This Pocket Guide provides a convenient summary of Opposite Strengths and how you can apply and benefit from it in your daily life. The eight case studies illustrate how to apply Opposite Strengths to make you more successful in life and relationships.
This app is intended primarily as a quick reference for people who have attended Opposite Strengths seminars or coaching sessions and know which of the eight patterns of opposite strengths are theirs. It also serves as a concise introduction to the theory for those previously unfamiliar with it. Complete information on Opposite Strengths and how it improves people's lives life as well as the short questionnaire used to identify the eight patterns of strengths are is available at http://oppositestrengths.com
© Opposite Strengths, Inc. 2016
The Pocket Guide will help you understand the eight natural patterns of strength — one of which is yours. Each of the eight patterns has a particular profile of interacting lead and supporting strengths, as explained below.
At the core of your being, helping to shape your personality, is a bundle of strengths. You have no counterbalancing weaknesses — only opposite strengths.
You have three pairs of strengths. The two strengths in each pair are polar opposites (rather like the North and South Poles).
In each pair of opposite strengths, one is a lead strength and the other is a supporting strength. You naturally use your three lead strengths more than you use your three supporting strengths. A physical analogy to this concept is being either right-handed or left-handed.
In effect, having lead and supporting strengths gives you a lop-sided nature, since it makes you out-of-balance in the core of your being. Your lack of symmetry is nothing to worry about, however. It is part of what makes you human.
There are three basic requirements for fulfilling your potential.
When you are yourself, you are doing what comes naturally. You
- use your natural pattern of strengths
- are true to yourself
- freely express your lead strengths.
When you are flexible, you are doing what the outside world is asking of you. You
- use the particular strengths required to solve the problem in a situation
- are true to your relationships with others
- emphasize your supporting strength.
When you break polarization, you move back and forth between being yourself and being flexible, alternating between the two states. It works like walking, when you shift your weight from one leg to the other and then back to the first leg again. The alternating use of both legs is what moves you forward.
If you over-express your lead strengths it will often create a problem for you. Personal growth begins when you solve that problem by emphasizing your supporting strengths. If in the process you over-express your supporting strengths, you will eventually begin to feel uncomfortable and want to go back to being your natural self. You solve this new problem by emphasizing your lead strengths again.
With practice you will become more sensitive to problems at both extremes. You will catch the problems sooner, when less pronounced reactions are required. In this way you will learn to nurture your personal growth more and more smoothly.
The case studies here involve a variety of people who experience real-world difficulties because of over-emphasizing their lead strengths. In each, the problem is solved by using a six-step strategy to balance the lead and supporting strengths.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern I corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) her lead strengths — thinking and dependent risking. She resolved the situation by expressing her supporting strengths, risking and independent risking, in a balanced way.
Loika was CEO of a medium sized printing company. She had inherited ownership of the company from her father, who had founded the company and built it into a successful printing business. Three years before, Loika's father had died, and Loika had taken over as CEO. Before taking the reins as CEO, Loika had worked as a salesperson for the company and had been extremely successful in doing the work. The company had a good deal of momentum and was experiencing steady and healthy growth. Now, after three years under Loika's leadership, the company was going downhill. Sales were in decline, and the company was beginning to lose money. As Loika sat in her office reviewing the numbers in the most recent annual report, she knew that something had to be done to turn the company back to growth and profitability. Loika decided to call an executive coach that had been recommended to her by another CEO.
Pain and frustration are signals of polarization. Another person can also alert you to a polarization problem.
Early in her sessions with the executive coach, Loika learned that she had lead strengths of thinking, practical thinking and dependent risking. As she and the coach talked more, it became clear that Loika was following her natural tendencies to think when it was time to act and to depend on others when it was time to depend upon herself. She was coasting along on the hard work of her father, toying with ideas for operational changes, but never getting around to setting anything in motion. In other words, she was polarizing on thinking and dependent risking.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
It will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- thinking ←→ risking
- practical thinking ←→ theoretical thinking
- dependent risking ←→ independent risking
To cure this polarization, Loika needed deliberately to express the two strengths opposite those on which she was polarizing. First, she needed to express more independence—to depend more on her own strengths. Also, she needed to express more leadership—to express her risking strength and take more initiative. As CEO, Loika had positional authority. What she needed to do was to fill that space by expressing her supporting strengths—by being more independent and taking more initiative.
