Tag:

Thinking

Mind Like a Steel Trap

by Ron Potter March 16, 2023

Steel

I visited my chiropractor the other day and he had a new young assistant who checked me in. As this young man was checking me in on the computer, I patted him on the shoulder as I passed him on my way to a chair. Wow! This kid’s shoulders felt like steel to me. I asked him if he was still in college and if he participated in sports. He was indeed enrolled in a nearby college and he said he was on the track team. I said, “Wow, you’re a runner?” He said no he didn’t run but he threw things: the shot and the hammer. It came clear. Those shoulders that felt like steel came from the fact that he threw very heavy things. In this case, feeling like steel was a good thing.

I’m not very attracted by the images, but when you see bodybuilders, they often look like they’re cut from a block of steel or granite. The image of Arnold Schwarzenegger when he was in his body-building days comes to mind. However, I’ve heard Arnold and other bodybuilders say that even though they work hard at building their bodies, they lose a lot of flexibility in the process. I think steel can be good, but the loss of flexibility is not.

You may have heard the old statement having a mind like a steel trap—or maybe it’s just a saying that us old engineers are familiar with. The idea is self-explanatory of course. You grasp an idea and your mind closes on it like a steel trap and won’t let go.

That’s a good thing if you’re setting up a trap to catch wild animals. It may not be the best approach when it comes to ideas.

Flexible Thinking

An article that Shane Parish wrote in his Farnam Steet blog caught my eye. His opening statement is “The less rigid we are in our thinking, the more open minded, creative and innovative we become.”

Shane has several quotes from a book written by Leonard Mlodinow. Shane’s opening paragraph says this about Mlodinow’s book: “Elastic: Flexible Thinking in a Constantly Changing World confirms that the speed of technological and cultural development is requiring us to embrace types of thinking besides the rational, logical style of analysis that tends to be emphasized on our society.”

I received a wonderful email from my grandson who is currently living halfway around the world with his parents. He said, “I look up to your logical thinking.” I certainly took that as a compliment from him but wasn’t sure it was the best thing to be known for in an ever-changing world. Shane, in his comments, says, “We need to accept that analytic thinking—generally described as the application of systematic, logical analysis—has limitations.” He goes on to say, “Although incredibly useful in a variety of daily situations, analytical thinking may not be best for solving problems whose answers require new ways of doing things.”

Experts Sometimes Know Too Much

In my years as a consultant to CEOs and their teams around the world, I would often observe a dynamic that fascinated me. Many people on the leadership team were outstanding on a particular topic. On that particular topic, they had a mind like a steel trap. However, there were many times when the team was stuck on a particular issue and couldn’t seem to come up with an answer outside of their expertise. But, on those occasions when there was a young (less expert) member of the team, they seemed to ask a question about their current dilemma that the “experts” had not thought of. In fact, they might often start their question with some qualifier like, “I don’t really know what I’m talking about here but I’ve just been thinking that it might be a good idea to explore ‘such and such.'”

I would often watch the team of “experts” go completely silent until one of them would acknowledge that they hadn’t really thought about it that way before. They were soon talking non-stop about how that opened them to a whole new way to think about their dilemma. Flexibility, not rigid “steel” thinking, had them coming up with new approaches.

“Flexible thinking” is required to work our way through our ever-changing world. Without it, we are just stuck and will quickly be left behind.

For next week’s blog I’m writing on a topic that really scares me. It scares me for personal reasons. It scares me to think about what my grandchildren will be facing in the world as they mature. It scares me for the human race in general. I’ve not yet figured out how to deal with the topic and not be afraid, but I and others must do it.

0 comment

Myers Briggs Type Indicator: Deciding

by Ron Potter April 1, 2021

There are a couple of problematic issues with this preference pair. One of the issues is the title of this preference. For years it was titled “Judging” but the wise people at Consulting Psychologists Press (CPP.Inc) who own the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) changed it to “Deciding” a few years ago. I think this is a better description.

The other problematic issue with this particular scale is that one end is defined as “Thinking” while the other end is described as “Feeling” (T vs. F). Business teams in particular revolt at the use of feelings. They’ll say things like they don’t let their emotions or feelings get in the way of making logical decisions. But this is your Deciding Function! You will either make balanced or unbalanced decisions. Make balanced decisions, both thinking and feeling. Those will be better decisions.

