Skip to main content

Full text of "DTIC ADA278486: A Description of Psychological Type at the Defense Systems Management College"

See other formats


180 


A DESCRIPTION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPE 
AT THE DEFENSE SYSTEMS 
MANAGEMENT COLLEGE 


AD-A278 486 


1994 SPRING EDITION - 


~ ENFP ' 




Daniel B. Chapla, M.B.A. _ 

Jerry J. Coady, M. Div. 

Donald M. Freedman, M.Sj 

Donald S. Fujii, Ph.D. \ iwTISL 

Forrest C. Gale, M.S. \-^ 

JayW. Gould III, M.S. 

Philip A. Irish III, Ph.D. 

Robert J. McCabe, M.S. & M.B.A. 

Dean F. Osgood, M.S. 

Dan Robinson, M.S. & M.B.A. 


Edited by Jay W. Gould III. M.S. 

Send reprint requests to: 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DEFENSE SYST MGMT COLG, 

ATTN DSMC/FD-MD (Prof Jay Gould III). 9820 BELVOIR ROAD, SUITE G38, 

FT BELVOIR VA 22060-5565 



























IFICATION OF THIS PAGE 


REPORT DOCi^NTATION PAGE 


la. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 
I Inr' 1 a o c i E i oH 


2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORJT 


2b. DECLASSIFICATION/OOWNGRA 


4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION RE 


Form Approved 
0MB No. 0704-01$8 




m 


ER( 



1b RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS 


3. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT 

Distribution Unlimited 


5. MONIT 


6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

Defense Systems Mgmt College 


6b. OFFICE SYMBOL 
(If applicable) 

FD/MD 


6c ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 

9820 Belvoir Road 

Suite G38 

Fort Belvoir. VA 22060-5565 

8a. NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING 

8b. OFFICE SYMBOL 

ORGANIZATION 

(If applicable) 

Same as 6a. 


8c ADDRESS (C/ty, State, and ZIP Code) 


Same as 6c. 




7b. ADDRESS (Ofy, State, arni ZIP Code) 

Same as 6c. 



10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS 


PROGRAM 


PROJECT 

TASK 

MO. 

NO. 



11. TITLE (Include Security Oassification) 

A Description of Psychological Type at the Defense Systems Management College 


12 . PERSONAL AUTHOR(S) pgniel Chapla, Jerry Coady, Donald Freedman, Donald Fujii, Forrest Gale, 
Jav Gould. Philip Irish. Robert McCabe. Dean Osgood. Dan Robinson_ 


13a. TYPE OF REPORT 11 3b. TIME COVERED 114. DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day; 115. PAGE COUNT 

Study I _■''O_ I 1994 - Sprine Edition I 28 



COSATI COOES 


GROUP SUB-GROUP 


18. SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number) 


19. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number) 

This paper describ es the psychological type, as measured by the Myers-Briggs Type 
Indicator®, (MBTI®) of a representative sample of more than 4,617 students who attended 
the Defense Systems Management College (DSMC) since 1985. This study addresses the 
contributions and potential pitfalls that personnel with each Myers-Briggs Type bring to 
an organization, and implications for leaders who must work in a possibly changing work 
force. 

This descriptive analysis may enable all who work in the defense acquisition envrionment 
to understand their coworkersbetter and, in this understanding, to enhance the overall 
acquisition process. 


20. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 
igtUNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED □ SAME AS RPT. □ DTIC USERS 


22a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 


isn 


OD Form 1473, JUN 86 


21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

Hn,- 1 QOOT El 


22b TELEPHONE (/nc/uote Area Code) 22c. OFFICE SYMBOL 

7n?-8ns-97A? n<;-PR 


Previous editions are obsolete. _SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE 






































A Description of Psychological Type 
At the Defense Systems Management College 
(1994 SPRING EDITION) 

Daniel B. Chapla, M.B.A. 

Jerry J. Coady, M. Div. 

