Newsletter #7

 

In this issue:

About Myers-Briggs® and Personality Types: Managers in the U.S., Canada, England, and Mexico. Who are they?

Introducing the Strong® College and High School Reports

The FIRO-B™: Team Chemistry, Part I

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode (TKI): What's Wrong with Competing?

 

About Myers-Briggs and Personality Types: Managers in the U.S., Canada, England, and Mexico. Who are they?

People often wonder if they have the ability or personality type to become a manager. As before, the short answer is "yes." All types become managers. It's also true that "birds of a feather flock together," which means there are similarities among those who tend to become managers. In this instance, we'll look at managers from four countries to see how they compare.

Thinkers and Judgers are overrepresented in managers in many countries. You'll see the same is true in the data that follow.

ISTJ

US: 17%

Canada: 21.9

Mexico: 28.9

England: 23.8

 

ISFJ

US: 3.4%

Canada: 2.9

Mexico: 0.3

England: 6.5

 

INFJ

US: 1.9%

Canada: 1.6

Mexico: 0.3

England: 2.4

 

INTJ

US: 10%

Canada: 11.8

Mexico: 8.3

England: 6.5

 

ISTP

US: 3.4%

Canada: 4.6

Mexico: 4.2

England: 4.4

 

ISFP

US: 1.2%

Canada: 1.2

Mexico: 0.1

England: 1.2

 

INFP

US: 2.7%

Canda: 2.4

Mexico: 0.1

England: 3.1

 

INTP

US: 6.6%

Canada: 8.3

Mexico: 3.2

England: 2.9

 

ESTP

US: 3.2%

Canada: 3.9

Mexico: 4.5

England: 3.9

 

ESFP

US: 1.4%

Canada: 1.0

Mexico: 0.3

England: 1.2

 

ENFP

US: 5.1%

Canada: 3.6

Mexico: 0.1

England: 2.9

 

ENTP

US: 8.1%

Canada: 6.7

Mexico: 4.1

England: 4.2

 

ESTJ

US: 15.8%

Canada: 15.5

Mexico: 36.3

England: 20.7

 

ESFJ

US: 3.6%

Canada: 1.9

Mexico: 0.3

England: 5.9

 

ENFJ

US: 3.4%

Canada: 2.5

Mexico: 0.1

England: 1.6

 

ENTJ

US: 13.1%

Canada: 10

Mexico: 9

England: 8.8

 

What do you notice about the numbers? Well, the first thing is the pattern is similar in every country. The high and low numbers seem to be the same types, irrespective of the country. Secondly, managers are mostly Thinkers and Judgers. ISTJs are the largest group in three countries, with only Mexico different with ESTJ as the largest. The smallest group is ISFPs in the U.S. and England (1.2%), while it's ESFPs for Canada (1%), and Mexico has three types at 0.1% of the total.

In no country were Feelers highly represented, with the highest being ISFJs in England at 6.5%. Perceivers are similarly a small part of the total. Canadian INTPs were the largest at 8.3%. Introverts make up 46.2% of American managers, while Mexican managers were 54.7% Extraverts. The English were almost evenly divided at 50.8% Introverts, while Canadians were 54.7% Introverts, the opposite of the Mexican managers.

Again, a key point to remember is all types become managers. If you're an ISFP, you can become a manager. It's likely you will meet few other managers of your type, yet you can still do it. Likewise, if you're an ISTJ, INTJ, ENTJ, or ESTJ, there's no guarantee you'll become a manager, that you'll like it, or you'll be a good manager should you get such a job. It is likely many of the other managers you will meet will be your type. This is particularly interesting for rare types like INTJ and ENTJ who are less likely to meet others of their type.

Another point to remember for those types who are rare in the above list, such as ISFP, ESFP, INFP, and INFJ, is that it's okay if you don't want to manage. This might relieve you of the pressure to take a management position. You might discover it's not for you and that's fine. You don't have to be a manager if you don't want to.

