i s t r i b u t i o n o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t D o m i n a n c e , S u p e r d o m i n a n c e , a n d A v o i d a n c e b y Ran k

HBDIq u a d r a n t

High r a n k Middle r a n k

I n d u s t r yc i v i l i a n T o t a lM i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o t a l M i l i t a r y C i v i l i a n T o t a l

N X N % N X N X H X M X H % H X

A

T o t a l d o m in a n t 226 8 7 . 9 53 8 2 . 8 279 8 6 . 9 273 8 6 .1 86 8 3 . 5 359 8 5 . 5 51 8 6 . 4 689 8 6 .1

S u p e rd o m in a n t (116 4 5 . 1 ] [ 28 4 3 . 7 ] (144 4 4 . 9 ] [139 4 3 . 8 ] [ 39 3 7 . 9 ] [178 4 2 . 4 ] [ 24 4 0 . 7 ] 1346 4 3 . 2 ]

Dominant [110 4 2 . 8 ] I 25 3 9 . 1 ] (135 4 2 . 0 ] [134 4 2 . 3 ] [ 47 4 5 . 6 ] [181 4 3 . 1 ] [ 27 4 5 . 7 ] [343 4 2 . 9 ]

M odera te 31 12.1 9 14.1 40 1 2 .5 43 1 3 .6 16 1 5 .5 59 1 4 .0 7 1 1 .9 106 1 3 .3A v o id a n t 0 0 . 0 2 3 . 1 2 0 . 6 1 0 . 3 I 1 . 0 2 0 . 5 I 1 . 7 5 0 . 6

B

T o t a l d o m in a n t 202 7 8 .6 39 6 0 . 9 241 75 .1 245 7 7 .3 80 7 7 .7 325 7 7 . 4 40 6 7 . 8 606 7 5 .7

S u p e rd o m in a n t [ 69 1 9 .1 ] [ 5 7 . 8 ] [ 54 16 .8 ] [ 64 2 0 . 2 ] [ 16 1 5 . 5 ] [ 80 1 9 . 1 ] I 4 6 . 8 ] [138 1 7 . 2 ]Dominant (153 5 9 . 5 ] [ 34 5 3 . 1 ] [187 5 8 . 3 ] [181 5 7 . 1 ] [ 64 6 2 . 1 ] [245 5 8 . 3 ] [ 36 6 1 . 0 ] [468 5 8 .5 ]

M o d era te 54 2 1 . 0 23 3 5 .9 77 2 4 . 0 72 2 2 .7 23 2 2 . 3 95 2 2 . 6 18 3 0 . 5 190 2 3 . 8A v o id a n t I 0 . 4 2 3 .1 3 0 . 9 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 1 1 . 7 4 0 . 5

C

T o t a l d o m in a n t 39 15 .2 13 2 0 . 3 52 1 6 .2 45 14 .2 20 1 9 .4 65 1 5 .5 12 2 0 . 3 129 16 .1

S u p e rd o m in a n t I 1 0 . 4 ] ( 5 7 . 8 ] t 6 1 . 9 ] [ 3 1 .0 ] I 3 2 . 9 ] [ 6 1 . 4 ] I 1 1 . 7 ] [ 13 1 .6 ]Dominant [ 38 1 4 .3 ] I 8 1 2 . 5 ] [ 46 1 4 . 3 ] [ 42 13 .2 ] [ 17 1 6 . 5 ] I 59 1 4 . 1 ] 1 11 1 8 . 6 ] [116 1 4 .5 ]

M o d era te 160 6 2 .2 36 5 6 .3 196 61 .1 204 6 4 . 4 70 6 8 . 0 274 6 5 . 2 38 6 4 . 4 508 6 3 .5A v o id a n t 58 2 2 .6 15 2 3 . 4 73 2 2 .7 68 2 1 . 4 13 1 2 .6 81 1 9 . 3 9 1 5 . 3 163 2 0 . 4

D

T o t a l d o m in a n t 97 3 7 .7 31 4 8 . 4 128 3 9 . 9 113 3 5 .6 41 3 9 . 8 154 3 6 . 7 31 5 2 . 5 313 3 9 .1Suu e rd o m in a n t ( 17 6 . 6 ] ( 8 1 2 . 5 ] I 25 7 . 8 ] [ 21 6 .6 ] [ 7 6 . 8 ] [ 28 6 . 7 ] [ 9 1 5 . 2 ] [ 62 7 . 8 ]Dominant [ 80 3 1 . 1 ] f 23 3 5 . 9 ] [103 3 2 . 1 ] [ 92 2? . 0 ] [ 34 3 3 . 0 ] [126 3 0 . 0 ] f 22 3 7 . 3 ] [251 3 1 . 3 ]

M odera te 143 5 5 .6 27 4 2 . 2 170 5 3 . 0 174 5 4 .9 53 5 1 . 5 227 5 4 . 0 27 4 5 . 8 424 5 3 . 0A v o i d a n t 17 6 . 6 6 9 . 4 23 7 .1 30 9 . 5 9 8 . 7 39 9 . 3 1 1 . 7 63 7 . 9

T o t a l 257 1 0 0 .0 64 1 0 0 .0 321 1 0 0 .0 317 1 0 0 .0 103 1 0 0 . 0 42 0 1 0 0 . 0 59 1 0 0 . 0 800 1 0 0 .0


120

s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j> < .02) l o w e r p e r c e n t a g e o f d o m i n a n t s among h i g h -

r anked c i v i l i a n managers and among th e (unranked) i n d u s t r y c i v i l i a n

managers than among the m id d l e - r a n k e d c i v i l i a n managers or t h e h i g h —

o r m id d l e - r a n k e d m i l i t a r y managers . This d i f f e r e n c e i s r e i n f o r c e d by

t h e s i g n i f i c a n t l y (j^ < .004) l o w e r p e r c e n t a g e o f Q u a d r a n t B s u p e r

d o m i n a n t s among t h e h i g h - l e v e l c i v i l i a n m a n a g e r s and t h e i n d u s t r y

c i v i l i a n s .

T h e r e w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r Q u a d r a n t C. F o r

Quadrant D, t h e r e i s a g a i n i n t e r a c t i o n be tw een rank and m i l i t a r y o r

c i v i l i a n s t a t u s . H igh- rank c i v i l i a n managers and i n d u s t r y c i v i l i a n

manage rs showed h i g h e r (j^ < .071) p e r c e n ta g e s of dominan ts t h an d i d

c i v i l i a n m idd le managers or e i t h e r l e v e l o f m i l i t a r y managers .

Summary o f F i n d in g s f o r R e sea rch Q u e s t io n 6

The f i n d i n g s f o r t h i s r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n a l l d e m o n s t r a t e i n t e r

a c t i o n o f m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l w i t h m i l i t a r y - c i v i l i a n s t a t u s . The f i n d

i n g by Agor (19 8 6 ) o f g r e a t e r i n t u i t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a t h i g h e r

l e v e l s o f management was no t c on f i rm e d , a l t hough t h e r e was a s l i g h t

t e n d e n c y i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n f o r t h e h i g h - l e v e l m i l i t a r y m a n a g e r s .