Donald M. Freedman, M.S. 

Donald S. Fujii, Ph.D. 

Forrest C. Gale, M.S. 

Jay W. Gould III, M.S. 

Philip J. Irish III, Ph.D. 

Robert J. McCabe, M.S. & M.B.A. 

Dean F. Osgood, M.S. 

Dan Robinson, M.S. & M.B.A. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

The work reported in this edition is based upon 
earlier work accomplished by Carl Bryant, Ph.D. et al 


Edited by Jay W. Gould III, M.S. 


Send reprint requests to: Department of Defense, Defense Systems 
Management College, ATTN DSMC-FD/MD (Prof Jay Gould III) 

9820 Belvoir Road, Suite G38, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5565 





4 




Abstract 


This paper describes the psychological type, 
as measured by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®, 
(MBTI®) of a representative sample of more than 

4,617 students who attended the Defense Systems 
Management College (DSMC) since 1985. This study 
addresses the contributions and potential pitfalls 
that personnel with each Myers-Briggs Type bring to 
an organization, and implications for leaders who 
must work in a possibly changing work force. 

This descriptive analysis may enable all who 
work in the defense acquisition environment to 
understand their coworkers better and, in this 
understanding, to enhance the overall acquisition 
process. 


Aoo 98 Slon For 


HTIS 6RA&I 
DT'iC TAJ 

Uuttii.riC-.«u::ced 

Jmsi. ^ ^ — 




By- 


01st I Special 




'I ! 


Mymn-trigg, T/p* Indicator and HBTI are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press. Inc. 


□ □ 






3 


The Defense Systems Management College (DSMC) Catalog states 
the College was created to provide "the best systems acquisition 
and training possible for the people responsible for acquiring 
weapon systems." The Catalog, (1994, p. 5), further states that 
DSMC is "committed to ensuring that members of our military 
services and associated civil servants in the defense acquisition 
business have the necessary expertise to manage defense systems 
effectively." To meet this goal the Department of Managerial 
Development since 1983 has been administering the Myers-Briggs Type 
Indicator (MBTI) to all students who have attended the Program 
Management Course (PMC). The MBTI was administered to provide 
these students with a way of understanding individual differences 
and utilizing this knowledge to accomplish their mission better. 
This paper describes the psychological type of a representative 
sample of more than 4,617 students who attended DSMC since 1985. 
This descriptive analysis may enable workers in the defense 
acquisition environment to understand their contemporaries better. 

Program Management Course 

The Program Management Course is a 20-week professional 
education for mid-career military and civilian participants. Its 
focus is on teaching effective defense systems acquisition 
management. The DSMC Catalog, 1994, p. 45, states: "Enrollment 
is targeted at promising candidates for senior positions in 
program management later in their careers...." 

Subjects 



Participants in this study comprise 4,617 military officers, 
civil servants, defense contractors and foreign nationals who 
attended the PMC between June 1985 and January 1994. This sample 
consisted of 1,321 students affiliated with the U.S. Army, 1,307 
with the U.S. Navy, 1, 405 with the U.S. Air Force, 143 with the 
U.S. Marines, 229 from the defense-related industry, 15 from the 
U.S. Coast Guard and 198 others (including foreign nationals). Due 
to the small number of Coast Guard students, breakdowns for that 
group were not performed. 

All students were given the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Form G 
on the first or second day of the PMC, at approximately the same 
time. 

Instrumentation 

The MBTI is described by Buros Institute of Mental 
Measurements (1985, p. 1,030) as "probably the most widely used 
instrument for non-psychiatric populations in the areas of 
clinical, counseling, and personality testing." In describing the 
MBTI Form G, Buros Institute of Mental Measurements (1985, 
p. 1,031) states that Form G "is now the standard form." It 
consists of 126 items; however, only the first 95 items are used in 
deriving the subject's score. The other 31 items are for research 
purposes only and normally are not scored. 

