4 48 Insufferable Sanctimonious Fanatical Jerk
4 48 Insufferable Sanctimonious Fanatical Jerk
 |
| A player works through the gypsys questions, Ultima IV: Quest of the Avatar |
Thou Hast Lost an Eighth!
There were at least a dozen pages, all laid out in a multiple-choice style quiz. The last page of questions revealed the total count: 70.Damn. That must be some quiz.
I paid no attention to the person discussing corporate policies, continuing to examine the quiz and its related paperwork. The back sheet listed a set of titles.
"The Architect"
"The Mediator"
"The Entertainer"
I counted sixteen titles in all. Continuing to ignore the presentation unfolding before the audience, I began penciling in answers.
The questions were bizarre. Answering them without context was difficult. They seemed to drift back and forth from acutely personal, to wildly broad and ambiguous. Unsurprisingly, I found myself seeking to fill in context with what I knew best.
"Common sense is: A) rarely questionable, or B) frequently questionable?
Depends on which of my guild members youre talking about.
"Are you more interested in: A) what is actual, or B) what is possible?"
Well, if it�s bench-filler night, we�re not going to be pushing heroics, are we?
"Writers should: A) say what they mean, and mean what they say, or B) express things more by use of analogy."
"Is it worse to be A) unjust, or B) merciless?"
Damn. This is some quiz.
I agonized over each answer. Years earlier, similar questions were asked of me. The difference was, back then, they were presented in all the glory of 4-color CGA.
"During a pitched battle, thou dost see a fellow desert his post, endangering many. As he flees, he is set upon by several enemies. Dost thou A) justly let him fight alone; or B) risk sacrificing thine own life to aid him?"
Let him fight alone! He got his own damn self into that mess! What a coward!
"Thee and thy friends have been routed and ordered to retreat. In defiance of thy orders, dost thou A) stop in compassion to aid a wounded companion; or B) sacrifice thyself to slow the pursuing enemy, so others can escape?"
Man, this is tough...I guess I would stop and help the wounded guy.
"After 20 years thou hast found the slayer of thy best friends. The villain proves to be a man who provides the sole support for a young girl. Dost thou A) spare him in compassion for the girl; or B) slay him in the name of justice?"
...uh, I dont...know. I mean...both of these things needs to happen.
...I dont know.
Why were the gypsys questions so difficult to answer? And why did I care so much about getting the right answer?
A fifteen year old, growing up in a small town in British Columbia, Canada, had few opportunities to fight in actual holy wars. There were no clash of iron sword, no lords nor fiefdoms, and certainly, no reason to make judgement calls about who lives or who dies.
The only way I could answer Lord Britishs carefully crafted questions was by translating them into real life situations. In doing so, I became aware of a troubling reality: not all scenarios have a positive outcome. The gypsy in Ultima IV was my very own Kobayashi Maru.
Sometimes, you have no choice but to decide on what sucks the least. But you have to decide.
You have to.
...I...guess I spare the guy.
"Thy path is clear!"
"ISFJ: The Defender"
Come again?
"The Defender is filled with a deep-seated need to serve others; they need to be needed."
Is this some kind of joke? How do you pull servant out of programmer?
"ISFJs are perfectionists and often under-appreciated. Their reliability is unquestionable, and because of this, they are often taken advantage of. The fruits of their labor are frequently enjoyed by other personality types less inclined to harbor feelings of guilt around getting others to do the real work."
Oh. A programmer that builds software for billion dollar companies. I guess that would be the way.
"ISFJs are notoriously bad at delegating�"
Well, if you want something done right�
"...but rarely seek acknowledgement, as they have a deep-seated belief that it is somehow wrong to want to be rewarded for demonstrating effort."
...or maybe its because pride isnt a virtue? That walking around, pounding your chest like youre some kind of bad-ass only makes you look foolish and embarrassing and�
...and why I am sitting here, trying to come with excuses why this isnt me?
The more I fought with the analysis, the more it made sense.
"ISFJs are methodical and accurate, and have a good memory, particularly as they relate to situations involving people."
So, it would be pretty easy for me to, say, recall the events of eight years of guild leadership?
"They are pleasant and loyal as a member of a team, but are prone to feeling stressed and overwhelmed in roles in leadership."
So it would seem.
"The loyalties they form are personal rather than institutional."
...which makes it difficult to kick people out of a guild without feeling guilty. Or giving people more chances than they deserve.
"ISFJs provide emotional and practical support to what few people they consider their close friends, and the longer the relationship, the more an ISFJ values it."
...which might explain the constant need to dwell on relationships now ended.
"ISFJs arent terribly good at managing or discussing distress�"
Go fuck yourself.
"...which manifests as unexplained moodiness to those not acquainted with the ISFJ. It is important to remember, when dealing with an ISFJ, that hidden under apparent bursts of outrage is a personality type destined to think of others before themselves, and is very likely bearing the burden of an issue, so that you do not have to."