Thinking – Positive and Negative

A thinking preference can be very positive when it comes to decision making. The thinking preference tends to be very logical, objective, and can be firm but fair. In addition, they will often hold justice in high esteem, can be very principle-based, and will easily critique ideas and decisions. In the end, it’s very difficult to argue with the logic-based decision that comes naturally to the thinking preference. And that can sometimes become the problem.

Because the thinking preference comes across as confident and even critical, there is a natural barrier for others to challenge. I had a boss once that was probably the most logical, thinking based person I’ve ever known. Because I had gained his trust, he often would take me to visit various project sites to get a feel for how the business was working. Unfortunately, it never occurred to him that the way he set up the meeting rooms seemed much like a judge (with full authority) questioning those running the business. He would sit at the center seat at a small table. To his left would be the site’s general manager and to his right would be me. He then would ask each of the site managers to enter the room, sit in a chair (feeling fully exposed) in front of this tribunal looking over the desk at them.

I know that my boss was simply trying to get as deep into the details (He also had a strong presence for sensing that we talked about in the last blog) and find out the truth of what was going on. As soon as he detected any weakness in a person’s thinking or attention to facts, he would relentlessly pursue further details with more critical questioning. Often the person seated in front of us (the tribunal) would eventually crumble and sometimes leave crying.

Later, as we were driving away from the site, I would say to my boss that he had really crushed Larry (or whomever). My boss would come back with genuine surprise and say something like “I noticed there was something wrong. What was the matter with that person?” I would explain to him that his approach to questioning and drilling down shook the confidence of some people. Again confused, he would say “I don’t get it. I’m just trying to find out how things are going!” He was a total thinker and never learned the value of balancing it with feeling type questions.

Feeling – Positive and Negative

The positive side of the feeling preference is truly caring. Caring for people. Caring for values. The feeling preference focuses on things like values, mercy, compliments, harmony, empathy, compassion. These are actually the issues that help create great teams. If you’ve read my blogs you’ll know that there is no correlation between IQ and success. But, there is a complete correlation between EQ and success. EQ is Emotional Quotient and deals with many of the issues we just listed above: value, harmony, empathy, compassion. The feeling preference does not ignore the thinking side. They’ll acknowledge all of the points that the thinking preference makes as being real and accurate but will question if a decision is better being made on the facts or harmony (or other feeling preference focus).

I’ve watched leadership teams get ready to make a decision based on logic. They’ll list all of the logical reasons they should make this particular decision. But then, someone says “But how will our customers react to that decision?” After a pause, someone will say “Your right. They’ll hate it. Maybe we should consider a different decision.”

Statistics

I’m going to take a look at the statistics to see what we might learn and then I want to close with a couple of more thoughts.

Here at the Statistics:

US Population Thinking = 40%; Feeling = 60%
Leadership Teams Thinking = 84%; Feeling = 16%
Operation Teams Thinking = 83%; Feeling = 17%

One of the things we learn from these numbers is that both Leadership and Operations Teams are substantially more thinking-oriented than the general population. To some degree, this makes sense because businesses and corporations generally run and make their decisions based on logic, not feelings. However, that’s a falsehood.

Fifth Avenue marketing firms learned long ago that people make decisions based on feelings and then justify those decisions based on logic. Business and Corporate leaders are just the same, they just won’t often admit it. In fact, it’s important to know that even ideas are believed to be true based on our emotions and then justified by logic. Knowing this to be true, it’s important that when having a team discussion about which decision to make, members should share their feelings, emotions, previous experiences (baggage) with each other. And don’t let a member get away with explaining the logic of a decision. Make sure they share their emotions first, then explain what logic they use based on the emotions.

You’ll get sick of me saying this time and time again, but the best decisions are balanced. Balance, balance, balance. However, it’s important that to balance this Deciding function, you must start with the feeling side.

0 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs Myers-Briggs Under Pressure

Myers-Briggs Under Pressure: Thinking

by Ron Potter July 10, 2017

“I don’t care what you think and don’t confuse me with facts! This is our only way out! Besides, that’s just about the dumbest idea I’ve heard this century. Have you burned out all of your brain cells?

