APT Conference Proceedings - Kansas City Missouri, 1995

MBTI: A TOOL FOR CHANGE AND QUALITY IMPROVEMENT©

Lynda Trommelen

 

Overview

MBTI Profile

Quality Improvement Model

Team Descriptions

Conclusion

Reference Reading

 

Overview

Effectiveness in today's organizations is dependent upon continuous quality improvement and a strong client focus. The MBTI is a valuable tool to any organization. It can be used to address quality improvement initiatives:

by influencing the organizational culture

by developing a climate of respect for diversity that values everyone's strengths

by enhancing communication within quality teams

by providing quality improvement teams with a tool for problem solving that uses all of the functions to guide the process

by meshing this 4 part model with quality skills & tools to enhance team outcomes

In 1988, the MBTI was introduced into this acute care teaching hospital as a tool for organizational renewal. Over a period of 6 years all staff were invited to participate in 2-3 day workshops that reflected the hospital’s mission and values. The MBTI was used as a tool to develop an appreciation of differences and establish a climate that valued and fostered diversity.

MBTI Profile

As the Table 1 & 2 indicate, a profile of the organization was developed with an awareness of differences between the management and staff groups.

Table 1: MBTI Organizational Profile: Sept /88 - June 94

Mgrs: 94 Staff: 663 Total: 757

* For a description of each of these types, click here.

	ISTJ	ISFJ	INFJ	INTJ
Mgrs	12	10	4	3
Staff	91	150	25	20
Total	103	160	29	23
%	14	21	4	3
	ISTP	ISFP	INFP	INTP
Mgrs	1	8	7	4
Staff	18	46	37	21
Total	19	54	44	25
%	3	7	6	3
	ESTP	ESFP	ENFP	ENTP
Mgrs	3	2	6	5
Staff	18	36	39	12
Total	21	38	45	17
%	3	5	6	2
	ESTJ	ESFJ	ENFJ	ENTJ
Mgrs	7	6	8	8
Staff	25	91	24	10
Total	32	97	32	18
%	4	13	4	2

As Table 2 indicates, the staff profile is predominately ISFJ. This is reflected in reality by a long term staff, which is very loyal to the hospital and its traditions, in touch with the day to day realities of the current health care environment, and cautious of change. Our managers reflect proportions closer to the population norms.

 

Table 2: Comparison of Management to Staff Profiles



In Canada, health care delivery is shifting the paradigm from the traditional medical model to a client focused approach, which is more responsive and centred around the needs of patients and their families. Hospital accreditation standards emphasize a quality improvement model that is focused on process and systems thinking as opposed to the previously limited approach of Quality Control methods. This required a change in mindset to a broader, more long term vision. Quality of patient care teams reflected the multitude of professionals and support staff to provide care in each of the service areas.

Change is a process that takes time in any organization. However knowing the profile of our organization (ie:ISFJ), it was important to give the process the extensive time required and provide the personal support to bring about this paradigm shift.

 

Quality Improvement Model

Three Quality of Patient Care teams used an MBTI model to determine its effectiveness as a tool for Quality Improvement. The model used the four functions, ie: sensing, intuition, thinking and feeling, to guide the team process. Initially the goal was to ensure that all perspectives were considered by the team since the organization’s profile is strongly skewed towards the Sensing and Feeling preferences. Based on what was learned from our first experience, work began to link the Quality Improvement tools to the four segments of our process. The intent was to develop a consistent approach that could be passed from team to team to enhance the overall development of a learning organization.

 

 

Descriptions of the 3 Quality of Care Teams studied:

 

1. Team A evaluated the problem of why 20% of patients remained in our Emergency department longer than 4 hours. Members consisted of the Emergency Dept. care givers, staff from other departments (eg: lab, X-ray, portering etc.) who support their efforts and managers, including the Senior Administrator responsible for all of these areas.

 

2. Team B reviewed the effectiveness of Processing our Day Surgery Patients throughout the continuum of care from the initial referral by a family physician for surgery to the post discharge clinic follow-up. This team consisted of over 40 areas that interact with the patient and family in the day surgery process.

 

3. Team C was a small focused group set up to look at the process for patient discharge on a specific ward with many patients transferred to other care facilities or sent home with support. An external consultant with specialisation in Quality Improvement tools for data gathering and analysis was added to this team. The intent was to set up from our evolving model, a more structured approach that could be transferred to other Quality of Patient Care Teams.

 

CONCLUSION

The presentation discussed the outcome of these efforts noting successes, problems encountered and the overall degree of satisfaction with this approach. By respecting the needs and perspectives of all personality types, it offers a model for other Quality Improvement teams to consider in their QI initiatives.

 

Reference Reading

1. Bridges, William, 1992, The Character of Organizations: Using Jungian Type in Organizational Development, Consulting Psychologists Press Inc., Palo Alto CA.  (Click here for more information)

2. Leebov, Wendy, Ersoz, Clara J., 1991, "Part III : The Manager’s Toolkit" in The Health Manager’s Guide to Continuous Quality Improvement, American Hospital Publishing Inc., Chicago, Illinois

 

 Click here for Contact Information

Back to top



©  Jolyn Enterprises

Last Revised: 15/07/2008