Exactly... there are hundreds of systems to evaluate people. All of them are abstractions which are unable to capture the full depth of reality, and so will work well under some conditions and bad under others. It's a matter of design choices and tradeoffs. Choose the system that better fits your needs and be aware of its limitations.
That said, I like MBTI's (or Keirsey's) simplicity. It gives you a lot of data for such a simple system, and is easy to apply. You have to be aware of its limitations, of course. But I've been playing with it for almost 10 years (in my personal life, not so much for work) and it rarely fails me.
I think it's the same principle as the Fibonacci scale for planning poker... you will always have some error in your system, don't fool yourself. So the ROI of a simple system might pay off...
PS: I agree, MBTI seems VERY accurate for people that are not in the middle of the scales, and not-so-accurate otherwise.
That said, I like MBTI's (or Keirsey's) simplicity. It gives you a lot of data for such a simple system, and is easy to apply. You have to be aware of its limitations, of course. But I've been playing with it for almost 10 years (in my personal life, not so much for work) and it rarely fails me.
I think it's the same principle as the Fibonacci scale for planning poker... you will always have some error in your system, don't fool yourself. So the ROI of a simple system might pay off...
PS: I agree, MBTI seems VERY accurate for people that are not in the middle of the scales, and not-so-accurate otherwise.