March 4
Personality Diversity, Communication, and Values
Topics: Why personality diversity is your (and your employer's) hidden asset. The five major ways that normal people differ. Identifying your unique personality. Why opposites attract... and then sometimes wish they hadn't. How personality factors influence styles of communication (the Interpersonal Circumplex model) and personal priorities and values (the Schwartz Value Wheel).
It's a given that humans differ, and all of us pay lip service to the notion that differences are valuable. Yet most of us also tend, at a more subliminal level, to view ourselves as benchmarks of normality. We can readily relate to those who are similar to us, but find those markedly different from us to be alienating (even if, perhaps, simultaneously fascinating) and confusing.
Yet, personality diversity is an organizational asset, not a liability, if properly managed. Studies of team effectiveness consistently indicate that, when asked to solve complex problems, diverse teams outperform homogeneous teams, and the more so as the problems become more complex. Why? Because others have perspectives and insights you lack. (They aren't necessarily smarter than you are, but they are stupid in different ways.) Of course, the phrase "if properly managed" is an important one; badly managed personality diversity can lead to turf wars or to an "us vs. them" mentality. On that, more later.
The purpose of this unit is to provide a systematic means by which normal (that is, nonclinical) differences in human personality can be compared and contrasted, and to discuss some real-world implications of those differences.
The Big Five
Let's begin with a look at the currently most influential model of personality diversity, the so-called Big Five model of personality. This model suggests that there are five basic ways that humans differ from one another. The five dimensions are seen as (largely, if not completely) independent of one another. While the dimensions are continuous (most people fall somewhere in the middle of a normally distribution of scores), we can think of them in terms of pairs of contrasting opposites as long as we don't take that too literally.
Dimension I: Extraversion (your Expressive Style)
This dimension addresses a person's preference for sociability and interactivity (high Extraversion, or E+) versus solitude and privacy (low Extraversion, or E-). E+ types tend to be quick to self-disclose, to process information out loud, to seek high levels of activity (to be outwardly busy), and to seek generalist work roles. E- types tend to be slow to self-disclosure (or selective about self-disclosure), to process information inwardly, to seek low levels of activity (to be inwardly busy), and to seek specialist work roles.
Dimension II: Openness (your Intellectual Style)
This dimension addresses a person's preference for abstract ideas and possibilities (high Openness, or O+) versus concrete realities and facts (low Openness, or O-). O+ types focus on thinking about the world as it might be, are more theory-driven, and tend to focus on the possibility or opportunity side of change (which, depending on their core values, may make them more "liberal"). O- types focus on acting in the world as it is now, are more application- or practice-driven, and tend to focus on the threat or risk side of change (which, depending on their core values, may make them more "conservative"). Under stress, O+ types tend to obsess, O- types to catastrophize. When solving problems, O+ types habitually try to widen or broaden the question (ask the biggest possible question first), while O- types habitually try to narrow the question (ask the smallest possible question first). To some extent, O+ types are more nonlinear, O- types more linear, in thought processes and learning styles.
Dimension III: Agreeableness (your Relational Style)
This dimension measures cooperative (high Agreeableness or A+) versus competitive (low Agreeableness or A-) approaches to interactions with others. A+ types usually describe themselves as empathic, sensitive, harmony-seeking; they like tasks and situations in which "everyone wins". A- types usually describe themselves as impersonal, analytical, outcome-driven; they like tasks and situations in which there are clear winners and losers. Correlated to the above, A+ types tend to decide subjectively ("with the heart") on the basis of personal values (but may find it hard to see the dark side of something they value, or may overidealize valued persons and situations), while A- types tend to decide objectively ("with the head") on the basis of impersonal logic (but may fail to factor in subjective or emotional considerations, or may strike others as too cold-bloodedly analytical).
Dimension IV: Conscientiousness (your Work Style)
This dimension measures convergent, task oriented (high Conscientiousness or C+) versus divergent, process oriented (low Conscientiousness or C-) work styles. C+ types usually describe themselves as organized, structured, systematic, early starters with steady work habits; they lose efficiency in low structure situations (needing stability), and usually adopt a "work first, play later," serious minded stance to life. C- types usually describe themselves as spontaneous, flexible, adaptable, "feast or famine" workers who rely on bursts of enthusiasm or energy; they lose efficiency in high structure situations (needing autonomy), and usually adopt a "mix work and play", fun loving stance to life. (Note: all of us can be both serious minded and fun loving; but C+ types tend to keep the humor inside, C- types to keep the seriousness inside. This dimension measures what shows on the outside, which is not always the most important aspect of the person.) C+ types tend to focus heavily on image management (how they look to others), while C- types tend to neglect or ignore such considerations. C+ types can easily be too rigid or inflexible, while C- types can struggle with disorganization or procrastination.