And don’t you dare challenge my intelligence or authority. I’ll make this decision and it will be the right decision.”

(If you didn’t start with the introduction to this “Myers-Briggs Under Pressure” series, I suggest you make a quick review because it will help you better understand these subsequent blogs.)

There are four types that have this particular combination, the Introverted ISTP, INTP and the Extraverted ESTJ, ENTJ. As noted above the dominant in all four cases is Thinking and the inferior in all four cases is Feeling. These are what’s known as our Deciding functions, how do we decide what to do after we have taken in the data through our Perceiving functions of Sensing and iNtuition.

In a healthy state, these Deciding functions would then work in tandem with the “perceiving” functions of Sensing or iNtuition depending type. But, under pressure or stress, Bill begins to lose this natural balance, falling back to his dominant function which has a need for logic at all expense. Bill will either lash out in an unexpected (even out of character) emotional outburst or even if he keeps a calm exterior, be begins to take any comments or feedback as personal slights and criticism.

Balance, Balance, Balance

This is where team members and colleagues come into play. It’s difficult for any one of us to break out of these pressure packed situations. As colleagues, we want to help Bill back into a balanced state by asking and sometimes even forcing him to use his auxiliary function. Notice that Bill’s auxiliary function could be either Sensing or iNtuition depending on type. Let’s start with the Sensing balance.

“Bill, what information are you missing to make this decision?”

“I’m not missing any information, it’s just that the information we have doesn’t make sense!”

“Which piece of information doesn’t seem to make sense to you?”

“This one data set just doesn’t align with what we thought we knew. If it’s correct it will have a three week impact on the coding section.”

“OK, let’s think through that. What are the consequences of the three week impact on that portion of the schedule when we put it in context of the overall project?”

“Well, when I think about it that way it probably doesn’t make too much difference.”

As we begin to force Bill to try a little balancing act, he’ll begin to regain his footing. Note that we can’t tell Bill that his data problem doesn’t have much impact to the overall project. Bill has to come to grips with that through balancing his own natural Thinking and Sensing functions.

If we’re dealing with either the INTP or ENTJ than iNtuition is the auxiliary function, not Sensing. The approach is similar, but focused more on the conceptual or future view (iNtuition) rather than the data (Sensing).

“Bill, we’re not questioning your ability in this matter, but what information are you missing to make this decision?”

“I’m not missing any information, it’s just that the information we have doesn’t make sense!”

“Well, where do you think this information will lead?”

“I just don’t know. That’s the problem.”

“Let’s go back to your gut instincts. What is your experience telling you?”

“I’m pretty sure it has to lead us in this direction, I just can’t see it yet.”

Stay tuned. Next in our series titled “Myers-Briggs Under Pressure” we’ll shift our focus from the dominant Thinking style to the dominant Feeling style. This one may have the most difficulty working in the corporate environment.

0 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs You Might Be Surprised

You Might Be Surprised: Thinking or Feeling – Part II

by Ron Potter May 23, 2016

After years of being totally compatible in almost every area, are Dave and Charlie discovering that they’re really quite different?

Spoiler alert!!! To fully appreciate this blog take just a minute and read our last blog that sets the stage for understanding the apparent conflict between Dave and Charlie and how they view each other.

After Dave erupted in utter disbelief which was turning into complete distain for the validity of the Myers-Briggs instrument we tried to calm things down long enough to turn this into a good learning opportunity. After a few false starts we finally hit on a question that fairly and accurately painted a picture of the differences between Dave and Charlie.

We asked Charlie if he felt he was located in an accurate position on the Deciding (Thinking-Feeling) scale now that he had learned the difference between the two approaches. With Dave still staring at him in disbelief Charlie indicated that he felt it was a fair and accurate assessment and he actually felt very comfortable with the outcome. Once again Dave couldn’t contain himself with a very loud “No Way!”

But then the question: Dave, what process do you use to purchase a new car? Dave was quick and precise; he would first determine the class of vehicle he currently needed (truck, SUV, sedan, etc), then he would research all new entries into the market, do a complete analysis of performance, maintenance and long-term care and finally use all the modern tools available on the web to find the absolute best price before finally approaching a dealership armed with all of the ammo he needed to make his purchase.