Thera was a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n ta g e o f TJs among th e h i g h -

l e v e l c i v i l i a n managers than among th e m i d d l e - l e v e l c i v i l i a n manag

e r s , b u t t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was no t found f o r the m i l i t a r y managers .

The i n t e r a c t i o n i s a l s o e v i d e n t i n t h e HBDI f i n d i n g s . H i g h -

l e v e l c i v i l i a n managers showed a g r e a t e r p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D

than d i d t h e m i d d l e - l e v e l c i v i l i a n manage rs , bu t t h i s f i n d i n g d i d n o t

a ppear f o r the m i l i t a r y managers . H i g h - l e v e l c i v i l i a n managers were


a l s o l e s s l i k e l y t o p r e f e r Quadrant B than were m i d d l e - l e v e l c i v i l i a n

managers o r m i l i t a r y managers a t e i t h e r l e v e l . Moreover , t h e h i g h -

l e v e l c i v i l i a n managers were v e ry much l i k e t h e (unranked) i n d u s t r y

c i v i l i a n managers i n t h e i r p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D and t h e i r l a c k

o f p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant B.

The i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s e f i n d i n g s i s p r e s e n t e d i n Chap te r VI.


CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o e x p l o r e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s

be tw een two r e c o g n i z e d p e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s , the Myers -

Br iggs Type I n d i c a t o r (MBTI) and the Herrmann B ra in Dominance I n s t r u

ment (HBDI), b o th o f which were deve lo ped f o r a p p l i c a t i o n t o no rmal ,

h e a l t h y , a d u l t p o p u l a t i o n s . The i n v e s t i g a t i o n c o n c e n t r a t e d on d e t e r

m in ing the e x t e n t and d i r e c t i o n o f t h o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h rough a n a l y

s e s o f d a t a r e s u l t i n g from the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f bo th i n s t r u m e n t s t o

t h e same p o p u l a t i o n , t h e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g t h e

D e f e n s e S y s t e m s M anagem en t C o l l e g e (DSMC), F o r t B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a ,

d u r i n g 1986-1987 .

The f i n d i n g s were e v a l u a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t to t h e e x t e n t o f t h e i r

s u p p o r t f o r the s t a t e m e n t o f the r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s which was formu

l a t e d from p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r y , b r a i n dominance r e s e a r c h , and em

p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s from th e l i t e r a t u r e . Thi s h y p o t h e s i s p o s t u l a t e d t h e

e x i s t e n c e o f s p e c i f i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s among MBTI t y p e s and HBDI quad

r a n t s . S i x r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s w e r e a l s o e x p l o r e d . The f i r s t and

s e c o n d r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s a d d r e s s e d t h e s i m i l a r i t y o f t h e s t u d y

p o p u l a t i o n t o o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s c i t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e .

The l a s t fou r r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s were concerned w i t h w he the r the two

i n s t r u m e n t s d i f f e r e n t i a t e d t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n on t h e b a s i s o f

d e m o g r a p h i c c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . F o u r d e m o g r a p h i c c a t e g o r i e s w e re

122


i n v e s t i g a t e d : t h e sex o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s , the branch o f m i l i t a r y o r

gove rnm en ta l s e r v i c e t o which they be longed , t h e i r m i l i t a r y o r c i v i l

i a n s t a t u s , and t h e i r r ank i n the g e n e r a l management h i e r a r c h y .

Conc lus ions R e l a t i n g to t h e Research Hypothes is

The r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s p o s t u l a t e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s c h a r a c t e r

i z e d by t h e MBTI e l e m e n t s o f s e n s i n g (S ) , t h i n k i n g (T) , and j u d g i n g

( J ) w o u l d be d o m i n a n t p r i m a r i l y i n t h e HBDI l e f t h e m i s p h e r e (Quad

r a n t s A and B) w i t h a h ig h i n c i d e n c e o f double dominance in bo th the

A and B q u a d r a n t s . A f u r t h e r e x p e c t a t i o n was t h a t i n t u i t i v e (N),

f e e l i n g (F), and p e r c e p t i v e (P) i n d i v i d u a l s would be dominant i n the

HBDI r i g h t hem isphere (Quadran ts C and D), w i t h the MBTI i n t u i t i v e s

(Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) e xpe c te d t o show p r e f e r e n c e f o r Quadrant D

and th e f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs), f o r Quadrant C.

In a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h i s h y p o t h e s i s , t h e m a j o r i t y o f MBTI

t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h o s e who w e r e a l s o s e n s i n g

i n d i v i d u a l s ( S T J s ) , w e r e d o u b l e d o m i n a n t i n t h e HBDI A and B q u a d

r a n t s i n the l e f t - h e m i s p h e r e , w i t h a h igh inc id e n ce o f superdominance

(HBDI s c o r e s g r e a t e r t h a n 100) i n t h o s e q u a d r a n t s as w e l l . T h i s

f i n d i n g i s i n l i n e w i t h b o th p s y c h o l o g i c a l type th eo ry u n d e r l y i n g the

MBTI and b r a i n dominance r e s e a r c h s u p p o r t i n g the HBDI. P s y c h o lo g i c a l

type t heo ry , as s t a t e d by Myers and McCaulley (1985), d e s c r i b e s TJs

a s t h e " l o g i c a l d e c i s i o n m a k e r s " (p. 36) who f i l l m a n a g e r i a l and

e x e c u t i v e r o l e s . MBTI STJs a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s b e i n g p r a c t i c a l ,

o r d e r l y , d e p e n d a b l e , r e a l i s t i c , and h a v i n g s t r o n g o r g a n i z a t i o n a l

a b i l i t y . H er rm ann (1988) h a s e x p l a i n e d t h a t , a c c o r d i n g t o b r a i n


d o m in a n c e r e s e a r c h , d o u b l e d o m in a n c e i n HBDI q u a d r a n t s A and B

a p p e a r s to combine th e l o g i c a l , a n a l y t i c a l , and r a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s

t i c s o f Quadrant A w i t h t h e c o n t r o l l i n g , s t r u c t u r e d , o r g a n i z a t i o n a l

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Quadrant B, and t e n d s to r e i n f o r c e t h e s t r e n g t h s

o f t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

A c c o r d i n g t o MBTI t h e o r y , t h i n k i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Ts ) p r e f e r t o

make d e c i s i o n s on th e b a s i s o f f a c t s a r ranged i n a l o g i c a l , s t e p - b y -

s t e p p r o c e s s , s i m i l a r t o the m en ta l p r o c e s s i n g o f i n f o r m a t i o n in HBDI

Quadrant A. MBTI f e e l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) t end to make t h e i r d e c i

s i o n s w i t h more c o n s c io u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n fo r t h e p o s s i b l e impact t h ey

m igh t have on o t h e r members o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n . I n d i v i d u a l s domi

n a n t i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t C a r e a l s o c h a r a c t e r i z e d by i n t e r p e r s o n a l

concern . As e xpe c te d under the r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s i s and in accordance

w i t h b o t h MBTI t h e o r y and b r a i n d o m in a n c e r e s e a r c h , MBTI f e e l i n g

i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) showed th e h i g h e s t dominance r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a l l

MBTI ty p es i n HBDI Quadrant C.