Loika knew that she needed to let go of the safe harbor which the company her father had founded represented for her. She needed to make a conscious decision to offer up that security—to risk using up the strengths of the present company to build her own dream and create a new company that was her own.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
Once aware that she needed build her own company—which would necessarily involve providing much stronger leadership—Loika began thinking of concrete ways to express her independence and exert more initiative. She decided to start by calling a meeting with the seven people who reported directly to her. She would use her lead strengths to plan the meeting in detail, and she would use her supporting strengths of independent and risking strengths to give the meeting the strong leadership that had been lacking in the past.
Loika called the meeting. Her subordinates attended reluctantly, as they expected another boring and non-productive meeting where nothing really happened. Although initially Loika felt uncomfortable and unsure of the new role she had assigned to herself, she followed her plan. She called the meeting to order on time, outlined the agenda, asked for comments, listened respectfully, and stated her own position in a positive and forceful way. She established goals, expressed expectations, and controlled the meeting with a firm hand. Those attending the meeting went away with a newfound respect for Loika and a new enthusiasm for doing their work. Loika did not change her spots: she still had the same lead strengths. Her good, realistic thinking and her warm regard for others still showed as the dominant features of her personality. She simply blended in other strengths by developing skill and effectiveness in expressing independence and by taking the initiative her position of leadership required.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern II corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) her lead strength — independent risking. She resolved the situation by expressing her supporting strength, dependent risking, in a balanced way. Carmen needed to emphasize dependent risking, not over-emphasize it.
Carmen was the financial VP of a small technology firm. The President was a dynamic visionary who was bent on becoming a dominant force in e-commerce. During a planning meeting, Carmen got quite a shock. The President said, "Carmen, you immediately go negative on every idea I come up with to move this company forward. You see every single reason why my ideas won’t work, and that’s all I ever hear from you. I just can’t take any more of that attitude! If you can’t start helping me find ways to make my ideas work, I’ll have to find me a financial officer who can."
Realizing that she was in serious trouble, Carmen confided in her best friend. Her friend put Carmen in touch with an executive coach who had an excellent reputation. Right off, the coach had Carmen complete an Opposite Strengths Inventory. Then he started helping Carmen examine her own behavior to understand the nature of the problem she was causing and figure out where she was polarized. Carmen soon came to realize that her strong independent streak and hard focus on reality were the source of her trouble. She was polarizing on both independent risking and practical thinking.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- thinking ←→ risking
- practical thinking ←→ theoretical thinking
- independent risking ←→ dependent risking
Next, Carmen and the coach figured out that Carmen needed to recognize her dependence on the President, deliberately emphasizing her dependent risking strength. She needed to listen more carefully to the President, put herself in the President’s shoes, and think more positively and creatively about ways to handle the risks that were inherent in the President’s plans.
This part was very difficult for Carmen. She felt quite secure and took great pride in her own ability to identify major problems with plans and to see the risks involved with great clarity. In her analysis, the President’s ideas were always far too risky, and getting on board with the President would mean exposing herself to the risks inherent in the plans as well as becoming dependent on her. Carmen nevertheless made the hard choice.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
Step-by-step planning was one of Carmen’s long suits, and she called on it as she developed a strategy that would: (1) demonstrate her confidence in the President, and (2) think creatively about how to minimize the impact of any risks that materialized. She would not give up her native ability to identify risks; she would simply place more emphasis on risk remediation. She decided to demonstrate her changed attitude and behavior at their next meeting.
