I don't think this is even any kind of theory or categorization of workers in general in the sense that all workers fall into one of these seven types...
It's just 'seven employees that drive managers crazy'. What it says on the tin. I'm pretty sure all seven types exist, but it isn't a way of defining employees on any kind of scale, it's just pointing out these 7 that are bothersome out of possibly many.
Yes. See if you can sit down for a couple of hours and come up with your own system of 5 or 7 or whatever number of behaviors you find annoying in a context you are familiar with and suggest things that might improve them. If you can manage the concentration required, I doubt it would take you more than a few hours to make a very similar looking list for some other scenario.
This statement is interesting to me, because I feel the same can be said of mbti. Is not mbti - especially its origins - rather anecdotal and categorical in nature? Isn't that the point?
It kind of is. I have become frustrated with the preponderance of theories like this. Many take on a life of their own, over time, like Jungian functions, Myers-Briggs, and Enneagram.
I suppose if people tread carefully, they can be used in a way that is beneficial. But a business consultant can relatively easily make these "things I've observed, and what I believe should be done about them" systems fairly easily.
What gives one person's anecdote based intuitive description system more validity than another's? Why for instance is the Riso-Hudson Ennegram anymore valid than [MENTION=8595]Zang[/MENTION] 's metagram, or any of the other variations of the enneagram?
It's only a parlor game if you don't apply it to reality. The page I cited gives advice on how managers can deal more effectively with these types of employees. Did you visit the page in the OP?
I did visit the page linked in the OP. That's what I based my comments on. I even looked at a lot of the consulting services that Marie G. McIntyre offers on the rest of her website, and looked her up on linked-in. I have had a fair amount of dealings with HR people like her.
Unfortunately, saying the "right things" in a corporate environment, things that create a superficial instinctual reaction, will get you very far, even if there is no empirical basis for the things you say. She may have some empirical basis for what she says, but that aspect is not well advertised.