Write a reflection based on the reading.
Samualadams
TheNewScienceofTeamChemistry.pdf.pdf
MARCH–APRIL 2017 ISSUE
THE NEW SCIENCE OF TEAM CHEMISTRY IN THIS PACKAGE WE LOOK AT THE PERSONALITY TYPES THAT MAKE UP A TEAM—AND HOW TO GET THE BEST FROM ANY COMBINATION.
SAVE SHARE BUY COPIES
Pioneers, Drivers, Integrators, and Guardians by Suzanne M. Johnson Vickberg and Kim Christfort
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
S AV E S H A R E
Organizations aren’t getting the performance they need from their teams. That’s the message we
hear from many of our clients, who wrestle with complex challenges ranging from strategic planning
to change management. But often, the fault doesn’t lie with the team members, our research
suggests. Rather, it rests with leaders who fail to effectively tap diverse work styles and perspectives
—even at the senior-most levels. Some managers just don’t recognize how profound the differences
between their people are; others don’t know how to manage the gaps and tensions or understand
the costs of not doing so. As a result, some of the best ideas go unheard or unrealized, and
performance suffers.
To help leaders claim this lost value, Deloitte created a system called Business Chemistry that
identifies four primary work styles and related strategies for accomplishing shared goals. Existing
personality tests didn’t do the trick—they weren’t tailored to the workplace, and they relied too
heavily on personal introspection. So we consulted biological anthropologist Helen Fisher, of
Rutgers University, whose research on brain chemistry in romantic relationships sheds light on
people’s styles and interactions. From there, we developed a list of business-relevant traits and
preferences that can be observed or inferred from behavior at work. A survey development
company then helped us build an assessment, which we tested and refined with three independent
samples of more than 1,000 professionals each. Finally, we collaborated with molecular biologist
Lee Silver, of Princeton, to adapt the statistical models he uses for genetic population analysis to
look for patterns in our business population data and to mathematically derive four work styles.
Since then, more than 190,000 people have completed our assessment, and we’ve conducted
follow-up studies to determine how each work style responds to stress, the conditions under which
the various styles thrive, and other factors that can inform how to manage the styles effectively.
We’ve also engaged leaders and teams in more than 3,000 “labs”—interactive sessions lasting 90
minutes to three days—during which we’ve gathered more data and explored strategies and
techniques for getting the most out of diverse styles.
In this article, we’ll lay out the value that each style offers, address the challenges of bringing people
with different styles together, and describe how to capitalize on the cognitive diversity in your
organization.
Understanding the Styles
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Understanding the Styles
Each of us is a composite of the four work styles, though most people’s behavior and thinking are
closely aligned with one or two. All the styles bring useful perspectives and distinctive approaches
to generating ideas, making decisions, and solving problems. Generally speaking:
Pioneers value possibilities, and they spark energy and imagination on their teams. They believe
risks are worth taking and that it’s fine to go with your gut. Their focus is big-picture. They’re drawn
to bold new ideas and creative approaches.
Guardians value stability, and they bring order and rigor. They’re pragmatic, and they hesitate to
embrace risk. Data and facts are baseline requirements for them, and details matter. Guardians think
it makes sense to learn from the past.
Drivers value challenge and generate momentum. Getting results and winning count most. Drivers
tend to view issues as black-and-white and tackle problems head on, armed with logic and data.
Integrators value connection and draw teams together. Relationships and responsibility to the
group are paramount. Integrators tend to believe that most things are relative. They’re diplomatic
and focused on gaining consensus.
Teams that bring these styles together should, in theory, enjoy the many benefits of cognitive
diversity, ranging from increased creativity and innovation to improved decision making. Yet time
and again, diverse teams fail to thrive—sometimes stagnating, sometimes buckling under the weight
of conflict. A first step for leaders hoping to turn that around is to identify the differing styles of their
team members and understand what makes each individual tick.
In our work, we’ve clustered thousands of groups by style and asked them to list the things that
energize and alienate them in the workplace. The lists vary greatly—what motivates one group can
suck the life out of another. Some of the differences have to do with how people interact. For
The four styles give teams a common language for understanding how people work.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
instance, Integrators abhor anything that feels like conflict, but Drivers love to debate. This can
create tension and misunderstanding. In one of our lab sessions, a CFO and her team were talking
about their executive meetings. One participant, an Integrator, confessed that she dreaded bringing
topics up because “it always leads to an unpleasant argument.” The CFO, a Driver, reacted with
surprise, saying, “But that’s just how we discuss things!”
Differences in how individuals think and contribute can also create problems. For instance, if a
Guardian walks through a detailed plan line by line, that may feel like a forced march to a Pioneer,
who wants to skip ahead or whiteboard a completely different idea. Conversely, the Pioneer’s riffing
about ideas without any agenda or structure may seem like an impractical mess to the organized
Guardian.
The four styles give leaders and their teams a common language for discussing similarities and
differences in how people experience things and prefer to work. Groups come to appreciate why
certain times feel so challenging (that is, which perspectives and approaches are at odds), and they
also begin to recognize the potential power in their differences.
One leadership team, for example, was struggling to get everyone aligned with its strategy and was
experiencing a great deal of interpersonal conflict in the process. This consumed a lot of the leader’s
time and energy, since members kept coming to him with complaints about others. Through
discussions with the team, we uncovered some norms that were disagreeable to each style:
Guardians felt that they’d been rushed through due diligence processes; Pioneers felt that
innovation was being squashed by rigid interpretations of compliance guidelines; Drivers were
frustrated by the team’s unwillingness to commit to a decision; and Integrators were bothered by
dismissive behaviors, such as eye-rolling.