Two days later, the President asked Carmen to come into his office. Overnight, he had come up with a totally new and innovative approach to marketing, which he now outlined for Carmen. Rather than responding as she had in the past, Carmen calmly implemented her new strategy. She asked the President some appropriate questions, made some acute observations, and then started throwing out suggestions for handling some of the risks that she perceived. On the spot, the two bonded into a more productive team, and Carmen was the one that took the initiative to make it happen. The President was visibly pleased to see Carmen exercising such positive leadership.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern III corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) his lead strengths — thinking and dependent risking. He resolved the situation by expressing his supporting strengths, risking and independent risking, in a balanced way.
Charles was well qualified and was doing a good job as the Chief Marketing Officer of a Fortune 500 company. While attending a National Conference of Marketing Professionals, he found himself feeling left out. Although he was enjoying the meetings and felt at home during the lectures, when evening rolled around, he was painfully alone. No one invited him to go to dinner or included him in other plans. He felt rejected and put down, and his already-low self-esteem plummeted.
As he thought about his problem, Charles realized that he was operating in his safe, "invisible man" mode. He was living in his head all day, being excessively quiet and reserved in his behavior, and depending on other people to make the first move socially. He was polarizing on two of his lead strengths—thinking and dependent risking.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- thinking ←→ risking
- theoretical thinking ←→ practical thinking
- dependent risking ←→ independent risking
Since the strength opposite to thinking is risking, Charles needed to emphasize his risking strength. He also needed to depend more on himself—to express his independent risking strength.
Charles could now easily see a solution. He needed to seize the initiative and ask to go along with one of the groups. The big risk for him was giving up his safe cocoon of invisibility and leaving himself open to possible rejection. In his mind’s eye he pictured his colleagues giving him the message—either spoken or unspoken—that they did not want his company. In the end, however, he decided to bite the bullet and take that risk. He would go ahead and assert himself and see what happened.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
Having made the hard choice to act, Charles was ready to plan what to do and when to do it. He decided after the formal meetings were over the next day, he would hang around the group he would most like to join. Then, at an appropriate moment, he would ask if he could join them.
The next day Charles homed in on a group and moved over to where they stood talking. He waited for some time for someone to speak to him, but no one did. Before the silence could become embarrassing, he screwed up his courage to act. In a fairly loud voice he said, "Say, I wonder if it would be all right if I tagged along with you all tonight?" To his great relief, several members of the group responded immediately and positively. One of them later explained, "We would have asked you to join us earlier, but we had the impression you already had plans." Charles’s polarization had a happy ending, and the experience made it easier for him to be more assertive in other situations.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern IV corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) his lead strength — thinking. He resolved the situation by expressing his supporting strength, risking, in a balanced way.
Bob is an executive in a Fortune 100 company. Instead of completing the business plan he was assigned to write for a new division the company was starting up, he began reading a just-released book that presented a radical, thought-provoking model of the change process in organizations. Days later, he was still thinking about the dynamics of change and had not written a single word on the business plan. A dressing-down from his boss made him painfully aware that he had been drifting and off-task.
Feeling very unsettled—and realizing this was not an isolated occurrence—Bob sought help from an executive coach he had heard was very good. Early in his sessions with the executive coach, Bob learned that he had lead strengths of thinking, theoretical thinking, and independent risking. As he and the coach talked more, it became clear that Bob was following the natural tendencies produced by his lead strengths in thinking and theoretical thinking. He was enjoying the activity of thinking about the general problem and theory of organizational change. Thus, he was polarizing on thinking—specifically, on theoretical thinking.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- thinking ←→ risking
- theoretical thinking ←→ practical thinking
- independent risking ←→ dependent risking
With the help of the coach, Bob decided to attack his problem at the level of the polarizing lead strength, thinking. The prescription, therefore, was to exercise his support strength risking: it was time for Bob to stop thinking and act.
Bob chose to give up the enjoyment he was having studying and thinking about the problem of change.
