Consultants use psychology in the strangest ways, applying theories to situations that would make their original formulators turn in their graves. Clients probably pay consultants for relatively objective, zeitgeist-attuned hunches as much as anything else. But, as elsewhere in life, the packaging does count. Psychology, it seems, increasingly provides the necessary authoritative oomph. It helps when number-crunching and semi-scientific terms allude to weighty theory. The famous Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality test - sorry, 'profiling tool' - is one consultancy favourite. It has been in use for 50 years and about two million people still take it every year in its original form. It pinpoints people's tendencies using four pairs of alternatives: extravert-introvert, sensing-intuitive, thinking-feeling and judging-perceiving. They look at whether a person prefers teams or working alone, is systematic or speculative, tends towards objectivity or subjectivity, and is decisive and controlling, as opposed to flexible and spontaneous. Consultants have kept the famous name and premise. But behind the facade, they have gutted the interior and now it is all sexy, post-modern minimalism. One company, a London-based 'strategy consultancy' called Cognosis, uses its edgier version to deconstruct the 'personality' of organisations. Depending on your view, this is a highly creative use of psychological knowledge, or a methodologically farcical distortion of Jung's theory of personality, on which the original test was based. The latter is probably closer to the truth. But, does it matter? After all, the notion does strike a chord. And it is worth noting that the test itself was developed by a mother-daughter team with as scant an understanding of construction process as the people at Cognosis. (They nonetheless received the eventual blessings of Jung). We are already used to the idea that companies have cultures. Mergers have exposed many employees to company culture-clash. Why not use psychology, however loosely, to try to predict and cope with such problems? Cognosis did just that for Safeway when the supermarket chain was on the receiving end of takeover offers. They characterised the suitors using an adapted MBTI designed to break down corporate structure into 16 possible types, then came up with a profile of each, along with their estimates about how well a marriage with Safeway might work. They saw Safeway itself as a 'harmoniser' because it is clubby, paternalistic, challenged by change and inward-looking. One possible partner, Tesco, was categorised as 'rational'. They saw it as forward-thinking, decisive, disciplined, logical and results-driven. If it took over Safeway, the consultants found, Tesco would tell Safeway staff what to do, but also explain why they should do it. If that did not work, then they would have to go. Asda, on the other hand, was deemed an 'idealist', because it was a decisive, empathetic, people-orientated communicator. Although clear about the sort of changes they planned, Asda would try to inspire change, rather than use logical argument. On this basis, Cognosis recommended Asda as the best match for Safeway. The findings of organisations like Cognosis do not always please everyone, because the profiles can be unflattering. In an assessment of investment banks, for example, Merrill Lynch came over as a swift and rational decision-maker, but at the expense of people-orientation. Both Lazard and Rothschild were seen as exclusive clubs, whose implicit rules had to be worked out by employees for themselves. These profiles were based on interviews with only 28 current and former executives and suppliers to the banks. And the Safeway analysis was based on 'research' that entailed questioning only eight industry experts. So it would be unwise to base any important decisions on this sort of analysis alone. However, there is no doubt that Cognosis and others are on to a good thing. Ascribing 'personality' to a company taps into a universal psychological technique people use to bring order to their world. Before the middle of the 20th century, people were not aware that they unconsciously grouped traits, and that this helped them understand others. Yet recognisable personality types have featured in story-telling for centuries. Today, company cultures have a profound effect on the lives of people who work for them. Profiling these cultures could help increase awareness of their underestimated significance. I wonder what sort of personality the South China Morning Post has? Jean Nicol is a Hong Kong-based psychologist and writer everydaypsychologist@yahoo.com