MBTI in Conflict Management

Revision as of 12:58, 8 April 2023

Written by Anna Hessellund Diedrichsen

Abstract

The article provides an examination of the application and benefits of MBTI in conflict management relevant to project management. Conflicts are inevitable between stakeholders defined as individuals who affect or are affected by a decision, activity or output of project management according to Project Management Institute ^[1]. Conflict management is crucial to foster healthy conflicts to improve effectiveness and productivity. An application of Myers–Briggs Type Indicator(MBTI) provides insights about differences in perception and judgement of all team members , valuable to determine appropriate behaviour, communication style and conflict management style when conflicts occur ^[2].

Firstly, the concept of MBTI is emphasised explaining the 16 personality types and four preferences, Extraversion vs. Introversion, Sensing vs. Intuition, Thinking vs Feeling and Judging vs. Perceiving, which combined assesses the way an individual prefer to perceive information and make decisions. Secondly, the article defends the application of MBTI in conflict management by emphasising the MBTI personality preferences linkage to the core activities in managing conflicts. Lastly, limitations of MBTI are discussed. Concerns about feasibility, flexibility, reliability are questioning. The project manager’s interpretation and assessment of an individual must not be limited to the MBTI type.

Conflict Management

From a pluralist viewpoint organisations consist of stakeholders having different values and goals where conflicts can be constructive. Conflict management is as the process of which the PM identifies and handles conflicts and is crucial to create effectiveness and productivity, further justified and elaborated by K. Popovic and S.G. Daugaard^{[3] [4]}. Conflict management is the art of empathizing differences of interests, preferences, and approaches to maximise performance and productivity of an organisation hence. It is a practice that involves activities related to such as identification of arising conflict, cause of conflict, and how to mitigate and solve it ^[5]. Conflicts inevitable arise due to 10 causes in the process of developing team effectiveness, and are products of numerous variables leading to arguments between people competing personal interests. The most significant conflict causes are following, explained by prof. Y. AS from University of Johannesburg ^[6];

• Disagreements escalating
• Poor organisational structure
• Personality clashes / differences in values & goals
• Poor communication

The purpose of conflict management is to foster healthy conflicts in a team. Further, F. Glasl’s model explains the nine stages of conflict escalation and it is of interest to identify and solve a conflict in the earlier stages to ensure win-win result between parties, figure 1^[7]. Thereby, conflicts can be positive and proactive however affect all stakeholders, hence it is relevant to understand individual personalities and interactions across team members in conflict management.

Figure 1: Friedrich Glasl’s model of the 9 stages of conflict escalation. Illustration created based on the original model by Friedrich Glasl^[7].

Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

The purpose of Myers-Briggs Type Indicator tool is to support project management in delivering output effectively within deadline. This article validates the application of MBTI in conflict management.

The Concept

The invention of Myers–Briggs Type Indicator assessment by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers originates from the theory described by C. G. Jung about analytical psychology^[8] . MBTI provides an examination of the individual’s conscious feelings and thoughts with the purpose of emphasizing differentiation in the way people perceive information and make decisions. Hence, MBTI discusses the individual’s preferences and not capabilities. It is the world’s most universally and widely used assessment tool to understand the individual's preferences and determine type. To clarify it is not a personality test but a typing test ^[9].

The purpose of MBTI is to assess individual preferences which connect to preferred behaviour in teamwork, interactions and thereby understand how team dynamics arise and are likely to communicate and interact. The underlying assumption is that people have specific preferences which impact its behaviour pattern. MBTI empathises eight preferences which are paired into opposite preferences of two. An individual tends to favour one of two opposing preferences and will feel energetic, natural and competent when using a preferred preference however, by practice people can master the proficient of using the opposite preference. Awareness about MBTI enable teams to leverage different personalities and strengths to increase effectiveness.

The 16 MBTI Types

In MBTI eight preferences can be combined and expresses 16 different personality types, figure 2. A person's psychological type is represented by four preferences but is a dynamic and interconnected system of personality in which the components interrelate to establish effectiveness and balance.

