“That’s why Baskin Robbins has thirty-one flavors of ice cream.”

That was how my friend Brad explained that “people are different” to his six-year-old daughter.

We’ve always known people are different and we humans have been trying to analyze and categorize those differences for a long time.

History of categories of people differences

In 500 B.C.E. Alcmaeon of Croton theorized that differences were due to humors, bodily fluids: blood, water, choler / bile, or phlegm. In 500 BCE Hippocrates – the father of medicine –  calculated ratios of humors, wrote them down and popularized the theory.

This paradigm held power until the 19th century and we still have these words in the English language: sanguine (too much blood, overly warm and optimistic), melancholy (too much water, tears and sadness), choleric / bilious (too much choler or bile – bad tempered, nasty), phlegmatic (too much phlegm, stuffy, stolid, unemotional).

Wilhelm Wundt and William James pretty much invented psychology in the late 19th century, both saying that differences in the human mind explained differences in people.  Wundt, a structuralist, said differences were in the brain and body best studied through  an “Inside to outside” science. James, a functionalist, believed studying behavioral function from the “outside to inside” analysis would yield better results.. Both structuralists and functionalists were concerned with the conscious mind..

Sigmund Freud dwelled upon the unconscious,  basic drives affecting behavior like sex drive and the fear of death, which were common to all people.  He theorized that differences were caused by these drives and the degree to which socialization (super ego) constrained them.

Carl Gustav Jung hypothesized a collective unconscious containing archetypes which guided all people. He also identified two mental functions.

• taking in information
• making decisions

Jung implied that differences in these might be inherited.

BF Skinner ushered in Behaviorism, which says that all behavior is determined by experience.  Most of Skinner’s experimentation was conducted with rats in mazes – probably the best analogy for contemporary organization life.

Despite rich experimentation in psychology, early management theory seemed to assume that all people were the same and that motivation was delivered by a method used with mules, a “carrot” dangled in front of the nose and a “stick” applied to the rear end.

We came a long way in management theory in the late twentieth century, although too many are stuck in the “muleskinner mindset” of performance management. “Carrot and stick” still rules.

Psychometrics used by companies

Some companies use the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) test to select and sort workers despite the fact that it is culturally biased and measures language, deductive analysis and spatial problem solving not general intelligence.

Some companies use personality tests, Caliper, 16pf, California Personality Assessment, etc. These tests typically measure extroversion, emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to new experience.

Some use IQ tests and personality tests without the input or interpretation of psychologists trained to administer them.

Tests that show differences between people are a cottage industry. I’m going to highlight four, which I think have some value: Meyers Briggs Type Inventory (MBTI), Life Orientations (LIFO), DISC assessment personality profile, Clifton StrengthsFinder by Gallup.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

Carl Jung theorized two conscious brain functions, perceiving or taking in information, and judging, making decisions on that information. Katherine Briggs studied with Jung.  She later expanded the Jungian concept of cognitive function and added research on (internal or external focus) and lifestyle (do you prefer taking in information or deciding and acting.)

In 1954 her daughter Isabel Briggs-Myers codified this work into the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,  Each of the functions/ or orientations is a continuum between two different preferences.

The word preference is key. It is like right or left handedness. Some people have such a strong hand preference that their non-dominant hand is quite limited. Some people are ambidextrous.

The four continua are each defined by two poles representing extreme answers to questions:

Where do you get energized?
I – internally – world of concepts and ideas Introvert–	E – externally – world of people and places -=Extravert
How do you prefer to take in information?
S– facts confirmed by the senses step by step Sensing —	N – connections, associations – skip around   — Intuiting
How do you make decisions?
T – logical ordered process, +/- charts	F – comparing impact on people and values
Thinking- –	Feeling
How do you prefer to live your life?
J-deciding and acting in a planned way Judging—	P- earning and experiencing as it comes Perceiving

This taxonomy produces sixteen personality types, with strength of preference,. For example, I am an ENTP, but I am only marginally an E and P, and at the top of the scale on N and considerably above the mid-point on T

I used the MBTI more than any psychometric assessment in my consulting with leadership teams.. It is well researched and documented as to statistical validity and the reliability of individual questions. Critics say the theory was created from thin air.  Perhaps, but it rings true.

What I like about MBTI  is that absorbing information and making decisions are critical to business and being aware of differences avoids misunderstanding and unproductive conflict.

I also like that the instrument doesn’t portray introverts as shy, broken people. Introverts relate and converse just like extraverts, they just get more energized by thinking and reflecting.

