One of the most common questions about using the DISC model is this: “How do I know another person’s personality style?”

Well, the short answer is: you can’t know another person’s style without assessment results.

You can, however, make an educated guess about their primary style (or at least how they are interacting in the current situation) by observing their words and behaviors and answering two simple questions (phrased in the language of the DISC model):

1. Are they more outgoing or more reserved? and
2. Are they more task-oriented or more people oriented?

Or, stated another way:

1. Do they speak more quickly, loudly and emphatically or more slowly, softly and monotone?, and
2. Do they speak in more factual, “thinking” language or in a more relational, “feeling” language?

Answer those two questions and you’ve got your starting point for connecting better with them.

If they are:

• Outgoing and Task oriented, use Dominant language.
• Outgoing and People-oriented, use Inspiring language.
• Reserved and People-oriented, use Supportive language.
• Reserved and Task-oriented, use Cautious language.

Related posts:

1. Communication Tips: Connecting With Reserved, People-Oriented People
2. Get Over Yourself To Develop Effective Communication Skills
3. Communication Tips: Connecting With Outgoing, People-Oriented People

Guy Answers the Question:
Is Changing Your Behavior Phoney?

As I teach, train, and coach using the DISC model, people hear me say that I encourage them to change their behaviors to fit the situation and to better connect with other people.

Sometimes, people ask me if consciously changing behavior is phoney or fake. This concern raises another common question about the DISC model, and how I recommend people use it to connect and communicate more effectively.

In answering this question, I often refer to a Thomas Jefferson quote:

In matters of style, swim with the current. In matters of principle, stand like a rock.

As I see it, choosing a behavior, word, or tone that will improve your communication effectiveness is not a moral or ethical issue. It is just a matter of style.

We often change our behaviors for different environments. For example, most people recognize that appropriate behavior during a wedding ceremony is likely to be different from appropriate behavior at the celebration party after the ceremony. Different environments call for different behaviors.

As long as your intent is not to defraud, manipulate, or somehow deceive the other person, behaving in a way that might be uncomfortable or unnatural for you in the interest of connecting with them is not fake or phoney. Rather, I see it as working to create a better environment for the other person.

Related posts:

1. A DISC Model Question You Should Ask of Yourself
2. DISC Model FAQ’s: Could I Have More Than One DISC Behavior Style?
3. DISC FAQ’s: Can I Change My Personality Style On Purpose?

Earlier this week, I attended the ASTD conference in Chicago. As I worked in the Kevin Eikenberry Group booth, I noticed an interesting dynamic happening at the booths around me.

Where someone was willing to stand on a platform and speak, other people were willing to stop and listen.

In fact, it looked to me like people were not just willing to listen; they wanted to listen.

Likewise, at the booths where people sat and waited for the conference attendees to approach them, nothing happened.

So, here’s a big lesson I learned while working an exhibit hall booth at ASTD 2010 in Chicago:

If you’ve got something to say, stand up and say it.

If you stand up and say it, other people will probably stop to listen. They might not like what you have to say. They might not agree with what you have to say. They will listen to what you have to say.

I’m not advocating the use of a platform to harrangue, harrass,  or irritate people. I am suggesting that to be heard you have to have the courage to stand-up and speak.

Related posts:

1. One Way To Guarantee That Your Suggestion Is Ignored
2. The Positive Runs Out
3. Effective Communication Skills: You Don’t Know Until You Ask

I don’t know about you, but I often get frustrated in conversations when the other person simply will not slow down long enough to hear what I have to say.

On a number of occasions lately, I have had the opportunity to work through these types of conversations with other people. We both wanted to be heard, and both of us were talking.

In reflecting on the situations, I recall some things I learned as a practicing engineer. I remembered concepts from the physical world that paint a clear picture by way of analogy for how we can better connect and communicate with others.

Imagine that you have a sealed container of some kind. It could be a pressure cooker on the stove or a carbonated beverage bottle on a warm day. They both demonstrate my point.