Figure 2: Myers-Briggs’ 16 Personality Types. Illustration created based on information by I.B. Myers^[9].

MBTI considers 4 categories collectively comprising the foundation of the individual’s personality type.

• Orientation: First category assesses where a person focuses its attention distinguishing between Introversion(I) and Extroversion(E). A tendency to prefer Extroversion focusses on the outer world emphasizing the power of engagement with people and activities. People who prefer Introversion focusses on the inner world of impressions and ideas.

• Perception: Second category assesses the way a person perceives and interprets information considering Sensing(S) and Intuition(N). A person who prefers Sensing tends to focus on “here and now”, gathering information through senses. A person who prefers Intuition tends to gather information based on previous patterns and seeks the wider context and future possibilities.

• Judgement: Third category assesses how a person makes rational decisions based on perceived information by distinguishing between Thinking(T) and Feeling(F). A person who prefers Thinking makes decisions based on logical arguments, defined rules and objective analysis. A tendency to prefer Feeling means a person makes decisions based on values and subjective consideration associating with the situation.

• Orientation: Fourth category assesses the way a person deals with the outer world distinguishing between Judging(J) and Perceiving(P). A person who prefers Judging enjoy planning and an organised approach in contrast to a person who prefers Perceiving enjoy flexibility, keeps options open and like being spontaneous.

The 16 personality types are classified based on the 8 cognitive functions meaning that descriptions of two MBTI types differ in the preference of the individual’s perception or judgement, see figure 3. A person's cognitive function reflect its behaviour and thinking.

Figure 3: The 8 Myers-Briggs Cognitive Functions. The figure relates to figure 2 and is created based on information by I.B. Myers^[9].

Application of MBTI in Conflict Management

The application of MBTI and its relevance to improve conflict management in project management is rationalised by defining how MBTI is leveraged in different stages of handling arising conflicts.

In “Conflict within Organizations – Structure” A. Garden argues for the benefit of using MBTI to explore sources of conflict and how they can be solved ^[10]. A Garden defends it as a constructive and developmental tool. In context of the principle of project management defined by Project Management Institute conflict management is a core behavioural competence needed to drive team productivity. According to DS/ISO 21502 conflicts must be managed appropriately using negotiation, empathy, assertiveness and evidence-based decisions, and thereby by applying MBTI in conflict management, the project manager (PM) will be able tailor communication, collaboration and encourage healthy conflicts ^[11].

MBTI assessment consists of approx. 100 questions and is applicable before setting the team and when managing team members. According to I.B. Myers ^[9], the individual’s personality MBTI type is consistent throughout its life however can change under an extreme period of its life or when a person goes through life changing situations. Hence, to mitigate the risk of incorrect answers in the test, it is relevant to take the test 2-3 times to acquire an accurate view a person’s personality.

The PM must consider the individual’s MBTI type throughout the activities of conflict management to mitigate the risk of a conflict will enter second and third level of F. Glasl’s nine stages of conflict escalation.

Identify Conflict Pairs

The PM can understand interactions and identify potential arising conflicts between the 16 MBTI personality types, by identifying conflict pairs. The last two letters of the MBTI type are defined as the conflict pair as the combination explains the way the individual make decisions and interact with the outer world, connected to focus and response to conflicts^[2]. The Myers-Briggs Type Company identifies four conflict pairs; TJ, FJ, TP and FP. The PM must be aware that people holding TJ have an extravert thinking preference. They are rational and conflicts often arise when logic is challenged. In contrast, the FP group prefers operating internally and conflicts arise when core values are challenged. By being conscious about conflict pairs the PM can be proactive and early spot situations where conflicts may occur and what behavioural changes to be aware of as a symptom of dissatisfaction of team members. When conflict pairs collaborate in a team the PM must be aware of how team members are likely to interact and clarify to team members how to communicate and interact with other personality types. MBTI personalities with common preferences share qualities and are less likely to be in conflict.