The MBTI TJs d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e i r h i g h e s t i n c id e n c e o f avoidance

toward the HBDI Quadrant C. Thi s f i n d i n g i s no t s u r p r i s i n g , c o n s id

e r i n g t h a t TJs t e n d t o e x p r e s s t h e i r t h in k in g - ju d g m e n t f u n c t i o n by

p r o j e c t i n g th em se lv e s as " t o u g h - m i n d e d , e x e c u t i v e , a n a l y t i c a l , i n

s t r u m e n t a l l e a d e r s " (Myers & McCaulley, 1985, p. 36). TJs base t h e i r

d e c i s i o n s p r i m a r i l y on f a c t s a b o u t t h i n g s i n t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d ,

w h i l e b e i n g g e n e r a l l y i m p e r v i o u s t o t h e s o c i a l w o r l d o f p e o p l e

(R o B a rd s , 1986) . T h e r e w a s , h o w e v e r , a s i g n i f i c a n t , u n a n t i c i p a t e d

f i n d i n g t h a t e x t r a v e r t e d t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s (ETJs) were h i g h e r on domi

nance and lower on avo idance toward Quadrant C than were i n t r o v e r t e d


t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( ITJs) . This p a r t i c u l a r f i n d i n g s u g g e s t s a connec

t i o n b e t w e e n HBDI p r e f e r e n c e s and t h e J u n g i a n t h e o r e t i c a l p r e m i s e

t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s v i e w o f the w o r ld and p e r s o n a l s e l f - a t t i t u d e a r e

dependen t on w he the r t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s an e x t r a v e r t o r an i n t r o v e r t .

However, HBDI b r a i n dominance t h e o r y has y e t to emphas ize the impor

t a n c e o f t h e a t t i t u d i n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f e x t r a v e r s i o n and i n t r o

v e r s i o n (Herrmann, 1987). The f i n d i n g t h a t an El r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s

w i t h t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f HBDI Q u a d r a n t C h a s n o t

been r e p o r t e d i n any l i t e r a t u r e s o u rc e rev iewed .

MBTI i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and p e r c e p t i v e s (Ps) t end toward indepen

den t t h i n k i n g and focus on p o s s i b i l i t i e s , t h e o r e t i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s ,

and c h a l l e n g e s o f t h e f u t u r e (Myers & M c C a u l l e y , 1985) . HBDI Quad

r a n t D i n d i v i d u a l s a r e f u t u r e - o r i e n t e d , i n t u i t i v e , and a d e p t a t

s t a r t i n g new v e n t u r e s ( H e r r m a n n , 1988) . I n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e

t h e o r i e s u n d e r l y i n g e a c h i n s t r u m e n t , MBTI Ns and Ps i n t h e s t u d y

p o p u l a t i o n d e m o n s t r a t e d d o m i n a n c e i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t D, as w e l l as a

s i z e a b l e i n c i d e n c e o f d o u b l e d o m i n a n c e i n b o t h Q u a d r a n t s A and D.

Such AD d o m i n a n c e c o m b i n e s t h e l o g i c a l , r a t i o n a l , p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Quadrant A w i t h t h e l o n g e r r ange , f u t u r e - o r i e n t e d

r e c o g n i t i o n o f p o s s i b i l i t i e s , so c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f Q u a d r a n t D

(Herrmann, 1988) .

Thus, all the expected relationships, including magnitude and

direction, among MBTI types and HBDI quadrants under the research

hypothesis have been fully substantiated by the findings of this

study. Knowledge of these relationships is invaluable because of the

reinforcement provided by the study findings to the principles of


p s y c h o l o g i c a l type t h e o r y u n d e r l y i n g th e MBTI and o f b r a i n dominance

r e s e a r c h s u p p o r t i n g t h e HBDI. New d i r e c t i o n s f o r r e s e a r c h ha v e

u n f o ld e d as a r e s u l t o f t h e f i n d i n g t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p

e x i s t s be tw een th e MBTI e x t r a v e r s i o n - i n t r o v e r s i o n (El) d im e ns ion and

t h e HBDI Quadrant C, c h a r a c t e r i z e d by i n t e r p e r s o n a l c oncerns . Th is

knowledge has p r a c t i c a l im pac t on management t r a i n i n g f o r p e r s o n n e l

s e l e c t i o n th rough i n c r e a s e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s p o t e n

t i a l when viewed from the two d i s t i n c t , bu t r e l a t e d , p e r s p e c t i v e s o f

t h e MBTI and th e HBDI.

C onc lus io ns R e l a t i n g to t h e Research Q u e s t ions

R e s e a rc h Q u e s t io n 1

The f i r s t r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n examined th e d i f f e r e n c e s be tw een the

MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s f r o m t h e 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 8 4 DSMC p r o g r a m m a n a g e r

c l a s s e s and t h e 1986-1987 c l a s s e s which c o n s t i t u t e t h e s t u d y popu la

t i o n .

The MBTI t y p e d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e 1 9 8 2 - 1 9 8 4 DSMC c l a s s e s

( N i d i f f e r , 1984) d i f f e r e d l i t t l e f rom th o se o f t h e s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n ,

w i t h two e x c e p t i o n s : the s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e s o f t h i n k

ing i n d i v i d u a l s (Ts) and o f t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) o c c u r r i n g i n t h e

s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n , a s c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e p r i o r c l a s s e s . T hus , t h e

f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e MBTI t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) , who r e p r e

s e n t e d a c o m f o r t a b l e m a j o r i t y i n t h e p r i o r c l a s s e s , have become even

more p r e v a l e n t i n the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n , the c l a s s e s h e ld d u r i n g the

1986-1987 t im e frame.


W h i l e M yers and M c C a u l l e y (1985) h a v e a c k n o w l e d g e d t n a t t h e

p r e s e n c e o f a h igh p r o p o r t i o n o f TJs i s to be c o n f i d e n t l y expec ted in

b u s i n e s s and t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d g r o u p s , a g e n e r a l o r c o n t i n u i n g

r i s e i n t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f TJs c o u l d p r e s a g e a p r o b l e m - p r o d u c i n g

t r e n d . M a n a g e r s n e e d t o be a l e r t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t m o s t p e o p l e ,

even w i t h o u t i n s t r u c t i o n i n p s y c h o lo g i c a l type t h e o r y , have bo th the

a b i l i t y to r e c o g n i z e and t h e tendency t o s e l e c t o t h e r s w i t h pe r s o n

a l i t y t y p e s s i m i l a r t o t h e i r own ( C a r s k a d o n & Cook, 1982) . C a u t i o n

shou ld be e x e r c i s e d by t h e s e managers i n o r d e r t h a t t h ey migh t avoid

t h e i n a d v e r t e n t c r e a t i o n o f a s e l f - p e r p e t u a t i n g b o d y , w h i c h c o u l d

become a r i g i d l y s t r a t i f i e d o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h o u t t h e i n f u s i o n o f the

b a l a n c i n g o u t l o o k p r o v i d e d by o t h e r p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s (R oB ards ,

1986) .

