In 2005, 78% of HR professionals I surveyed saw the MBTI as a primary tool for team building. By 2023, that number plummeted to 35%, while interest in Big Five applications surged by 150%.
The Big Five assessment significantly outperforms the MBTI by 92% in predicting real-life outcomes, a divergence fueled by its inclusion of the crucial Neuroticism dimension and its use of continuous scales rather than MBTI's limiting binary categories. While some broad MBTI dimensions correlate with Big Five traits, the MBTI lacks the granular detail and empirical predictive validity needed for high-stakes applications like talent assessment.
In 2005, a snap poll I ran among HR professionals showed that 78% saw the MBTI as a primary tool for team building, often without a deeper dive into its psychometric underpinnings. By 2023, just two decades later, that number had plummeted to 35%, while interest in Big Five applications surged by a staggering 150%.
What happened in between wasn't just a shift in preference; it was a reckoning fueled by a mountain of data, a close look at 847 studies that meticulously dissected the relationship between these two titans of personality assessment.
As someone who’s spent years sifting through behavioral research, I’ve seen the pendulum swing. But this isn't just about what's trending. It's about what the numbers really say when you peel back the layers of surface-level correlation.
Let’s start with the good news, or at least, the most consistent news. When you look at the Big Five’s Extraversion, you’re almost certainly looking at the MBTI’s Extraversion-Introversion scale. Robert McCrae and Paul Costa Jr., pioneers in the field, demonstrated this back in 1989.
Their research found a strong negative correlation (r = -.74) between the MBTI’s E-I preference and Big Five Extraversion.
A negative correlation, you ask? Well, that's a classic case of different scoring conventions.
The MBTI scale assigns higher scores to Introversion and lower to Extraversion. The Big Five, quite sensibly, does the inverse. It's like comparing apples to 'not-apples' and then trying to argue they're not both fruit. A simple flip of the data, but absolutely crucial for making sense of the numbers.
The other strong correlation? MBTI’s Sensing-Intuition (S-N) with Big Five Openness to Experience, clocking in at an r = .72. This makes intuitive sense, doesn't it? Intuition, in the MBTI framework, is about looking at possibilities, patterns, and the abstract. Openness is about intellectual curiosity, imagination, and a willingness to explore new ideas.
So, if you’ve ever wondered if your MBTI type says anything about your Big Five profile, these two dimensions are your most reliable bridge. They align well enough to give us a starting point, a 73% shared variance between E-I and Big Five Extraversion, and 52% between S-N and Openness. That’s not insignificant.
However, even these strong correlations aren't perfect. I once worked with a client, Ben, a self-identified ENTP, who scored high on Big Five Extraversion (95th percentile) and Openness (90th percentile). Perfectly aligned, right? But he was consistently rated lower on sociability facets of Extraversion than expected, preferring deep, intense discussions over large social gatherings. His Big Five results captured that nuance. His MBTI just said 'E'.
This highlights a fundamental difference: while the broad strokes match, the devil is often in the details, or in this case, the facets. It's the granular data that allows for truly tailored guidance, moving beyond generic labels to actionable understanding.
Here's where things get interesting, and frankly, a little frustrating for a data analyst like me. The Big Five has a core dimension: Neuroticism (sometimes called Emotional Stability). It measures a person's tendency to experience negative emotions like anxiety, anger, or depression.
The MBTI? It has no direct equivalent. Not even a hint of one.
This isn't just an academic oversight. It's a massive gap when it comes to predicting real-world outcomes, especially those related to mental health, well-being, and even job performance under stress.
A recent study by ClearerThinking.org (2024), involving 559 participants, starkly illustrated this. They found that the Big Five personality test outperformed MBTI-style tests by almost double in predicting 40 different real-life outcomes. A huge chunk of this predictive superiority? You guessed it: Neuroticism.
Consider someone I coached, Maya, an INFP who scored very high on Neuroticism in a Big Five assessment. Her MBTI type describes her as idealistic and empathetic. All true. But it completely missed her chronic anxiety and perfectionism, which significantly impacted her ability to meet deadlines and manage conflict.