According to Briggs-Myers and McCaulley (1989, p. 3), the main 
purpose of the MBTI is to identify four basic preferences. They 
are: 

Extroversion-Introversion (El). The El index is designed to 

reflect whether a person is extroverted or introverted. 




4 


¥ 


5 

Extroverts are oriented primarily toward the outer world; thus 
they tend to focus their perception and judgment on people and 
objects. Introverts are oriented primarily toward the inner 
world and thus tend to focus their perceptions and judgments 
upon concepts and ideas. 

Sensing-Intuition (SN). The SN index is designed to reflect 
a person's preference between two opposites ways of 
perceiving; one may rely primarily upon the process of 
sensing, which reports observable facts or happenings; or one 
may rely more upon the less obvious process of intuition which 
reports meaning, relationships, and/or possibilities that have 
been worked out beyond the reach of the conscious mind. 

Thinking-Feeling (TF). The TF index is designed to reflect a 
person's preference between two contrasting ways of judgment. 
A person may rely primarily on thinking to decide impersonally 
on the basis of logical consequences, or a person may rely 
primarily on feeling to decide primarily on the basis of 
personal or social values. 

Judgment-Perception (JP) . The JP index is designed to 
describe the process a person uses primarily in dealing with 
the outer world; that is, with the extroverted part of life. 
A person who prefers judgment has reported a preference for 
using a judgment process (either thinking or feeling) for 
dealing with the outer world. A person who prefers perception 
has reported a preference for using a perceptive process 
(either sensing or intuition) for dealing with the outer 
world. 

Keirsey and Bates (1984) provide another means of 
understanding MBTI types. Their method is called temperament. 
They state, "One's temperament is that which places a signature or 
thumbprint on each of one's actions, making it recognizably one's 
own" (p. 27) . In Keirsey and Bates' model there are four 
temperaments encompassing the 16 MBTI types. The four temperaments 


are as follows: 


I 


6 

SP: This temperament includes ISTP, ESTP, ISFP, ESFP. The SP 
"must be free; he must not be tied or bound or confined or 
obligated," (Keirsey 6 l Bates, 1984, p. 31). 

SJ: This temperament includes ISFJ, ESFJ, ISTJ, ESTJ. The 
SJs "...must belong and this belonging must be 
earned....Dependency, for the SJ is neither a legitimate condition 
nor desire....Moreover, he must be the giver not the receiver; the 
caretalcer, not the cared for" (Keirsey & Bates, 1984, p. 41) . 

NF; This temperament includes INFJ, ENFJ, INFP, and ENFP. 
The NF's quest is for becoming. "The NF's truest self is the self 
in search of itself or, in other words, his purpose in life is to 
have a purpose in life" (Keirsey & Bates, 1984, p. 58). 

NT: This temperament includes INTPs, ENTPs, INTJs, and ENTJs. 
"Power fascinates the NT but power over nature not power over 
people. Scratch the NT, find a scientist. The NT loves 
intelligence, which means doing things well under varying 
circumstances" (Keirsey & Bates, 1984, p. 48) . Another way of 
understanding MBTI preferences is provided in the Page (1985) 
model. There is some debate among proponents of this approach and 
the Keirsey and Bates approach. 

The IS quadrant consists of the group called "Thoughtful 
Realist." This quadrant includes ISTJ, ISTP, ESTP, ESTJ. 
Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow (1990, p. 12) describe the IS leader as 
leading "through attention to what needs to be done." Their 
individual focus is on "practical consideration." Their 
organizational focus is on "continuity." The statement that best 







7 

characterizes this group is "lets keep it!" McCaulley (1976, 
p. 734) in discussing how the types in the IS quadrant use 
knowledge stated, "Knowledge is important to establish truth. The 
IS types are contemplative pragmatists, interested in developing 
the facts to prove the soundness of ideas." She further labeled 
this group the "Careful Compilers." 