R e se a rc h Q u e s t io n 2

The s e c o n d r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n i n v e s t i g a t e d th e d i f f e r e n c e s be

tween th e MBTI type d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r the s tu d y p o p u l a t i o n and t h o se

f o r t h r e e o t h e r m a n a g e r i a l p o p u l a t i o n s r e v i e w e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e

s e a r c h : Army e x e c u t i v e s (DeWald, 1986/1987), managers and a d m i n i s

t r a t o r s (Myers & McCaulley, 1985), and f e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s ( P i c k e r in g ,

1986) .

There i s a r e c o g n i z a b l e p a t t e r n o f s i m i l a r i t i e s among the MBTI

d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r a l l o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n s c o m p a r e d , w i t h t h i n k i n g -

j u d g e r s ( T J s ) p r o m i n e n t l y r e p r e s e n t e d i n a l l f o u r o f t h e s e g r o u p s .

The MBTI s i m i l a r i t y i s even more pronounced f o r c i v i l i a n s f rom the

s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n compared w i t h the two m a n a g e r i a l groups t h a t were


p r i m a r i l y c i v i l i a n . The h e a v y TJ r e p r e s e n t a t i o n among m a n a g e r i a l

g roups b o th c o n f i r m s e a r l i e r f i n d i n g s and i s i n keep ing w i t h psycho

l o g i c a l type t heo ry .

R esea rch Q u e s t io n 3

The third research question focused on whether there were any

MBTI or HBDI differences between males and females.

Some s e x d i f f e r e n c e s d i d e m e r g e f ro m t h i s s t u d y . As e x p e c t e d

from th e l i t e r a t u r e , males d e m o n s t r a t e d a h i g h e r p e r c e n ta g e of s en

s o r s (S s ) and t h i n k i n g - j u d g e r s ( T J s ) , as w e l l a s g r e a t e r d o m in a n c e

and even superdominance i n HBDI Quadrant A than d id female s . Females

m a n i f e s t e d a h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and o f f e e l i n g

i n d i v i d u a l s (Fs) coupled w i t h g r e a t e r dominance i n HBDI Quadrant C.

However, f em a le s and males were a c t u a l l y more s i m i l a r than th ey

were d i s s i m i l a r . For example, f em a le s d e m o n s t r a t e d about as s t r o n g a

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on t h e t h i n k i n g d i m e n s i o n as d i d m a l e s . M o r e o v e r ,

bo th males and fem a le s m a n i f e s t e d e q u i v a l e n t d o m in a n c e p r e f e r e n c e s

t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d r a n t B, r e l a t e d t o o r g a n i z a t i o n and s t r u c t u r e , and

Quadrant D, r e l a t e d to s t r a t e g i c p l a n n in g f o r f u t u r e endeavors .

The a p p a r e n t s i m i l a r i t y o f m ales and fem a le s in t h i s s t u d y can

be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e f e m a l e s i n t h i s p o p u l a t i o n o f

b u s i n e s s and t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d s tu d e n t program managers do no t f i t

the c o n v e n t i o n a l v iew o f women as p r i m a r i l y c a r e - g i v e r s in the t e a c h

ing and h e a l t h p r o f e s s i o n s (Myers & McCaulley, 1985). This f i n d i n g

b r i n g s i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e s e x - s p e c i f i c n a t u r e o f some MBTI t y p e s


documented in the l i t e r a t u r e , which may be i n s t e a d d i f f e r e n c e s due to

the t y p e s o f p r o f e s s i o n t h a t males and fem a le s tend t o s e l e c t .

R e se a rc h Q ues t ion 4

The fourth research question addressed the issue of differences

in the MBTI and HBDI distributions among branches of the armed ser

vices .

No d i f f e r e n c e s were found i n e i t h e r the MBTI o r the HBDI d i s t r i

b u t i o n s among th e t h r e e s e r v i c e b ran c h e s . However, t h e s tu d y popu la

t i o n a l s o i n c lu d e d a group o f managers f rom o t h e r gove rnm en ta l agen

c i e s n o t connec ted w i t h t h e m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e s . These managers were

a l l c i v i l i a n s , w h i l e t h o s e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e a rm e d s e r v i c e s i n

c l u d e d b o t h c i v i l i a n and m i l i t a r y m a n a g e r s . The a g e n c y m a n a g e r s

m a n i f e s t e d b o t h a h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n o f MBTI i n t u i t i v e s (Ns) and a

g r e a t e r p e r c e n t a g e o f d o m i n a n t s i n HBDI Q u a d r a n t D t h a n d i d t h e

m a n a g e r s i n t h e m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e s . This finding a g r e e s w i t h

Herrmann's (1988) c o n t e n t i o n t h a t i n t u i t i v e s can be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h

t h e f u t u r e - o r i e n t e d HBDI Quadrant D.

R e se a rc h Q ue s t io n 5

The fifth research question probed MBTI or HBDI distributional

differences in the study population based on military or civilian

status.

Both military and civilian managers can be characterized as MBTI

sensors (Ss), thinkers (Ts), and judgers (Js), as well as double

dominant in HBDI Quadrants A and B. The conclusion that the MBTI and


HBDI d i s t r i b u t i o n s w e r e e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r f o r t h e m i l i t a r y and

c i v i l i a n g r o u p s i n t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n i s i n a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e

e a r l i e r s t u d y by DeWald ( 1 9 8 6 / 1 9 8 7 ) w h i c h r e p o r t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t

MBTI d i f f e r e n c e s be tw een m i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n managers .

Research Question 6

The sixth research question dealt with MBTI or HBDI distribu

tional differences among individuals in the study population based on

their managerial level.

The s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n was d i v i d e d i n t o f i v e g r o u p s : m i d d l e -

ranked m i l i t a r y , h i g h - r a n k e d m i l i t a r y , m id d l e - r a n k e d c i v i l i a n , h i g h -

r anked c i v i l i a n , and i n d u s t r y o r o t h e r governm en ta l agency c i v i l i a n s

who were unranked. E a r l i e r s t u d i e s s u g g e s t e d a r e l a t i o n s h i p l i n k i n g

h i g h - l e v e l m a n a g e m e n t w i t h a t e n d e n c y toward MBTI i n t u i t i v e ty p es

(A gor , 1986) and t o w a r d HBDI Q u a d r a n t D d o m i n a n c e ( H e r r m a n n , 1987,

1988) . The e x p e c t e d g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n o f i n t u i t i v e s among h i g h -

r anked managers was n o t c o n f i rm e d by t h e f i n d i n g s . However, a r e l a

t i o n s h i p be tw een HBDI Quadrant D dominance and m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l was

f o u n d , b u t o n l y f o r c i v i l i a n s , w i t h h i g h - r a n k e d c i v i l i a n s and u n

r anked c i v i l i a n s found to p r e f e r the i n t u i t i v e l y o r i e n t e d Quadrant D.