Dimension V: Negative Emotionality (your Stress Management Style)
This dimension measures characteristic responses to stress. (It does not measure anxiety proneness in a clinical sense; both poles are normal personality variants.) High Negative Emotionality or N+ types are more emotionally labile (have a wider emotional range or more mood swings), experience and express anxiety directly (verbally), and tend to be more prone to such mood states as worry, self-doubt, and guilt. Low Negative Emotionality or N- types are more emotionally stable (have a narrower emotional range or fewer mood swings), experience and express anxiety indirectly (they engage in "anxiety binding" or the "somatization" of anxiety), and tend to be less prone to negative mood states. While our culture probably values N- over N+, it should be stated clearly that N+ is not only a normal variant but can be an adaptive one (it is, among other things, arguably more authentic, can lead to greater levels of compassion for fellow strugglers, and so forth).
Implications
The Big Five is not an either-or model. Most people's scores on any of the dimensions above is moderate. We might use the = sign to indicate moderate scores (for instance, an E= person is neither strongly extraverted nor strongly introverted but is an "ambivert" whose responses may be more situationally determined).
Can you rate yourself on the five dimensions above? Of course, these are subjective ratings. Many formal psychological assessment tools are based on the Big Five model. In class, attendees will be given an opportunity to complete a brief personality inventory based on the Big Five model and to receive information about the behavioral implications of their personality preferences.
Different cultures value different Big Five patterns. Overall, American culture probably values the E+ O+ A+ C+ N- pattern most highly (though one could debate the O+ and A+, since most CEO's and business leaders are A- and perhaps O-).
Longitudinal studies indicate that, with increasing age, most people become measurably more E-, O-, A+, C+, and N- over time... not enough to change the basic structure of their personality (which may be genetic in origin), but enough to reach statistical significance.
In relationships, opposites probably attract early on (because the other person is strong where you are weak), yet these same differences can become sources of chronic conflict in the long run (because changes you think of as "easy" or "natural" are very difficult for a person of the opposite temperament). Managing this fact is a key to success in any relationship.
Implications for Communication
Each of us can be thought of as having a default mode of communicating and relating to others. Where you fall on the Big Five dimensions largely determines your default mode. Let's consider implications of each of the dimensions, then look at two influential models of how the dimensions interact to produce real-world behavior in the workplace.
How Extraversion influences communication
Because E+ types "think out loud" and E- types "think inside their own head", conflicts can center around the timing of discussions and the means by which discussions are held. E+ types like to talk things out openly, directly, and immediately, because they form their ideas in the process of interaction (may not know what they think until they say it). But E- types like to ponder things privately first until they have clarified their own thoughts, and then and only then share with others, often sharing only those parts they think are relevant (oftentimes, this means sharing the conclusion but not the process or the intervening steps that led to that conclusion). Under stress, E+ types turn up the volume; but this is threatening to E- types, who want to withdraw or turn the volume down. E- types like indirect forms of communication like email, but E+ types tend to think of that as "not real communication". In contrast, E+ types are drawn to face-to-face meetings, which E- types often find boring, demotivating, inefficient, or worse.
How Openness influences communication
The nonlinearity, top-down style of thinking, and metaphorical or approximate style of the O+ person can clash markedly with the linear, bottom-up, and factual or precise style of the O- person. It's easy for O+ types, looking at their O- colleagues, to think "stick in the mud, tunnel vision, can't see the forest for the trees, change-averse, reactionary, sluggish", while the O- types see their O+ co-workers as "blue-sky theorists, impractical, unrealistic, theory junkies, full of crazy ideas, absent-minded professors". While neither stereotype is helpful, both are common. (A more useful approach is for O- types to help O+ types to become grounded in practical reality, while O+ types help O- types to stretch their ideas and to think outside the box.) O+ types often feel that O- types take too long to get to the point (because they won't skip any details), while O- types often find the "chase the rabbit where it runs", "Kenner Close-N-Play" style of the O+ uninterpretable if not a little crazy.
How Agreeableness influences communication
Because A+ types are motivated by harmony, they find it hard to deliver bad news (usually sugar-coating it very highly, or avoiding conflict-laden situations altogether); they like and need to agree, to get along, to build bridges of connection. Hence, when an A+ type appears to agree, it may mean that s/he really does agree, or may mean instead that s/he does not want to openly disagree. A- types, on the other hand, being motivated by competition and competence, can find it hard to deliver good news (such as praise, affirmation, appreciation, a pat on the back), finding such activities redundant at best, uncomfortable or even repellent at worst. A- types tend to be blunt and direct, but sometimes they are adversarial, not because they really disagree, but because this seems the best way to ferret out the best ideas (whoever "wins" the discussion must be right). Hence, A+ types can easily get their feelings hurt, while A- types become mystified about why they are seen as uncaring and insensitive.