Charlie, what process do you use to purchase a new car? “Well, I’ve had one car salesman that I started using right out of college. He’s taken good care of me through the years and we’ve actually become pretty good friends. I trust him and I believe he has my best interest at heart so when he calls and says it’s time for me to purchase a new car, I ask him for his recommendations and have always purchased what he suggested. It’s always worked just fine for me.” Charlie made his decision based on the values of friendship, loyalty and trust. It works for him. Charlie comfortably fit on the Feeling side of the Deciding function.

Dave of course sat there with his mouth wide open. When he regained his composure enough to control of his jaw muscles, he finally said to Charlie “You have always seemed to have cars that fit your need and personality so I guess we can still be fishing buddies.”

Be very careful when you think you really know someone and their Myers-Briggs functions, they might just surprise you.

0 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs You Might Be Surprised

You Might Be Surprised: Thinking or Feeling – Part I

by Ron Potter May 2, 2016

Dave and Charlie had been best friends for most of their lives. They had met in college and seemed to share common interests in both the classes they were taking and in the great outdoors. Both of them loved camping, hiking and most of all fishing. As their careers began their work took them in different directions but they used their outdoor activities to stay connected and would schedule at least one fishing trip together each year. Families began to grow and the distractions increased but their annual fishing trip was never abandoned.
And then a wonderful thing happened about half way through their careers. All of a sudden they were working for the same company and ended up in the same city. As it turned out their children had all gone away to college and they had a bit more time to spend together and they took full advantage of it by adding some weekend outings and expanding their fishing adventures to all kinds of venues.
You probably couldn’t find two guys more compatible then Dave and Charlie. They knew their similarities added to their mutual bond.
Then one day Dave and Charlie ended up in one of my Myers-Briggs team building sessions. As I run the sessions I rearrange the people in the room around the conference table based on their positioning within each scale. This allows me to talk with those in the middle of the scale about their ability to adjust their behavior depending on the situation. It also allows me to talk with those who are solidly on one side or the other of the scale about how clear their preferences are and how they will default to those preferences in many situations and often without even much thought. It’s just natural.
As we progressed through the scales of Energizing (Extraversion and Introversion) and the Attending/Perceiving functions, Dave and Charlie weren’t far apart and I could often see them exchanging knowing looks. Then we came to the deciding function, the one identified by Thinking and Feeling.
Once we’ve taken in our information through either our Extraversion conversation or Introversion reflections and processed it through our Sensing attention to detail or our iNtuitive conceptual view, we then will decide. This Deciding function shows us how we approach decisions from either a very logical, practical angle or a Values based approach. While Thinking types will consider emotions and feelings as data to weigh their decisions will be made based on logic. And while the Feeling types will consider logic and objectivity as data to value, in the end they will make their decision based on values.
Well now the dynamics between Dave and Charlie had changed. Dave was solidly on the Thinking side of the table and Charlie was well into the Feeling side of the table and Dave was staring at Charlie in utter disbelief.
Finally, Charlie almost erupted. “There is no way this instrument can be valid! Charlie and I have known each other all of our lives and we are completely alike. There is no way he could be on the Feeling side of this category. That’s not who we are!!!”
Can you guess how Charlie reacted? Did he truly belong on the Feeling side of this preference? Did Dave really not know Charlie after all of these years? In our next Myers-Briggs based blog we’ll continue the story of Dave and Charlie. Please join us. You might be surprised.

0 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs You Might Be a Jerk If

You Might Be a Jerk If: Thinking

by Ron Potter December 21, 2015

(If you didn’t start with the introduction to this “You might be a jerk if…” series, I suggest you make a quick review because it will help you better understand these subsequent blogs.)

“I don’t care what you think and don’t confuse me with facts! This is our only way out! Besides, that’s just about the dumbest idea I’ve heard this century. Have you burned out all of your brain cells?
And don’t you dare challenge my intelligence or authority. I’ll make this decision and it will be the right decision.”