Bob mapped out a series of practical steps he could take to express his risking strength by taking action. This included removing the new book he had been reading from the room and setting up a series of no-nonsense deadlines for completing the business plan.
Bob chose to—and had the power to—control his own behavior. He drew upon a balance of his opposite strengths in thinking and risking in order to complete his writing assignment. He completed an excellent business plan on time and learned a valuable lesson in using all his strengths.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern V corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) her lead strength — dependent risking. She resolved the situation by expressing her supporting strength, independent risking, in a balanced was.
Cheryl was the CEO of a large insurance company. She cared deeply about the success and well-being of each and every member of her executive team. There was never a time when she was too busy to answer a request for help from any one of them—whether it was putting together a proposal, preparing a presentation, wrestling with a personnel problem, or listening to someone vent about a personal problem. Now she was lying in a hospital bed recovering from a severe heart attack and trying to figure out, "Why me?" An answer was not long in coming. Months earlier, her physician had warned her to slow down, get some rest, and start taking better care of her own body. Instead, she had ignored the advice and had continued to run herself ragged trying to help other people solve their problems.
Cheryl had popped in and out of an Opposite Strengths seminar that an executive coach had given at the company, and she now looked to the coach for help. The coach helped Cheryl to understand that she was by nature a warm and caring person who wanted very much to help the members of her team. Unfortunately, caring for and pleasing other people had become such an all-consuming interest that nothing else mattered very much—including Cheryl herself. She soon came to realize that she was holding onto the support and approval produced by exercising her dependent risking strength.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
Since Cheryl was polarizing on dependent risking, she would need to start emphasizing her independent risking strength in order to correct her problem, She had been saying "yes" to everyone that came through her door, and she needed to learn how to say "no." She needed to get more balance in her life—to start paying as much attention to her own needs as the needs of others.
- risking ←→ thinking
- practical thinking ←→ theoretical thinking
- dependent risking ←→ independent risking
Saying "no" to people in need in order to further her own well-being would be very hard for Cheryl: it seemed contrary to both her nature and the expectations her team members had by then developed. In spite of this, her practical thinking strength told her that her own survival depended on paying more attention to her own needs. She made the tough decision to begin saying "no" to others whenever it seemed appropriate.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
One woman on the executive team had been particularly aggressive about taking up Cheryl’s time with a seemingly endless series of problems. Cheryl decided to make her the first target for her new behavior of emphasizing independent risking. She developed a little script in her mind that she would use in saying "no" the next time the woman came to her with a problem.
On Cheryl’s third day back on the job, her problem-lady showed up. After listening for awhile, Cheryl said, "I understand how pressed you are feeling because of all of the new regulations and the tightness of your deadline, and I know you could badly use some help. Under other circumstances, I would happily pitch in myself, but I just can't do that right now. I absolutely have to take it easy for a while because of my health concerns. What I would like to do instead is to refer you to a gentleman who retired from the company two years ago and is now available for temporary consulting jobs. He should be an excellent resource for you, and I will be happy to call him and set up an appointment for you." Cheryl's team member readily agreed. It would take time and more practice on her part, but Cheryl had taken the first big step. She was learning to sustain her success by saying "no."
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern VI corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) her supporting strength — independent risking. She resolved the situation by expressing her lead strength, dependent risking, in a balanced way.
Geneva had just returned to work as Chief Operating Officer of a commodities trading company. She had spent three months in therapy because of severe depression, and she was trying to understand what had happened to her. The company had retained an executive coach during her absence, so she decided to see if the coach could help her understand what was causing her to feel so depressed.