Life Orientation (LIFO)

The LIFO assessment was created in 1967 by Drs. Stuart Atkins and Allan Katcher based upon the psychological research of Erich Fromm, Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. I was introduced to LIFO at Gemini Consulting induction training and we used it with client team.

The LIFO instrument places your life orientation among four categories:

• Supporting – Giving – people who strive to include others, be helpful, and fair
• Controlling -Taking – people who strive for competence, results, direct action
• Adapting – Dealing – people who strive for harmony, know people, are flexible
• Conserving – Holding – people who strive for the right answer, are analytical , slow but sure

The report shows your primary mode and a fall back perhaps if under stress. For example, my profile is supporting-giving primary and adapting-dealing secondary. However, my controlling/taking score it is close to in normal and stress mode.

DISC Assessment Personality Profile

The DISC assessment was created in 1956 by industrial psychologist Walter Clarke, based upon the 1928 research and theory of William Moulton Marston.

The report places you in four categories with a percentage score:

• Dominance – Directing -people who use force to overcome resistance
• Inducement – Influencing -people who use charm to overcome resistance
• Submission -Steady – people who accept and accommodate resistance
• Compliance – Cautious – people who carefully follow directions to overcome resistance

DISC theory concerns managing environment and so is context dependent. There are only  four categories. My DIS scores are within one percentage point, making interpretation difficult and strengths and weaknesses difficult to determine..

Clifton StrengthsFinder by Gallup (CSF)

The Clifton Strengths Finder was created in 2001 after much research by Donald O. Clifton at the University of Nebraska. Clifton’s intention was to study the personality traits of  the “best of the best” so that companies could hire according to those strengths. The Gallup Organization, known as a pollster, but having deep survey data expertise, acquired Clifton’s company Selection Research Inc and together they created the Clifton StrengthsFinder.

The CSF has been widely adopted by the coaching industry. Building upon your strengths to overcome your weaknesses is a positive approach. The current version has 177 paired comparison questions over 34 strength domains.

The report urges the respondent  to pay most attention to the top five identified strengths. My top five strengths (Learner, Empathy, Achiever, Strategic, and Communication) aligned with my perception, but that shouldn’t be surprising as I answered the questionnaire.

Issues with psychometric personality assessment

Theory base, reliability and validity

Critics of these and other psychometric personality assessment often focus on the origins of theory or the statistical reliability and validity studies of the instrument. It is true that many of the theory origins are subjective and some instruments are better tested for reliability and validity than others, but there are other issues.

Subjectivity

All are self-report questionnaire data, that is my perception of myself. Therefore the answers are inherently subjective and prone to cognitive biases like finding what you expect and rater bias. Some start in the middle and never move more than one point; some use the entire scale, but are skewed to one side or the other, which makes comparing results  problematic…

Non-predictive results

\Some companies use such instruments to hire, staff teams, promote and sometimes fire people who “don’t fit.” The results of these tests by themselves do not produce the objective predictive data to justify those decisions beyond a reasonable doubt.

Best Uses for personality assessment

Personal development

A good use of these instruments is to learn about yourself. Will you only learn what you already know?. Maybe, but treat results as a starting point. For another view, talk with others about them – a significant other, friend, teammate,  coach, or your boss.

For example, I score myself particularly low on LIFO Conserving – Holding  and DISC Compliance – Caution a fact that my wife says doesn’t ring true especially on my “cheap” days.

Team formation

I wouldn’t use these instruments to select members for a team; that should be based on capabilities and connections.  However, comparing and discussing  results can help a team for a working approach that  respects differences and capitalizes on strengths.

What about career planning?

Could knowledge of one’s strengths cause us to pitch a job? Yes. Could an MBTI type or a DISC or LIFO profile guide you in what jobs to seek. Yes, but interest, skill base, and opportunity might be more important.

What to do about differences between people

In ancient Greece the Oracle at Delphi was a kind of psychometric testing and leadership coaching center. To help the leaders who came from far and wide to ask her advice the Oracle had a measurement system, (animal entrails divination), and a theory base, (147 maxims of the Oracle). She also had a contractual disclaimer in three maxims enshrined on the entrance, which are not bad advice for those evaluating themselves and the differences between people.:

• Know thyself – get the opinions of others in addition to self-report.
• Nothing in excess – don’t overuse assessments, pigeonholing people.
• Surety brings ruin – allow for change of circumstance, personal growth, and adapt. People will always surprise you.

Brad’s daughter has now graduated from university, but I used his Baskin Robbins “people are different” analogy with my six-year-old granddaughter. She said “I know, it would be a very boring world if we were all the same.”

Yes, it would.