I sat back in my chair and stared off into the abyss of the auditoriums extremities, oblivious to the shouting costumed musketeers around me, their plastic toy sabres dancing in the air.
To be honest, I expected the geeks populating my guild to be dismissive of a personality test. Theyd want to see the numbers, the proof, the analytical data backing up the "assessment". It wouldnt have surprised me to see them theorycraft every vague rationale to the point of elimination. That was, after all, the type of culture I was trying to foster in DoD.
If you dont understand something, dont guess. Do the research.
To be certain Id get involvement, I promised a little forum Karma to sweeten the deal. They dove right in, awaiting their evaluation (shared in confidence upon completion). I encouraged them to discuss their findings in the forum; many chose to do so. And over the course of the next several weeks, the thread grew hot with activity.
The data continued to pour in. Word trickled down from the heavy forum users to those who preferred the isolation of the game, and with it, came more piqued interest. By the time the quizs fifteen minutes of fame were up, I had enough entries to field two full 25-man raid teams...and still have several on the bench. And the data itself was rich with trivia:
The Myers Briggs was a complete and total sham.
Katharine and Isabel were social scientists much in the way that Brian Fellow, Tracy Morgans SNL character, was an accredited zoologist that held an advanced degree in environmental studies. That is to say, they were not. The very test taken by hundreds of thousands of people across the globe was created not by the scientific rigor of the academic community, but by "enthusiastic young individuals with a love of sociology."
I adore enthusiasm. Its what got me interested in programming and learning about the mechanics of people management. But I am not an expert, and Id want to be sure my readers knew that when examining my writing. Unfortunately, when considering the MBTI, the industry behaves in exactly the opposite manner, often citing the many studies that back the MBTI as a means to prove its academic rigor. But those "studies" are not as academic as one might expect.
At least half of all published material on the MBTI comes from the Center for the Application of Psychological Type which, coincidentally, also provides training for the MBTI. And training does not come cheaply. The advocacy and sales of the MBTI clock in at nearly $20 million annually. A core contingent that both totes a tests scientific accuracy while simultaneously benefiting from its lucrative profits shrouds the MBTI with an ethically gray cloud that grows uncomfortably dark with each new glance.
Perhaps the most telling piece of evidence to the MBTIs inefficacy came in 1948, just five years after the test was first published. A psychologist named Bertram Forer devised a personality test of his own, one that harbored a secret. The first set of students he administered it to were amazed at its ability to accurately identify each of their own traits and behavior. As part of the experiment, Forer asked them to rate that accuracy on a scale of 1-5. The average rating came back consistently at 4.2. Thats when Forer revealed the secret...
...the evaluations were pulled at random from the local newspapers astrology column.
Forers experiment has been repeated hundreds of times since he "amazed" his initial subjects. The results are nearly always 4.2.
This was the Forer Effect in action: the tendency for us to accept generalized descriptions that could apply to a wide slice of the population, merely because we wish them to be true. To many, who we are and why we behave the way we do is a conundrum that troubles us, it is a puzzle we must solve.
We hear what we want to hear, agree with what looks like it is falling into place, unaware that confirmation bias is a Texas sharpshooter, drawing targets around the bullet holes so that we can agree, nay, insist that the test has hit its mark. Its enough to keep the Horoscope publishing industry alive and well, long after science has proven that (as the meme goes) the alignment of the stars and planets will not affect us in any way shape or form.
I heard what I wanted to hear. Perhaps not at first...but as I read through it, contemplating how much I agonized over those questions...they had to be right. It had to be right.
Maybe part of it was right?
Maybe just a bit of it was?
Or maybe it was just right in the sense that it was right for everybody...and nobody.
Questions remained.
Are there other, more accurate personality tests out there? Ones that have real scientific proof in identifying a persons type? Perhaps. The Big Five may be one such test, featuring traits that are easily both positive (agreeableness) and negative (neuroticism), which may help to keep the Forer Effect at bay during test administration. As the story goes, "more data is needed."
Why a company would ask its employees to take the test? For the exact same reason I wanted DoD to take it: I thought it would give me that insight, show me those patterns, help me connect the dots, so that I could understand my people better. Help me find the leaders and the followers. Just as I wanted to understand myself better, even after my gut instinct ate at me with the very first glance. This isnt you.
There are no shortcuts to understanding people, no slots you can easily place them in. But when companies grow large, they dont want to hear "no easy solutions". They want you to get it done. They want the "people" part of people management a little more efficient, a little more streamlined...
...a little more automated.
Any org (guild or company) that cares about its people should invest in tools with care, rather than grab at whatever is most "brilliantly marketed". The Myers Briggs test is popular and successful because of wishful thinking...and little else. But neither popularity nor success are a measure of accuracy, which is the one thing the MBTI needs, but lacks. Anyone who states otherwise hasnt done the research, and is merely guessing.
