1 personality types of actuaries associate professor leonie tickle macquarie university, sydney

1

Personality Types of Actuaries

Associate Professor Leonie TickleMacquarie University, Sydney

2

The Actuarial Stereotype

• Marketing audit of the Australian actuarial profession:

– Perception: “technical”, “conservative”, “specialist” and “respected”

– Actual: “technical”, “respected”, “specialist”, “challenging”

– Ideal: “respected”, “creative”, “ethical” and “influential”.

(Gale et al. 1995)

3

Overview• Why study personality types of actuaries and

accountants?

• Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

• Personality types of accountants and accounting students

• Personality types of actuaries

• Personality types of actuarial students

• Implications

4

Why Study Personality Types of Actuaries?

• Students and careers advisers: Career decisions

• Academics: Students’ learning styles; curriculum that encourages diversity

• Employers: Fully utilising talents of staff

• Actuarial Profession: Health and vibrancy of the profession

• All individuals: Personal development; working with others

5

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

6

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)Energy orientation

ExtraversionEnergised by interaction, and direct energy outward

IntroversionEnergised by inner world, and direct energy inward

Information perception

SensingFocus on reality observed through the senses

iNtuitionFocus on pattern, context and interrelationships

Decision-making

ThinkingDecisions are based on objective, logical analysis

FeelingDecisions are based on personal, subjective values

Dealing with the outer world

Judging

Like to make decisions and come to closure

Perception

Like to continue collecting information and exploring

7

MBTI - Energy orientation

ExtraversionEnergised by interaction,

and direct energy outward

IntroversionEnergised by inner world, and

direct energy inward

energised by interaction energised by internal world

expressive contained

learn and work best through discussion with others

learn and work best by processing information alone

think out loud think before speaking

(not “loud” or “talkative”) (not “shy” or “inhibited”)

8

MBTI – Information perception

SensingFocus on reality observed

through the senses

iNtuitionFocus on pattern, context

and interrelationships

“facts speak for themselves”

“facts illustrate principles”

focus on facts before broad concepts

focus on broad concepts before facts

concrete, practical, specific, detailed

conceptual, creative, theoretical, general

oriented to present reality oriented to future possibility

9

MBTI – Decision-making

ThinkingDecisions are based on

objective, logical analysis

FeelingDecisions are based on

personal, subjective values

critique and analyse empathise and honour

justice mercy

fair = everyone treated equally

fair = everyone treated as an individual

(not “cold-hearted”) (not “emotional” or “irrational”)

10

MBTI – Dealing with the outer world

JudgingLike to make decisions and

come to closure

PerceivingLike to continue collecting information and exploring

like to finish things like things open-ended

scheduled, organised spontaneous, flexible

like to make decisions and complete tasks

like to postpone decisions and continue exploring

(not “judgmental”) (not “perceptive”)

11

MBTI - Type TableISTJ

Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

Type names are from Keirsey (1998)

12

MBTI - Type TableISTJ

Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

13

MBTI - Type TableISTJ

Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

14

MBTI - Type TableISTJ

Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

15

MBTI - Type TableISTJ

Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

16

= Population (Myers, I.B. et al, 1998). Each represents 1%.

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

17

Personality Types of Accountants and Accounting Students

18

= Population (Myers, I.B. et al, 1998) = Accountants (Satava, 1996)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

19

= Population (Myers, I.B. et al, 1998) = Accountants (Satava, 1996)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

20

= Population (Myers, I.B. et al, 1998) = Accountants (Satava, 1996)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

21

I S T J Inspector

(18% - 27% of accountants, 12% of population)

• Practical, matter-of-fact and realistic• Logical, analytical, objective• Dependable, dutiful, trustworthy, loyal• Value tradition and accepted methods• May overlook the big picture and new possibilities• May not consider the impact of decisions on

people

Personality types of accountants

22

Personality types of accountants

E S T J Supervisor

(14% - 19% of accountants, 9% of population)

• Practical, matter-of-fact and realistic• Decisive, assertive in implementing plans,

confident• Organised, efficient, dependable• Logical, systematic, pragmatic• May overlook wider ramifications of actions• May not consider the impact of decisions on

people

23

Personality types of accountants• Lack of diversity? 35–46% -STJ (21% in pop)

• Filtering out of E-, N-, F-, P- (Laribee, 1994)

• Type and role: Managers and senior partners more often N- than S- (Schloemer et al, 1997)

• “Perhaps we are not attracting and retaining what the accounting profession needs, or not giving students the opportunity to develop the skills required… We need a better mix of personality NOW.” (Briggs et al, 2007)

24

Personality Types of Actuaries

25

= Population = Accountants (Satava, 1996) = Actuaries (Patrick, 1996)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

26

= Population = Accountants (Satava, 1996) = Actuaries (Patrick, 1996)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

27

Personality types of actuaries

I S T J Inspector

(23% of actuaries, 18-27% of accountants, 12% of population)

