Bill linked to a new (at least to me) personality profile thingy. I haven't done the Meyers-Briggs test in a while, but I have consistently scored ESFP, and I generally like that assessment. One version of the test had a fairly long paragraph describing ESFP's, and it fit exactly. (I always remember that I am ESFP, because I am exactly opposite of Daniel, and somehow INTJ is easier to remember.

The idea of this test is that I pick 5 words that I think describe myself, and then you all pick five words too, and it compares all of your responses to mine. So, pick away...
I hesitate to say this for fear that it will change your answers, but it will ask you for your name. Whatever you fill in will be posted for all to see, ie. if you say I am great and wonderful, everyone else will see that is what you said. So - feel free to make up a different name if you want to criticise me, etc.

And of course, remember:
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.
Posted by Jon Daley on August 2, 2006, 7:28 am | Read 13615 times
Category Reviews: [first] [previous] [next] [newest]
Well, that was sort of fun. I selected a dozen characteristics before narrowing them down to six. Although Peter and I had no intersections at all, I could easily have picked what he did, plus more. So much depends on context. I certainly could have said "intelligent" but chose the more-inclusive "able." And though I chose "tense" because I see that aspect of your personality and think it's important (as is the fact that you fight it), I could also have picked "relaxed" because you are more relaxed in your reactions than most people. As you can guess, I'm always frustrated with surveys that don't give me a chance to include a long-winded explanation. :)
Posted by SursumCorda on August 2, 2006, 10:18 am

I also had to narrow down from a longer list. I chose dependable as I figured trustworthy fit into that. I also have trouble with the description "Facade" because I do think those describe Jon, they just weren't in my top 6.
Posted by joyful on August 3, 2006, 8:29 am

This version of the Johari Window has better labels, I think (Open, Blind, Hidden, and Unknown, avoiding the judgemental-sounding "Facade"), but the main problem is being restricted to so few attributes. That can be useful, I suppose, in forcing you to decide which descriptions are more important, but falls down in falsely excluding valid characteristics.
Posted by SursumCorda on August 3, 2006, 10:07 am
Add Comment
Add comment
E-mail me when comments occur on this article