The
How
Interaction Styles
is based on observable behavior patterns
that are quite similar to the popular
social styles models and DISC®. Interaction
Styles tells us the "how" of
our behavior. It refers to patterns of
interaction that are both highly contextual
and yet innate. Knowing our interaction
style helps us locate interpersonal conflicts
and situational energy drains. It gives
us a map for greater flexibility in our
interactions with others.
Adapted
from Linda V. Berens, Understanding
Yourself and Others®: An Introduction
to Interaction Styles (Telos Publications,
2001) *Used with permission.
History of the Four
Interaction Styles
Throughout the ages, observers of human
behavior have repeatedly identified patterns
or configurations of behavior. Such holistic
sorting of behavior patterns has been
recorded for at least twenty-five centuries.
Ancient philosophers described four dispositions
called temperamentsa choleric, a
phlegmatic, a melancholic, and a sanguine.
Interpretations of these patterns have
varied over the years, with two distinct
interpretations, one is David Keirseys
temperament theory and the other relates
to the Interaction Style Model.
Most twentieth-century
psychologists abandoned holistic observation
of human behavior for a microscopic examination
of parts, fragments, traits, and so on.
To them, all human beings were basically
alikeand individual differences
were due to chance or conditioningyet
many of them ultimately described patterns
that resemble our holistic view.
The seeds were sown for
the Interaction Style Model in the 1920s.
In 1928, William Marston wrote about the
emotional basis for our behavior. John
Geier built on Marstons work and
developed the DiSC® instrument. Geier
looked at traits and clusters of traits
that would help us understand how we behave
in the social field. Then
came a long string of frameworks and instruments
that described the social styles of people.
These frameworks yielded descriptions
similar to Geiers interpretation
of Marstons work.
Many of these authors
referenced the work of Carl Jung, Isabel
Myers, and Katharine Briggs. Their primary
focus, in contrast to Jung, was on outer
behavior, not inner states. Some even
reference Keirseys temperament theory.
They seemed to not realize they were referencing
separate models.
All of these models suggest
that these styles or types are inborn.
In the meantime, studies continue to be
conducted on the various temperamental
traits that can be identified and tracked
over time with physiological measures.
Many of these traits seem to relate to
the Interaction Styles patterns.
The
Four Interaction Style Patterns
Adapted from Linda
V. Berens, Understanding
Yourself and OthersĘ: An Introduction
to Interaction Styles (Telos Publications,
2001) *Used with permission.
|
Chart-the-Course™
The
theme is having a course of action
to follow. People of this stylefocus
on knowing what to do and keeping
themselves, the group, or the project
on track. They prefer to enter a
situation having an idea of what
is to happen. They identify a process
to accomplish a goal and have a
somewhat contained tension as they
work to create and monitor a plan.
The aim is not the plan itself,
but to use it as a guide to move
things along toward the goal. Their
informed and deliberate decisions
are based on analyzing, outlining,
conceptualizing or foreseeing what
needs to be done.
|
Behind-the-Scenes™
The
theme is getting the best result
possible. People of this style
focus on understanding and working
with the process to create a positive
outcome. They see value in many
contributions and consult outside
inputs to make an informed decision.
They aim to integrate various
information sources and accommodate
differing points of view. They
approach others with a quiet,
calm style that may not show their
strong convictions. Producing,
sustaining, defining, and clarifying
are all ways they support a group's
process. They typically have more
patience than most with the time
it takes to gain support through
consensus for a project or to
refine the result.
|
|
In-Charge™
The
theme is getting things accomplished
through people. People of this style
are focused on results, often taking
action quickly. They often have
a driving energy with an intention
to lead a group to the goal. They
make decisions quickly to keep themselves
and others on task, on target, and
on time. They hate wasting time
and having to back track. Mentoring,
executing actions, supervising,
and mobilizing resources are all
ways they get things accomplished.
They notice right away what is not
working in a situation and become
painfully aware of what needs to
be fixed, healed, or corrected.
|
Get-Things-Going™
The
theme is persuading and involving
others. They thrive in facilitator
or catalyst roles and aim to inspire
others to move to action, facilitating
the process. Their focus is on
interaction, often with an expressive
style. They Get-Things-Going™ with
upbeat energy, enthusiasm, or
excitement, which can be contagious.
Exploring options and possibilities,
making preparations, discovering
new ideas, and sharing insights
are all ways they get people moving
along. They want decisions to
be participative and enthusiastic,
with everyone involved and engaged.
|
Things-in-Common
Adapted from Linda
V. Berens, Understanding
Yourself and OthersĘ: An Introduction
to Interaction Styles (Telos Publications,
2001) *Used with permission.
- Directing versus
Informing communicationsways
we influence others
- Initiating versus
Responding rolesways to
define relationships
- Control versus
Movement focuswhere we
focus our attention when interacting
These dynamics are always
operating in a situation, and if we become
polarized along these dimensions as we
interact with others, miscommunication
and misunderstanding are probable and
likely to result in destructive conflict.
However, we need to remember that we always
have at least one aspect in common with
someone of a different interaction style.
Chart-the-Course™
& In-Charge™ have in common
Directive Communications - Give structure,
direct |
Behind-the-Scenes™
& Get-Things-Going™ have in common
Informing Communications - Evoke,
draw forth, seek input |
In-Charge™
& Get-Things-Going™
have in common
Initating Roles- External World, reach
out, interact |
Chart-the-Course™
& Behind-the-Scenses have in common
Responding Roles-
Internal world, reflect, slow pace |
In-Charge™
& Behind-the-Scenes™
have in common
Control - Focus on control
over the outcome |
Chart-the-Course™
& Get-Things-Going™ have in common
Movement - Focus on movement
toward the goal |
Interaction Styles
and the 16 Personality Types
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
INFJ
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
ISTJ
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
INFP
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
ISFJ
|
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
INTJ
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
ISTP
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
INTP
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
ISFP
|
|
IN-CHARGE™
ENFJ
|
IN-CHARGE™
ESTJ
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
ENFP
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
ESFJ
|
|
IN-CHARGE™
ENTJ
|
IN-CHARGE™
ESTP
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
ENTP
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
ESFP
|
Interaction Styles
and DiSC®
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
" C"
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
" C"
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
" S"
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
" S"
|
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
" C"
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
" C"
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
" S"
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
" S"
|
|
IN-CHARGE™
"
D "
|
IN-CHARGE™
"
D "
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
" i "
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
" i "
|
|
IN-CHARGE™
"
D "
|
IN-CHARGE™
"
D "
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
" i "
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
" i "
|
Interaction Styles
and Social Styles
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
Analytical
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
Analytical
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
Amiable
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
Amiable
|
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
Analytical
|
CHART-THE-
COURSE™
Analytical
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
Amiable
|
BEHIND-THE-
SCENES™
Amiable
|
|
IN-CHARGE™
Driver
|
IN-CHARGE™
Driver
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
Expressive
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
Expressive
|
|
IN-CHARGE™
Driver
|
IN-CHARGE™
Driver
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
Expressive
|
GET-THINGS-
GOING™
Expressive
|
In-Charge, Get-Things-Going, Chart-the-Course, and Behind-the-Scenes are trademarks of Unite Media Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|