Our discussions highlighted team strengths, such as an openness to sharing perspectives and
voicing concerns and a commitment to generating innovative ideas and supporting the business.
The team brainstormed strategies for accommodating individuals’ differing styles and taking
advantage of the value that each brought. A month after we met with them, members indicated they
had been actively hypothesizing about one another’s styles and were developing a better
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
understanding of the team. Even more important, they reported a greater sense of shared purpose,
an environment that better enabled them to contribute at their highest levels, and an improved
ability to accomplish goals.
Managing the Styles
Once you’ve identified the work styles of your team members and have begun to consider how the
differences are beneficial or problematic, you must actively manage them so that you’re not left with
all frustration and no upside. You can do so in three ways.
Pull your opposites closer.
Often, the biggest pain points are in one-on-one relationships when opposite styles collide. Each of
the styles is different from the others, but they’re not different in equal measure. For example,
Guardians are generally more reserved than Drivers—but both types are very focused, which can
help them find common ground. Guardians and Pioneers, however, are true opposites, as are
Integrators and Drivers.
As you’d expect, the interpersonal problems that tend to arise when opposite styles come together
can put a damper on collaboration. Indeed, 40% of the people we surveyed on the topic said that
their opposites were the most challenging to work with, and 50% said that they were the least
enjoyable to work with. Each type cited different reasons for the difficulties.
For example, one Driver explained why she doesn’t enjoy working with Integrators:
“I find it exhausting to do all the small talk to make everyone feel good about working together. I just
want to get things done, give honest and direct feedback, and move forward. Having to worry about
sensitive feelings slows me down.”
An Integrator who found Drivers challenging to work with said:
“I need to process things to get the contextual background for the big picture. Drivers often speak in
code or thought fragments that we need to translate.”
We were told by a Guardian:
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
“I’m always thinking about how I’m going to implement something…and while the Pioneers have great
ideas, they typically can’t be bothered with discussing how to execute them. But, if the outcome doesn’t
match their vision, they’re frustrated!”
And a Pioneer admitted:
“I have a very difficult time adjusting to a Guardian’s style. I am decisive and like to generate ideas
without judgment. Guardians can come across as judgmental, and they don’t allow creativity to flow.”
Despite the havoc such differences can wreak on team performance, opposite styles can balance
each other out. Still, that takes time and effort. We worked with one Guardian-Pioneer pair who
struggled in the beginning but, by openly discussing their differences, eventually forged a stronger
partnership. The Pioneer was quite comfortable speaking in front of groups and doing so on the fly.
The Guardian dreaded public speaking even with thorough preparation, which she rarely saw as
enough. When getting ready to present something together, the Pioneer often felt impatient, and
the Guardian felt alarmed at what she saw as inadequate planning. As their relationship progressed,
they began to trust and adjust to each other. The Pioneer learned that her partner’s meticulousness
often got them out of a tight spot and that doing a bit more preparation herself helped her to be
better in the moment. The Guardian learned that her partner’s more spontaneous approach was
engaging and enabled them to be more flexible and responsive to their audience’s needs. She found
that when they were working together, she could relax a bit and take more risks herself.
By pulling your opposites closer—having them collaborate on small projects and then take on bigger
ones if it’s working out—you can create complementary partnerships on your teams. It’s also
important to pull your own opposites closer to you, to balance your tendencies as a leader. This is
really about generating productive friction. Think Lennon and McCartney, Serena and Venus, the
Steves (Jobs and Wozniak). Differences are what make such collaborations powerful.
Elevate the “tokens” on your team.
If you’ve got a team of 10 people, seven of whom are Guardians, what leadership approach should
you favor? Adopting one that works well for Guardians—seeking the greatest good for the greatest
number—might seem like the practical thing to do. But in our experience, it’s often more effective to
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
focus on styles that are represented by just a few team members, since it’s those minority
perspectives you need to court to reap the benefits of diversity.
When a team’s makeup is lopsided, cognitive bias can creep in, often leading to “cascades.” Imagine
trying to change the direction of a big waterfall. Without a feat of engineering, it would be
impossible. That’s how a cascade works on a team: Once ideas, discussion, and decision making
start flowing in a particular direction, momentum keeps them moving that way. Even if diverse
views exist on the team, they probably won’t change the flow once it’s established, as people often
hesitate to voice disagreement with an idea that gets early visible support.
Momentum builds for various reasons: Reputational cascades generally result from a fear of looking
bad or of being punished for disagreeing, and informational cascades can occur when people
assume that early speakers know something others don’t. Either way, you end up with self-
censoring and groupthink, which means the team doesn’t benefit from its diverse perspectives.
Of the teams we work with, about half are relatively
balanced, and the rest are dominated by one or two
styles. We’ve also found that top leaders are most
likely to be Pioneers, and then Drivers. In many
cases, the majority of executive team members
share the leader’s style, which can make the team
particularly susceptible to cascades. Pioneers tend
to be spontaneous and outgoing. They think quickly
and speak energetically, sometimes before thinking
much at all. Similarly, Drivers like to take charge in
group settings, and with their competitive and direct
style, they’re inclined to jump right in and state their
point of view rather than hang back to hear what
others have to say. Especially if they’re in the
majority or supported by a leader with a similar
style, there’s a strong chance that Pioneers or
Drivers will set the direction of a cascade with early comments.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
We were asked by one leader to help uncover why her team, though highly productive, was
repeatedly criticized by internal stakeholders for its lack of diplomacy. We analyzed the team’s
composition and saw that it was dominated by assertive and outspoken Drivers. When we asked
whether this style might be ruffling feathers, those individuals pushed back, saying that they knew
what needed to get done and didn’t have time to worry about people’s feelings.