The executive coach asked Geneva to complete the Opposite Strengths Inventories and shared the results with Geneva during a feedback session. To Geneva's surprise, she discovered that she had Pattern VI strengths. Her first reaction was to reject the pattern. She had particularly wanted to see herself as leading in independence, since everybody in the company—including herself—tended to regard dependence as a weakness. Then it dawned on Geneva: She had been trying to be something that she was not. She was polarizing on a supporting strength—independence—and blocking her natural lead strength in dependent risking.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- risking ←→ thinking
- theoretical thinking ←→ practical thinking
- dependent risking ←→ independent risking
Geneva was caught in an environment with a value system that tended to see dependence as a weakness. The CEO to whom she reported had a strong independent streak. Even Geneva's husband had independent risking as a lead strength and respected others who were strongly self-sufficient and independent. In addition, independent leadership was essential in her executive role. Correcting her problem would require Geneva to emphasize her dependent risking —the inherently valuable lead strength with which she was actually born.
Geneva knew that for the sake of her own health, feeling of well being, and self-respect, she needed to come back home to herself and be true to her natural way of being. She had been being flexible all right—but so flexible that it was killing her. She had to get out of her current job regardless of the cost—which, indeed, was great. Stepping down from the prestigious position of Chief Operations Officer of a large company meant she stood to lose both the respect she valued so highly and all of the financial rewards that came with the job.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
Geneva knew she needed to make a change, but she wanted to cut her losses to a minimum. In consultation with the executive coach, she devised a plan. She would submit her resignation to the CEO and ask to be assigned to a new position that might be called "Vice-President for Client Development." As she envisioned this position, it would call on her natural strengths as she enhanced relationships with present clients and developed new clients, as well.
Geneva submitted her resignation to the CEO and requested the new assignment. In reality, Geneva's performance as Chief Operations Officer had been weak, and the CEO had already considered making a change. He had hesitated only because of Geneva's long tenure with the company and his strong feelings of loyalty to Geneva. He accepted Geneva's resignation with relief, and he felt that Geneva could do a great job for the company in the new position. After Geneva came home to her natural strengths, her job performance was outstanding, and her value to the company increased dramatically. Besides that, for the first time in many years Geneva got up in the morning anxious to go to work rather than dreading the day.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern VII corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) his lead strength — independent risking. He resolved the situation by expressing his supporting strength, dependent risking, in a balanced way.
Thanks to his high drive, self-confidence, and native intelligence, Roger had risen to middle management in a natural gas company. He had expected to take the next step up the ladder and replace the retiring Executive Vice President. Instead, he was passed over, and one of the other Division Managers was promoted. Roger was stunned. He could not understand why he was not chosen, since his division had the best record in terms of profitability, efficiency, and customer satisfaction.
Roger scheduled a meeting with the company President, who explained why Roger did not receive the promotion. He told Roger the main reason was his failure to get along well with the other Division Managers. He saw Roger as the major contributor to a problem they were having with divisions competing and fighting one another instead of cooperating and working as a team towards a common goal. Roger’s progress up the ladder had stopped because his excessive self-interest had gotten in the way of good relationships with his peers. Roger was polarizing on independent risking.
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- risking ←→ thinking
- practical thinking ←→ theoretical thinking
- independent risking ←→ dependent risking
The strength opposite to independent risking is dependent risking. Basically, Roger needed to shift his attention away from his personal goals for his division and focus on company goals. Part of that shift would mean recognizing that the success of the company depended on all of the team members as a collective. He would need to exercise his dependent risking strength by coming to understand what his team members were thinking and feeling, showing them greater respect, and working with them cooperatively to build up the company.
The challenge for Roger was to let go of his ego—which had actually grown quite large because of his solid achievements in the past. To move forward in his own career, he now needed to recognize that he was dependent on the support of his teammates. He made a deliberate decision to swallow his pride and become a contributing member of the team, thus expressing his strength in dependent risking.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
Roger planned how he would start becoming a better team member. At the next meeting of Division Managers, he would get up before the group, publicly admit that he had failed to be a good team member, and say he was ready to mend his ways. After that, he would continue to make sure his division was still growing and doing well, but he would now spend more time deliberately helping the other Division Managers to grow their own divisions. Rather than competing with them, he would actively try to help them whenever it was appropriate.
