Newsletter #2

 

In this issue:

Which Myers-Briggs® types become dental hygiene students and why?

About the Strong Interest Inventory®: What's the Work Style Scale?

The FIRO-B™: What the Total Needs Scores Tell Us

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode (TKI): What's Good About Avoiding?

 

Which Myers-Briggs types become dental hygiene students and why?

Many of you have seen statistics about the 16 types and which careers they choose. Some of you have taken the Myers-Briggs Career report to see which professions your type chooses most often. Here we're going to do the opposite: talk about one profession, dental hygienist, and who chooses it and why. This will help us understand the dynamics at work.

A number of researchers have given the Myers-Briggs to dental hygiene students for career studies. As might be expected, the results follow a pattern. What can we imagine the results will show?

First, let's consider the nature of the work. The field requires mastery of technical skills and scientific knowledge. The person has to be comfortable with routine, have good attention to detail, precision, thoroughness, organizational ability, a desire to help people, and comfort with standards and schedules.

Now let's consider which types might find such work appealing. Just from reading the above description, it's clear the field is more likely to attract Sensors than Intuitives. Many Sensors enjoy work that requires skillfully applying well-learned knowledge. Likewise, dealing with immediate situations, using sound, conventional approaches is more interesting to Sensors than creating new, breakthrough methods.

Sensor-Feeler types are often attracted to health care fields with direct physical care, while Sensor-Thinker types often like health care fields that require highly technical skills. As you might imagine, Judgers were highly overrepresented in this group. In particular, Sensor-Judgers are attracted to the field. The need for high standards of cleanliness, conformity, schedules, and concrete action all appeal to SJs. It's also interesting to note that Thinker-Judgers were overrepresented. The most likely explanation is the scientific and technical demands of the job.

We would probably expect Extraverts to be drawn to this field. This happens to be the case. Likely reasons are the job requirements for sociability, interpersonal communication, and the ability to put patients at ease. Extravert-Judgers seem to like the career because they are surrounded by people and they are helping others using standard procedures, in a structured, scheduled environment.

So what does the research show? In the latest study, the most common type was ISFJ (18%), followed by ESFJ (17%), ESTJ (14%), and ISTJ (13%). The least likely types were INFJ (1.2%), INFP (1.2%), INTJ (1.8%) and INTP (1.8%). Extraverts made up 57% of the sample, Sensors 75%, Feelers 57%, and Judgers 73%. These results are in line with previous studies that showed ESTJ, ESFJ, ENTJ, and ISTJ types as the most common among dental hygiene students. One study showed that 39% of the participants were either ESFJ or ISFJ.

Of course, if you want to be a dental hygienist and are not one of the more common types, go ahead and do it. All types become dental hygienists. Some just choose the occupation with greater frequency than others. Do what you want to do. Remember: statistics tell us a great deal about groups, but nothing about how individuals will act. Never use statistics as a reason NOT to do something you want to do.

 

About the Strong Interest Inventory: What's the Work Style Scale?

Basically, this scale shows whether people prefer to work with things, data, or ideas versus those who prefer to work with people. The interesting part is this scale correlates to the General Occupational Themes and the Basic Interest Scales.

It's more common for those who score highest on the Realistic and Investigative themes to also score towards the Ideas/Data/Things pole of the Work Styles scale. Likewise, those who score high on the Enterprising and Social scales generally tend towards the People pole.

There are gender differences on this pole. You can see this on page 6 of the Snapshot. Females tend more towards the People pole than males. The box represents the middle 50% of scores, while the bar shows the middle 80%.

In college, those who score towards the Ideas/Data/Things pole tend to study physical sciences, machine trades, engineering, computer and information sciences, and math. Those who prefer the People pole tend to study subjects such as education, journalism, business, and social sciences.

As far as occupations go, the top scorers for Work with People pole are Child Care Provider (female), Home Economics Teacher (female), Community Services Organization Director, High School Counselor, and Secretary (female). The highest scorers on the Works with Ideas/Data/Things pole are Physicist, Chemist, Mathematician, Computer Programmer/Systems Analyst, Biologist, and Geologist.

Once again, be careful about choosing an occupation based on your score on this scale. If you scored towards the People pole, you can still be a chemist, for example. If you choose that field, you might want to look for ways to become more involved with others. You might become a manager, for instance.

 

The FIRO-B: What the Total Needs Scores Tell Us

The FIRO-B tells us a great deal about our individual desires for interacting with others. The Total Needs score combines your needs for Affection, Inclusion, and Control. The scores range from 0-18. Low is considered from 0-5, Medium from 6-12, and High is 13 and up.

Low scores often indicate a person is very selective about the people with whom he or she interacts. Another possibility is the person feels indifferent about satisfying this need.

Medium scores usually mean the person will try to satisfy this need, either by getting others to respond or expressing the behavior him- or herself. High scorers usually want to satisfy this need frequently, often with many different people in different settings.

The need with the greatest score is the area in which the person feels most comfortable. In new situations, this is likely to be the area he or she tries to satisfy first. For example, if a person's highest need is Inclusion, in a new situation the person will try to meet all the members of the new group, attempt to "fit in," and seek to get the feeling of belonging to the group. A person who scores highest on Control will likely want to understand the hierarchy in the group, who's in charge, how the group is structured, who is responsible for what, etc. Those who score highest on Affection will usually try to establish close personal relationships with the group, as well as developing personal trust among the group.

Remember, the highest score is the need the person is least likely to sacrifice. Similarly, the lowest score will be the first to go. So, a person whose high score is Affection and low score is Inclusion might be more comfortable working closely with trusted colleagues rather than joining a new team. Still, none of the needs will be ignored, particularly if the person scores in the medium to high range.

 

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode: What's Good About Avoiding?

When people read the results of the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI), they can jump to the conclusion that avoiding is a poor style. In fact, each of the 5 styles works well in some situations and poorly in others. Avoiding is useful in some situations.

For example, it helps to reduce stress. Some situations cannot be resolved immediately or ever. Dealing with them too soon can cause tensions to rise and anger to develop. Avoiding can save time. Again, the time might not be right to deal with an issue. In other cases, the issue simply isn't important enough to deal with. Avoiding lets us skip those times when little can be gained.

Another great use of avoiding is to control anger. If you notice your anger level rising, you can avoid dealing with an issue immediately. By waiting until you've had a chance to cool down and rethink the issue, you're more likely to come up with a useful solution. You can also reframe or reconsider what the other person said to you. Rather than assuming he or she was out to hurt you, take some time to reflect back on what happened. The motive you assume to be there might be missing.

Postponing an issue will allow you to gather more information, take a break from the stress, change perspective, refocus, and give you time to come up with new options or to deal with a more important matter first. One technique to make sure the issue isn't simply ignored is to set a date when the issue will be handled. Simply saying, "Not now" won't work. It might be 10 minutes from now or next week, but set a time and stick to it. Give a reason why now is a poor time.

Knowing which issues are most important is key to using the avoiding style effectively. For example, a meeting without clear goals or an agenda could be a waste of time. Skipping that meeting might be the best idea. However, if an issue that's not on the agenda keeps coming up, it's a sure sign it needs to be addressed. Another sign that an issue needs attention is when people are careful NOT to mention something. Usually, that indicates the issue really is important and avoiding no longer works.