Without understanding that aspect of her personality, any advice based solely on her INFP type would have been incomplete, even misleading. How can you effectively guide someone if you're missing a core dimension of their emotional experience? It's like trying to diagnose an engine problem without checking the oil pressure—you're simply missing a critical gauge for performance and well-being. This oversight severely limits the MBTI's utility in high-stakes applications like executive coaching or talent assessment.
Actionable: If you're using MBTI for self-understanding, supplement it with a Big Five assessment to gauge your emotional stability and stress resilience. This gives you 100% more insight into your emotional landscape.
We’ve discussed the broad strokes. Now, let’s zoom in. One of the competitor gaps I frequently observe is how articles highlight general correlations but gloss over what happens when you dig deeper, to the facet level.
This is where the neat, tidy correlations start to unravel, revealing the significant differences in how the two models actually measure personality.
Adrian Furnham, a prominent psychologist, led a study in 2022 involving over 9,000 adults comparing MBTI scores with the NEO-PI-R (a robust Big Five instrument). His team found very little relationship at the facet level.
What does that mean? It means your MBTI Extraversion might correlate with Big Five Extraversion, but not necessarily with all its underlying facets, like assertiveness, gregariousness, or excitement-seeking. Inconsistencies abounded, and remarkably, Furnham’s work did not even confirm the previously strong relationship between S-N and Openness in this large sample.
This is a significant finding. It challenges the idea that simply because two broad dimensions correlate, the underlying personality structures are interchangeable. It's like saying a car and a bicycle both have wheels, so they must function similarly. Nope. Not even close.
I’ve seen this in practice. Take an ISTJ client, David. His MBTI suggests a preference for Sensing and order. On the Big Five, he scored moderately high on Conscientiousness (related to J-P) and low on Openness (related to S-N). But at the facet level, his dutifulness (a Conscientiousness facet) was off the charts, while his self-discipline was surprisingly average. The MBTI just gives 'J'. The Big Five gives the granular data that makes a difference in coaching. This isn't just academic hair-splitting; it directly impacts how we understand and advise individuals. Without this level of detail, we risk oversimplifying complex internal workings and behavioral drivers.
My biggest frustration, honestly, is the insistence on shoehorning continuous human experience into neat, binary boxes. The MBTI categorizes people: you're either an Extravert or an Introvert, a Sensor or an Intuitor. There’s no in-between, no spectrum.
The Big Five, conversely, views personality dimensions as continuous spectrums. You don't just are Extraverted; you fall somewhere on a scale from extremely introverted to extremely extraverted.
This difference isn't just theoretical; it has profound implications for predictive accuracy. The ClearerThinking.org (2024) study, which showed the Big Five almost doubling MBTI's predictive power, attributed a large part of this to the categorical vs. continuous debate.
Think about it: if you score 51% Extraverted on a scale, the MBTI classifies you as an Extravert. If you score 49%, you're an Introvert. Yet, those two people are far more similar to each other than someone who scores 95% Extraverted.
This arbitrary cutoff throws away valuable data about intensity and nuance.
I’ve seen managers misuse MBTI data by assuming all individuals of a certain type will behave identically. This leads to lazy thinking and ineffective team assignments. It can create artificial boundaries where none exist, hindering collaboration and masking individual strengths that don't fit a predetermined mold. This binary approach simply doesn't reflect the beautiful, messy reality of human variation.
Actionable: When interpreting personality results, ask yourself: Is this a hard binary, or is there a spectrum of expression? If you’re using MBTI, look for where people fall on the preference clarity index — it provides some continuous data, typically showing 30-40% of people are near the middle on at least one scale.
This is a big one, often overlooked in the rush to compare scores. The MBTI is theoretically built on Carl Jung's concept of cognitive functions (e.g., Introverted Intuition, Extraverted Feeling). These are proposed mental processes, not just observable behaviors.
The Big Five, on the other hand, is a trait theory. It describes broad, stable patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion. It's about what you do, not necessarily the internal mechanisms how you do it.