The ES quadrant consists of the "Action-Oriented Realist." 
Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow (1990, p. 12) describe the ES leader as 
leading "through doing." Their individual focus is on "practical 
action." Their organizational focus is on "results." The 
statement that best describes this group is, "Let’s do it!" 
McCaulley (1976, p. 734) described the ES type as being "interested 
in practical action." Knowledge is seen as "important for 
practical use." She labeled this group the "pragmatists." 

Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow (1990, p. 12) describe the IN 
quadrant as "Thoughtful-Innovator." This group is seen as leading 
"through ideas to what needs doing." Their individual focus is 
"intangible thoughts and ideas." Their organizational focus is 
"vision." The statement that best describes this group is, "Lets 
think about it differently!" McCaulley (1976, p. 734) states that 
for the IN type "knowledge is important for its own sake." She 
labeled this group the "academics." She further describes this 
quadrant as "the most scholarly and least practical; introversion 
makes concepts and ideas more interesting than action, intuition 
makes future possibilities and theory more interesting than 
present realities and facts." 




8 


The EN quadrant is described by Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow 
(1990, p. 12) as "Action-Oriented Innovators." This group "leads 
through enthusiasm." Their individual focus is on "systems and 
relationships." Their organizational focus is on "change." The 
statement which best describes them is "Let's change it!" 
McCaulley (1976, p. 734) calls the EN group "innovators." She 
states that for them "knowledge is important for innovations." 
Their interests are seen as being related to possibilities. 

The validity of the MBTI is addressed in the manual. 
Briggs-Myers and McCaulley (1989) report in that manual, extensive 
correlational data to support their claims of MBTI validity. 

The reliability of the MBTI has been extensively studied. 
Buros Institute of Mental Measurements (1985, p. 1,032) states 
test-retest reliability is good and coefficients range from .48 
over 14 months to .87 over 7 weeks, depending on the particular 


dimension. 




9 


Research Questions c i -J Findings 

The first research question asked: "What is the distribution 
of Myers-Briggs types for students attending the PMC?" The results 
are lasted in Table 1. 


Table 1 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
(N = 4617) 


ISTJ 

ISFJ 

INFJ 

INTJ 

1398 

106 

75 

516 

30.3% 

2.3% 

1.6% 

11.1% 

ISTP 

ISFP 

INFP 

INTP 

226 

32 

66 

319 

4.9% 

.7% 

1.4% 

6.9% 

ESTP 

ESFP 

ENFP 

ENTP 

135 

25 

83 

257 

2.9% 

.5% 

1.8% 

5.6% 

ESTJ 

ESFJ 

ENFJ 

ENTJ 

740 

82 

54 

445 

16.0% 

1.8% 

1.2% 

9.6% 


The second research question asked: "What is the 
distribution by temperament of students attending the PMC?" The 
results are listed in Table 2. 


Table 2 

Distribution of PMC Students 
by Temperament 
(N = 4617) 


SJ 

2326 

51.0% 


SP 

418 

8.9% 


NF 

278 

6 . 1 % 


NT 

1537 

33.4% 




10 


The third research question asked: "What is the 
distribution by Myers-Briggs Type of students who are affiliated 
with the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Industry?" The 
results are listed by Service in Tables 3-7. 


Table 3 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
for PMC Students Affiliated with the Army 

(N = 1321) 


ISTJ 

ISFJ 

INFJ 

INTJ 

439 

31 

18 

131 

33.2% 

2.3% 

1.3% 

9.9% 

ISTP 

ISFP 

INFP 

INTP 

68 

4 

10 

85 

5.1% 

.3% 

.7% 

6.4% 

ESTP 

ESFP 

ENFP 

ENTP 

42 

5 

17 

59 

3.2% 

.4% 

1.3% 

4.5% 

ESTJ 

ESFJ 

ENFJ 

ENTJ 

260 

25 

18 

109 

19.7% 

1.9% 

1.4% 

8.3% 






11 


Table 4 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
for PMC Students Affiliated with the Navy 

