an be achieved.

For instance, in one company most of the employees were sales people – highly motivated and very personable. Everyone worked and got on well together – except that the others found Joe, the warehouseman, slow and difficult to relate to. Personality profiling showed that the salespeople were High D/I people, whereas Joe was High C/S. But armed with this knowledge the profiler asked the salespeople how often their orders were delivered incorrectly. The answer was ‘Almost never’ – at which point Joe’s

At work, and in many out-of-work scenarios, most people need to work as part of a team at some time or another. Sometimes you may wonder just what makes another team-member tick. They probably wonder just the same about you! With personality profiling you can discover how to ensure that Together Everyone Achieves More. Before looking into the relevance of profiling in teams, first a little background.

Introduction

People are different – but they are predictably different. A personality profile helps predict how someone will react in a given situation, helping you understand what motivates them – and what they’re trying to avoid. And they can understand you too. In his book “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”, Dr Stephen Covey said: “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.”

In 1926 Dr William Marston, an expert in behavioural understanding and the inventor of the polygraph (lie-detector), devised a system to understand people’s personality styles. In his book “The Emotions of Normal People” he grouped people according to their active or passive tendencies, dependent upon their view of the environment. The main styles identified are:

D – Drive – “My Way” (3% of the population)
I – Influence – “The Fun Way” (12% of the population)
C – Compliance – “The Right Way” (16% of the population)
S – Steadiness – “The Safe Way” (69% of the population)

Of course there aren’t just four styles, as everyone exhibits different levels of each of the four, resulting in an almost infinite number of combinations of the main styles. In fact a profile that showed someone as all one style would be extremely suspect. Your style, for instance, may be a combination of ‘High D’, ‘Medium I’, ‘Fairly C’ and ‘Low S’. No style is inherently ‘Good’ or ‘Bad’, all have positive features.

The aim of profiling is to identify and play to your strengths, while utilising the self-awareness of possible weaknesses. If you choose to share this knowledge with others in the team, and they’re willing for you to study their profiles, real synergy can be achieved.

For instance, in one company most of the employees were sales people – highly motivated and very personable. Everyone worked and got on well together – except that the others found Joe, the warehouseman, slow and difficult to relate to. Personality profiling showed that the salespeople were High D/I people, whereas Joe was High C/S. But armed with this knowledge the profiler asked the salespeople how often their orders were delivered incorrectly. The answer was ‘Almost never’ – at which point Joe’s s

ow someone will react in a given situation, helping you understand what motivates them – and what they’re trying to avoid. And they can understand you too. In his book “The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”, Dr Stephen Covey said: “Seek first to understand, then to be understood.”

In 1926 Dr William Marston, an expert in behavioural understanding and the inventor of the polygraph (lie-detector), devised a system to understand people’s personality styles. In his book “The Emotions of Normal People” he grouped people according to their active or passive tendencies, dependent upon their view of the environment. The main styles identified are:

D – Drive – “My Way” (3% of the population)
I – Influence – “The Fun Way” (12% of the population)
C – Compliance – “The Right Way” (16% of the population)
S – Steadiness – “The Safe Way” (69% of the population)

Of course there aren’t just four styles, as everyone exhibits different levels of each of the four, resulting in an almost infinite number of combinations of the main styles. In fact a profile that showed someone as all one style would be extremely suspect. Your style, for instance, may be a combination of ‘High D’, ‘Medium I’, ‘Fairly C’ and ‘Low S’. No style is inherently ‘Good’ or ‘Bad’, all have positive features.

The aim of profiling is to identify and play to your strengths, while utilising the self-awareness of possible weaknesses. If you choose to share this knowledge with others in the team, and they’re willing for you to study their profiles, real synergy can be achieved.