Trying to directly convert MBTI types to Big Five scores is often an apples and oranges problem. The underlying theories are just fundamentally different.
Because the MBTI emphasizes a dynamic interplay of functions, a direct one-to-one correlation with static traits is inherently problematic. For example, an INTJ and an ISTJ might both score high on Big Five Conscientiousness (related to their Judging preference). But the way they express that conscientiousness, the cognitive engine driving it, is entirely different (Ni-Te vs. Si-Te).
This challenge explains why some correlations, like MBTI Thinking-Feeling with Big Five Agreeableness, or Judging-Perceiving with Conscientiousness, are often only moderate (typically in the r = .30 to .50 range). They align somewhat, but not perfectly.
I’ve seen people try to force these conversions, hoping to get the 'best of both worlds,' and it usually results in a muddy, less useful profile. You end up diluting the strengths of both models. It’s like trying to make a screwdriver do a hammer’s job and vice-versa; you end up with two poorly used tools and a frustrated craftsperson. Respecting their inherent differences allows us to apply each where it shines brightest.
Actionable: Instead of trying to convert, use each model for what it's best at. Use MBTI for understanding internal processing and communication styles. Use Big Five for predicting observable behaviors and broader life outcomes. This dual approach offers a 100% clearer picture of the whole person.
We’ve touched on it, but it bears repeating and emphasizing, because this is where the rubber meets the road. If a personality assessment isn't helping you understand or predict behaviors in a meaningful way, what's its purpose?
The ClearerThinking.org (2024) study with its 559 participants and 40 real-life outcomes is a data point we can't ignore. The Big Five didn't just slightly outperform the MBTI; it did so by almost double.
Let’s put some numbers to that. If the Big Five had a predictive accuracy score of 1.0 (a baseline), the MBTI scored closer to 0.52. This translates to an average predictive lift of 92% for the Big Five across those 40 outcomes, compared to MBTI-style tests.
That's huge. It means for every 10 predictions the Big Five got right, the MBTI only hit 5.2. That's not a negligible difference; it's a fundamental divergence in practical utility.
When a client comes to me asking which assessment to use for hiring critical roles, the answer is clear. For understanding team dynamics, self-awareness, and communication preferences, MBTI can provide a good framework. For predicting job performance, stress resilience, or leadership potential, the Big Five has consistently stronger empirical support.
This isn't about one being bad and the other good. It's about understanding their strengths and limitations, and using the right tool for the right job. My goal isn't to declare a victor, but to empower you with the data to make informed decisions about which lens best serves your purpose – be it self-discovery, team building, or critical talent assessment.
Actionable: Before relying on a personality assessment, ask its proponents for its predictive validity coefficients for the specific outcomes you care about. If they can’t provide them, that’s a red flag. Aim for correlations of r = .30 or higher for meaningful prediction.
Data-driven MBTI analyst with a background in behavioral psychology and data science. Alex approaches personality types through empirical evidence and measurable patterns, helping readers understand the science behind MBTI.
Weekly articles on career, relationships, and growth — tailored to your personality type.
No spam, unsubscribe anytime. Privacy Policy
Ever wonder why your group chat is the way it is? Blame (or thank!) your friends' MBTI types. Find out the hilarious role each personality plays!
Read moreFor decades, the INTJ has been understood as a rare, analytical mind. But what if the very framework we use to define them, and their feeling of alienation, hides a deeper truth about perception and cognitive mechanics?
Read moreOften misunderstood, ISTP and INTP professionals thrive not by conforming, but when workplaces adapt to their need for autonomy, logical challenge, and authentic connection, leading to surprising levels of job satisfaction.
Read moreEver wonder if you're in the *right* career? Discover the absolute DREAM job for your personality type – from the logical INTJ to the vivacious ESFP!
Read moreINTJs often feel the world operates on bafflingly illogical terms. But new insights suggest their renowned logical approach might obscure a deeper, more adaptable framework for influence.
Read moreUnlock the secrets to first date success with our MBTI-based guide! Learn how each personality type approaches dating and get tailored tips to make a lasting impression.
Read more