0:00
/
0:00
Transcript

5 Business Reasons I Quit the Enneagram

Why I turned down a lucrative business contract with a worldwide brand and walked away from a popular personality tool.

HeinzSight is where I explore life, work, and faith—hoping to inspire and stir your own thoughts along the way. The views expressed are my own.


For five years, I was a certified Enneagram teacher. I led workshops in corporate settings and built it into my coaching business. But after deeper study, I’ve walked away from it as a professional tool. While it’s popular in some circles, I believe the risks outweigh the benefits.

One of the most pivotal moments in my career came when I was offered a lucrative contract to implement the Enneagram at a major global brand. It would have been a huge feather in my cap—a shiny endorsement that most would have jumped at. But something didn’t sit right.

Despite the promise of financial gain and prestige, I realized that promoting a tool I had started questioning—the Enneagram—didn’t align with my values. I took a step back, trusting that sometimes the boldest thing you can do in business is walk away from the opportunities that don’t serve your purpose. I turned down the contract.


Here are the top five reasons I no longer use the Enneagram in a professional context. (I also wrote a post with more faith-oriented reasons.)

1. It Lacks Scientific Validity and Reliability.

In the world of professional development, tools must be trustworthy. The Enneagram simply isn’t. The psychological community has not validated it, and in a comprehensive study of 36 personality typologies, it was rated as the least credible.1 Relying on an unproven system for hiring, team building, or leadership development is irresponsible.

2. Its Origins Are Inappropriate for the Workplace.

The Enneagram wasn’t developed in a clinical or academic setting. Its origins trace back to early 20th-century spiritual mysticism and New Age philosophy. Introducing a tool with esoteric and spiritual roots into a diverse, secular workplace is inappropriate and can create an environment of exclusion and potential liability. Professional tools should be neutral and universally applicable.

Photo by MART PRODUCTION on Pexels

3. It Promotes Unhelpful Labeling and a Fixed Mindset.

The Enneagram is highly determinative, meaning it encourages people to define themselves and others by a single number. This leads to stereotyping (”He’s such a Type 8”) and can foster a fixed mindset, limiting an individual’s potential for growth. Instead of helping people adapt, it can become an excuse for behavior rather than a catalyst for change.

4. It Encourages Self-Focus Over Team Cohesion.

While self-awareness is valuable, the Enneagram often leads to an excessive focus on self-identity. Team conversations can shift from shared goals and collaborative problem-solving to analyzing personal types. This can inadvertently create division and distract from the “we” of a high-performing team, replacing a focus on collective success with a focus on individual typologies.

Photo by Mikhail Nilov on Pexels

5. It Distracts from Proven, Evidence-Based Practices.

Time and resources are finite. By choosing an unvalidated tool, organizations risk distracting their teams from developing measurable skills that directly contribute to business objectives. The energy spent learning and applying the Enneagram could be invested in proven, evidence-based frameworks for communication, conflict resolution, and leadership.

I recommend and have used:


Conclusion

In conclusion, while the goal of understanding ourselves and our colleagues is a worthy one, the Enneagram is the wrong tool for the job. Professionals deserve development tools that are validated, inclusive, and focused on fostering collaborative growth—not unproven labels.

And if you’re ever faced with a decision to choose between the easy route and what truly aligns with your values—remember, sometimes the boldest move is saying “no” when the opportunity doesn’t serve your long-term purpose.

Thanks for reading HeinzSight with Chris Heinz! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

1 Kocher, Gerald P., Madeline R. McMann, Annika O. Stout & John C. Norcross, “Discredit Assessment and Treatment Methods Used with Children and Adolescents,” vol #44, no. 5, 2015, pp. 722-729, Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15374416.2014.895941


Related Posts

Discussion about this video

User's avatar

Ready for more?