"Thee and thy friends have been routed and ordered to retreat. In defiance of thy orders, dost thou A) stop in compassion to aid a wounded companion; or B) sacrifice thyself to slow the pursuing enemy, so others can escape?"
Man, this is tough...I guess I would stop and help the wounded guy.
"After 20 years thou hast found the slayer of thy best friends. The villain proves to be a man who provides the sole support for a young girl. Dost thou A) spare him in compassion for the girl; or B) slay him in the name of justice?"
...uh, I dont...know. I mean...both of these things needs to happen.
...I dont know.
Why were the gypsys questions so difficult to answer? And why did I care so much about getting the right answer?
A fifteen year old, growing up in a small town in British Columbia, Canada, had few opportunities to fight in actual holy wars. There were no clash of iron sword, no lords nor fiefdoms, and certainly, no reason to make judgement calls about who lives or who dies.
The only way I could answer Lord Britishs carefully crafted questions was by translating them into real life situations. In doing so, I became aware of a troubling reality: not all scenarios have a positive outcome. The gypsy in Ultima IV was my very own Kobayashi Maru.
Sometimes, you have no choice but to decide on what sucks the least. But you have to decide.
You have to.
...I...guess I spare the guy.
"Thy path is clear!"
 |
| The 16 personality types in the MBTI (Source: 16 personalities.com) |
Whatd You Call Me?
I glared at my results in denial."ISFJ: The Defender"
Come again?
"The Defender is filled with a deep-seated need to serve others; they need to be needed."
Is this some kind of joke? How do you pull servant out of programmer?
"ISFJs are perfectionists and often under-appreciated. Their reliability is unquestionable, and because of this, they are often taken advantage of. The fruits of their labor are frequently enjoyed by other personality types less inclined to harbor feelings of guilt around getting others to do the real work."
Oh. A programmer that builds software for billion dollar companies. I guess that would be the way.
"ISFJs are notoriously bad at delegating�"
Well, if you want something done right�
"...but rarely seek acknowledgement, as they have a deep-seated belief that it is somehow wrong to want to be rewarded for demonstrating effort."
...or maybe its because pride isnt a virtue? That walking around, pounding your chest like youre some kind of bad-ass only makes you look foolish and embarrassing and�
...and why I am sitting here, trying to come with excuses why this isnt me?
The more I fought with the analysis, the more it made sense.
"ISFJs are methodical and accurate, and have a good memory, particularly as they relate to situations involving people."
So, it would be pretty easy for me to, say, recall the events of eight years of guild leadership?
"They are pleasant and loyal as a member of a team, but are prone to feeling stressed and overwhelmed in roles in leadership."
So it would seem.
"The loyalties they form are personal rather than institutional."
...which makes it difficult to kick people out of a guild without feeling guilty. Or giving people more chances than they deserve.
"ISFJs provide emotional and practical support to what few people they consider their close friends, and the longer the relationship, the more an ISFJ values it."
...which might explain the constant need to dwell on relationships now ended.
"ISFJs arent terribly good at managing or discussing distress�"
Go fuck yourself.
"...which manifests as unexplained moodiness to those not acquainted with the ISFJ. It is important to remember, when dealing with an ISFJ, that hidden under apparent bursts of outrage is a personality type destined to think of others before themselves, and is very likely bearing the burden of an issue, so that you do not have to."
I sat back in my chair and stared off into the abyss of the auditoriums extremities, oblivious to the shouting costumed musketeers around me, their plastic toy sabres dancing in the air.
---
To be honest, I expected the geeks populating my guild to be dismissive of a personality test. Theyd want to see the numbers, the proof, the analytical data backing up the "assessment". It wouldnt have surprised me to see them theorycraft every vague rationale to the point of elimination. That was, after all, the type of culture I was trying to foster in DoD.
If you dont understand something, dont guess. Do the research.
To be certain Id get involvement, I promised a little forum Karma to sweeten the deal. They dove right in, awaiting their evaluation (shared in confidence upon completion). I encouraged them to discuss their findings in the forum; many chose to do so. And over the course of the next several weeks, the thread grew hot with activity.
The data continued to pour in. Word trickled down from the heavy forum users to those who preferred the isolation of the game, and with it, came more piqued interest. By the time the quizs fifteen minutes of fame were up, I had enough entries to field two full 25-man raid teams...and still have several on the bench. And the data itself was rich with trivia:
- The most common personality in my guild: ESTJ (The Executive, 15.4%), the fifth most common personality type out in the wild.