At the next Division Managers’ meeting, as planned, Roger made his speech. He was contrite, admitted his past mistakes, and vowed to work at being a better team member instead of trying to be a star. The other Division Managers and the President literally applauded him for his forthrightness and courage in making such a speech. Afterwards, he followed through with his intention to put substantial time and effort into helping other divisions solve their problems. Many of the other Division Managers came to rely on his advice—and greatly appreciated receiving it. Roger was back on the path of success.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
This case study shows how a person with Pattern VIII corrected a problem caused by over-emphasizing (polarizing on) his lead strengths — theoretical thinking and independent risking. He resolved the situation by expressing his support strengths, practical thinking and dependent risking, in a balanced way.
Allen hung up the phone feeling hollow. His accountant had just informed him that there probably would not be enough money in the account to meet the next payroll. For over a year the temp agency that he had founded ten years before had been going downhill. The country was in a recession, and his client base was plain old drying up. He was depressed and didn’t know which way to turn.
What had Allen done to let himself and his company get into such a desperate situation? In his pain, he turned to an executive coach he knew of for assistance. Allen soon learned that his lead strengths were risking, theoretical thinking, and independent risking. The coach also helped him see that he had been indulging in a lot of wishful thinking about the state of the economy instead of concentrating on matters closer to home. His strong ego had kept on telling him that he could make a go of the business in spite of bad times. He was polarizing on two of his lead strengths (theoretical thinking and independent risking).
Become aware of the reward or product of your strengths that you are holding onto and refusing to let go. Then identify the polarizing strength with which that product is associated.
This will be the strength opposite the one on which you are polarizing:
- risking ←→ thinking
- theoretical thinking ←→ practical thinking
- independent risking ←→ dependent risking
The opposite strength for theoretical thinking is practical thinking, and the opposite strength for independent risking is dependent risking. Once he understood what was happening, Allen gave himself a good dressing down. "You have to be realistic and deal with this! For once, you have to let go of your big, fat ego and get yourself some help, or you’re going to lose this company."
Step 4. Make a conscious personal choice to express the opposite strength.
Playing the role of successful entrepreneur had been giving Allen a great deal of pleasure, and admitting that his business was falling apart was in direct conflict with that self-image. Being realistic, which requires a deliberate shift of emphasis from abstract thinking to a clear focus on the facts, would not be easy. To stop his pain, however, he was now willing to take off his blinders and face the actual situation, as well as to look for strengths outside of himself in order to save the company.
Let go of whatever rewards you are getting from polarizing.
Step 5. Shift your attention to the opposite strength and identify practical ways to express it.
Allen thought about how to help himself see and accept reality and how to find a person to give him sound business advice. He decided to accomplish both goals by asking for help from his accountant, who was a realist by nature and had the talents of a competent control manager.
Step 6. Change your behavior in ways that actually express the opposite strength.
When Allen met with the accountant the next day, his behavior had changed dramatically. Where before he would gloss over the " details" of concern to the accountant and rave on about the good things that were about to happen, he now tried to learn exactly where the business stood. He asked questions, listened carefully to the accountant’s answers, and aggressively sought advice. Together, they made tough decisions about letting people go, moving to smaller quarters, and drastically cutting other expenses. Allen took the accountant in as a partner, and they became a good team. Once the economy picked up, the company became successful—even more than before.
Breaking a polarization problem does not mean trying to stop using the polarized strength altogether. Instead, the goal is to alternate emphasis so that both strengths in a pair are expressed.
By nature, you are a warm, caring person who is naturally helpful to others. You are more oriented to thought than to action... to specifics than to generalities... to the realities of "the now" than to future possibilities. You think things through, reason things out, and develop careful plans before you act. You are also dependable, loyal, and consistent, and you tend to have a calming influence on others during crisis situations.
