You may have heard me rant about how I am not fond of labeling people… especially me. Come on now, I am so wonderfully dynamic that any label you may throw would only stick to the sole of my boot. I don’t like to be judged or pigeon-holed, and so I try not to do the same.

I know, this is an impossibility. When you meet a stranger, you don’t have the time or ability to fathom a new soul, so you quickly judge, label and compartmentalize the stranger. In some ways, this is helpful in dealing with the stranger based on how you dealt with people in the past who you judged to be in the same “compartment.”

For instance, in the past, you might have run across a scraggily guy with lots of facial hair and a strange hairdo wearing a T-shirt with incomprehensible words on it. When you said, “Unix is dead” this person got quite upset. So the next time you met someone who wore a similarly incomprehensible T-shirt and facial hair, he immediately put the stranger in the same mental compartment as the first one … where was that box labeled “Geek”? Oh here it is… Right, remember do not talk about the demise of Unix.

We all do this, and hopefully you would have the change to get to know a stranger better so that you take him out of that box…

But what really annoys me is these codified boxes passed around. These “personality tests” that allow a quick pigeon-hole of everyone in the entire world. Yeah, it seems like there is a new one of these every few years. As a kid, I was labeled an “Autumn” and therefore, not only would dull earth tones look good on me, I have certain personality traits as well.

So, the idea here is that if you meet someone who looks good in the dull colored clothes they are wearing, this person is “energetic, makes quick decisions, but is also disagreeable and will hurt your feelings.” (see this table).

But wait a minute, sure I may be loyal and a good organizer, but I am not quick to make a decision … I actually enjoy the deliberation before I proceed, and I also feel like I am very conscious of other’s feelings. Like all good pigeon holes, I can get one foot in, but not both.

Of course when you read these personality tests, they always say that not everyone fits completely into the categories, but why have them if they aren’t accurate? It seems that having any sort of indicator like this is allowing one to prejudge others … judging simply by appearances.

I have a friend who first came to work dressed completely in black with fishnet stockings, spikey hair and ripped black coat with the words “Fk Corporate America” in white letters on it. All the business people were concerned that we had just hired someone who would steal everything not nailed down. Actually, it was just the opposite, as this guy has more integrity than anyone I know. Granted, he cared more in defending our host servers than in the corporation that actually owned the servers, but he told us that by his jacket.

Perhaps the best approach is to understand all possible personality tests and layer them on top of an individual… I can see what I should put on my business card now:

Jon Spayde, in the latest issue of Utne Reader, defends the use of these indicators by saying:

I have a new perspective on my colleagues, especially in meetings. Rather than a roomful of neurotics who simply refuse to conform to my standards of How People Should Be, they’re folks who bring widely varying gifts to the conference table.

I don’t know, I always had that perspective even before personality tests. Every person to me is different and their opinions, though not the same as mine, are valid. I just can’t see how labeling them helps foster that.

But I guess if it does create acceptance between people, then by all means, email the latest personality type fad, for the world certainly needs more tolerance.