Social Styles (October 25, 2006 by James Montgomery Jackson)
(Webmaster note -- the reading was the first verse of the Gershwin brothers "Let's call the Whole Thing Off"
You say either; I say eyether. You never understand what I mean. Let’s call the whole thing off. But if we call it off, then I lose you and you lose me. So maybe I should do as the song says and go along and say either too. But if I always do that, haven’t I then lost me, and you’ve lost me? There’s got to be a better way.
In the last full congregational survey we did a number of years ago, the top three objectives for the worship service were 1) to help us understand ourselves better, 2) to show new paths for individual growth and change, and 3) to build community. I modestly suggest this topic can do it all – but, it’s up to you.
This service came about as a direct result of a conversation I had with Gabe after one of our early meetings on deciding whether to buy our new church home. After a lengthy congregational discussion, I made the comment we shouldn’t send a bunch of Amiables to negotiate with the prior owners. You have a 3x5 card in your order of service that you’ll soon be using, and I’ll pass a basket around with pens if you need one.
I worked in the business world for thirty years and experienced (or was subject to) vast amounts of training. Much was technical, but a lot involved the softer elements of human resources. Most of it I have forgotten. However, two training opportunities proved very useful, both when I was working and in organizations such as our Congregation.
Hopefully, I am exhibiting some of the first, which was all about making presentations. It says here, pause for laughter.
The second, which is the topic of today’s message, was about Social Styles. We humans seem to have a strong desire to classify ourselves. Some, classifications like Sun signs are based on when you were born. How many of you know your Sun sign? Scorpio here. Even Mother Goose gets into the act with the rhyme that starts “Monday’s Child is fair of face.” In the supermarket tabloids and monthly magazines we are bombarded with quizzes we can take to classify ourselves and understand how our group differs from theirs.
I’ve had training that used many different classification models: Myer’s Briggs system with their four dimensions and sixteen types; the nine types from the Enneagram and so on. The Social Styles classification is based on only two dimensions and was developed by David Merrill and Roger Reed sometime in the late 70s early 80s. Unlike the Enneagram or Myers-Briggs, which depend primarily on self-analysis, Social Styles is developed based on input of co-workers. It deals with actions and not so much how you are feeling inside.
This is what gives it a very practical aspect. At times we can all relate to the close-up picture of a duck sitting calmly on the water, while pulling back to see the larger frame shows the duck is paddling like hell just to stay where she is. In Social styles it is the above water that counts.
I told gg this service was specifically designed for her because she claims to love to multitask. While I am describing the four styles, you should make check marks next to each style as I describe it. Put a tick on the right side when I am talking about that style if you think OTHERS would say that about you, and a tick on the left if they would not. Not sure – no mark. At the end, you can see what you think others would perceive your style to be. This isn’t perfect, but generally works fairly well.
Most of you will have one dominant style or two that gather most of the check marks on the “yep that’s me” side of the ledger. The very first time I did this, I was equally placed between Analytic and Driver, based on self-reporting. Just like you may have to do, I had to guess which was dominant and decided Analytic was the one, and labeled myself a “Driving Analytic.” The instructor, with whom I had worked for several years, looked at me and said, “No Jim, you are definitely an Analytical Driver. Primary is Driver and secondary is Analytic.” In a later training when I received input from bosses, coworkers and those who reported to me, the Driver aspect came through loud and clear. So, if you decide you are an Amiable and the rest of the Amiables tell you in the nicest way possible that maybe you are in the wrong group, it’s best to believe them. Again, the key is how you act above the surface, not what those legs are doing under the water.
The two dimensions in Social Styles are Assertiveness (the degree to which you tend to tell versus ask during interactions) and Emotiveness (the degree to which you tend to show your feelings). Unlike Myers-Briggs where the percentage of the general population in each of the 16 categories is not even close to equal, in Social Styles, approximately 25% of the general population will fall into each category. No category is good; no category is bad. Each has strengths; each has weaknesses. So, here we go.
Since I am a Driver, I’ll start with them. Remember, tick marks on the right when I say something about Drivers that fits you (as other people see you) and on the left if it doesn’t. Drivers are wondering when I am going to get to the point and stop all the introductions. Just Do it Now! Drivers want to know what’s the bottom line? Life is a zero-sum game. Someone has to win and someone has to lose and winning is better than losing. Likes to be in control. Decisions should be based on facts, given the available options. Decisive and risk tolerant. Target acquired? Aim. Fire!
Analytics next, since that’s my second most prominent style. Detailed oriented. Methodical. Creatures of habit. Analyzes and weighs all the alternatives, because you like to be right. Offer consistent and well organized data. Like to bring up and answer the question, “What if…?” Makes practical business decisions. Likes rules, not surprises. Content working alone. Target acquired? Aim, check to make sure the wind hasn’t shifted; aim; check to make sure barometric pressure hasn’t changed; aim; have we considered if we are using the best weapon?