Understand Cause of Conflicts between Pairs

According to studies and S.G Daugaard, the PM must empathise causes of conflicts in project teams which mostly relate to the 4 reasons, explained by prof A. YS ^{[6] [4]}. The most significant is due to an unresolved disagreement that escalates to an emotional level. The focus must be to prevent conflicts from entering second level producing a win-lose result or lose-lose between parties. By identifying conflict triggers of personality types it can be recognised how a person prefers to solve a conflict and what elements of the shadow side to be aware of to prevent escalation. If a team member has a tendency to be an Extraverted Thinking Type the PM must be aware that the person is in higher risk of being in conflict with Introverted iNtuition types since they may perceive Introverted intuitives as unfocused and slow. In contrast, team members with an Introverted Intuitive type carefully take time to find insights and perceive Extraverted thinkers as too theoretical and fast. An understanding of the fundamental differences of perception between the MBTI types enables the PM to predict conflict occurrence and identify the root cause of disagreements, poor communication and etc. between team members.

Facilitation and Conflict Resolution

In a conflict between two team members the conflict is mitigated by using the PM as the mediator who assists the parties in the conflict to clearly define the issue, understand interests and move to a resolution. A preferred communication style of an MBTI type is assessed in the test hence, by knowing the MBTI type of each party the PM can support both parties in how to convey a message effectively to the counterparty and what aspects to address of the counterparty to accommodate its way of perceiving information. Thereby, conflicts are mitigated and negative personality crashes are avoided.

In a team the PM must understand that communication between Thinking and Feeling types often crash due to Feeling types tend to feel attacked by Thinkers. Stakeholders with feeling preferences should advocate arguments to Thinkers by respecting cost of consequences, listing facts and keeping language objective. In contrast, Thinkers should focus on empathy acknowledging the opinion of the Feeling type and address the person’s concerns. A Feeling type will feel respected and heard and the conflict is likely to progress positively.

Additionally, according to I.B. Myers communication between Sensing and Intuitive types are constructive when Sensing people know the importance of paying attention to the initiatives and ideas from Intuitive people, while the Intuitive person must respect the importance of taking a step back and check the Sensing person follows its thoughts ^[9]. In successful collaboration, contribution from the Sensing type supports and strengthens the argument of the Intuitive type. In this situation, the PM must clarify to the Sensing type the best way to approach an Intuitive person and how the two personality types complement each other.

By understanding the MBTI type of the team members and the PM, the PM is able to constructively communicate to individuals and support collaboration across team members. MBTI enables the PM to quickly assess preferences and interests of team members to decide whether to address logic and facts or emotions and opinions interacting with Thinkers or Feelers in a conflict.

Facilitation and Conflict Resolution

Awareness of a person’s MBTI personality type may also uncover what conflict management style is preferable, approaching conflicts. Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) assesses the individual’s preferred conflict management style and complement MBTI to succeed in conflict management during conflict resolution ^{[6] [12]}. TKI is developed by K. W. Thomas and R. H. Kilmann and identifies five conflict management styles defined by two dimensions, Assertiveness and Cooperativeness.

• Accommodation (unassertive, cooperative)
• Avoiding (unassertive, uncooperative)
• Competing (assertive, uncooperative)
• Collaborating (assertive, cooperative)
• Compromise (intermediate assertive and uncooperative)

Figure 4: Relationship between MBTI, Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) and F.Glasl’s model. The figure is created based on information by I.B. Myers, Kilmann Diagnostics LLC. & F.GlasI ^{[9] [13] [7]}.

Research indicates correlation between preferred conflict management style and MBTI type, figure 4. Extroverted people are more likely to collaborate than introverted. A successful PM is aware of own conflict management style based on their MBTI type however can compensate to use alternative approaches for different conflict situations. By paying attention to different conflict management styles related to the MBTI type the process of tailoring behaviour and communication becomes effective in conflict resolution.