(N = 1307) 


ISTJ 

ISFJ 

INFJ 

INTJ 

391 

28 

19 

147 

29.9% 

2.1% 

1.5% 

11.2% 

ISTP 

ISFP 

INFP 

INTP 

75 

15 

21 

85 

5.7% 

1.1% 

1.6% 

6.5% 

ESTP 

ESFP 

ENFP 

ENTP 

39 

8 

20 

69 

2.9% 

.6% 

1.5% 

5.3% 

ESTJ 

ESFJ 

ENFJ 

ENTJ 

221 

21 

12 

137 

16.9% 

1.6% 

.9% 

10.4% 


Table 5 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
for PMC Students Affiliated 
with the Air Force 
(N = 1405) 


ISTJ 

ISFJ 

INFJ 

INTJ 

407 

38 

26 

169 

29.0% 

2.7% 

1.9% 

12.0% 

ISTP 

ISFP 

INFP 

INTP 

58 

9 

22 

105 

4.1% 

.4% 

1.6% 

7.5% 

ESTP 

ESFP 

ENFP 

ENTP 

36 

10 

37 

87 

2.6% 

.7% 

2.6% 

6.1% 

ESTJ 

ESFJ 

ENFJ 

ENTJ 

215 

30 

16 

141 

15.3% 

2.1% 

1.1% 

10.0% 












Table 6 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
for PMC Students Affiliated 
with the Marine Corps 
(N = 143) 


ISTJ 

ISFJ 

INFJ 

INTJ 

45 

3 

0 

12 

31.5% 

2.1% 

0 

8.4% 

ISTP 

ISFP 

INFP 

INTP 

9 

3 

5 

8 

6.3% 

2.1% 

3.5% 

5.6% 

ESTP 

ESFP 

ENFP 

ENTP 

5 

0 

2 

8 

3.5% 

0 

1.4% 

5.6% 

ESTJ 

ESFJ 

ENFJ 

ENTJ 

30 

1 

2 

10 

21.0% 

.7% 

1.4% 

7.0% 


Table 7 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
for PMC Students Affiliated 
with Industry 
(N = 246) 

ISTJ 

ISFJ 

INFJ 

INTJ 

64 

2 

3 

32 

26.0% 

.8% 

1.2% 

13.0% 

ISTP 

ISFP 

INFP 

INTP 

12 

0 

3 

19 

4.8% 

0 

1.2% 

7.7% 

ESTP 

ESFP 

ENFP 

ENTP 

5 

1 

4 

23 

2.0% 

.4% 

1.6% 

9.3% 

ESTJ 

ESFJ 

ENFJ 

ENTJ 

43 

0 

4 

31 

17.4% 

0 

1.6% 

12.6% 


Figures 1-5 (in Appendix A) provide graphic depictions of 
the data displayed in Tables 3-7. 










13 


Question four asked: "What is the distribution by gender of 
students attending the PMC?" The results are shown in Table 8. 

Table 8 

Distribution of Myers-Briggs Types 
by Gender 
for PMC Students 
(N = 4617) 

(N = 4180 MEN & 437 WOMEN) 



ISTJ 

ISFJ 


INFJ 


INTJ 


MEN 

1372/32.8% 

91/ 

2.2% 

63/ 

1.5% 

470/11.2% 

WOMEN 

87/19.9% 

15/ 

3.4% 

12/ 

2.7% 

46/10.5% 


ISTP 

ISFP 


INFP 


INTP 


MEN 

206/ 4.9% 

26/ 

.6% 

56/ 

1.3% 

288/ 

6.9% 

WOMEN 

20/ 4.6% 

6/ 

1.4% 

10/ 

2.3% 

31/ 

7.1% 


ESTP 

ESFP 


ENFP 


ENTP 


MEN 

124/ 3.0% 

19/ 

.5% 

72/ 

1.7% 

228/ 

5.4% 

WOMEN 

11/ 2.5% 

6/ 

1.4% 

11/ 

2.5% 

29/ 

6.6% 


ESTJ 

ESFJ 


ENFJ 


ENTJ 


MEN 

710/17.0% 

68/ 

1.6% 

43/ 

1.0% 

405/ 

9.7% 

WOMEN 

88/ 20.1% 

13/ 

3.2% 

11/ 

2.5% 

40/ 

9.1% 


Question five asked: "What is the distribution by MBTI 


preference for students attending^ the PMC?" Table 9 reports the 
results of this analysis. 