The team also had a small group of Integrators—the style that typically shows the most relationship-
building prowess. But those folks were marginalized, rarely spoke, and told us that they felt shut out
and devalued. Although they were eager to share their thoughts and ideas with us in private, they
were unwilling to stand up to the Drivers dominating the team. As a result, the group seemed to be
losing out on the strengths of those who were best equipped to help them improve their
relationships with stakeholders.
How can you elevate minority perspectives on your team to avoid cascading and marginalization—
without turning others off ? Here are some tactics that may help.
If you’re trying to get Guardians to share their perspective, give them the time and the details they
need to prepare for a discussion or a decision. Then allow them to contribute in ways that are
comfortable for them (for instance, in writing) and that don’t require them to fight for the floor—
because chances are, they won’t. Making advance reading and preparation an option rather than a
requirement will lessen the burden for those uninterested in spending time this way, such as
Pioneers.
To elicit Pioneers’ ideas, allow room for discussions to get expansive. Provide white boards and
encourage people to get up and grab the marker. Determining in advance how long you’ll allow such
discussions to go on will help those who prefer more structure—particularly Guardians—to relax into
the free-flowing exercise.
As for Integrators, dedicate some energy toward forming real relationships with them—and then ask
for their thoughts. Also seek, and empower them to seek, the perspectives of other team members
and stakeholders. Explore with them how the discussion or decision affects the greater good. Doing
some of this work offline may prevent Drivers from getting antsy with what they may see as time-
consuming niceties.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
For Drivers, keep the pace of conversations brisk, and show clear connections between the
discussion or decision at hand and progress toward the overall goal. Consider introducing an
element of experimentation or competition—say, gamifying a training program—to keep them
interested and engaged. Some styles, such as Integrators, may be less motivated by competition, so
also look for ways to build or strengthen relationships—for instance, by providing opportunities for
competing teams to socialize together.
Beyond these type-specific tactics, there are more-general ways to elevate minority perspectives on
your team:
Encourage anyone in the minority to speak up early to give them a chance to influence the direction
of the conversation before a cascade sets the course. Polish psychologist Solomon Asch’s classic
experiments on conformity demonstrated that when even one person goes against the majority, the
likelihood that others will offer divergent perspectives increases greatly. Take advantage of this
phenomenon to promote healthy dissent.
Also ask people to brainstorm on their own ahead of time and then share their ideas in round-robin
fashion when the group convenes. Studies have shown that this approach is more effective than
group brainstorming. Like giving minority styles the floor first, individual brainstorming can get
more diverse ideas into the mix before a particular direction gains momentum. It also gives greater
voice to those who prefer to process and generate ideas in a quiet atmosphere or at a more deliberate
pace.
If a team is light on a particular style, try asking others to “think like” that style. Do this early in the
conversation, before the majority viewpoint takes hold. Many of us are accustomed to saying, “Just
playing devil’s advocate”; in this case, one might say, “Just playing Guardian here…” or “If I were to
view this issue through the lens of a Driver….” We’ve found that teams that have learned about the
four styles are quite adept at putting themselves in the shoes of others when asked, and that doing
so can enrich and round out a discussion that otherwise might be one-dimensional.
Pay close attention to your sensitive introverts.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Although a cascading team may lose out on
contributions from any style that’s in the minority,
members who are highly introverted or sensitive are
at greatest risk of being drowned out. We see the
most evidence of introversion and sensitivity among
Guardians but also find these traits in a subset of
Integrators we’ll call Quiet Integrators. As with
people who don’t share their team’s dominating
style, sensitive introverts are rarely heard unless
leaders deliberately reach out to them.
A Pioneer or Driver cascade can feel like Niagara
Falls to Guardians, who tend to be reserved, to
consider decisions carefully, and to avoid
confrontation. Particularly if they’re in the minority,
they may not speak up when others are clamoring to
say their piece. Similarly, Quiet Integrators tend to
be particularly nonconfrontational and focused on consensus—so if the team appears to be leaning
in a certain direction, they’re unlikely to offer a divergent perspective. And because neither
Guardians nor Quiet Integrators are inclined to embrace risk, they will probably see little reason to
stick their necks out to challenge the prevailing wisdom.
Add to that the ways in which Guardians and Integrators are affected by stress. In a study of more
than 20,000 professionals from inside and outside Deloitte, those styles were more likely than
Pioneers and Drivers to report feeling stressed. And their stress levels were higher in response to
every kind of situation we asked about—face-to-face interactions, conflicts, a sense of urgency,
heavy workloads, and errors. In a second sample, this time of more than 17,000 professionals,
Guardians and Integrators were also less likely to report that they work effectively under stress.
These findings fit right in with author Susan Cain’s work on introverts and psychologist Elaine Aron’s
work on highly sensitive people. Both suggest that today’s breakneck, open-space, highly
collaborative work environment is particularly challenging for these groups.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Now consider all this in light of the fact that top leaders tend to be Pioneers or Drivers. People who
are most introverted, most stressed, and least adaptable are often being led by those who are most
extroverted, least stressed, and most adaptable. You can probably see how this could pose
difficulties for everyone.