In relation to F. Glasl’s nine stages of conflict escalation high cooperativeness and assertiveness is preferred to create win-win situation reflecting healthy conflicts. When dealing with individuals who prefer introversion the PM must proactively encourage them to express opinion and not leave a conflict right away. Moreover, when setting a team the PM should consider including Extraverted Sensing types as they are proven to be natural conflict mitigators with the strengths of being realistic, and accepting facts and use them constructively I.B. Myers ^[9]. They are likely to pull conflicts factions together and make things run effortlessly.

Important, it is favourable to set a diverse project team across MBTI types and encourage stronger relationships between different MBTI types, appreciating different qualities in a conflict.

Reflection and Limitations

This section reflects the application of MBTI and limitations relevant to the project manager.

Generalisation

MBTI assessment categories people into 16 different fixed types allowing the PM to simply compare preferences and interests across a team. It is not as comprehensive and detailed as a personality test which provides an exhaustive picture of the individual and the complexity of its behaviour. Further, MBTI does not concern other relevant factors such as personal values, educational- and cultural background etc. The tool can easily be applied but is criticised to provide oversimplified results hence is not feasible in some situations.

Lack of Flexibility

MBTI can be overemphasized as basis for understanding team members leading to misjudgements. A person with a tendency towards one preference can change behaviour in different conflict situations. It is important to use MBTI as a tool to understand the PM’s and team members preferences however be careful not to stereotyping individuals and view the individual as unique as all humans also appreciate preferences in different levels.

Negative Conflict Occurrence

Application of MBTI can create conflict between the project team and PM if the team members feel labelled. The PM should not use MBTI for evaluation and judgement. MBTI in conflict management is a tool to support and understand team members hence, by conveying the message of the purpose and vision behind MBTI to the team members the PM can encourage buy-in.

Reliability

A risk of dissonance is possible between a person’s self-perception and how other perceive it. As a result a person’s MBTI type may not reflect reality which can lead to negative conflicts and misinterpretation. In order to prevent dissonance MBTI can be supplemented by a survey evaluating how team members perceive each other. Thereby, mismatches and similarities will be examined and the PM is able to assess the correctness of the individual’s MBTI.

Conclusion

Annotated bibliography

MBTI Book PMI

References

1. ↑ Project Management Institute, Inc.. (2021). Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (7th Edition). Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). Retrieved from https://app-knovel-com.proxy.findit.cvt.dk/kn/resources/kpSPMAGPMP/toc
2. ↑ ^{2.0 2.1} Retrieved from www.mbtitype.com
3. ↑ Retrieved from https://ieeexplore-ieee-org.proxy.findit.cvt.dk/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5074859
4. ↑ ^{4.0 4.1} Retrieved from http://wiki.doing-projects.org/index.php/Dealing_with_conflict_in_project_management#cite_note-Book10-7
5. ↑ Retrieved from http://integral-review.org/pdf-template-issue.php?pdfName=vol_6_no_3_fathi_metatheory_building_in_dialogical_conflict_situations.pdf
6. ↑ ^{6.0 6.1 6.2} Retrieved from https://ieeexplore-ieee-org.proxy.findit.cvt.dk/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=8095588
7. ↑ ^{7.0 7.1 7.2} Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Glasl%27s_model_of_conflict_escalation
8. ↑ Retrieved from https://eu.themyersbriggs.com/ebooks/ebook-recipient-download?i=8GRxkRc76oNjeM0XR2N8Ymqf7vBV5oLEf%2fPAGwfg59g%3d
9. ↑ ^{9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6} Retrieved from BOOK
10. ↑ Retrieved from https://www-taylorfrancis-com.proxy.findit.cvt.dk/books/mono/10.4324/9781351206112/resolve-conflict-organizations-annamaria-garden
11. ↑ Retrieved from https://findit.dtu.dk/en/catalog/60d31c4ad9001d00e85de43b
12. ↑ Retrieved from https://www.usgs.gov/human-capital/thomas-kilmann-conflict-mode-instrument-tki
13. ↑ https://kilmanndiagnostics.com/the-tki-and-the-mbti-2/