• Practical, matter-of-fact and realistic• Logical, analytical, objective• Dependable, dutiful, trustworthy, loyal• Value tradition and accepted methods• May overlook the big picture and new possibilities• May not consider the impact of decisions on people

28

Personality types of actuaries

I N T J Mastermind

(16% of actuaries, 2% of population)

• Global, creative, conceptual, long-range thinkers

• Concise, rational, objective, critical

• Value innovation over authority or accepted methods

• May overlook practical details, engage in abstractions

• May not see impact of decisions on people, give praise

29

Personality types of actuaries

I N T P Architect

(12% of actuaries, 3% of population)

• Curious, insightful, ingenious

• Logical, analytical, objective, critical, skeptical

• Flexible, dislike routine problems

• May be impractical

• May not consider the impact of ideas on people

30

Is the actuarial stereotype justified?• More Introverts (70%: accountants 50%, pop 50%)

• More Thinkers (80%: accountants 70%, pop 40%)

• More Intuitives (50%: accountants 30%, pop 30%)

• Stereotype of meticulous, detail-oriented not

supported

• More diverse than accountants?: ISTJ (23%), INTJ

(16%), INTP (12%), ESTJ (9%)

31

Personality Types of Actuarial Students

32

Study of actuarial students (Tickle, 2009)• 109 first year Macquarie University actuarial students

(60% response rate)

• Sex: Male (57%), Female (43%)

• Country of birth: Australia (27%), China (31%), Hong Kong (3%), Malaysia (15%), Korea (7%), India (5%), Pakistan (3%), Vietnam (3%) - also Taiwan, Kenya, Singapore, Egypt, Russia, Sri Lanka.

• English is first language for only 24%.

• English is spoken at home for only 32%.

• Age of decision to study actuarial studies: <15 (2%), 15-17 (8%), 17-18 (45%), 18-21 (27%), 22-23 (10%), 24+ (8%).

33

= Population = Actuaries (Patrick, 1996) = Actuarial students (Tickle, 2009)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

34

= Population = Actuaries (Patrick, 1996) = Actuarial students (Tickle, 2009)

ISTJ Inspector

ISFJProtector

INFJCounsellor

INTJMastermind

ISTPCrafter

ISFPComposer

INFPHealer

INTPArchitect

ESTPPromoter

ESFPPerformer

ENFPChampion

ENTPInventor

ESTJSupervisor

ESFJProvider

ENFJTeacher

ENTJField Marshall

35

Recap of MBTI Profiles

MBTI Dimension Overall

E I S N T F J PPopulation

Accountants – S T J

Actuaries I – T –

Actuarial students

– – T –

References: Myers, I.B. et al (1998); Kovar et al (2003); Patrick (1996); Tickle (2009).

36

Factors in choosing actuarial program very

imps/w imp

mod s/w unim

p

very unim

p

Strong job prospects 46 46 8 0 0

Actuarial career is highly paid 45 48 8 1 0

Good at mathematics (N) 51 33 13 3 0

Intellectually challenging (N, T) 46 33 18 3 0

Prestige / actuaries are highly respected

42 35 17 6 0

Opportunities to work overseas 30 29 27 11 3

Avoid career requiring very good English

12 22 18 16 31

Didn't know what else to do 5 16 29 17 34

Family pressure 3 16 13 28 41

Didn't get marks for first preference 5 5 9 16 66

37

Alignment between personality and …

very close

s/w close

mod not very close

not close at all

…degree subject matter, at time of choice

13 57 18 9 2

…degree subject matter, now (first year)

17 50 23 8 0

…future career 17 50 28 4 0• Significant shift between alignment now and in

career

• ENTP and ESTJ reported closest alignment

• INFP, INFJ and ISFP (and F types in general) reported the least alignment (but reasonably high satisfaction)

38

Satisfaction with degree• Choice to major in Actuarial Studies:

– 40% very satisfied– 41% somewhat satisfied– 14% neutral– 5% somewhat dissatisfied

• Satisfaction rated higher than alignment

• ENTJ and ENTP most satisfied

• ENFJ and ESFP (and F types in general) least satisfied

39

DiscontinuanceChoice of major

• 72% would choose Actuarial Studies again

• Low for ENFJ, ESFJ, ENFP, ESFP (F types in general)

Discontinuance

• 3% have seriously considered discontinuing, and a further 26% have considered it but not seriously.

• Types most often reporting considering discontinuance are ESFP, ESFJ, ENFP, INFP (F types in general)

• Main reasons cited – workload and difficulty

40

Career PlansIntend to complete Part III

Yes 79%No 18%Not sure 3%

RoleUsing actuarial skills in a traditional actuarial role 42%Using actuarial skills in a non-traditional actuarial role 50%Not using actuarial skills but in the financial sector 6%Not using actuarial skills and not in the financial sector 2%

INTP, ENTJ, INFJ, INFP more inclined toward non-traditional roles

41

Career Plans - continuedIntended practice area

Investments 23%

Banking and finance 20%

Life insurance 15%

Risk management 7%

Superannuation 3%

GI / health 3%

Not sure 27%

E and N types most inclined towards investments and banking

42

Summary of study

• Personality profile of actuarial students similar to the general population.

