Okay this may be semantics but in terms of type development I think there's an essential difference between change and compensation.
I'm an INTP and yet I have the capability to plan, empathise, be the centre of attention and still keep myself as an INTP. See I don't change into an ENFP when surrounded by a group of fun people I compensate.
I see this coming up in discussion with people who see that "changing their type" is some kind of compromise of their integrity. Perhaps if they saw it more as compensation then it'd go more favourably.
Now to define the whole compensation better I see it more as using what you have and just applying it to something different. For example although I claim to have empathy most of the time I am merely forming a causal relationship between the circumstance and outcome with reference to the database of previous experiences that I have. I reckon (can't confirm as I don't seem quite capable of walking a mile in another man's shoes) that with say an ENFJ it's more "feeling the force". Where as I can try to understand the connection between circumstance A and emotion B they understand it intuitively and know how a person feels almost as a sculptor moulds their work. I know that's a shoddy description to go with but the intuitive picture behind that is larger than I feel capable of putting into words without going into poetry.
Anyhow the concept is that it's possible to compensate and emulate but not to change. I will never be an ENFP but I can seem very like it at times and can respond to things in an ENFP manner. This is how development goes. All that advice on changing what you do is not particularly true, I think if it was more bent toward where you apply your current abilities it'd be a bit better and more applicable.
Right well I thought that was an interesting change of perspective but now it's written I'm not so sure.