You might ask, Why bother catering to sensitive introverts? Shouldn’t people be able to adapt and
manage their stress? To speak up even when it’s difficult? Maybe you simply don’t want those who
can’t.
We think you do. Cain’s and Aron’s research shows that people who are more introverted or sensitive
have particular strengths that can benefit teams and organizations. For example, they tend to be
conscientious and thorough—good at spotting errors and potential risks. They can focus intensely
for long periods of time. They’re good listeners and more likely to highlight others’ great ideas than
to seek the spotlight for themselves. They often tackle and excel at the detail-oriented work that
others can’t or simply don’t want to do. So while reaching out to sensitive introverts may be labor-
intensive, the effort should pay off.
To get the most out of your Guardians and your Quiet Integrators, consider asking how you can help
them keep their stress levels manageable. This may involve identifying ways to slow the pace,
reduce information overload, provide quieter or more private work environments, or run
interference for them so that they can focus without a lot of distraction.
Next, to borrow a suggestion from Susan Cain’s popular TED Talk about the power of introverts:
“Stop the madness for group work! Just stop it!” Engage Guardians and Quiet Integrators by giving
them some alone time for more-reflective tasks. Instead of defaulting to teamwork, ask whether
some tasks are actually better done in solitude.
Sensitive introverts may not take charge, or compete, or even talk much at all, but don’t mistake this
for lack of interest. They’re almost certainly observing and processing. If you want their perspective,
ask them directly, but use a light touch—cold-calling Guardians and Quiet Integrators can backfire if
Encourage anyone in the minority to speak up before a “cascade” starts.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
they haven’t had a chance to reflect first. If you do
give them an opportunity to prepare and then make
space for them to speak in a meeting, they’ll
probably be happy to offer their thoughts. One
leader we worked with was particularly skilled at
this. Before meetings that included introverted team
members, she would tell them what the discussion
would focus on, often making specific requests to
facilitate their involvement: “Will you say
something about X topic or comment on section Y
when we get to it in the meeting?”
Guardians and Quiet Integrators spend a lot of time
and energy reviewing their own mistakes, so it’s
important to create an environment where good
faith efforts are celebrated even when they fail.
Since teams that feel psychologically safe have been
shown to outperform those that do not, this can
benefit team members of all styles.
Practicing What We Preach
We’ve seen the power of this approach in working with executives and teams, and we’ve also
experienced it personally, in our own opposing-styles partnership. One of us, Kim, is a Pioneer with
a good bit of Driver mixed in. She values expansive thinking and rapid advancement, and she leads a
large team dominated by other extroverted, free-wheeling Pioneers. Suzanne is a Guardian and a
Quiet Integrator—a double dose of introverted sensitivity—making her a bit different from many of
her teammates. She processes things deeply, insists on rigor, and can’t be rushed. Working with Kim
and the broader team sometimes feels to Suzanne like trying to thread a needle in the midst of a
hurricane. To Kim, working with Suzanne sometimes feels like running in deep water.
Early on, things didn’t always go smoothly for us, but with time we’ve realized how much stronger
we are working together. Suzanne knows that Kim’s always got the big picture in mind, and Kim
trusts that Suzanne has considered every detail. And as the team’s leader, Kim has created a
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
protective enclave that allows Suzanne to take cover
and do what she does best. Our partnership is better
for it, and so is our team.
Suzanne M. Johnson Vickberg is a social-personality psychologist and Deloitte’s lead researcher on the firm’s Business Chemistry system.
Kim Christfort
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
How Work Styles Inform Leadership by Alison Beard
S AV E S H A R E
STRATEGY Adam Malamut Chief Customer Experience Officer, Marriott
Two years ago, when I was chief talent officer for Marriott, I was tasked with streamlining and
modernizing our learning and development capabilities. I’d assembled a new team and wanted to
make sure we understood one another, our roles and responsibilities, and our strategic objectives
before embarking on this journey. We used the personality style framework not only to understand
our own strengths and weaknesses and how to work more effectively together but also to identify
where we needed to augment the team and what we could realistically accomplish in our first year,
and then our second.
As one of the initial steps in the strategic planning process, everyone considered their own profiles
and those of their respective teams and started to staff them more appropriately. For example, the
groups working on the design and development of our learning content and delivery approaches
had a strong Guardian and Driver orientation; they needed to be pushed from a creative standpoint,
Kim Christfort is the national managing director of Deloitte Greenhouse experiences. She is one of the original architects of the firm’s Business Chemistry system.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
so we added a Pioneer to lead an arm of that team. And when I staffed the group charged with the
detail-oriented and collaborative process of organizing and integrating our learning and delivery
offerings, I made sure to include Guardians and Integrators. As a Pioneer and Driver, I need those
types around me personally, too.
Now I’m in a new role—chief customer experience officer—and getting ready to launch a series of
change initiatives following our merger with Starwood. My peers and I—a group of seven senior
leaders—plan to use this approach to improve collaboration as we develop and execute on our
strategic plans.
MANAGING UP AND DOWN Elizabeth Bryant Vice President, Southwest Airlines University
When I took the personality style test six months ago—along with about 50 other senior Southwest
executives—I had a real “aha” moment. The surprise wasn’t my own results: I’m strong on both the
Pioneer and Integrator scales—a strategist and a communicator. It was that I hadn’t been thinking
carefully enough about how to temper those tendencies for people with different styles.