The sealed container has pressure in it greater than the pressure exerted on it by the environment. As a result, venting the container causes the liquid inside to vent out of the container.

If you want to put something new into the container, you can either let what’s inside it vent to reduce the pressure before pouring in the new contents or you can push the new contents in at a high pressure.

The first approach takes a little patience, but it doesn’t take much energy.

The second approach can seem faster in the moment, but it takes lots of energy and it creates the risk of rupturing the container.

I think that people are sort of like the containers in my example above.

When they have pent up emotional pressure inside (anger, frustration, pain, etc.), they have to vent what’s inside of them before they can receive any new information. They have to be heard and understood before they are ready to hear and understand.

Keeping this thought in mind, here’s a communication tip for you. The next time you are confronted by a really agitated person, give them a chance to vent before you attempt to deliver your message. Once they relieve the pressure inside of themselves, they just might be willing to listen to what you have to say.

Related posts:

1. DISC Model FAQ’s: Is Changing Your Behavior Phoney?
2. How To Control Your Anger: Two Questions To Ask Yourself
3. One Way To Guarantee That Your Suggestion Is Ignored

This series of articles contains specific tips, insights, and techniques for connecting with people better.

Related posts:

1. Communication Tips: Connecting With Reserved, People-Oriented People
2. Communication Tips: Connecting With Outgoing, People-Oriented People
3. Communication Tips: Connecting With Outgoing, Task-Oriented People

Related posts:

1. DISC Model FAQ’s: Is Changing Your Behavior Phoney?
2. Communication Tips: Connecting With Reserved, People-Oriented People
3. Connecting With People

Guy Answers the Question:
Can Four Styles Really Describe Everyone?

One question that frequently comes up when I teach the DISC model is this:

“Can you really describe everyone with just four styles?”

The short answer is: yes, you can describe all the behaviors and perspectives of all people using information revealed by understanding the four DISC style descriptors.*

Sometimes people take exception to this simple answer. When they do, I usually get challenged with something like:

“There are 6 billion people on the planet, you can’t possibly define all of them with four letters/categories.”

To which, I reply: “You’re right. I can’t define all people with four letters or categories. I can, though, use four basic style descriptors to create a frame of reference that allows me to understand them better when we interact.”

Here are some observations to support this position.

We Regularly Use Only Two Categories to Describe All People

There are two broad categories that we use every day to describe all people on the planet: male and female.

The studies of male vs. female perspectives I have read indicate that men tend to share perspectives on certain issues, women tend to share perspectives on these same issues, and men tend to have different perspectives from women on the issues in question.

The results in the studies point to general perspective similarities only on the issues evaluated in the study. It would be a wrong application of the study results to say that all men or all women think, feel, or behave a certain way in all situations. It is okay to say that the studies reveal tendencies and similarities in the perspectives evaluated in the studies.

I am not a woman. When I read the study results about the perspectives many women have on certain issues, I frankly don’t get it. I understand it intellectually. I just don’t relate to the perspective.

When I interact with my wife, I can use my understanding of the study results to better understand the true intent of her words and actions. I can attempt to view her behavior through her lens rather than through mine. I don’t want to stereotype her with the results. I just want to use the study results to get an emotional hook that allows me to “get” what she is saying in a different way than I would “get” it if I had no way to reframe what I was hearing and seeing.

We Use Only 26 Letters to Define the English Language

I don’t know the exact number of words used in the English language. I have heard that it is greater than 1 million words. And still, all of them are fully defined with only 26 letters.

What Does All This Have to do With the Question We Began With?

I don’t want to categorize, label, or box-in anyone. I don’t want to tell people what job they are or are not qualified to pursue because of their behavior style. I don’t want to psychoanalyze them. I just want to understand them so that I can connect and communicate better.

The four DISC behavioral styles simply reveal tendencies and patterns in behaviors and perceptions. They do not neatly define another person.They do provide guidance and insight to understanding other perspectives that happen to be different from mine.