Bill is stuck! His dominant function is Thinking which helps him analyze situations and spot the pitfalls in advance. And normally, he’ll balance these great skills with either a good conceptual view of the world or a great grasp of the data, depending on his complete type.
There are four types that have this particular combination, the Introverted ISTP, INTP and the Extraverted ESTJ, ENTJ. As noted above the dominant in all four cases is Thinking and the inferior in all four cases is Feeling. These are what’s known as our Deciding functions, how do we decide what to do after we have taken in the data through our Perceiving functions of Sensing and iNtuition.
In a healthy state, these Deciding functions would then work in tandem with the “perceiving” functions of Sensing or iNtuition depending type. But, under pressure or stress, Bill begins to lose this natural balance, falling back to his dominant function which has a need for logic at all expense. Bill will either lash out in an unexpected (even out of character) emotional outburst or even if he keeps a calm exterior, be begins to take any comments or feedback as personal slights and criticism.

Balance, Balance, Balance

“Bill, what information are you missing to make this decision?”
“I’m not missing any information, it’s just that the information we have doesn’t make sense!”
“Which piece of information doesn’t seem to make sense to you?”
“This one data set just doesn’t align with what we thought we knew. If it’s correct it will have a three week impact on the coding section.”
“OK, let’s think through that. What are the consequences of the three week impact on that portion of the schedule when we put it in context of the overall project?”
“Well, when I think about it that way it probably doesn’t make too much difference.”

As we begin to force Bill to try a little balancing act, he’ll begin to regain his footing. Note that we can’t tell Bill that his data problem doesn’t have much impact to the overall project. Bill has to come to grips with that through balancing his own natural Thinking and Sensing functions.
If we’re dealing with either the INTP or ENTJ than iNtuition is the auxiliary function, not Sensing. The approach is similar, but focused more on the conceptual or future view (iNtuition) rather than the data (Sensing).

“Bill, we’re not questioning your ability in this matter, but what information are you missing to make this decision?”
“I’m not missing any information, it’s just that the information we have doesn’t make sense!”
“Well, where do you think this information will lead?”
“I just don’t know. That’s the problem.”
“Let’s go back to your gut instincts. What is your experience telling you?”
“I’m pretty sure it has to lead us in this direction, I just can’t see it yet.”

As we begin to force Bill to try a little balancing act, he’ll begin to regain his footing. Note that we can’t tell Bill where the data should lead him. Bill has to come to grips with that through balancing his own natural Thinking and iNtuition functions.
Stay tuned. Next in our series titled “You might be a jerk if…” we’ll shift our focus from the dominant Thinking style to the dominant Feeling style. This one may have the most difficulty working in the corporate environment.

0 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs Myers-Briggs In-Depth

Myers-Briggs In-Depth: Deciding: Thinking vs Feeling – Part II

by Ron Potter April 27, 2015

Deep Misconceptions

I mentioned in my last blog on this preference of Thinking and Feeling (our Deciding function) that most (business) people react negatively to this “Feeling” function and will associate with the Thinking side rather than the “touchy feely” side. This causes an imbalance in Corporate Leadership teams of roughly 85% identify themselves with a Thinking Preference and about 15% with a Feeling Preference.

T and F Buddies

Years ago we had a pair of hunting and fishing buddies on the team, Ted (with a Thinking Preference) and Fred (with a Feeling Preference). As we introduced this preference and Fred came out on the Feeling end of the spectrum Ted had an incredibly animated reaction. “What do you mean Fred is on the Feeling side of this scale? No way! We’ve been hunting and fishing buddies for years. We think the same about almost any topic. We almost finish each other’s sentences. No way is Fred on the Feeling side of this scale!” Interestingly, Fred seemed to just remain quiet through the episode with a slight smile on his face.

How do you Buy a Car?

At one point, as Ted continued to grumble at the inaccuracy of the instrument, the question was asked, how do you go about purchasing a car? Ted launched into a detailed explanation of how he does all of his internet research; knowing every detail about the car he wants, how consumers rate the car, what’s the residual value after a few years of ownership, what price people have been paying in his region and a whole host of other logical data sets for purchasing the car. He only then approaches the dealer to make the best possible purchase. When the same question was asked of Fred he said something like “I have a dealer that I have worked with for 15 years and trust him to call me when he thinks I should replace my car and tell me which car would be best for me, offers me a deal and I take it.” The sound of Ted’s jaw hitting the floor made everyone jump.