For example, my boss—who leads corporate services—is more of a Driver, so I can’t just talk through
the vision of a particular initiative with him. I need to make it very clear that we’re hitting our
milestones: “Here’s what we’ve accomplished, and here’s where we’re going.”
We’re both paying more attention to the mix of styles on our leadership team, too. It’s the two of us
plus three Integrators, so we all need to put our Guardian hats on once in a while to make sure that
we’re gathering the data, protecting our history and culture, and moving at the right pace.
I’ve also had my direct reports take the assessment, and I’ve learned that they’re mostly Integrators.
That’s great, but I’m conscious that we need some Driver behavior as well: A goal is just a goal until
you make it happen. My husband reminded me of this the other day. We’d been house hunting, and
I’d found the perfect place for us to buy, so I felt my work was done. But then he said, “You know,
Elizabeth, it’s great that you have this vision and go after it, but then everyone around you has to get
to work. I’m the one who has to deal with the realtor, the lawyer, the inspector.” I shared this story
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
with my team and asked that they tell me when an idea I suggest sounds challenging—or even
impossible. And I’m now more conscientious when thinking out loud. Something I ask about
o堂andedly could, for an Integrator, Driver, or Guardian, be understood as an important to-do item.
HIRING AND JOB CRAFTING Greg Keeley Executive Vice President, American Express
I took the assessment as part of an executive evaluation, and I expected my results to show that I’m
100% Driver, because that was my role at American Express. But I was strongest on the Pioneer
scale. This showed me that although I was doing what the firm needed me to do, many of the
behaviors I’d adopted didn’t reflect who I really am.
I shared the findings with my boss and my team and asked my direct reports to take the test. I was
pleasantly surprised by the diversity in our group and soon realized that I could dial down the Driver
aspects of my job. Of course, we still had product, process, and revenue goals to hit, but I could use a
scorecard to track those, delegate some duties, and spend more time on new-product development
and strategy.
When I did, my job satisfaction shot way up. I’m in the same role, with the same boss and team, but
I have so much more passion and energy than I did before. I’ve even changed the way I introduce
myself to new colleagues or vendors. Before a meeting starts, I take a few minutes to say, “Here’s
how I tend to think and act…” and I ask them to do the same for me. It’s a shortcut to better
communication and engagement.
And personality now informs how I think about assignments, promotions, and hiring. When I was
recently trying to fill a role, I met with a strong candidate who took the assessment and came up as a
Driver/Guardian. But the job required vision and coordination with other groups. What I needed was
a Pioneer/Integrator. I modified the job description and finally found the right person. The
Driver/Guardian took a position in the company more suited to his personality. I’d love to see middle
managers adopt this sort of thinking—they oversee an estimated 80% of the workforce—because it’s
fundamental leadership training. You need to know who you are before you know what you can
become.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
TEAMWORK Charles Derosa U.S. Treasurer, National Grid
I’ve now led three teams at National Grid, ranging from about 25 people to about 200. I always talk
to my staff about personality styles, because I believe it helps people work together more effectively.
I’m a Driver, one of those personalities that can push people hard. I like facts and figures, and goals
and objectives. My natural instinct is to skip small talk. One of my bosses is a Pioneer; he enjoys
brainstorming. One of my direct reports is an Integrator, who wants to make sure every view is
expressed. Other people on my team are Guardians. They’re very reliable but not always flexible,
and they often play devil’s advocate. To function effectively, we need to recognize and appreciate
everyone’s style and to have open discussions about our differences: What does each of us like? And
what really bugs us? This enables us to be more thoughtful in our interactions.
Since we started having these conversations, the people on my team have adapted their styles a bit:
The Guardians recognize that their behavior can seem defensive, and they try to avoid ruffling
feathers while still conveying important messages. The Drivers now show more patience. When
dealing with me, everyone prepares more thoroughly and tries to get to the point more quickly. I
have adapted as well; in the past I’d get frustrated, but now I realize how important each style is in
reaching the best decision. And when the group has personality conflicts, I do my best to facilitate
progress. In the end, we’re all better able to work together toward our goals and those of the
department.
It’s human nature to gravitate toward people with work styles similar to our own. But there will
always be (and we benefit from) personality diversity in the workplace. I believe in providing the
right opportunity to all types.
DECISION MAKING Gary Pilnick Vice Chairman, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer, Kellogg
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Executives need to be thinking in all four quadrants of personality when they’re making big
decisions. For example, I’m a Pioneer/Integrator, which means I need to flex to Driver and Guardian
mindsets sometimes. Otherwise all I’m doing is dreaming and talking to people. When I’m working
with a fellow Pioneer/Integrator, I need to ask, “Where’s your data?” and set firm deadlines. With a
Driver, I’ll say, “OK, we’ve clarified objectives and the schedule. What experts should you consult
with now? Who needs to be informed?” With a Guardian, it’s about focusing on results: “Are we
pushing hard enough?”
Because my team has been through the assessment process, we can all talk this way now. In a recent
meeting with one of my leaders, we started by “pioneering” together, then I was reminded “OK, it’s
time to ‘drive’ and make a decision.” And we did it with smiles on our faces.