14 


Table 9 

Distribution by Preference 
for PMC Students 
(N = 4617) 


Extraversion 


Introversion 

59.3% 

Sensing 

59.4% 

Intuition 

39.3% 

Thinking 

87.4% 

Feeling 

11.3% 

Judging 

74.0% 

Perceiving 

24.8% 


Discussion 

The results of this descriptive analysis indicated that 30.3 
percent of students who were administered the MBTI between 1985 and 
1994 were ISTJs. The second largest group of students (16.0 
percent) were found to be ESTJs. The INTJs comprised 11.1 percent 
of the sample and ENTJs made up 9.6 percent. This group of four 
types represented 67.1 percent of the sample. In other words, 
almost 70 percent of the PMC students who were described in this 
study shared the Thinking-Judging orientation. This finding should 
not be surprising. McCaulley, Godleski, Yokomoto, Harrisberger, 
and Sloan (1983, p. 394) state the "stereotypical engineer is 
logical, tough-minded and decisive. In MBTI terms the 


tough-minded are the TJ." In a study consisting of data ex .acted 



15 


from the MBTI Data Bank, McCaulley (1990) reported on 7,463 people 
who indicated that they were managers or administrators. She 
found that 21,7 percent were ISTJs, 14.3 percent were ESTJs, 9.9 
percent were INTJs, and 11.2 percent were ENTJs. A casu 
assessment of PMC students showed 60-70 percent of each class wer 
engineers. Therefore, the comparison with stereotypical engineers 
appears to be valid. In addition, this distribution of subjects 
placed the four largest groups into each of the four quadrants, 
which Page (1985) identified as useful in understanding how 
organizations operate. Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow (1990) cited the 
earlier work of Page (1985) to describe the characteristics of 
people whose preferences were in each of the four quadrants. 

The 30.3 percent of this sample which comprise the ISTJ group 
are classified in the IS quadrant and are called "Thoughtful 
Realists." 

Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow (1990, p. 16) describe the 
contributions that ISTJs make to an organization: 

Contributions to Organization 

--Get things done steadily and on schedule. 

—Are particularly strong with detail and careful 
in managing it. 

—Have things at- the right place at the right 
time. 

—Can be counted on to honor cor itments and 
follow through. 

—Work well within organizational structure. 







16 



They also describe the ISTJs possible weaknesses: 
Potential Pitfalls 


—May overlook the long-range implications in 
favor of day-to-day operations. 

—May neglect interpersonal niceties. 

—May become rigid in their ways and thought of as 
inflexible. 

--May expect others to conform to standard 
operating procedures and thus not encourage 
innovation. 

When the other three types which are found in this quadrant 
(ISFJ, ISTP, ISFP) are added to the ISTJ group, 38.2 percent of the 
entire sample was classified in the IS quadrant. 

The 16.0 percent of this sample which comprises the ESTJ group 
are classified in the ES quadrant and are called "Action-Oriented 
Realists." Krebs-Hirsh and Kummerow (1990, p. 19) describe the 
contributions and potential pitfalls of ESTJs this way: 

Contributions to Organization 

—See flaws in advance. 

—Critique programs in a logical way. 

—Organize the process, product and people. 

—Monitor to see if the job is done. 

—Follow through in a step-by-step way. 

Potential Pitfalls 


—May decide too quickly. 

—May not see the need for change. 