As a Pattern I and the Pattern I Case Study
|
|
|
|
|
You are a stable, practical, fact-oriented person who tends to be both self-sufficient and self-confident, and you have the ability to focus on problems and solve them in a logical, orderly manner. You are naturally ambitious and goal-oriented, and you gravitate toward leadership roles. Although you tend to be competitive and are not shy about standing up for your rights, you hold your feelings inside rather than expressing them, and you are somewhat cautious about starting up new relationships. You also like to have some formality in your relationships... think things out before you act... are a down-to-earth person... value personal freedom and independence...
As a Pattern II and the Pattern II Case Study
|
|
|
|
|
At your core, you are a philosopher—a sincere, studious, patient person with a genuine love for acquiring and furthering knowledge. You are rarely impulsive, as rationality and logic naturally guide your behavior. You are fundamentally warm, caring, and people-centered, but at the same time, your strengths make you emotionally reserved and cautious about initiating new relationships. You are also a flexible thinker... have an active imagination... are both idealistic and conscientious...
As a Pattern III and the Pattern III Case Study
|
|
|
|
|
You are among the warm, outgoing, highly social people of the world. Close relationships with others are your main focus in life. You identify strongly with others and feel a great deal of compassion toward them. This helps make you a skilled communicator—especially on an emotional level. You enjoy being in a group and are particularly effective in that setting—or even with an entire audience. You show your emotions openly and make other people feel comfortable sharing theirs.
As a Pattern VI and the Pattern VI Case Study
|
|
|
|
You are a dynamic, enthusiastic, action-oriented individual whose natural focus of attention is on yourself and your own personal goals. You are practical, fact-oriented, and realistic about what can be accomplished. You are both self-reliant and self-confident and willingly take calculated risks. You have an intense desire to accomplish and drive hard to achieve your goals. You also have a natural, intuitive feel for both people and situations... gravitate toward roles of responsibility...
As a Pattern VII and the Pattern VII Case Study
You are both dynamic and persuasive. You have the inborn desire and ability to sell and promote your own ideas and dreams. You thrive on change and feel stifled by the status quo—you are change-oriented. Although you are a global, "big-picture" thinker with a natural ability to understand abstract concepts, you are more oriented to action than thought. You express your thoughts and feelings freely and expect others to respond to you vigorously. You are idealistic and have a tendency to see how things could be more clearly than how they really are.
As a Pattern VIII and the Pattern VIII Case Study
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Want Others To...
|
Want Others To...
|
Want Others To...
|
You are strongly inner-directed in both your feelings and thinking. Many adjectives that best describe you begin with "in"—like innovative, introspective, insightful, inventive, and individualistic. You are a stable person who is more oriented toward thought than action. Your style of thinking is global and intuitive. You naturally speculate about possibilities and look for alternative solutions, and you tend to see how things could be more clearly than how things actually are. You are something of a perfectionist, and you set high standards for both yourself and others.
As a Pattern IV and the Pattern IV Case Study
|
|
|
|
Want Others To...
|
You are a warm, outgoing person who has other people as your main focus in life. You are a dynamic, action-oriented individual who is more of a doer than a thinker and more of a realist than a dreamer. You are a practical, down-to-earth, fact-oriented person who prefers to deal with today's problems rather than tomorrow's possibilities. You place a premium on warm relationships and have a natural talent for developing them.
As a Pattern V and the Pattern V Case Study
|
|
|
|
Want Others To...
|
Good listener — maintains stability — methodical, stable, respectful, consistent.
Objective thinker — uses common sense — analytical, strong-willed, realistic, self-reliant.
Fundamental philosopher — synthesizes information — sensitive, scholarly, idealistic, mild-mannered.
Intuitive thinker — concentrates on one thing at a time — independent, insightful, precise, intense.
Helpful coordinator — facilitates communication — likable, generous, inclusive, adaptable.
Sensitive relator— gives to others — open, humorous, expressive, affectionate.
Energetic accomplisher — drives hard to achieve goals — energetic, ambitious, forceful, action-oriented.
Dynamic visionary — stimulates change — eloquent, innovative, charismatic, impelling.