Of course, it’s nice to lean into your dominant style, and most of us do when we’re under stress. But
we all are able to shift mindsets, or think like the others, when we’re reminded to. It’s not like trying
to write with the wrong hand. It’s more like going a little faster or slower than normal on the
highway, or taking a new route to work. It feels different and maybe a little uncomfortable, but it’s
not awkward. I’ve worked for several Pioneer/Drivers over the years, and I wouldn’t have survived
without the ability to get things done. I have a strong Pioneer in a key compliance role, but I
wouldn’t want anyone else because she can flex into Guardian when necessary. And I have a Driver
on my team who now recognizes that he can deliver faster results with more-lasting outcomes by
slowing down and getting colleagues to collaborate.
I see this framework as one way to move all our departments toward a more agile culture that values
quick yet informed decisions. It’s a blueprint for touching all the bases.
“If You Understand How the Brain
Alison Beard is a senior editor at Harvard Business Review.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
ETHAN HILL
“If You Understand How the Brain Works, You Can Reach Anyone” by Alison Beard
S AV E S H A R E
The Theory: Helen Fisher’s research on the brain
systems that drive human personality, attraction,
and love has been featured in academic journals,
TED conferences, and the dating website
Match.com. It is now finding business-world
applications at companies such as Deloitte.
Affiliated with the Kinsey Institute and Rutgers
University, Fisher also coaches executives, and in
2015 she launched the corporate consultancy
NeuroColor in partnership with leadership and
innovation adviser David Labno.
How did you make the leap from personal relationships to professional ones?
My work on personality styles had been getting
some attention, and Dave Labno, who I didn’t
know at the time but who would eventually
become my partner, heard me in an interview on
National Public Radio. He called me up and said,
“You know, Helen, you don’t study love. You
study relationships.” And instantly I could see
that he was right. The questionnaire I’d developed to help people pair off romantically could be
applied to understanding family, friends, colleagues, clients. Dave had worked in business for years
and knew all the currently available personality tests, and he felt that mine was a disruptive
technology.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Why is it better than other assessments such as Myers-Briggs and Big Five personality tests?
Because it is based on brain chemistry. I looked at neurological research to develop the
questionnaire and then, with colleagues, used functional magnetic resonance imaging to validate it.
We all have two parts to our personalities that are in constant interaction: culture (which is what
your upbringing teaches you to believe, do, and say) and temperament (which comes from your
biology, genes, hormones, and neurotransmitters). I study temperament. Most brain systems keep
the eyes blinking, the heart beating, the metabolism running. But when Match.com asked me, “Why
does someone fall in love with one person rather than another?” I tried to find a neurological
answer. I spent two years studying the literature and found, over and over, that four biological
systems—dopamine/norepinephrine, serotonin, testosterone, and estrogen/oxytocin—are each
linked to a particular suite of personality traits. I found this in research not only on humans but also
on doves, lizards, and monkeys.
What links did you find?
People who express certain genes in the dopamine system tend to be curious, creative,
spontaneous, energetic, and mentally flexible. They are risk-takers and seek novelty. People who
have high serotonin activity (or who take SSRI antidepressants) are more sociable, more eager to
belong. They’re quite traditional in their values and less inclined toward exploration. People
expressive of the testosterone system are tough-minded, direct, decisive, skeptical, and assertive.
They tend to be good at what we called rule-based systems—engineering, computers, mechanics,
math, and music. And people who are expressive of the estrogen/oxytocin system tend to be
intuitive, imaginative, trusting, empathetic, and contextual long-term thinkers. They are sensitive
to people’s feelings, too, and typically have good verbal and social skills.
Working with a statistician, I created a questionnaire to measure the degree to which a person
expresses the traits in each of these four systems. Then we put it on Match.com and Chemistry.com
and watched who was naturally drawn to whom.
How did you test its accuracy?
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
I did two fMRI studies—one with young couples, the other with older couples. The subjects
answered my questionnaire and then went into the scanner. It turned out that people who scored
high on my scale measuring the traits linked with the dopamine system showed a lot of activity in
dopamine pathways of their brains. Those who scored high on my serotonin scale had increased
activity in an area linked with “social norm conformity.” In people with high testosterone scores,
brain activity was highest in areas related to visual and mathematical perception and in areas built
by fetal testosterone. Those who scored highest on my estrogen/oxytocin scale showed more
activity in the mirror neurons linked with empathy and other brain regions built by fetal estrogen.
That, in itself, is different from any other questionnaire. I was able to validate that mine is
measuring what I say it’s measuring.
So should we throw out those other tests?
I don’t have any problem with other good questionnaires that are based on psychology or linguistic
studies or even intuition—but I don’t think they’re as accurate, because they’re not drawn from hard
science. Let’s look at the Myers-Briggs, which is probably the best known. It’s measuring four things:
extroversion versus introversion, intuitive versus sensing, thinking versus feeling, and judging
versus perceiving behaviors. Well, the feeling/thinking questions are really measuring the
estrogen/oxytocin and testosterone system traits. The perceiving/judging scale focuses on
dopamine- versus serotonin-linked traits. So in those areas, they’ve got it right. But the
intuitive/sensing scale measures estrogen-linked traits versus serotonin-linked traits; that suggests
that those traits oppose each other, which they don’t in the brain.
As for extroversion/introversion, Isabel Myers, one of the creators of Myers-Briggs, once said that
this scale measures where you get your energy—either from being with others or from being alone.
But her questions also measure whether you’re outgoing or reserved, which are totally different
things. For example, I and many other people are outgoing introverts—we’re comfortable
chatterboxes in social settings—but we recharge when we’re alone.