Which Deciding Function is Better?

Even as you’re reading this I’m probably getting different answers. In the personal case of Ted and Fred, the answer is both. For Ted, his research and logical decision helps him make the “best” decision for him. For Fred, he was totally comfortable that a valuable relationship had been developed and could be trusted resulting in the best decision for him.

Favorite Equation

In a team situation, as always, the best answer is Balance, Balance, Balance. One of my favorite equations is:

Effective Decisions = Quality of Decision X Acceptance of Decision (E.D. = QXA)

We can have the highest quality and accurate decision made but if people don’t accept the decision, no positive outcomes are achieved. We can have the most highly accepted decision that everyone is cheering over and if it’s not accurate or the best decision for the circumstances, it also becomes a failure. Good or effective decisions require both quality and acceptance. Thinking types focus on quality while Feeling types focus on acceptance. We need both. Balance, Balance, Balance!

Have you learned to balance your own preference type? Do you have someone around you that helps you with this balancing act? How about your teams? Have you learned to balance, balance, balance? Share some stories with us.

Myers-Briggs In-Depth is a blog series in which I dive into each MBTI function with more detail, providing some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decision making. Click here to read the entire series.
Interested in an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs functions? Click here to read the Using MBTI to Great Advantage series.

3 comments

Blog Myers-Briggs Myers-Briggs In-Depth

Myers-Briggs In-Depth: Deciding: Thinking vs Feeling – Part I

by Ron Potter April 13, 2015

Deep Misconceptions

We learned in the Energizing Function that preconceived ideas of what constitutes an Extravert and an Introvert often lead to misunderstandings. It gets even worse in this function because of the title “Feeling.”

Most (business) people react negatively to this “Feeling” function and will associate with the Thinking side rather than the “touchy feely” side. While this is a complete misconception, it drives a very strong bias to the Thinking side. In my data base of corporate leaders that I’ve gathered over the last 25 years, roughly 85% identify themselves with a Thinking Preference and about 15% with a Feeling Preference. This is far outside the parameters of the other functions.

Why the bias?

The main reason is that the people leading corporations pride themselves with making purely logical decisions. Or more accurately, leaders fool themselves into believing they make purely logical decisions. We know through observation and are increasingly aware through brain science that we actually make more of our decisions on the feeling side and then justify them by logic. I think that’s the point here.

It Felt Like the Right Thing to Do at the Time

Justified. Besides being the title of one of my favorite TV programs over the last several years, we are often faced with this issue in the corporate world. As we review results we are often asked how and why a certain decision was made. If we can recall the “logical” steps that we went through to make the long ago decision, we have a chance of justifying the decision. If our only response is “It felt like the right decision at the time” it becomes difficult to defend our choices. More corporate leaders identify themselves with a Thinking Preference (85%) because of the assumed superiority of Thinking, logical based decisions.

How Do You Feel about that?

I’ve used one technique through the years that dispels this imbalance very quickly. While grappling with a topic during a team discussion I’ll ask “What do you think about this solution?” This question will generate many logical based answers. A little while later I’ll ask “How do you feel about this solution?” For the truly Thinking preferenced people, it seldom generates any new response beyond their initial logic based response. But for those members who actually reside closer to the middle or even on the Feeling side of this preference, it generates a much more robust, deeply felt answer. And what’s amazing to me is that these responses almost always initiate a deeper discussion that many times leads to a different answer than was first proposed. Also, the Thinking crowd actually begins to engage in their Feeling side which begins to create balance. Remember, Balance, Balance, Balance is the key to great decision making with Myers-Briggs.

1 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs Using MBTI to Great Advantage

Using MBTI to Great Advantage – Deciding

by Ron Potter January 18, 2015

Using MBTI to Great Advantage is a blog series in which I’ll do an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs (MBTI) functions and then in subsequent blogs will dig into each one in more depth with some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decisions making. Click here to read the Series Introduction.

Deciding Overview: Thinking vs. Feeling

Now that you’ve “perceived” (the first decision making function) the world around you (see previous MBTI blog), how do you then finally decide (the 2nd decision making function)?