How Conscientiousness influences communication
In their search for closure, C+ types often rush to a conclusion (or push others to do so); it seems as if "the clock is always ticking", and they want others to "get to the point" as they do themselves. Often this means that the C+ type sounds more sure than s/he really is, because words of certainty or closure (yes, no, will, won't, should, shouldn't) figure so heavily in their speech patterns. A C+ type may make such a firm statement as an opening gambit, and then be very surprised when C- colleagues mistakenly think this means that the discussion is over. C+ types can also sound judgmental of others, as when they "should all over" other people. C- types, in their search for options, often delay a conclusion (or drag their feet when others are trying to close); it seems as if they "always need more time", and they want others to allow processes to take the time they inherently need to take. (An old counseling saying, "You don't push the river; the river carries you," was undoubtedly first coined by a C- type, which most counselors happen to be.) Often this means that the C- type sounds less sure than s/he really is, because words of flexibility or adaptability (might, maybe, could, why don't we, what about, do you think) figure so heavily in their speech patterns. Often C- types answer a question with a question or with an observation. (C+ husband: "Do you want some peaches?" C- wife: "Well, we haven't had peaches in a long time." This is a C- way of saying that she wants the peaches, but the husband may easily miss it.)
How Negative Emotionality influences communication
N+ types are open about their anxieties (which makes them look panicky), while N- types cloak their anxieties (from themselves as much as from others, which makes them look unrealistically stoic). Communication breakdowns are often based along these lines. "Now, now, let's not lose our heads" is a N- comment (usually made by someone who is also A-), and it tends to infuriate the N+ recipient of the comment (especially if that person is also A+).
The Big Five and interpersonal relationships
A contemporary approach that attempts to link the Big Five to interpersonal relationship patterns (as well as to gender roles and gender differences) is the so-called interpersonal circumplex model.
If we make the Big Five dimension of Agreeableness the X-axis or horizontal axis on a Cartesian coordinate plot, and make Extraversion the Y-axis or vertical axis, then the space defined by these two axes (with the population average on both dimensions defining the midpoint) can be styled the "interpersonal circumplex", because in the minds of many communication theorists, these two dimensions in combination largely determine how you relate to, communicate with, and interact with others. (In fact, the model is also called a circumplex because it is said to have some complex statistical properties that I won't bother you with here.)
For instance, those most likely to be seen by others as "warm" are E+ A+ types, who have both an outgoing and a cooperative nature. Those most likely to be seen as "cold" (but who may not be bothered by that designator) are E- A- types, who have both a reserved and a competitive nature.
Those most likely to be seen by others as dominant (as "leaders" in a conventional sense) are E+ A- types, who are outgoing yet competitive. Those most likely to be seen as submissive or "followers" are E- A+ types, with their combination of reserve and cooperation.
Using this approach, we can define two dimensions: agency (effectiveness in the outer or objective world) as being mostly a matter of self-assertion or an outward focus (E+), and communion (effectiveness in the inner or subjective world) as being mostly a matter of relationality or an emotive focus (A+). In our culture, traditional gender roles (which don't always reflect reality, of course) dictate that men should "specialize" in agency, women in communion. This leads, in the work of gender theorist Sandra Bem, into four sex role types or quadrants:
Androgynous = E+ A+ (agentic and communal)
Traditionally masculine = E+ A- (agentic but not communal)
Traditionally feminine = E- A+ (communal but not agentic)
Undifferentiated = E- A- (neither agentic nor communal)
Advantages of this model include links to the world of clinical psychology, the notion being that pathological extremes in any direction begin to look like subclinical disorders. (Extreme E+ A+ types tend to develop histrionic-narcissistic personality disorders; extreme E+ A- types, antisocial-sadistic disorders; extreme E- A+ types, avoidant-dependent disorders; extreme E- A- types, schizoid-schizotypal disorders. If you're not up on the meaning of these clinical terms, don't sweat it.) The fact that men and women have differing pathologies, and that they at least stereotypically manage conflict differently, is explained in part by this fact.
The Big Five and values
The so-called Schwartz value wheel is one attempt to use Big Five ideas to classify or categorize human values.
In an extensive cross-cultural study of values, Schwartz (1992) surveyed thousands of primary and secondary school teachers in 20 countries. (He chose teachers in part because their job is to be conveyors of cultural values to students.) He used a correlational method to identify clusters of similar values. Based on a comprehensive statistical analysis of the correlational results, he found that value similarities and differences can largely be explained on the basis of two orthogonal dimensions, yielding a value circumplex. The two dimensions are:
Although Schwartz' work shows no direct evidence of being influenced by the Big Five model, what his research suggests is that values are driven by two of the Big Five dimensions. The first dimension above largely corresponds to Agreeableness (self-enhancement is like A-, self-transcendence is like A+), while the second obviously corresponds to Openness (change is like O+, conservation like O-).
Here are sample values that fit in each quadrant of Schwartz's model. The model doesn't imply that people of a given personality type are only driven by values in "their quadrant", but it does suggest that these should, all things being equal, be primary values for a person of that type:
Interestingly, cultural differences in the prevalence of different values makes good theoretical sense as well. More individualistic cultures tend to emphasize O+ A- values more, while more collectivist or communitarian cultures tend to emphasize O- A+ values more. Within our own culture, we can perhaps (?) associate O+ with liberalism and O- with conservativism in a political sense, and with less certainty, might expect correlational relationships between A- and secularism, A+ and religious faith.
What does this mean, by the way, for counselors and others who work in people-helping roles? In general, it means that:
The moral?