I see the DISC model as a sort of alphabet that helps me to understand people more fully than I would if I was stuck with only my viewpoint as a filter for understanding them.

When you really understand the model and it’s application, you learn that there are far more than four “categories” to use for that understanding. (I don’t really like the word category in this context. It’s just the simplest word I can find at the moment.)

When you consider the different simple combinations of the four DISC descriptors, you quickly arrive at 41 generalized style “types.”

For example, I have a strong blend of Cautious, Dominant, and Supportive traits. None of the three fully describes my viewpoint. The combination of the three traits gets pretty close. Likewise, my wife has a strong blend of Dominant, Inspiring, and Cautious traits. When I look at that combination of traits, it gets pretty close to describing how she usually responds to situations.

To take it one step deeper, you could consider the various levels of intensities of the four styles that any given person might exhibit. When you do that, you get 19,680 different Basic DISC style graphs. I don’t intend to go deeply into these subtleties here.

And, I haven’t even begun to comment on what you learn from the Environmental DISC style graphs or by understanding “low styles” like the “I” trait shown in my DISC profile graph to the right.

All of this simply makes the point that the simple little DISC model of human behavior has much more depth than most people see when they first encounter it.

When people use the model to define another person or to limit their potential, they use the model as a weapon. They are stereotyping and labeling. Both of which, I think, are wrong. These are really good strategies if you want to irritate someone with the DISC model.

When people use the model to create an understanding of another person’s perspective, they use the model as a tool. They are connecting and communicating more effectively. Both of which, I think, are good.

To me, the beauty of the model lies in its simplicity. Its simplicity helps me to remember it when the pressure hits. It helps me to quickly explain it to others when the time is right.

The depth of the model gives me confidence that I can, with study and practice, learn to use it to strengthen and deepen all of my relationships.

*When I say “all people,” I am referring to all people who fall into what you could call “normal human psychology.” Which means, people with no clinical psychological disorder. This would be something like 90-95% of the people on the planet. Not truly everyone, but most people I encounter on a daily basis.

Related posts:

1. DISC Model FAQ’s: Could I Have More Than One DISC Behavior Style?
2. DISC Model FAQ’s: Is Changing Your Behavior Phoney?
3. A DISC Model Question You Should Ask of Yourself

As Mary spoke about Sue’s behavior, she said something like this: “Sue did it on purpose just to irritate me.”

I remember thinking: “Maybe she did. Maybe she didn’t.”

I was not on the flight in question, and I did not personally observe the interaction between the two people. So, I don’t know exactly what transpired between them. I only know that Mary believed/perceived that Sue had behaved in a particular way with the express intent of irritating her. Based on Mary’s further description of the events, I also know that her behaviors towards Sue:

1. Came from her belief that Mary had intentionally irritated her, and
2. Served to escalate the conflict between them.

From what I could hear of the conversation, Mary never asked Sue about her thoughts, feelings, or intentions. Mary simply made some quick assumptions about Sue and then launched a tirade against her that significantly escalated the conflict.

Mary believed certain things about Sue. She did not know these things. Sadly, she acted on her belief without confirming it in any way. She just got angry and attacked (verbally in this case).

Later, as I sat on the flight and reflected on what I had heard, I recall thinking:

You never know another person’s intentions until you ask.

The point of this blog is to learn how to get over yourself and to get out of your own way when it comes to interacting, building relationships. leading, and communication with others.

My personal approach to the challenge of quickly judging other’s intentions is to keep an attitude of curiosity. For example, rather than assuming someone intentionally did something to irritate me, I work to ask myself a question like:

• “I wonder if they meant that the way I heard it?” or
• “I wonder what they see in this situation that I am missing?”

I’m far from perfect at avoiding the tendency to make wrong conclusions about others. So, I’m asking for your input:

What tips/techniques/suggestions have you used to better understand others and their intentions?