As we work our way through the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), we once again encounter two words that carry a lot of pre-conceived baggage. Most business leaders assume (incorrectly) that business decisions should be made on a purely logical, fact based, “thinking” basis. There isn’t any room for touchy-feely in business decision making.

Well, the Feeling side of this function isn’t necessarily touchy-feely and in fact some of the most hard-nosed leaders I’ve met actually fall on the Feeling side of this equation. It’s not about emotion it’s about values and the “right” thing to do. Our Thinking types can lay out an argument that is purely logical, based on facts, and structured top to bottom building a clear argument for their case. Our Feeling types may look at all those facts and logic and actually agree with the conclusion but at the same time say “Who cares? Is this the right thing to do for our employees, customers, shareholders?”

Emotional Thought. This balancing act is often referred to as “Emotional Thought.” In his book Learn or Die: Using Science to Build a Leading-Edge Learning Organization, Edward Hess says”

“Neurobiological research has shown that certain aspects of cognition, such as learning, attention, memory, decision making, and social functioning, are ‘both profoundly affected by emotion and in fact subsumed within the processes of emotion.’” (Bolds are mine)

This one is tough. Balancing this one becomes particularly tricky but has profound impact if we achieve the right balance. Also, all of the latest brain research that has been exploding over the last ten to fifteen years points to the fact that we as human beings actually make our decisions based on the Feelings side of this equation and then justify our decision based on logic (Thinking). We’ll have a lot more to learn about this one in coming blogs.

But, once again, the three rules for being more effective at decision making are:
1. Balance
2. Balance
3. Balance

This one may be the more difficult one to personally balance. What have some of your experiences been either successful or unsuccessful?

1 comment

Blog Myers-Briggs Using MBTI to Great Advantage

Using MBTI to Great Advantage – Energizing

by Ron Potter December 22, 2014

Using MBTI to Great Advantage is a blog series in which I’ll do an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs (MBTI) functions and then in subsequent blogs will dig into each one in more depth with some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decisions making. Click here to read the Series Introduction.

Energizing Overview: Extroversion vs Introversion

Unfortunately the two words associated with this function carry a lot of preconceived baggage. We think of the outgoing, gregarious, easy to talk with extroverted type or the shy, quite, retiring introverted type. And while we may see some of those characteristics in this function, that’s not what is getting measured here.

This is your “energizing” function. When you need to get creative, solve a problem, grapple with an issue, deal with alternatives, how do you get energized around the solution?

Extraverts need to talk. While talking our energy seems to grow, ideas start falling into place, internal decisions get made and finally, right during the conversation our fingers snap and our brain says “That’s it. I’ve got it.” The extroverted conversation energized us.
Introverts on the other hand need to reflect. They may do just as much talking with colleagues and others to gather as much input as possible and will likely do a lot more reading and studying but at some point, they just need to let all of that information come together in their head as their introverted thoughts process all that they’ve learned and put it into a structure that makes sense to them. At that moment they express an inward (and sometime outward) smile and their brain says “That’s it. I’ve got it.”

Greatest confusion and misunderstanding.
Because of how these two functions work so differently, it has been my observation that this function is at the root of most miscommunication and misunderstanding between team members and one of the biggest causes of wasted effort in team meetings. I’ll be giving you a lot of examples and solutions for making this function work well for you and the team in future blogs.

Don’t assume you know.
One last thought on the Energizing function. Because we think we know what (or who) an extravert and introvert is, we arm-chair psychologists make the most mistakes with this function. I have worked with talkative introverts and quiet extraverts. Do Not make assumptions on this function. You’ll often be wrong and create more misunderstanding and confusion. I’ll repeat the following statement many times because it’s so important: Don’t try to figure out if a person has an extroverted or introverted preference, just learn to balance your process so that both types flourish and contribute to the dialogue and decision making.

Remember, the three rules for using this function effectively:
1. Balance
2. Balance
3. Balance

Learn to process team dynamics in a balanced way and learn to balance your own preferences. You’ll be seen as a better leader and your teams will be identified as high-performance teams.

Share with us some of your experiences with this function both from a personal understanding or a team dynamic impact.

1 comment