--May overlook the- niceties in working to get the 
job done. 

--May be overtaken by their feelings and values if 
they ignore them for too long. 

When the other three types that comprise this quadrant (ESTP, 
ESFP, ESFJ) were added to the ESTJ group, 21.3 percent of the 
sample was classified as being in the ES quadrant. 

The 11.1 percent of the sample which made up the INTJ group 





17 


was classified as being in the IN quadrant. Krebs-Hirsh and 
Kununerow (1990, p. 28) list the contributions to the organization 
and potential pitfalls of INTJs as follows: 

Contributions to Organization 

—Provide strong conceptual and design skills. 

—Organize ideas into action plans. 

—Work to remove all obstacles to goal attainment. 

—Have strong visions of what the organization can 
be. 

--Push the organization to understand the system 
as whole with its complex interaction among 
parts. 

Potential Pitfalls 


—May appear so unyielding that others are afraid 
to approach or challenge them. 

—May criticize others in their striving for the 
ideal. 

—May have difficulty letting go of impractical 
ideas. 

—May ignore the impact of their ideas or style on 
others. 

When the other three types which make up this quadrant (INFJ, 
INFP, INTP) are added, 21.1 percent of the sample fell within, this 
quadrant. 

The 9.64 percent of this sample which was typed as ENTJ were 
classified as being in the EN quadrant. Krebs-Hirsh and Kiammerow 
(1990, p. 31) list the contributions to the organization and 
potential pitfalls of ENTJs as follows: 





18 


Contributions to Organization 

—Develop well-thought-out plans. 

--Provide structure to the organization. 

—Design strategies which work toward broader 
goals. 

—Take charge quickly. 

—Deal directly with problems caused by 
confusion and inefficiency. 

Potential Pitfalls 


—May overlook people's needs in their focus on 
the task. 

—May overlook practical considerations and 
constraints. 

—May decide too quickly and appear impatient and 
domineering. 

—May ignore and suppress their feelings. 

When the other three types that comprise the EN quadrant are 
added, 18.2 percent of this sample fall within this quadrant. 
Conclusions ^ 

McCaulley (1990, p. 411) addressed the issue of who reaches 

the top in management. She states: 

Management samples are more heavily weighted toward 
sensing types. However, top-management samples tend to 
be more evenly divided between sensing and intuitive 
types (executives in CCL programs, top executives in 
Japan, senior federal executives). Intuitives are in 
the majority among innovative leaders, such as the 
founders of Inc. 500 firms, top executives, and rising 
stars in education. 

In summary, though any t-ype can reach the top, executives 
most likely to do so are somewhat more likely to prefer 
extraversion and intuition, and are highly likely to 
prefer thinking and judgment. 

Based on the descriptive analysis provided in this paper, it 
appears the population is very similar to the people McCaulley 
(1990) identified as managers. However, the ENTJs which she 


describes as top executives comprise only 9.6 percent of this 





19 


sample. 

McCaulley (1990, p. 410) also addressed the issue of type 
differences in changing organizational environments. She cited two 
studies which combined temperament and quadrant analysis. She 
states: 


Mitroff and Kilmann (1975) and Kilmann and Mitroff (1976) 
have described their experiences in asicing clients to 
describe their ideal organization. STs describe the 
ideal organization with clear procedures, meticulously 
followed. The SFs describe a friendly place where 
people lilce worlcing together and feel included. The NFs 
describe a company with enough resources to serve 
humanitarian goals fully; and the NTs envision a place 
where there are clear strategic plans and the 
organization is moving toward its long range goals. 

What does this mean for students who attend the PMC? To 
begin, 51.0 percent of the students in this sample were SJs. They 
want clear procedures, which seldom change and that everyone 
follows (often without question). They make up the majority of 
this sample of PMC students. What are the implications of having 
SJs dominate an organization such as a program management office 
which has been characterized as being in an almost constant state 
of change? How do you energize this portion of the work force and 
its leadership that most likely is operating in the environment 
they find least rewarding and perhaps most stressful? There are 
questions worthy of further investigation. 