Another problem with this and most personality tests is that they aim to put those who take them in
one category or another. But the brain doesn’t work in cubbyholes. My test measures how strongly
you express traits in each neural system. Some might be expressed more strongly than others. But
the granularity is there.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Still, at the end of the day you, Match, and Deloitte are labeling people by dominant style. What’s the benefit in that?
Here’s an example from my own life. I was recently working with a man who, like me, is very high
on dopamine, but unlike me, very high on serotonin, which is linked with risk aversion. A particular
issue cropped up, and although I was convinced that I was absolutely right in my appraisal of it, he
was being very cautious. If I didn’t know anything about brain chemistry, I would have thought he
was just being stubborn as hell. But instead, I saw that it was what I call a “serotonin gap.” His
hesitation had nothing to do with me or the project. It’s just the way he is. This smoothed over what
could have been a big misunderstanding and made us a better team. Now I want his serotonin
around me because I see the value of it.
Is the idea to not just identify and understand differing personalities at work but also to adjust your behavior to better suit your colleagues?
Absolutely. You can tailor the way you present information, modify your language when responding
to questions, and even adjust how you carry your body so that people with other styles are more
receptive. Let me give you another example. A senior partner at Deloitte, who’d heard me talk about
the styles, was about to give a presentation to an important client. His team had just finished up the
slide deck, it was almost midnight, and everyone was on their way to bed. But he suddenly realized
that the focus of the pitch—big on theory, few details—wasn’t right for his audience of global bank
executives, who he suspected were high-serotonin types. So they stayed up most of the night to
redo it, and in the morning they closed a million-dollar deal. The point is: If you understand how to
size up those around you, you can reach anyone—your clients, bosses, subordinates—far more
effectively.
Is it possible to change your style?
We’re flexible to a certain extent, but not entirely. For example, math is a skill linked to testosterone.
I’m terrible at math, and I’m never going to be great at it. If I’d grown up with a physicist mother and
an architect father—in a family culture that valued math—I’d be better at it, but I’d never be great.
Could someone make me tough-minded? I doubt it. I might act tough when I have to, but it makes
me uncomfortable. Some time ago, after I gave a speech at the Smithsonian, a female executive
came up to me and said, “At work I’m decisive and authoritative, but I married a man who wanted
me to be soft and sweet at home. And I could do it, but I found it exhausting.” She told me that she
ultimately divorced him. So yes, we can act out of character, but it’s tiring. At NeuroColor, we have
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
people take our questionnaire twice. The first time, they describe their thinking and behavior at
work; the second time, how they are “outside work.” It’s a great measure of authenticity: Where are
you most yourself ?
Do you see a future in which these tests inform decisions about hiring, promotions, and team building? High-serotonin people in accounting, high-dopamine in business development?
I don’t think you’d want to pigeonhole people that way. But I’d certainly add this information to the
mix, because it can help you build more-effective teams. The four styles of thinking and behaving
evolved in hunter-gatherer societies over many millennia for a reason. Imagine a group of people in
Africa, hundreds of thousands of years ago, walking together to look for a new camp. Suddenly, they
find some mushrooms. You can’t have only high-dopamine types, because they’d all try the
mushrooms and maybe be poisoned. You need some high-serotonin types to say, “We shouldn’t do
this; it’s not in our tradition”; some high-testosterone types to say, “Let’s experiment: Feed the
mushrooms to the dog and see what happens”; and some high-estrogen types to say, “Let’s discuss
what we know about these mushrooms.” We evolved to think differently so that we could put our
heads together and come up with good solutions. Complementary styles of thinking make for a
more effective team. Unfortunately, it seems that when organizations think about diversity today,
they look at race or gender or cultural background—but not diversity of mind. So you have your
women and minorities represented, and that’s great—but they may all share the same temperament,
so the group isn’t as diverse as you think.
You’ve assessed people in many different countries. Have you found more similarities or differences?
The president of Match asked me a few years ago if my questionnaire would work in other cultures,
and I told him that if it didn’t, I had failed, because I’m studying the human personality, not the
American personality. That version has now been used successfully in 40 countries.
But we have found some interesting regional differences. For example, more Chinese and Japanese
people score high on the serotonin scale. When I mentioned this to a geneticist, Lee Silver from
Princeton, he wasn’t surprised. He told me that there’s a gene for social-norm conformity that
occurs more frequently in China and Japan than anywhere else. He also told me that there’s a gene
When firms think about diversity, they look at race or gender—but not diversity of mind.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
linked with dopamine that’s most common in the Amazonian basin. You could hypothesize that the
exploratory, high-dopamine types walked over the prehistoric land bridge from Africa, carrying
those genes with them and passing them down, or that people with those traits were the only ones
who could adapt to life in the Amazon and survive. You can begin to see how entire cultures—and
organizations—take on certain personality styles.
Testosterone and estrogen are sex-linked traits. Do you worry that your framework reinforces gender stereotyping?
It’s true that across cultures, many more men score high on the testosterone scale, and many more
women score high on the estrogen scale. At the same time, we all are made up of an array of the
traits. As I said, I’m high estrogen, and in a group those traits come out: I listen carefully, I try to get
along. When I’m alone, at my desk, I’m all dopamine: I’m creative, focused on my work. I’m lower
on testosterone: I’m not tough-minded or good at math. But I am logical—certainly in business if not
always in love. So in evaluating yourself and others, you have to think about all four biological
systems. When you understand where someone lands on each scale, you begin to see the full
personality.