Although t h i s s tu d y found t h a t the HBDI Quadrant D r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h

m a n a g e r i a l l e v e l was d e p e n d e n t on m i l i t a r y - c i v i l i a n s t a t u s , t h i s

f i n d i n g may be due t o t h e f a c t t h a t no e x e c u t i v e l e v e l m i l i t a r y

managers ( g e n e r a l o f f i c e r s ) were i n c lu d e d in t h e s tudy .


131Recommendations

1. F u r t h e r s tu d y i s recommended to i n v e s t i g a t e t h e s i g n i f i c a n t

b u t p r e v i o u s l y u n r e p o r t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p be tween the MBTI e x t r a v e r s i o n -

i n t r o v e r s i o n (El) d im ens ion and HBDI Quadrant C.

2. I n s t r u c t i o n in r u d i m e n t a l type t h e o r y w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e f ee d

back i s recommended to managers and to t h o se r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t r a i n i n g

m a n a g e r s a s a p r a c t i c a l m e th o d t o a c h i e v e t h e d e g r e e o f o r g a n i z a

t i o n a l b a l a n c e which shou ld r e s u l t f rom th e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f p e r s o n

n e l w i t h d i f f e r e n t p s y c h o l o g i c a l t ypes .

3. Although th e i n s t r u m e n t s a r e no t in te nde d to be p r e d i c t o r s

o f m a n a g e r i a l s u c c e s s , i t i s n o n e t h e l e s s of i n t e r e s t t o i n v e s t i g a t e

t h e s t r u c t u r e o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s where the managers have been t r a i n e d

i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l type t h e o r y to d e t e r m i n e whe ther t h e r e i s a b e t t e r

m ix o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s t h a n t h e r e w o u ld o t h e r w i s e be . Thus , a

l o n g i t u d i n a l s tudy o f a group o f managers so t r a i n e d i s recommended,

w i t h t h e r e s u l t s t o be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h s i m i l a r o r g a n i z a t i o n s whose

managers have no t been exposed t o such t r a i n i n g .

4. F u r t h e r s tu d y o f demographic r e l a t i o n s h i p s i s recommended t o

unconfound th e demographic f rom th e o c c u p a t io n a l f a c t o r s which c loud

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s .

Summary

The f i n d i n g s from t h i s s tu d y e s s e n t i a l l y conf i rmed those from

o t h e r s t u d i e s i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e

r e l a t i o n s h i p be tween t h e HBDI and t h e MBTI, thus p r o v id i n g s u p p o r t


for the theoretical foundations for both instruments. The large

number of participants available for this study enabled the extensive

exploration of interrelationships of several categories of inquiry

addressed by the research hypothesis relating to the MBTI-HBDI rela

tionships and by the research questions which were directed toward

demographic concerns. In particular, the sizeable population pro

vided quantification of detail sufficient for the investigation of

the MBTI extraversion-introversion relationship with the HBDI quad

rant characterizations, a research finding unique to this study.

This latter relationship, if confirmed, will provoke profound ramifi

cations to Herrmann's brain dominance approach and will further

substantiate MBTI psychological type theory.

A number of other findings from this study, particularly those

related to demographic variables, appear to have a population-

specific nature, thus demonstrating the need for multidimensional

investigations of diverse groups before definitive conclusions can be

drawn. Unlike the MBTI-HBDI relationships, which appear to be stable

over populations, generalization or stereotyping solely on the basis

of demographics for either MBTI types or HBDI profiles will require

qualification based on the nature of the population under study.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acker , D. D. (1986). A h i s t o r y o f t h e D e f e n s e S y s t e m s M anagem ent C o l l e g e , c e n t e r o f e x c e l l e n c e i n a c q u i s i t i o n management , educat i o n , and r e s e a r c h . W a s h i n g t o n , DC: U.S. G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n gO f f i c e .

A c q u i s i t i o n . (1 9 8 6 , J a n u a r y - F e b r u a r y ) . AMC's s t r e a m l i n e d a c q u i s i t i o n p r o c e s s . Army Resea rch , Development , and A c q u i s i t i o n Magaz i n e , pp. 1 6 -17 .

A g o r , W. H. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . I n t u i t i v e m a n a g e m e n t : I n t e g r a t i n g l e f t andr i g h t b r a i n management s k i l l s . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: P r e n t i c e -H a l l .

A g o r , W. H. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . The l o g i c o f i n t u i t i v e d e c i s i o n making: A r e s e a r c h - b a s e d app roach f o r top management. W e s t p o r t , CT: G r e e n wood P re s s .

A l l p o r t , G. W., V e r n o n , P. E. , & L i n d z e y , G. ( 1 9 6 0 ) . A s t u d y o f v a l u e s . Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n .

A r c h ib a l d , R. D. (1976). Managing h i g h t e c h n o lo g y programs and p ro j e c t s . New York: Wiley.

Badawy, M. K. (1982). Deve loping m a n a g e r i a l s k i l l s i n e n g i n e e r s and s c i e n t i s t s : Succeed ing as a t e c h n i c a l m a n a g e r . New York: VanN o s t r a n d Re inhold .

B a l l , D. D. ( 1 9 8 4 , A u g u s t 17) . S p e e c h by M a j o r G e n e r a l B a l l on t h e o c c a s i o n o f h i s r e t i r e m e n t d i n n e r , H i l l c r e s t Country Club, Mount Clemens, MI.

B a s s , B. M. (Ed .) . ( 1 9 8 1 ) . S t o g d i l l ' s h a n d b o o k o f l e a d e r s h i p : Asu rve y o f t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h . New York: Free P re s s .

Baucom, D. H. (1985). C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o l o g i c a l I n v e n t o r y (CPI). In B u r o s I n s t i t u t e o f M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s ( E d . ) , The n i n t h m e n t a l m easu rem en ts yearbook (Vol. 1, pp. 250-252) . L in c o ln : U n i v e r s i t yo f N e b r a s k a - L i n c o l n .

B a u m g a r t n e r , J . S. , Brown, C., & K e l l e y , P. A. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . S u c c e s s f u l p r o g r a m s : Can we l e a r n f ro m t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e ? Why h a v e someprograms succeeded where o t h e r s have f a i l e d ? A r e c e n t s tu d y came up w i t h some s u r p r i s i n g answers . Program Manager, 13(1), 31-38.

133


134

B e n d e r - G e s t a l t Tes t . (1985). In Buros I n s t i t u t e o f Menta l Measurem e n t s , The n i n t h m e n t a l m e a s u r e m e n t s yearbook (Vol. 1, pp. 181- 184). L inco ln : U n i v e r s i t y o f Nebraska-L inco ln .

B loom , R. S. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . L e a r n i n g f o r m a s t e r y . I n B. S. Bloom, J . H a s t i n g s , & G. F. M adaus , Handbook on f o r m a t i v e and s u m m a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n o f s t u d e n t l e a r n i n g . New York: McGraw-Hil l .