Please leave your responses in the comments section below. (If you see this post at some other site like facebook, please come on over to my blog to leave your comment.)

*Mary and Sue are totally fictitious names. While the event is real, I do not know, nor would I share if I knew, the real names of the parties involved.

Related posts:

1. Get Over Yourself To Develop Effective Communication Skills
2. Effective Communication Skills: How to Quickly Guess a Person’s DISC Style
3. Effective Communication Skills: Use And More than But

I have seen this concept discussed in a number of ways and in a variety of contexts. And today, I was reminded of the importance of this concept in virtually every area of our lives. Specifically, I received feedback from a coaching client about how this concept had helped her in her professional life.

This particular person is a hard-working, intelligent, kind, and capable person. She, like many of us, has one or two challenging professional relationships. In her case, she likes, trusts, respects AND has a challenge with one of her colleagues.

Because they work in an environment that is dynamic and rapidly changing, she often has conversations on new projects, initiatives, and ideas. Sometimes, she does not think of every question to ask for clarity and understanding at the time of her initial conversation about new projects with this colleague. In the past in these situations, she found that she felt criticized and ridiculed when she had to go back for clarity a day or so later.

She knew that she needed clarity, and the feeling of being criticized when she went back to her colleague resulted in her avoiding the follow-up conversations.

In one of our coaching calls a few weeks ago, I suggested that she tell the person in advance that she might have further questions when she got back to her desk and that she would likely call the next day to get answers on these questions.

She has done that over the last few weeks, and today she reported that the quality of her interactions with her colleague has improved remarkably.

This communication strategy matches the concept of begin with the end in mind. By telling her colleague that she will likely have questions, she is:

• Establishing reasonable expectations with her colleague,
• Preparing her colleague to receive the call, and
• Showing that she is concerned with a positive outcome.

She has taken personal responsibility to change what she can change rather than going into a blaming mindset or set of behaviors with regard to her colleague. She has made a consistent and persistent effort to make sure that her communications are as clear as possible. She has embodied what this blog is all about: learning to get over your ego, fears, self-consciousness, and self-protective behaviors to do what needs to be done to have healthy, productive relationships in all areas of your life.

I won’t be sharing her name, but she knows who she is. Since I wasn’t personally present to observe her interactions over the last few weeks, I may have some of the details a little off. I think she’ll be okay with that. Mostly, I want her to know that  I am proud of her efforts and her success, and I want the rest of my readers to learn from her example..

Related posts:

1. Effective Communication Skills: You Don’t Know Until You Ask
2. Effective Communication Skills: How to Quickly Guess a Person’s DISC Style
3. Get Over Yourself To Develop Effective Communication Skills

After the webinar, I was speaking with my friend and colleague Kevin Eikenberry. We discussed the webinar, and, as we spoke, I remembered an event from a training class I lead on this topic one time. During the training class, I made the point that only positive reinforcements encourage people to give high-level, maximum effort.

A class participant challenged me on this point, and our conversation went something like this:

Participant: “Are you saying that I have to keep giving people positive reinforcement for their workplace behaviors?”

Me: “Yes, that’s exactly my point.”

Participant: “Why don’t they just do what they’re supposed to do. I told them they were doing a good job once. I shouldn’t have to keep telling them.”

Me: “Well, you’re probably right about that. Is it ok if I ask you a question?”

Participant: “Sure.”

Me: “Do you have to keep paying people for them to keep coming back to work?”

Participant: “Of course I do.”

Me: “Well, you paid them once. Why do you have to keep paying them?”

Participant: “You’re kidding, right? I have to keep paying them because the money eventually runs out. If I stop paying them, they’ll go somewhere else.”

Me: “It’s exactly the same thing with reinforcements and high-level performance. If you stop giving encouragement, praise, and other positive input to people; eventually the positive runs out.”

Related posts:

1. How To Get People To Do What You Want
2. Effective Communication Skills: You Don’t Know Until You Ask
3. Why You Might Eventually Do Something You Don’t Want to Do…