A Brief History of Personality Tests by Eben Harrell
S AV E S H A R E
Alison Beard is a senior editor at Harvard Business Review.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
First used by the U.S. Army during World War I to try to predict which soldiers would suffer from
“shell shock,” personality testing today is a roughly $500 million industry, with an annual growth
rate estimated at 10% to 15%. Millions of workers take assessments each year as part of personnel
selection, to improve collaboration and teamwork, and to identify satisfying career paths.
But personality screening is not without controversy. In recent lawsuits, courts have ruled that the
use of certain tests discriminates against protected classes of workers, particularly those with
disabilities. Research suggests that many beliefs held by HR professionals about personality
screening run counter to scientific evidence. And management scholars worry that fixating on
personality as the primary source of conflict at work can cause managers to overlook the crucial role
they play in creating the enabling conditions for teams to succeed—whatever their composition.
The industry’s robust growth, however, suggests that managers increasingly rely on personality
testing as a tool to optimize their workforces. The tests are inexpensive compared with other
assessment tools, and they are easy to administer—modern tests can be taken online without an
examiner present. Hundreds of assessments exist today, yet over the past century, three have had an
outsize impact.
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Katharine Briggs began her research into personality in 1917 as a means to understand what she saw
as an unlikely attraction between her cherished daughter, Isabel, and fiancé, Clarence Myers. Over
20 years, the mother-daughter team worked to develop the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, drawing
heavily on the work of the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung. Since the 1960s, some 50 million people
have taken the test, making it by far the most popular personality assessment ever created.
The MBTI holds that people have preferred modes of perception (sensing or intuition) and judgment
(thinking or feeling) as well as attitudes about how they build energy (extroversion or introversion)
and their orientation to the outer world (judging or perceiving). These preferences combine to form
16 personality types.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
Experts argue that the categories don’t predict individual or team effectiveness. Studies have found
that more than half the people who retake the test get a different result the second time. The Myers-
Briggs Foundation warns against using it “for hiring or for deciding job assignments,” yet the test’s
popularity persists at many blue-chip firms. Proponents find it useful for helping people understand
their own and their colleagues’ styles and preferences and for reducing conflict in the workplace.
The Five-Factor Model
Often called the “Big Five,” the five-factor model is a set of personality traits derived from a
statistical study of words commonly used to describe psychological characteristics across cultures
and languages. The categories are openness to experience, conscientiousness, extroversion,
agreeableness, and neuroticism.
Widely accepted by academics as the gold standard in the evolving field of personality research, the
FFM has informed a host of other personality assessments, including the NEO Personality Inventory
(developed by two of the creators of the five-factor model) and the Hogan Personality Inventory
(which examines how a person relates to others). Unlike the MBTI, assessments based on the Big
Five can reliably predict job performance, studies show. (The correlation is stronger for other
psychometric measurements, such as IQ , however.) Research also suggests that FFM-based
assessments can help predict personalities that are likely to either clash or work harmoniously
together.
Strengthsfinder
A new branch of psychology emerged in the 1990s that examines how healthy minds remain
resilient and flourish. “Positive psychology” has spawned various assessments; Gallup’s
StrengthsFinder 2.0, the most popular, is taken by 1.6 million employees every year in more than
400 of the Fortune 500 companies. Strengths-based assessments aim to increase engagement, job
satisfaction, and productivity by helping companies design jobs that take advantage of their
employees’ best qualities. Other assessments that harness insights from positive psychology include
the VIA Survey of Character Strengths and the Birkman Method.
Some argue that focusing only on the positive is not the optimal way to spur improvement; criticism
and realistic self-assessments also contribute to better performance.
What’s Next
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
What’s Next
Increasingly, companies are abandoning brand-name and open-source tools in favor of bespoke
personality tests. The goal is to improve hiring practices by identifying high performers in given
roles and then reverse-engineering job descriptions on the basis of their traits.
Some academics are skeptical of these products, partly because of the proprietary nature of the
firms’ methodologies. But many believe that advances in neuroscience and in tools for statistical
analysis will yield a reliable way to identify the traits that lead to a high-performing workforce.
Given the potential payoff, companies will continue to invest in personality screening as they battle
for competitive advantage in a knowledge economy.
Eben Harrell is a senior editor at Harvard Business Review.
Comments
Leave a Comment
P O S T
R E P LY 0 0
31 COMMENTS
gajapathi kannan 2 hours ago
This sounds very much like Disc (S and C combined as Guardians, D split into Pioneers and Drivers, I left unchanged).
It will be interesting to see how this changes diverse group working effectively vs many other tools like this. If a team
is not effective its not because they use wrong tool.
POSTING GUIDELINES
J O I N T H E C O N V E R S AT I O N
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
We hope the conversations that take place on HBR.org will be energetic, constructive, and thought-provoking. To comment, readers must sign in or
register. And to ensure the quality of the discussion, our moderating team will review all comments and may edit them for clarity, length, and relevance.
Comments that are overly promotional, mean-spirited, or off-topic may be deleted per the moderators' judgment. All postings become the property of
Harvard Business Publishing.
READ 4 PIECES IN THIS PACKAGE
START WITH: PIONEERS, DRIVERS, INTEGRATORS, AND GUARDIANS
HOW WORK STYLES INFORM LEADERSHIP
“IF YOU UNDERSTAND HOW THE BRAIN WORKS, YOU CAN REACH ANYONE”
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PERSONALITY TESTS