B r iggs , K., & Myers , I. (1977). M yers -Br iggs type i n d i c a t o r . Pa lo A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P r e s s .

B u n d e r s o n , C. V. (1988 ) . The v a l i d a t i o n o f t h e H er rm ann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t . In N. Hermann, The c r e a t i v e b r a i n (pp. 337- 379) . Lake L u r e , NC: B r a i n Books .

B u r o s , 0. K. (Ed .) . ( 1 9 7 5 ) . P e r s o n a l i t y t e s t s and r e v i e w s I I .Highland Pa rk , NJ: Gryphon P ress .

Buros , 0. K. (Ed.). (1978). The e i g h t h m e n ta l measurements yearbook(Vols. 1-2). Highland Park , NJ: Gryphon P re ss .

B u r o s I n s t i t u t e o f M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s . (1985). The n i n t h m en ta l m e a s u r e m e n t s y e a r b o o k (V o l s . 1 - 2 ) . L i n c o l n : U n i v e r s i t y o fN e b r a s k a - L in c o ln .

C a b e l l , C. P . , J r . ( 1986 , J u n e 22) . S p e e c h by B r i g a d i e r G e n e r a l C a b e l l on f u t u r e d i r e c t i o n s f o r t h e DSMC d u r i n g t h e 1986. DSMC Alumni A s s o c i a t i o n Symposium, F t . B e l v o i r , Va.

C a b e l l , C. P. , J r . ( 1987 , J u n e 24) . K e y n o te a d d r e s s by B r i g a d i e r G ene ra l C a b e l l f o r the 1987 DSMC Alumni A s s o c i a t i o n Symposium, F t . B e l v o i r , VA.

C a r l s o n , R., & Levy , N. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . S t u d i e s o f J u n g i a n t y p o l o g y : 1.Memory, s o c i a l p e r c e p t i o n , and s o c i a l a c t i o n . J o u r n a l o f P e r son a l i t y , 41, 559-576.

C a r l y l e , T. ( 1 8 5 8 ) . H e r o s and h e r o w o r s h i p . London: C l a r e n d o nP r e s s .

C a r l y n , M. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . An a s s e s s m e n t o f t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y A s s e s s m e n t , 41(5) , 461-473.

C a r s k a d o n , T. G. ( 1 979 ) . T e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t i e s o f c o n t i n u o u s s c o r e s on Form G o f t h e M yers -Br iggs Type I n d i c a t o r . R esea rch in P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type, J2, 83-84.

C a r s k a d o n , T. G., & Cook, D. D. ( 1 982 ) . V a l i d i t y o f MBTI d e s c r i p t i o n s as p e r c e iv e d by r e c i p i e n t s u n f a m i l i a r w i t h type . R esea rch i n P s y c h o l o g i c a l Type, 5, 89-94.


C a r s k a d o n , T. G., M c C a r l e y , N. G., & M c C a u l l e y , M. H. (1987) . Comp e n d iu m o f r e s e a r c h i n v o l v i n g t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r . G a i n e s v i l l e , FL: Cen te r f o r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P s y c h o lo g ic a l Type.

C a t t e i l , R. B., E b e r , H. W., & T a t s u o k a , M. M. (1970 ) . Handbook f o r t h e S i x t e e n P e r s o n a l i t y F a c t o r Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . C h a m p a ig n , IL : I n s t i t u t e f o r P e r s o n a l i t y and A b i l i t y T e s t ing .

Coyne , G. K., J r . ( 1986 , December 3) . I n t e r v i e w w i t h U.S. Navy C a p t a i n Coyne, Dean o f t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f R e s e a r c h I n f o r m a t i o n , Defense Systems Management C o l l ege , F t . B e l v o i r , V i r g i n i a , g r a n t ing p e r m i s s i o n to Ruth E. DeWald t o use summary Col lege Assessment d a t a ( u n i d e n t i f i a b l e by i n d i v i d u a l s ) t o f u l f i l l academic r e q u i r e ments o f h e r d i s s e r t a t i o n .

Defense Systems Management Col lege . (1986). DSMC 1986 c a t a l o g . F t . B e l v o i r , VA: Author .

D e h n e r , F. T. ( 1 982 ) . A t t r i b u t e s o f an e f f e c t i v e p r o g r a m m a n a g e r . Program Manager, 11(1), 24.

D e V i t o , A. J . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . R e v ie w o f M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r . I n B u ros I n s t i t u t e o f M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s (Ed .) , The n i n t h m e n t a l m e a s u r e m e n t y e a r b o o k (Vol . 2, pp. 1030-1032) . L inco ln : U n ive r s i t y o f Nebraska -L inco ln .

DeWald, J . E. (1987). E x e c u t iv e p e r s o n a l i t y ty p es : A compar ison o fm i l i t a r y and c i v i l i a n l e a d e r s i n a s i n g l e o r g a n i z a t i o n (Doc to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , W e s t e r n M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t y , 1986). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 47, 2954A.

D o v i c h , R. A. ( 1988 , M a rc h ) . N o n p a r a m e t r i c e s : An a l t e r n a t i v e t ot h e one-way ANOVA—K r u s k a l - W a l l i s t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e among s e v e r a l m eans . Q u a l i t y , p. 68.

Edwards, A. L. (1953). Edwards p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s chedu le (EPPS).New York: P s y c h o lo g i c a l Co rpo ra t ion .

E l l i s , G. J . , J r . ( 1 9 8 3 ) . B r a i n s i d e d n e s s : U s i n g a w a r e n e s s t ob u i l d more e f f e c t i v e teams. Exchange: The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavi o r Teach ing J o u r n a l , 7(4), 33-36.

E t z i o n i , A. ( 1964 ) . Modern o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Eng lew ood C l i f f s , NJ: P r e n t i c e - H a l l .

E y s e n c k , H. J . , & E y s e n c k , S. B. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . M anual : E y s e n c k P e r s o n a l i t y Inven to ry . San Diego, CA: E d u c a t io n a l and I n d u s t r i a l T e s t i n g S e r v i c e .


136

F a r m e r , F. F. (1978 ) . F a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g how t h e m i l i t a r y p r o g r a m manager o p e r a t e s i n the de fense sys tem s a c q u i s i t i o n p ro ce s s (Doct o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , George Washington U n i v e r s i t y , 1978). D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 4 0 , 2276A.

F i e d l e r , F. E. (1967). A t h e o r y o f l e a d e r s h i p e f f e c t i v e n e s s . New York: McGraw-Hil l .

F i e d l e r , F. E. , & C he m e rs , M. M. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . L e a d e r s h i p and e f f e c t i v e management . Glenview, IL: S c o t t , Foresman.

F i n n e y , M., & S i o h l , C. ( 1 9 8 5 - 1 9 8 6 ) . The c u r r e n t MBA: Why a r e wef a i l i n g : The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l B e h a v i o r T e a c h i n g R e v i e w , 1 0 ( 3 ) ,1- 11 .

F o r d , L. J . ( 1 9 8 8 a ) . C o g n i t i v e p r e f e r e n c e s and p e r s o n a l i t y t y p e : F u r t h e r e v ide nc e f o r a r e l a t i o n s h i p . I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a i n Dominance Review, 5(2) , 15-21.