 

Introducing the Strong College and High School Reports

Many of you are familiar with the Strong Interest Inventory. While the Interpretive and Professional reports are often used with working adults, there are other versions created specifically for students: the College and High School Reports.

Both reports use the same basic questions as the other Strong reports. What is different is how the results are compiled and how the information is presented. For example, high school students learn about which summer jobs or school activities might be interesting for them, based on their results. High school students can learn about non-college options for careers that interest them. College students can learn which fields of study, future careers, extracurricular activities, internships, etc. would likely interest them. The Strong is a great aid in choosing a college major for those who cannot decide.

Both student reports include the six-page Snapshot, as do the other Strong reports. Students will get recommendations for specific careers, as well as general directions. They'll also learn which kinds of classes would be most useful, such as hands-on training, group projects, traditional classroom, and more. Both reports include worksheets so students and parents can take the information from the reports and use it to create plan for the future.

 

The FIRO-B: Team Chemistry, Part I

One of the most common uses of the FIRO-B is promoting team work. Since working with other people is the one common element of work teams, the FIRO-B is a great tool to explain why there is friction between two or more people. When you "click," or get along, with another person, it's seems as if work goes smoothly. When things go poorly, it's hard to get anything meaningful accomplished. The FIRO-B can explain why you get along well with some and not with others in your team. Likewise, you can use that information to make team work go more smoothly.

It should be no surprise to learn that two people are more likely to get along well together when the expressed needs of one match the wanted needs of the second person. For example, if one person has an Expressed Affection score of 5, and the second has Wanted Affection score of 5, we have a good match. If all three scales match, you would have a perfect match and likely little difficulty working with the other person. Of course, such a combination may not happen often. In fact, most people find that if they match on two of the three scales, they get along relatively well.

To be more precise, it's unnecessary for the scores for both people to be exact. Usually if they fall in the same range, that's enough. So if one person has a low score on Expressed Control and the other has a low score on Wanted Control, then they will likely get along well in that regard.

When there's a mismatch on the scales, disagreements can result. Logically, when there's a mismatch on the highest total need, disagreement can be most difficult. If your highest Wanted Need is Control, and the other person's lowest need is Expressed Need is Control, the mismatch will be stronger. Likewise, if the mismatch occurs on your lowest total need, the disagreements will probably be less daunting.

 

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode (TKI): What's Wrong with Competing?

As in past issues, we'll be discussing the potential downside to use the competing style to resolve conflict.

Competing has advantages that are of great benefit in certain circumstances. For example, it helps when another person is attempting to take advantage of you, when you need to test assumptions, and when it's important to assert your position. However, where there is light, there is shadow. We'll discuss the less positive aspects of competing now.

Perhaps the biggest disadvantage to competing is the significant negative effect it can have on relationships. Many people are sensitive to competing behavior and can form negative opinions about competitive people. Many will feel as if they were taken advantage of, coerced into accepting a decision, or as if their position was not heard, respected, or considered. If this were to occur several times in a short period of time, it's probable the other person would no longer continue to negotiate on points. He or she would likely avoid the situation as much as possible.

Another problem with competing is the solution you reach might not be the best for all concerned. In competing, a person attempts to get his or her needs satisfied at the cost of others. Few people will accept being at the losing end of negotiations for long. They might resort to competing behavior themselves, or the solution you reach together will leave everyone dissatisfied. People will withhold useful or needed information if they feel they have no opportunity to participate or won't be heard.

Motivation and initiative can suffer in an organization or group where competing is the most common or frequent conflict style. As mentioned, many people dislike the competitive style, so they will withdraw and refuse to participate when that style is used. If the decision is going to be imposed on them, why should they care or contribute? They'll soon recognize it's not worth the effort.

Finally, if competing doesn't work, many people are tempted to escalate their tactics, including using threats, physical force, hostile words and actions and more. Once again, no one responds positively to such measures. Resistance will surely increase. All aspects of the relationship will suffer. If you make threats that lack credibility, you'll lose respect and authority. In sum, your negotiations might deadlock and you'll get exactly what you wanted to avoid.