Out of the Box Coaching
and
Breakthroughs with the Enneagram,
Mary R. Bast, Ph.D.
Copyright © 1999. All rights reserved. Revised:
July 21, 2010
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, risk-taking, style Three executive, was newly reporting to a former peer, Dave S., a team-oriented, more conservative style 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 style 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 a style 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:
Give the purpose and main idea first; few details unless asked for them.
Describe the challenges, possibilities, and future benefits of your ideas.
Identify non-routine aspects of what you propose, encourage imagination.
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:
Respect feelings (your own and others') as important facts.
Acknowledge that beliefs, values, and needs drive behavior as much as (or more than) logic.
Consider potential sources of resistance--and treat them as legitimate!
More Articles on MBTI at This Site:
MBTI and Enneagram (Flautt & Richards) How Gil Solved His Problems
Conscious Type Development Enneagram "Temperaments"
Links to Related Sites: