Classifying Individual Differences
As we seek to understand individual differences, we tend to gravitate toward classification systems. Having some ways to organize and simply understand the complexities of human behavior is very helpful.
When trying to understand personality, it is important to recognize that all we have to go on is the outer behavior we observe. Much like in the following picture, all we see are shadows.
If we assume what is behind the behavior, we may misunderstand the true nature of that individual’s personality. As we can see, we might expect a sphere to have made these shadows, but if the light is right, several other shapes can make the same shape shadow.
So when an organizational setting requires or sets a norm for certain behaviors, individuals of different personality types may exhibit very similar behaviors.
Personality Has Several Aspects
The following is adapted from Linda V. Berens, Linda K. Ernst, and Melissa A. Smith, Quick Guide to the 16 Personality Types and Teams (Telos Publications, 2004) *Used with permission.
Just as our behavior is not determined by our personality type, the cylinder can have a rectangular shadow or an oval shadow depending how the light is shining.
All behavior occurs in a context—be it work, school, home, socializing, and so on. It is important to understand that our personalities reflect the requirements of these contexts as well as our innate tendencies and how we have adapted to these contexts over time.
 The Contextual Self
The contextual self is who we are in any given environment. It is how we behave depending on what the situation requires. The idea of a personality “type” doesn’t leave out freedom of action in the moment.
The Developed Self
When the contextual self becomes habitual and ongoing, it becomes a part of your developed self. Personality development is influenced by our choices and decisions as well as by interactions and roles.
The Core Self
This aspect of our personality exists from the beginning of our lives. This aspect of ourselves is in our genes. We are born with a tendency to behave in certain ways, which influences how we adapt, grow, and develop.
When looking at personality types, all three of these aspects must be considered. Current behavior and adaptations may or may not be consistent with the core self. All are interrelated.
Feeling Sure about Your Best-Fit Type
The following is adapted from Linda V. Berens, Linda K. Ernst, and Melissa A. Smith, Quick Guide to the 16 Personality Types and Teams (Telos Publications, 2004) *Used with permission.
What Is Best-Fit Type?
Best-fit type refers to the type pattern that fits you best. No one description or pattern will be a perfect match to all of who you are. Your personality is rich and complex, and a “type” or type pattern cannot adequately express all of that richness. Each of the sixteen types comes in a variety of “flavors,” and best-fit type means that the themes and preferred processes of that type seem to fit you the best.
Personality Instruments
Sometimes people come to understand who they are through self-reporting on personality instruments. No instruments that rely solely on self-reporting are completely accurate. Ethically, they must all be accompanied by a validation process, preferably involving self-discovery. Many instruments have standards that require face-to-face facilitated feedback with a qualified professional. This booklet is not meant to replace this valuable interactive process but to support it.
Preference versus Measurement
Remember that the results individuals receive from an instrument do not measure an amount of any particular preference but are designed to “indicate” which one they prefer. The score is only a product of the instrument and should not be used as a strength or weakness indicator. A score of 0 for Thinking and 15 for Feeling does not indicate that the respondent does not think! The result merely indicates that the respondent has a preference for Feeling and, if accurate, reflects the accuracy of the indicator for that particular respondent.
The Multiple Model Approach to
Understanding Personality Differences
by Linda V. Berens
Personality is one of the most complex aspects of what is known as a complex human system. We could look at separate traits, but how useful would that be? No one could remember them all. It is human nature to seek out categories, and so we turn to typologies to help us simplify. Yet a single way of looking at personality will always fall short. A multiple model approach solves the dilemma of oversimplification while having something that is easy to remember and useful.
In using multiple models to look at the same thing, we must use models that are not conflicting and that relate in some way. To be useful, each model must provide different information. Here we review the models, or lenses, that best help us understand personality in terms of its patterns and the dynamic processes that help maintain the patterns.
The 16 Personality Types
Sixteen personality patterns have been observed over time from various perspectives and theoretical bases. Each of these patterns has a theme of its own.
Each lens provides different information about personality. Sometimes it is useful to explore each lens on its own. Other times two lenses are used together for a more complete picture. The lenses taken together give the fullest picture and provide the most information.
Type Preference - Briggs Myers
In the 1940s, Isabel Myers began developing a self-report questionnaire that could help people find where they fit in Jung’s theory. Her mother, Katharine Briggs, had been exploring Jung’s typology since the late 1920s. She was interested in its applicability to fiction writing as well as helping people understand their differences. As Myers and Briggs began to craft a self-report instrument, they faced several challenges. They had to take what Jung had seen as an integrated whole and try to figure out how to ask questions to get at that whole. They chose to focus on Jung’s notion of opposites and force choices between equally desirable, psychological opposites.
» READ MORE ABOUT THE TYPE PREFERENCES
The 4 Temperaments
Temperament theory is based on descriptions of behavior that go back over twenty-five centuries. It tells us the “why” of behavior, our motivators, and sources of deep psychological stress. Knowing our temperament patterns tells us our core needs and values as well as the talents we are more likely to be drawn to develop. Temperament gives us four broad themes in a pattern of core psychological needs, core values, talents, and behaviors—all of which are interrelated.
» READ MORE ABOUT THE 4 TEMPERAMENTS
Interaction Styles
Interaction Styles is based on observable behavior patterns that are quite similar to the popular social styles models and DISC®. Interaction Styles tells us the “how” of our behavior. They refers to patterns of interaction that are both highly contextual and yet innate. Knowing our interaction style helps us locate interpersonal conflicts and situational energy drains. It gives us a map for greater flexibility in our interactions with others.
» READ MORE ABOUT INTERACTION STYLES
Cognitive Dynamics — 8 Processes
Cognitive Dynamics is based on the Jungian theory from which psychological type instruments are derived. Each of the sixteen types has a theme based on a unique dynamic pattern of cognitive processes and their development. Knowing our innate tendencies to use these processes in certain ways can help us release blocks to our creativity and to effective communication. This model provides us the key to growth and development as we examine how each of the cognitive processes identified by Carl Jung plays out in our personality pattern.
» READ MORE ABOUT THE 8 PROCESSES
Using Psychological Type Instruments
In looking at how the models relate to the sixteen personality types, it is important to remember that the results of any instrument are just an artificial snapshot in time. Also, an instrument is not the theory. The results of an instrument are neither the whole of a theory nor the whole of a personality. This is why ethical and competent users of psychological type instruments follow the person-to-person feedback standards of self-selection and validation by the client. One must not assume the results of psychological type instruments are 100 percent accurate. They must always be validated through an exploratory process such as we describe in this book.
How Do the Models Relate?
The models meet at the level of the sixteen type patterns. Each of the 4 temperament patterns and each of the four interaction styles has four variations; thus, each expands to sixteen types. The four-letter codes produced by psychological type instruments, when they are accurate and verified for individuals, match these sixteen type patterns. While at first glance the matching process looks illogical, it occurs at a deep theoretical level when looking at Jung’s original works. More importantly, it occurs on a descriptive, behavioral level. Following is the Temperament Matrix with the sixteen theme names, the interaction styles, the four-letter personality type codes, and the type dynamics patterns represented by the type code. (The dominant process is listed first, auxiliary second, tertiary third, and inferior fourth.)
REMEMBER
This matching of the codes is not necessarily derived from instrument results but from a matching of the best-fit type patterns. And instrument results might be different from the best-fit type pattern.
|