Amiables now. They would like everyone to be happy. They think well of others. Want to avoid any hurt feelings. They like to help others and cherish close personal relationships. They like others support. They encourage cooperation and teamwork. Look for win-win solutions, but are not very good at setting goals. When pushed too far, they will hold a grudge. Target acquired? How does everyone feel about this target? What is our process for dealing with any collateral damage?
Expressives – you have been forced to make check marks mostly on the left now and you are dying to tell us about yourselves. You are colorful, dramatic. Even if you are not Italian, you talk with your hands – and you do talk. You are interested in what is possible and create excitement over the prospects. You share ideas and visions. You exaggerate and generalize. You want to get started – soon! Sometimes too soon and you leap before you look. Don’t bug me with rules, limits details. Oh darn, missed a deadline, but boy didn’t we have fun. Jump from one thing to another. Fire! Oh we haven’t decided on a target? What’s taking so long? Fire! We should have a party after the service; we’ll have such a good time.
Look at your three-by-five card. Does one of the four types have lots of checks on the right and not too many on the left? Probably your type. If two seem pretty close, make a quick gut reaction – unless you can’t do that, in which case you are probably not an Expressive.
I’m going to put on a little moving music and I am going to ask you to switch seats and sit next to your fellow style-mates. Expressives in the back right. Drivers in the back left. Amiables in the front right and Analytics (who are wondering whether it is my right or their right) in the front left. You can leave your hymnal and use the one wherever you end up sitting.
************* Moving time ***********
Okay, I need the Expressives and Amiables to stop greeting their new neighbors and Drivers, thanks for your patience. Analytics should stop doing their regression analysis on how many ticks they made left and right in each group and wondering if I shouldn’t have asked different questions.
Why talk about Social Styles in a religious service? Unitarian Universalists claim to value diversity. Sometimes we need help to recognize how to value something so we are more than just tolerant of it. For our community it means to be able to share the gifts we have and mingle those gifts with others for a greater good. Let me describe a hypothetical Congregational committee – Say a task force to design the next pledge campaign. In fact it is such an important task force, we’ll have four of them – one made up of each of our four groups.
Here are some scenarios of how the meetings would go. Let’s start with the Amiables this time. They will begin their meeting late because they’ll wait for everyone to show up. In fact, if one person is still late after 10 minutes the discussion will center on whether someone should try to call the missing person to see if they’re okay. If so who, how long should they wait, would the person feel badly if we did call.
Eventually, the meeting would start, at which point a chalice would be lit, and the participants would go around the table telling about what they are feeling about the day. Discussion would proceed to make sure everyone understood why they were together. The room would be quiet, everyone respectfully taking their turn. Somehow a leader would be chosen, and then there would be discussion wherein members of the group would ask others what their experiences had been in past campaigns, what people liked, what had upset them. It would be late by now, and after consulting calendars a second date would be set to continue the discussion. The end result would be a wishy-washy campaign that would upset no one/inspire no one, probably be on time, but not very successful.
The Expressives meeting. Expressives would not wait for a formal chalice lighting. As soon as there were two in the room, they would commence animated discussions about how they felt about whatever happened to them recently, what fun they had at the whatever, some dyads would quickly start brainstorming new and inventive ways to hold the pledge campaign. The room would be loud with much talking – but little listening. Somehow a leader would be chosen to herd these cats and they would start off by continuing in a more organized fashion the brainstorming. Eventually someone would realize they needed to take notes and one would reluctantly do so, as long as everyone realized it was for this time only. Energy would pour out of the room. The final result would be an innovative campaign, which was late, and while everyone had a great time, in the end we weren’t quite sure whether we had accomplished the goal, since the group discovered none had been set.
Drivers. The meeting would start on time, even if only two of the fourteen members were present. Of the two, one would take charge and the other would know in their hearts the first person was only a figurehead and the congregation was really relying upon the second person to make sure things got done right. A goal would be agreed upon and set. Practical ideas discussed. Tasks delegated by the leader. The meeting would end on time, maybe even early. At the second meeting, only a few of the assigned tasks would be accomplished because in the meantime the members had each come up with better ideas and so didn’t waste their time on the assigned tasks. In the end an alpha leader would take charge, the others would perform their assigned tasks, the goal would be reached and everyone on the committee, except the alpha leader would be unhappy because of the leader’s dictatorial style – but none of them would express their dissatisfaction. Many would simply leave the community.
