Problem Solving with the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
(Those who dropped in from the APT may want to
read about
all nine Enneagram styles;
for Enneagram
buffs who want more information on the MBTI, see links at bottom of page.)
The MBTI has
helped executives understand the diversity of conceptual styles people bring to their work groups;
it's also a pragmatic tool for coaching people to communicate more effectively by
considering others' temperament. The descriptions and brief case histories below
demonstrate what can be accomplished by understanding the MBTI in the context of one's
Enneagram style:
Basically, we're problem-solving creatures: we take in data
(Perceiving) and we decide what to do with it (Judging).
Perceiving
As we take in data, we rely primarily on one of two
perceptual
modes: we perceive either directly through our
senses (S), or more indirectly through our
intuition
(N).
Sensors are more
concrete
perceivers, relying more heavily on what they can taste, touch, hear, see, and what is
right in front of their noses--they analyze through comparison to their past experiences.
They tend to think sequentially from A to B to C, using
inductive reasoning
(going from the specific to the general).
Intuitors, on the other hand, tend to
consider the hunches, the overall picture, the
possibilities,
the patterns, and to use deductive reasoning (going from the general to the
specific). Because they focus on possibilities, Intuitive types draw more on the unknown,
the indirect, the not - yet - experienced -- and are therefore more oriented in time to
the future.
The differences in how those with
Sensing
and Intuitive preferences perceive the world is one of the key areas
where communication can falter in organizations, and this can be particularly problematic
if they're also different Enneagram styles.
Stan and Dave
Stan G., an
independent, results-oriented,
Enneagram Three
executive, was newly reporting to a former peer,
Dave S., a team-oriented, more conservative
Enneagram Six who valued participative management. Before our work together,
these differences in leadership style were exaggerated by their MBTI differences: Stan
prefers Intuition and Dave prefers
Sensing as a
perceptual mode.
Stan (Intuiting) saw
his new boss Dave (Sensing)
as lacking intelligence and entrepreneurship.
He did not want to bring Dave in on plans for a project that could generate a large profit
but which also involved a large calculated risk. Geared to the expedient route, and
preferring to focus on the overall picture, Stan thought the project "would die a
slow death if I have to wait for Dave's approval on every detail!"
Consequently, Dave
didn't trust Stan and was always on his
back for details (otherwise he feared Stan would not volunteer information). This became a
vicious circle because Stan would then say, "See, he never leaves me alone!"
After learning about their MBTI (and Enneagram) differences
Stan came to appreciate Dave's gifts and acted accordingly. He was
astonished at
the difference in his relationship with his boss when he began to honor Dave's
differences: "I gave him such a minute level of detail I was sure he'd be bored;
instead, he not only agreed to my proposal but actively sought support for it from the CEO!"
Quinton and Karen
Because style differences can be particularly problematic
in a reporting relationship, I'd like to offer one more situation where the tables were
turned: where the boss (Quinton Z.) was an
Intuitive and his subordinate,
Karen T., was a Sensor. With her
Sensing
preference, Karen (an
Enneagram Six) was enthusiastic
about updating her boss on the sequence of events leading to a successful project.
Quinton, on the other hand, was an off-the-scale
Intuitive
(and Enneagram Seven) who asked me, "What's
wrong with her? She wants to tell me how the team was formed, every action they took, and
I still don't know what she was getting at. I basically tuned out for most of the
conversation!"
Intuitive types find it almost impossible
to lock into an idea unless they hear the overview or purpose first (and
Enneagram style Sevens are
impatient with details anyway). So Quinton wasn't as
interested in the pieces of a puzzle as he was in what it meant, what it was going to
represent.
Karen,
used her Sensing
preference to lock ideas together quite literally like matching puzzle pieces on the basis
of their shape; she needed to build up her understanding of an idea piece by piece. And
she assumed that's how Quinton would want to understand it.
I can't emphasize enough how this difference is a potential
cause of misunderstanding. Karen described her first meeting with
Quinton, head of their organization's strategic planning function as
follows: "Have you ever wandered onto a Hollywood movie set? You know,
where it looks like a real town, but behind the store fronts there's nothing? I wasn't
about to tell him I didn't have a clue what he was talking about. I just grabbed my
briefcase and told him I was ready. As far as I was concerned, we might as well be taking
off for the moon!
After some rehearsal using Jean Kummerow's
Talking in
Type, Karen had greater success in understanding the communication style that
would match Quinton's and help her succeed in her job:
Karen also realized
she couldn't expect her boss to be responsible for
her missing connections. (Quinton thought he was
perfectly clear, but he was not being concrete
enough for Karen.) She
learned to ask for details and discuss the steps involved to carry
out the strategic plan.
Judging
Now let's take a look at the basis on which decisions are
made--the Judging preference. This component of problem-solving is the one
with which we decide to act on the perceptions we've allowed to filter in. It's not an act
of being negatively critical, but rather one of analysis.
Of the two general Judging categories, we tend to
prefer either a rational, objective, generally principled, logical basis for choice (Thinking);
or a more situational frame of reference which takes into account our own values, needs,
and reactions as well as those of others (Feeling). You can understand
this distinction best by asking, "What's the primary
basis for my
decisions?"
An important point:
this is not a difference between people who are
"logical" and those who are "emotional"--that would be simplistic.
Thinkers
also feel, and Feelers also think!
Oscar Y., for example, was an
Enneagram
Five who also had a
Thinking
preference. He headed Operations for a company which had acquired a smaller company in the
same industry. He and his staff were asked to determine which company's computer
system could monitor business indicators most efficiently, and the logical choice
technically was the acquired company's system.
Everyone on the planning team (all with a
Thinking
preference) agreed that changing to this system would take no more than nine months. No
particular attention was paid to the cultural differences of the two companies, the
expectations and assumptions of either set of employees, or the implications of the
reporting relationships as various functions were merged. These considerations would all
have emerged from the Feeling preference, which was underdeveloped on
this team.
In several departments, executives from the acquired
company became managers of employees from the acquiring company. What could have been
anticipated, had they been better able to draw upon the
Feeling
preference, was the mistrust and resentment of employees in the "old" company
who not only had expected "one of theirs" to be promoted, but who had helped
design and implement the "old" system that was now being replaced.
A year later, members of the executive team
scratched
their heads in
puzzlement, wondering why there was so much resistance to the new system!
When making your team decisions, remember to:
More Articles on MBTI at This Site:
MBTI Team Roles
MBTI
and Enneagram (Flautt & Richards)
How
Gil Solved His Problems
Conscious Type Development
Links to Related Sites:
TypeLogic/MBTI profiles
Association for Psychological Type
International