The SPs comprise only 9.2 percent of this sample. Who takes 
care of their need for inclusion in the program management office? 
Perhaps they perceive themselves as different, not fitting in and 
unappreciated. If so, it is possible these people are forced to 
operate in what could be called a "siege mentality." Perhaps they 





20 


find little pockets of warmth that let them survive in an otherwise 
cold environment, or they leave the organization. 

The NFS make up 6.1 percent of this sample. How is the 
purpose of the program management office communicated? Is any 
attention paid to the service of the country or humankind? If not, 
how does a program manager get this group to "buy into" his or her 
goal. 

Finally, the NTs comprise 33.4 percent of this sample. For 
them the vision of the organization and where it is going in the 
long run is very important. Is the plan clear? If not, this group 
will detect inconsistencies immediately, and their energy possibly 
will be diverted to other areas of interest. 

One other possible area of concern is related to predicted 
changes in the United States work force. If the demographic 
changes which are predicted by Johnston and Packer (1987) occur, 
far greater emphasis will have to be placed on team building in the 
program management office of the future. These changes include 
more women entering the work force and minorities comprising a 
larger share of new workers. The sample described in this study is 
more than 90 percent male. Of the men described in this study, 
approximately 95 percent are white. How successful this largely 
homogenous population will be at adapting to a changing work force 
is a matter of no small debate. What is clear, however, is that 
change will be occurring. The question of the resistance to change 
by this population is evidenced by the statements of many PMC 
students. Recent PMC students have reported a great deal of 




21 


resistance to the implementation of Total Quality Management in 
their organizations. If this resistance is, in fact, a 
characteristic of the acquisition environment, successful work 
groups may become more and more rare. The time to address this 
issue is now. Hopefully, this paper will be of assistance in that 
effort. 


! 


22 

References 

Briggs-Myers, I., & McCaulley, M. H. (Eds.). (1989). A guide to 

the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator 
(fifth printing). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist 
Press. 

Buros Institute of Mental Measurements. (1985). The ninth 

mental measurements yearbook (Vol. 2) . Lincoln, NE: The 
University of Nebraska Press. 

Defense Systems Management College. (1991). DSMC 91: 

Catalog of the defense systems management college (p.5). Fort 
Belvoir, VA: Linda Stiltner. 

Johnston, W. B., & Packer, A. E. (1987). Work and workers in 

the year 2000. In Hudson Institute, Workforce 2000 (p.p. 
75-104). Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute. 

Keirsey, D., & Bates, M. (1984). Please understand me: 

Character & temperament types (4th ed.). Del Mar, CA: 
Prometheus Nemesis Book Company. 

Krebs-Hirsh, S., & Kummerow, J. M. (1990). Introduction to type 
in organizations. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist 
Press. 

McCaulley, M. H. (1976). "Psychological type in engineering: 

Implications for teaching." Engineering Education, 66(7), 
729-736. 



23 


McCaulley, M. H. (1990). The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and 

leadership. In K. E. Clark & M. B, Clark (Eds.), Measures of 
leadership (pp. 381-418) . Greensboro, NC: Leadership Library 
of America. 

McCaulley, M. H., Godleski, E. S., Yokomoto, C. F., Harrisberger, 
L., & Sloan, E. D. (1983). Applications of psychological 
type in engineering education. Engineering Education, 73(5), 
394-400. 

Page, E. C. (1985). Organizational tendencies. Gainesville, 

FL: Center for the Applications of Psychological Type. 




24 


APPENDIX 


A 



MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE 

FOR THE ARMY 



MYERS-BRIGGS 3/17/94 













MYERS-BRIGGS 3/17/94 












MYERS-BRIGGS 3/17/94 












MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE 

FOR THE MARINES 



MYERS-BRIGGS 3/17/94