- Conversely, the rarest type in real life, INFJ (The Advocate) made up 6.1% of the guild. In fact, 6.1% of the guild (4 players) was split among four types:
- INFJ (The Advocate)
- INFP (The Mediator)
- ENFP (The Campaigner)
- ENFJ (The Protagonist)
- Rarer still, within DoD (and conversely, more prevalent in real life) were ESFP (The Entertainer) and ENTP (The Debater), both at 4.5%
- The four most common types in DoD were paired mirrors of each other:
- ISTJ (The Logistician) and ESTJ (The Executive)
- INTJ (The Architect) and ENTJ (The Commander)
- ISTJ (The Logistician) made up the brunt of DoD�s leadership.
- ISFP (The Adventurer), ESTP (The Entrepreneur), ISTP (The Virtuoso) and INTP (The Logician) all shared the exclusive 1.5% slice with me -- DoD had only one of each.
That last nugget was of particular interest. Of the sixty-six guildies having completed the quiz, only five entries represented their type in isolation. Yes, I was the only ISFJ in the group, but I wondered how many more were out there. How many just didnt get around to taking the test? And why?
Perhaps they knew the truth -- the truth I wouldnt find out until months passed.
The Myers Briggs was a complete and total sham.
 |
| The most accurate horoscope reading for 2015 available |
A Constant Four-Point-Two
People much smarter than I figured out long ago that the validity of the MBTI as a means of gauging personality is...problematic, at best. A critical examination begins with its creators, Katharine Briggs, and her daughter, Isabel Myers.Katharine and Isabel were social scientists much in the way that Brian Fellow, Tracy Morgans SNL character, was an accredited zoologist that held an advanced degree in environmental studies. That is to say, they were not. The very test taken by hundreds of thousands of people across the globe was created not by the scientific rigor of the academic community, but by "enthusiastic young individuals with a love of sociology."
I adore enthusiasm. Its what got me interested in programming and learning about the mechanics of people management. But I am not an expert, and Id want to be sure my readers knew that when examining my writing. Unfortunately, when considering the MBTI, the industry behaves in exactly the opposite manner, often citing the many studies that back the MBTI as a means to prove its academic rigor. But those "studies" are not as academic as one might expect.
At least half of all published material on the MBTI comes from the Center for the Application of Psychological Type which, coincidentally, also provides training for the MBTI. And training does not come cheaply. The advocacy and sales of the MBTI clock in at nearly $20 million annually. A core contingent that both totes a tests scientific accuracy while simultaneously benefiting from its lucrative profits shrouds the MBTI with an ethically gray cloud that grows uncomfortably dark with each new glance.
Perhaps the most telling piece of evidence to the MBTIs inefficacy came in 1948, just five years after the test was first published. A psychologist named Bertram Forer devised a personality test of his own, one that harbored a secret. The first set of students he administered it to were amazed at its ability to accurately identify each of their own traits and behavior. As part of the experiment, Forer asked them to rate that accuracy on a scale of 1-5. The average rating came back consistently at 4.2. Thats when Forer revealed the secret...
...the evaluations were pulled at random from the local newspapers astrology column.
Forers experiment has been repeated hundreds of times since he "amazed" his initial subjects. The results are nearly always 4.2.
This was the Forer Effect in action: the tendency for us to accept generalized descriptions that could apply to a wide slice of the population, merely because we wish them to be true. To many, who we are and why we behave the way we do is a conundrum that troubles us, it is a puzzle we must solve.
We hear what we want to hear, agree with what looks like it is falling into place, unaware that confirmation bias is a Texas sharpshooter, drawing targets around the bullet holes so that we can agree, nay, insist that the test has hit its mark. Its enough to keep the Horoscope publishing industry alive and well, long after science has proven that (as the meme goes) the alignment of the stars and planets will not affect us in any way shape or form.
I heard what I wanted to hear. Perhaps not at first...but as I read through it, contemplating how much I agonized over those questions...they had to be right. It had to be right.
Maybe part of it was right?
Maybe just a bit of it was?
Or maybe it was just right in the sense that it was right for everybody...and nobody.
---
Questions remained.
Are there other, more accurate personality tests out there? Ones that have real scientific proof in identifying a persons type? Perhaps. The Big Five may be one such test, featuring traits that are easily both positive (agreeableness) and negative (neuroticism), which may help to keep the Forer Effect at bay during test administration. As the story goes, "more data is needed."
There are no shortcuts to understanding people, no slots you can easily place them in. But when companies grow large, they dont want to hear "no easy solutions". They want you to get it done. They want the "people" part of people management a little more efficient, a little more streamlined...
...a little more automated.
Any org (guild or company) that cares about its people should invest in tools with care, rather than grab at whatever is most "brilliantly marketed". The Myers Briggs test is popular and successful because of wishful thinking...and little else. But neither popularity nor success are a measure of accuracy, which is the one thing the MBTI needs, but lacks. Anyone who states otherwise hasnt done the research, and is merely guessing.
Comments
Post a Comment