Last the Analytics. Their meeting would also start on time. At least one of the participants would have brought in a detailed analysis of the results from the previous campaign or more likely last 28 campaigns. The data would be distributed and discussed. Much time would be spent by each person making sure they understood the validity of the data. A list would be made of questions to be researched. The meeting would end late, because the data were so damn interesting. By meeting two, the questions would be researched, as would several additional questions that had occurred to people during the week while doing their initial research. Someone would volunteer to do a survey of all congregations in the US to determine the most effective pledge campaign. As a committee of the whole they agree to meet the next day to design the questionnaire. Result: 5,700 pages of information are developed and stacked in boxes in a storeroom for future reference. No index was ever created for the information. Because they ran out of time, they conducted the same campaign as last year.
Four task forces. Four very ugly results. How do we do this right? Expressives are dying to blurt out the obvious: by combining the talents of all four types. Amiables are still stuck on worrying about why all the drivers felt so badly, Analytics are wondering how good the data was and Drivers are still waiting for me to get to the point! Time’s a-wasting.
Okay Drivers, here are two points: First, the Expressives are right, combining the talents, the positive aspects, of all four groups leads to better results; second if we recognize others’ styles, we can relate to them better and minimize the negatives of our own style.
In group work it is important that we have all four styles represented. Drivers are good at bringing a task to conclusion; Expressives bring excitement and innovativeness to the task – all work and no play make Jack and Jill dull children; Amiables help smooth out problems that may arise along the way, they, along with Expressives, make sure feelings are part of the equation. Analytics make sure the feelings have facts to go along with them.
If you are a committee leader, I suggest you consider your current members. Is any style over or under represented? Stuck in a rut – are you utilizing Expressives well? Not getting anything accomplished – lacking a Driver? Always seem to be unintentionally stepping on toes – where are your Amiables? Recommendations to the Board being sent back for more information – Analytics can help.
We are a small congregation and I know at least the Analytics will be thinking, sometimes, committees are small and it is not possible to have all four types included. What then? Hold that thought, I’ll get there.
Am I implying Drivers have to be in charge of everything for it to work? Absolutely not. Emphatically not. The leader of a committee, task force, the board, can and should come from any style. What I do mean is, if you are leading a group, you should understand its Social Style make-up.
Why? You can assist team members to fill roles that result in good committee work and that they will find meaningful. Secondly, if your committee is missing representation from one of the styles, you as the leader, must make sure someone represents the positive aspects of that style. Lacking a Driver? You the leader will have to act the part to be successful. Sometimes one of the other team members has a strong enough back-up style to fill the gap. As the leader you must ask that team member to take on that role. Lastly, since other people don’t react as you react, you must consciously modify your style to accommodate theirs. This is part of our respect for the diversity of the congregation.
I am a driver and I want stuff to start on time and end on time. If I am running a meeting, I need to be a bit flexible so the Amiables and Expressives have time to check in and socialize. I can either do this by having a quick sharing time at the start of the meeting (in which case I can start the meeting on the dot pleasing the Analytics) or by unofficially letting the first few minutes of meeting time be unstructured, but then skipping the more formal check-in.
I will have an agenda, but should feel comfortable in letting the natural course of the discussion rearrange the items on my agenda. But I also have the responsibility to make sure all the items are covered.
If I am not running the meeting, I need to stop checking my watch every ten seconds after the scheduled meeting time. But similarly, the non-Driver leader needs to take my needs into account, and not perpetually start late or not have an agenda. I need to recognize and be patient with Expressives and Amiables who will use lots of feeling words that to me seem to miss the point. Despite my inclinations, those feeling words need to be said; often they, not facts, are the primary determinant in making a good decision. Feeling folks must recognize that facts also have relevance, and sometimes are the primary focus of the decision.
Even after the path is clear to me, I need to have patience with Analytics and Amiables who are less willing to take risks than I and take more time to feel comfortable with a decision. They in turn should recognize that decisions must be made with incomplete data.
I could go on and on with examples, but I won’t. I have a strong desire to end on time.
To that end, I’ll share two questions I ask myself when I am interacting with individuals or groups. Within a group: How can my natural style help this group achieve its objectives and how do I need to modify my natural style to help this group achieve its objectives. One-on-one: What is this person’s style and how do I need to modify my natural style to best relate to this person.
Let me use an analogy. Consider our congregation as a choir of the whole. I am a baritone (between bass and tenor). If there are no basses present, that’s the role I take. If basses, but no tenors, I can stretch and cover the tenor. I can even sing alto, if the part is not too high. Try as I might, I left my ability to be a soprano sometime in Junior High. I am most comfortable as a baritone, but flexibility allows me to help make the music beautiful and balanced.
When I ask these questions I am not asking myself to change my central character – to lose myself to accommodate others’ needs. Because I am a Driver, I am reminding myself to smooth my edges, to be aware of how my actions affect others, to be versatile in my responses. This is really self-serving on my part. I want this religious community to be healthy and vibrant and to grow so it can continue to fulfill my spiritual needs.
Isn’t that what you want too?