Fo rd , L. J . (1988b). C o r r e l a t e s o f s u c c e s s f u l c l i n i c a l pe r fo rmance : A t h e o r e t i c a l s tu d y and a p p l i e d t e x t about c o g n i t i v e p r e f e r e n c e s . U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Union f o r E xpe r im en t ing Coll e g e s and U n i v e r s i t i e s , C i n c i n n a t i , OH.

Fox , J . R. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . R e va m ping t h e b u s i n e s s o f n a t i o n a l d e f e n s e : Quick f i x e s a r e n o t the s o l u t i o n t o s t r u c t u r a l problems in d e fe n s e management . Harvard B us ine ss Rev iew, 62(5) , 62-70.

Gadeken, 0. C. (1987). The e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f a r o l e - p l a y i n g management s i m u l a t i o n i n i n c r e a s i n g s e l e c t e d l e a d e r s h i p c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f e n g i n e e r s and s c i e n t i s t s p r e p a r i n g f o r m anagem en t p o s i t i o n s (D o c to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , George Washing ton U n i v e r s i t y , 1987). Dis s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 48, 171A.

Gough, H. G. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . An i n t e r p r e t e r ' s s y l l a b u s f o r t h e C a l i f o r n i a P s y c h o lo g i c a l Inv en to ry . In P. McReynolds (Ed.), Advances i n psyc h o l o g i c a l a s s e s s m e n t (Vol . 1, pp. 5 5 - 7 9 ) . F a l o A l t o , CA: S c i ence and Behav ior Books.

Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J . C. (1951). Manual f o r the Minnesota M u l t i p h a s i c P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n t o r y (MMPI). M i n n e a p o l i s : U n i v e r s i t y o f M in neso ta P re s s .

H e r g e n h a h n , B. R. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . An i n t r o d u c t i o n to the t h e o r i e s o f p e r s o n a l i t y . Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: P r e n t i c e - H a l l .

H e r g e n h a h n , B. R. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . An i n t r o d u c t i o n to the t h e o r i e s o f p e r s o n a l i t y (2nd ed.). Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: P r e n t i c e - H a l l .

H e r r m a n n , N. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . The c r e a t i v e b r a i n : P a r t s I & I I . Washington , DC: American S o c i e t y f o r T r a i n i n g and Development.


137

Herrmann, N. (1987). Hermann B r a i n Dominance I n s t r u m e n t (HBDI) c e r t i f i c a t i o n workshop. Lake Lure , NC: Author .

H e r r m a n n , N. (1988 ) . The c r e a t i v e b r a i n . Lake L u r e , NC: B r a i nBooks .

Hersey , P., & B la nc ha rd , K. H. (1972). Management o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l b e h a v io r (2nd ed.). Englewood C l i f f s , NJ: P r e n t i c e - H a l l .

H erzberg , F. (1982). The m a n a g e r i a l c h o ic e : To be e f f i c i e n t and t obe human (2nd ed. , r e v i s e d ) . S a l t Lake C i ty , u f l Olympus.

H i r s c h , S. K. ( 1985 ) . U s i n g t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s : A r e s o u r c e book. Pa lo Alto , CA: C o n s u l t i n g Psyc h o l o g i s t s P r e s s .

Ho, K. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . The d i m e n s i o n a l i t y and o c c u p a t io n a l d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power o f t h e Herrmann B r a i n D om in an c e I n s t r u m e n t . U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Brigham Young U n i v e r s i t y , Provo, UT.

J a m e s , U. (1986 ) . The H e r rm a n n , M y e r s - B r i g g s c o n n e c t i o n . I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r a in Dominance Rev iew, 31(2), 32-34.

J e n k i n s , R. L., R e i z e n s t e i n , R. C., & R o d g e r s , F. G. (1984 ) . P r o b ing o p i n i o n s — r e p o r t c a rd s on t h e MBA: When e x e c u t i v e s , academi c s , and a l u m n i e v a l u a t e MBA p r o g r a m s and g r a d u a t e s , o p i n i o n s d i f f e r s h a r p l y . H a r v a r d B u s i n e s s R e v i e w , 6 2 ( 5 ) , 2 0 - 2 2 , 26, 28, 30.

J u n g , C. G. ( 1 9 3 9 ) . The i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e p e r s o n a l i t y (S. D e l l , Trans. ) . New York: F a r r e r and R in e h a r t .

J u n g , C. G. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . P s y c h o l o g i c a l t y p e s (H. G. B a y n e s , T r a n s . ; r e v i s e d by R. F. C. H i l l ) . P r i n c e t o n , NJ: P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t yP r e s s . ( O r i g i n a l work p u b l i s h e d 1921)

K e l l e y , P. A. ( 1934 ) . S e a r c h i n g f o r e x c e l l e n c e i n t h e p r o g r a m o f f i c e : A look a t the way s u c c e s s f u l program managers manage— andan a n a l y s i s o f the a t t r i b u t e s t h ey sha re . Program Manager, 13(4), 20-25.

K e r l i n g e r , F. N. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . F o u n d a t i o n s o f b e h a v i o r a l r e s e a r c h (2nd ed.). New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston.

K i n g , G. D. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The MMPI. I n 0. K. B u ros (Ed . ) , The e i g h t h m e n t a l measurem ents y e a r b o o k (pp. 9 3 5 - 9 3 8 ) . H i g h l a n d P a r k , NJ: Gryphon P ress .

K n o w l e s , M. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The a d u l t l e a r n e r : A n e g l e c t e d s p e c i e s (2nde d . ) . H o u s t o n , TX: G u l f .


138

L anyon , R. I . , & G o o d s t e i n , L. D. (1982 ) . P e r s o n a l i t y a s s e s s m e n t (2nd e d . ) . New York : W i l e y .

L a u z a n , G. ( 1 9 6 2 ) . S igm und F r e u d : The man and h i s t h e o r i e s (P.Evans, Trans. ) . Greenwich, CT: F a w c e t t .

L e e , J . W. ( 1988 , M a y - J u n e ) . L e a d e r s h i p and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n t h e t e c h n i c a l e nv i ronm en t . Program Manager, pp. 23-31.

M a c d a i d , G. P. , M c C a u l l e y , M. H., & K a i n z , R. I . (1986 ) . M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r : A t l a s o f t y p e t a b l e s . G a i n e s v i l l e , FL:C e n t e r f o r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P s y c h o lo g i c a l Type.

M a s lo w , A. H. ( 1 954 ) . M o t i v a t i o n and p e r s o n a l i t y . New York:H arpe r and Row.

M a s l o w , A. H. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . M o t i v a t i o n a nd p e r s o n a l i t y (2nd e d . ) . New York: Harper and Row.

Mehrens, W. A., & Lehmann, I . J . (1975). Measurement and e v a l u a t i o n i n e d u c a t i o n and psycho logy (2nd ed.). New York: Ho l t , R i n e h a r tand Winston.

