Newsletter #42

In this issue:

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator® and Communicating with INFPs

About the Strong Interest Inventory®: 2004 Artistic Theme Scores

About the FIRO-B™: Team Development – Role Satisfaction Part III

The 16PF®– The 16 Personality Factors: Factor O – Apprehension

Communicating with INFPs

Many INFPs prefer talking with people on a one-to-one basis, with an emphasis on human values, and with someone with whom they have established trust. They usually like the personal touch, so spend time getting to know them and what they find important. Other INFPs really enjoy and spend a great deal of effort writing long e-mails. INFPs generally want to be appreciated as individuals, someone unique, working for harmony and understanding. They want people to provide positive reinforcement as well as gentle criticism. INFPs like inspiring personal stories about how others have overcome adversity, as well as stories that have meaning. They usually want autonomy, and the freedom to choose goals they agree with. As with many Feeler types, they like to know how the information or plan will help people develop and reach their potential.

Areas to avoid when communicating with INFPs include being too logical, harsh, or critical. This can be an issue, since "too harsh" for an INFP might be "normal" conversation for other types. INFPs generally do not do well with rigid structures, hierarchy, or inflexible timelines. If you focus exclusively on what's "practical" or "obvious," you're sure to alienate most INFPs. It takes time to establish trust with them, particularly if you're highly task-oriented. INFPs react poorly when others try to control them. Conformity is rarely an INFP trait. Ignoring the personal or human side of an issue will also tend to aggravate INFPs. Likewise, they are unlikely to enjoy long, detailed discussions about routine matters, standard procedures, or minutiae. Another common error is to assume you understand the INFP's position on a subject without taking the time to listen to him or her. Top

About the Strong Interest Inventory: 2004 Artistic Theme Scores

The latest version of the Strong was released in December 2004. There were a number of changes to the test questions and the resulting reports. One change was the ranking of the different professions for men and women in each general occupational theme code, according to the most and least likely to choose that theme. This time the Artistic theme is our focus.

Let's start with the men. The occupations most likely to choose Artistic as the top theme included Editor, Technical Writer, ESL Instructor, English Teacher, Translator, Art Teacher, Attorney, and Minister. The least likely included Production Worker, Farmer/Rancher, Financial Analyst, Bookkeeper, Accountant, Health Information Specialist, Medical Technician, and Banker.

For women, the list was almost identical. Among the most likely to choose Artistic were Editor, ESL Instructor, Technical Writer, English Teacher, Urban & Regional Planner, Art Teacher, Translator, and Attorney. Among the least likely, the list is the same as for men: Production Worker, Farmer/Rancher, Financial Analyst, Bookkeeper, Accountant, Health Information Specialist, Medical Technician, and Banker.

Of course, it’s possible to have Artistic as your top theme and not like any of the above occupations. This information shows the general trend, and is not a reason to either choose or eliminate any option from your career search. Top

The FIRO-B: Team Development – Role Satisfaction, Part III

For many of us, our scores on any particular FIRO-B scale can fall in the medium range, either high or low. In such cases, it might be worthwhile to look at your highest score and see how it relates to those aspects of being on a team that are most important to you. Let’s look at those cases where Affection is your highest score.

Those who report Affection as their highest total need frequently state they want a feeling of being part of a family when they're on a team. Loyalty to the team and a sense of commitment are important, as are support and encouragement from within the team. High scorers usually want long and intense contact with others, and their conversations can be rather frank. Still, personal warmth and rapport are high on the list of desirable team traits. These types often prefer to have contact with team members outside of work or formal meetings and to develop close personal bonds with others. Being appreciated by other team members is usually very important, particularly acknowledging individual contributions and efforts.

As usual, most of us will share some of the above desires to some degree. It's more a matter of which factors are most important to you and whether or not your needs can be met on your team. Top

The 16 Personality Factors: Factor O – Apprehension

The next 16PF scale for discussion is the Factor "O" scale, which is Apprehension (Self-Assured vs. Apprehensive). What exactly does this scale measure?

High scorers tend to worry about things and feel apprehensive and insecure. This could be a result of life circumstances or just a general pattern of reacting to events. People with high scores report they're sensitive, self-critical, and feel hurt if people dislike them. Worrying can help if it leads a person to anticipate dangers and take preventative steps to reduce risks, as well as being able to better judge the consequences of actions.

In contrast, low scorers tend to be more self-assured, confident, and self-satisfied. They report worrying less than most people, don't spend much time thinking about what they should've said, and don't care if people dislike them. Extremely low scores can mean someone is unrealistic, and his or her confidence is never shaken, even when it’s warranted. They might ignore information that conflicts with their self image.

Factor O is one of the three scales which shows a gender difference, with women generally reporting slightly higher scores than men. This factor contributes to the global Anxiety scale. The socially desirable pole of this scale is the low end.

As with all the 16PF scales, major insights come from the interactions among the 16 scales, and not from each scale in isolation.