• Job prospects and pay are important factors in choosing actuarial studies.

• Limited evidence that F-types are less satisfied, feel less alignment and are more likely to discontinue.

• Limited evidence that INTP, ENTJ, INFJ, INFP types are more inclined toward non-traditional roles, and E and N types toward investment and banking.

43

Implications

44

Implications: Careers Advice

• Are students choosing the degree because of pay and job prospects rather than alignment with interests?

• Interest in maths is important for students and probably also emphasised by careers advisers – need to also promote problem-solving skills and business judgement.

• Importance of communication skills needs emphasis.

• Positive IAAust developments (e.g. More than Maths).

• Differences between actuarial studies and accounting.

45

Implications: Learning and Teaching• NT students: are analytical, logical, critical; like to work

independently; like challenge; enjoy being creative; are concerned with relevance and meaning.

• ST students: want concrete, specific information; learn from actual experience; like a structured environment; want immediate feedback and lose interest if not practical.

• SF students: process information based on personal experience; respond to collegiality, trust and encouragement; learn best by talking and group activity.

• NF students: look for possibilities and patterns, uniqueness, originality, personal relevance; like a flexible and innovative environment; bored by routine.

Silver and Hanson (1996)

46

Implications: Learning and Teaching

It wasn't what I expected… I’m used to having someone in every subject or in anything I do and I love company, I hate being by myself. I find it very hard to motivate myself to do the work as it is very challenging and I have no one to make it more enjoyable. [However, the] subjects are thought-provoking and testing, which keeps me interested and appeals to my curious and determined nature.

(ESFP)

47

Implications: Learning and Teaching

[Actuarial studies] is so interesting and sparks my passion and curiosity. However, I dislike it as I struggle to make friends with people in the course … I would definitely be loving university life if I had one or two people to come along for the ride. However, the high expectations I have in myself … and being able to provide for my future family, is too strong of a drive for me to give up.

(ESFP)

48

Implications: Learning and Teaching

Appears boring, with a concentration on known facts rather than theories.

(INTP)

In 5-10 years time, I hope to be a well respected professional actuary, and admired for my abilities and talents, as well as my ability to think outside the square.

(ENTP)

49

Implications: Actuarial Profession• What is the “ideal” personality profile for

actuaries? Is diversity a good thing?

• Could we be attracting a diverse range of people into the profession but failing to retain them?

50

Acknowledgements

QED

NZ Society of Actuaries

Consulting Psychologists Press

Macquarie University Department of Actuarial Studies

Maree Moses, Sharon Collett and Alison Petto-Hamilton

51

ReferencesBriggs, S.P., Copeland, S. & Haynes, D. (2007). Accountants for the 21st Century, where are you? A

five-year study of accounting students' personality preferences. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18, 511-537.

Gale, A.C., Ballantyne, M.R., Lyon, J.A., Merten, A.E., Shuttleworth, D. & Torrance, D.M. (1995). A marketing audit of the actuarial profession. Transactions of the Institute of Actuaries of Australia, 636-712.

Keirsey, D. (1998). Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence. Prometheus Nemesis:.

Kovar, S.E., Ott, R.L. & Fisher, D.G. (2003). Personality preferences of accounting students: A longitudinal case study. Journal of Accounting Eduction, 21, 75-94.

Laribee, S.F. (1994). The psychological types of college accounting students. Journal of Psychological Type, 28, 6.

Myers, I.B. (1999). Introduction to Type, (Sixth edition edn) Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Myers, I.B., McCaulley, M.H., Quenk, N.L. & Hammer, A.L. (1998). MBTI Manual: a Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (3rd edition). Melbourne: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Patrick, M.C. (1996). Actuarial Profile Research Project Canada. In Institute of Insurance and Pension Research. University of Waterloo, Ontario.

Satava, D. (1996). Personality types of CPAs: National vs. local firms. Journal of Psychological Type, 36, 36-41.

Schloemer, P.G. & Schloemer, M.S. (1997). The personality types and preferences of CPA firm professions: An analysis of changes in the profession. Accounting Horizons, 11(4), 24-39

Silver, H. F. and Hanson, J. R. (1996). Learning Styles and Strategies. Silver, Strong and Associates.Tickle, L. T. (2009). Survey of first year actuarial students. Unpublished.

52

Thank you

53

LinksAccountants: The Lion Tamer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

=XMOmB1q8W4Y

New Zealand Society of Actuaries Financial Services Forum

27 November 2009