For instance, in one company most of the employees were sales people – highly motivated and very personable. Everyone worked and got on well together – except that the others found Joe, the warehouseman, slow and difficult to relate to. Personality profiling showed that the salespeople were High D/I people, whereas Joe was High C/S. But armed with this knowledge the profiler asked the salespeople how often their orders were delivered incorrectly. The answer was ‘Almost never’ – at which point Joe’s

people according to their active or passive tendencies, dependent upon their view of the environment. The main styles identified are:

D – Drive – “My Way” (3% of the population)
I – Influence – “The Fun Way” (12% of the population)
C – Compliance – “The Right Way” (16% of the population)
S – Steadiness – “The Safe Way” (69% of the population)

Of course there aren’t just four styles, as everyone exhibits different levels of each of the four, resulting in an almost infinite number of combinations of the main styles. In fact a profile that showed someone as all one style would be extremely suspect. Your style, for instance, may be a combination of ‘High D’, ‘Medium I’, ‘Fairly C’ and ‘Low S’. No style is inherently ‘Good’ or ‘Bad’, all have positive features.

The aim of profiling is to identify and play to your strengths, while utilising the self-awareness of possible weaknesses. If you choose to share this knowledge with others in the team, and they’re willing for you to study their profiles, real synergy can be achieved.

For instance, in one company most of the employees were sales people – highly motivated and very personable. Everyone worked and got on well together – except that the others found Joe, the warehouseman, slow and difficult to relate to. Personality profiling showed that the salespeople were High D/I people, whereas Joe was High C/S. But armed with this knowledge the profiler asked the salespeople how often their orders were delivered incorrectly. The answer was ‘Almost never’ – at which point Joe’s

of the main styles. In fact a profile that showed someone as all one style would be extremely suspect. Your style, for instance, may be a combination of ‘High D’, ‘Medium I’, ‘Fairly C’ and ‘Low S’. No style is inherently ‘Good’ or ‘Bad’, all have positive features.

The aim of profiling is to identify and play to your strengths, while utilising the self-awareness of possible weaknesses. If you choose to share this knowledge with others in the team, and they’re willing for you to study their profiles, real synergy can be achieved.

For instance, in one company most of the employees were sales people – highly motivated and very personable. Everyone worked and got on well together – except that the others found Joe, the warehouseman, slow and difficult to relate to. Personality profiling showed that the salespeople were High D/I people, whereas Joe was High C/S. But armed with this knowledge the profiler asked the salespeople how often their orders were delivered incorrectly. The answer was ‘Almost never’ – at which point Joe’s

an be achieved.

For instance, in one company most of the employees were sales people – highly motivated and very personable. Everyone worked and got on well together – except that the others found Joe, the warehouseman, slow and difficult to relate to. Personality profiling showed that the salespeople were High D/I people, whereas Joe was High C/S. But armed with this knowledge the profiler asked the salespeople how often their orders were delivered incorrectly. The answer was ‘Almost never’ – at which point Joe’s slow, careful approach could be seen as a virtue and a real asset to the organisation.

Despite taking just seven minutes to complete, the personality profile derived from the combination of the different levels of each style gives an amazingly accurate profile of the subject in:

How they think of themselves;
How others see them;
How they act under stress;
Their communication preference;
Greatest fears;
Greatest motivators.

What is your boss’s profile? If you are the boss, what are the profiles of your subordinates? Reading their reports, with their permission, could give you a new insight into their character traits and help staff retention. Sickness at work and replacing unhappy or underperforming staff has a negative impact on profitability. Personality profiling is a low cost way to surround yourself with a synergistic group of people, performing at their best.

Knowing your own preferred style, and that of others in the team, can go a long way towards creating an environment in which Dr Covey’s recommendation to “Think Win/Win” can flourish.

1. Let’s get it right from the beginning. Recruiting staff is expensive in time and money. Personality profiling is a cost-effective way to maximise the chances of finding the right person first time. Sample interview questions are included.

2. When someone is unsure of themselves in a new environment their pattern will change in a particular way, so the profile can be used to check how someone is settling into a new role, and whether they need further support.

3. We saw, in the case of Joe, how each team-member can be valued for their specific qualities. Knowledge of individuals’ preferred style means that responsibilities can be shared in a way that best utilises talents, instead of putting round pegs into square holes.

4. When you understand a team-mate’s greatest fears, this may explain many things that remain unsaid. For instance a High C hates conflict, so their High D co-worker would be better suited to complaining about poor service from a supplie