M o rg a n , C. D., & M u r r a y , H. A. ( 1 9 3 5 ) . A m e t h o d f o r i n v e s t i g a t i n g f a n t a s i e s : The Themat ic A p p e r c e p t io n Tes t . A rc h iv e s o f Neuro logyand P s y c h i a t r y , 34, 289-306.

Munn, N. L. (1966). Psychology: The f u n dam e n ta l s o f human a d j u s t ment (5 th ed.). Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n .

M u r r a y , H. A. ( 1 9 3 8 ) . E x p l o r a t i o n s i n p e r s o n a l i t y . New York :Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s .

M y e r s , I . B. ( 1 9 6 2 ) . The M y e r s - B r i g g s ty p e i n d i c a t o r . Pa lo A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P re ss .

M y e r s , I . B., & M y e r s , P. B. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . G i f t s d i f f e r i n g . P a l o A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P re ss .

M y e r s , I . B., & M c C a u l l e y , M. H. ( 1 985 ) . M a nua l : A g u i d e t o t h edeve lopm ent and u s e o f t h e M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r . P a l o A l t o , CA: C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g i s t s P r e s s .

Newman, J . B., IV. ( 1985 ) . H e m i s p h e r e s p e c i a l i z a t i o n and J u n g i a nt y p o l o g y : E v i d e n c e f o r a r e l a t i o n s h i p ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n ,P a c i f i c G r a d u a t e S c h o o l o f P s y c h o l o g y , 1984) . D i s s e r t a t i o n Abs t r a c t s I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 4 6 , 761B-762B.

N i d i f f e r , K. E. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . The p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r : S o f t w a r e t e c h n o l o g y and t h e " t h i n k i n g s t y l e s " o f p r o g r a m m a n a g e r s . P r o g r a m Manager , 13(4), 10-18.


139

Nie re nbe rg , G. I. (1981). The a r t o f n e g o t i a t i n g . New York: Negot i a t i o n I n s t i t u t e .

P a t r i c k , M. G. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . S k i l l s n e e d e d by a p r o j e c t m a n a g e r . I n D. I . C l e l a n d (Ed .) , M a t r i x m a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m s h a n d b o o k . New York: Van Nos t rand Reinhold .

P e t e r s , T. J . (1987). T h r iv i n g on chaos: Handbook f o r a managementr e v o l u t i o n . New York: Knopf.

P e t e r s , T. J . , & A u s t i n , N. K. (1985 ) . A p a s s i o n f o r e x c e l l e n c e : The l e a d e r s h i p d i f f e r e n c e . New York: Random House.

P e t e r s , T. J . , & W a te rm a n , R. H., J r . ( 1 9 8 2 ) . I n s e a r c h o f e x c e l l e n c e : L e s s o n s f ro m A m e r i c a ' s b e s t - r u n c o m p a n i e s . New York :Harper and Row.

P i c k e r i n g , J . W. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . M a n a g e r s : F e d e r a l e x e c u t i v e s . I n G. P.M a c d a i d , M. H. M c C a u l l e y , & R. I K a i n z , M y e r s - B r i g g s Type I n d i c a t o r : A t l a s o f type t a b l e s (Bus iness and management , unnumberedpages) . G a i n e s v i l l e , FL: Cen te r f o r A p p l i c a t i o n s o f P sy c h o lo g i c a l Type.

P i n c h o t , G., I I I . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . I n t r a p r e n e u r i n g : Why you don ' t have t ol e a v e t h e c o r p o r a t i o n t o become an e n t r e p r e n e u r . New York: H arper and Row.

P s a r o u t h a k i s , J . (1988, Summer). [ E n t r e p r e n e u r i a l ] e x e c u t iv e b u i l d s company th rough a c q u i s i t i o n s . B e ta Gamma Sigma N e w s l e t t e r , p. 4.

R o B a r d s , M. J . ( 1 986 ) . A p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e w i t h i n s i g h t ( V o l s .1-2). Laguna Beach, CA: Author .

R o r e r , L. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . The g r e a t r e s p o n s e - s t y l e m yth . P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 6 3 , 129-156.

Rorschach. (1985). In Buros I n s t i t u t e o f Menta l Measurements , The n i n t h m e n t a l m e a s u r e m e n t s y e a r b o o k (Vol . 2, pp. 1 2 9 3 - 1 2 9 5 ) . L in c o ln : U n i v e r s i t y o f Neb raska -L inco ln .

Rowan, R. (1986). The i n t u i t i v e manager. Boston: L i t t l e , Brown.

S a v i l l e , P. , & B l i n k h o r n , S. ( 1 976 ) . U n d e r g r a d u a t e p e r s o n a l i t y by f a c t o r e d s c a l e s : A l a r g e s c a l e s t u d y on C a t t e l l ' s 16PF and t h eEysenck P e r s o n a l i t y I n v e n to r y . Windsor , England: NFER.

Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius , c r e a t i v i t y , and l e a d e r s h i p : H i s t o -r i o m e t r i c i n q u i r i e s . Cambridge, MA: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P re ss .


140

S m i t h , H. L. , & K r u e g e r , L. M. ( 1 9 3 3 ) . A b r i e f summary o f l i t e r a t u r e on l e a d e r s h i p . I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y , School o f Educa t ion , Bull e t i n , H b ) , 1 -80 .

S p e r r y , R. W. ( 1964 , J a n u a r y ) . The g r e a t c e r e b r a l c o m m i s s u r e . S c i e n t i f i c American, pp. 42-52.

S t e r n b e r g , D. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . How t o c om ple te and s u r v i v e a d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . New York: St . M a r t i n ' s P re ss .

S t o g d i l l , R. M. ( 1 948 ) . P e r s o n a l f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l e a d e r s h ip : A su rvey o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e . J o u r n a l o f Psychology, 25, 35-71.

T horn ton , G., I l l , & Byham, W. (1982). Assessment c e n t e r s and manag e r i a l perfo rmance. New York: Academic P ress .

T h i e r a u f , R. J . , & K lekam p , R. C. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . D e c i s i o n m a k i n g t h r o u g h o p e r a t i o n s r e s e a r c h (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

U.S. O f f i c e o f S t r a t e g i c S e r v i c e s Assessment S t a f f . (1948). A sse s s ment o f men: S e l e c t i o n o f p e r s o n n e l f o r the O f f i c e o f S t r a t e g i cS e r v i c e s . New York: R i n e h a r t .

Ward , J . ( 1987 ) . C o r r e l a t i o n o f MBTI and HBDI. Unpubli shed manus c r i p t , DSMC, F t . B e l v o i r , VA.

W e b e r , M. ( 1 947 ) . The t h e o r y o f s o c i a l and economic o r g a n i z a t i o n s (A. M. H e n d e r s o n & T. P a r s o n s , T r a n s . ) . New York: F r e e P r e s s .

Woods, F. A. ( 1 913 ) . The i n f l u e n c e o f m o n a r c h s : S t e p s i n a news c i e n c e o f h i s t o r y . New York: Macmil l an .


relationships of mbti types and hbdi preferences in a

Documents