This blog is an excerpt from a feedback session with a client who was seen for coaching to improve his ability to develop interpersonal relationships. He is in his mid-20’s and not currently involved in a significant relationship. He reported a previous experience with a 16-Type measure that indicated a preference for ISTJ (which was confirmed during our session). The Professional Report from the publisher leadersbeacon.com is presented in pieces below (numerical information only). As is typical in my coaching practice, I did not provide him with the Elements Personal Development Report, until the feedback session was finished.
From the Practitioner Details
Type Preferences
Extraversion 3 Introversion 14
Sensing 16 iNtuiting 14
Thinking 19 Feeling 4
Judgement 17 Perception 6
I begin by examining the reported scores for information on response style. This will guide how I interpret the assessment results. This individual tends to respond with a mixture of Somewhat and Very Like me choices. Read the chapter in the manual to gain more insights into this practice. The S/N scores add up to 30. However, the max score without the Type Precision Module (TPM) is 26 for the S/N scale. Therefore, we conclude that the initial result indicated a three-point or less difference between the S-score and the N-score. After the TPM was applied, the result was two-point difference. Even though the difference went down a point, we can be comfortable with the results given the accuracy improvement when the TPM is called for.
After presenting the client with a description for each Type index (E/I, S/N, T/F and J/P), he was very comfortable in confirming the ISTJ result. I let further discussion pass to the time when we were going over the sub-scale results (particularly the S/N subscale results). He did express a somewhat negative attitude towards his Type preference. This was based upon the web-based information that he had read on ISTJs. I explained that considerable pathology exists in personal expression on the internet and that only professional sites should be explored. There is no pathology in a Type!
Discussion of the Sub Scale Results:
I will give a brief description of the discussion that took place for each of the four sub scale groups. The numeric results are presented below the corresponding discussion.
I presented each of the E/I sub scale descriptions with a general statement of his level of reported expression. As can be seen below, his results indicate a strong involvement with all four of the I sub scales and little or no preference for the E side. We discussed his level of gregariousness in differing settings. He reports that when in public, he holds an underling belief of being the least valuable person in the room. This makes relationships challenging. This also is the basis of why he lacks confidence in his relationships with others. He stated that he wants to explore why he thinks that way. When asked to describe the situations where he may be comfortable interacting with others, he mentioned how discussing technical things in small groups is OK. This especially true when he is in a knowledgeable position or a teaching role.
Sub Scale Results:
E/I Sub Scales
Starting Action 0.75 Observing Action 4.5
Tendency for Group Settings 0.5 Tendency for One-on-One Settings 3
Socially Expressive 0 Socially Reflective 5.5
Energizing Effect 0.75 Calming Effect 4.5
The S/N sub scales indicated an ability to use both sides of the dichotomy. The scale of Drawn to the Facts VS Ideas show a reported result indicating a preference for both sides, with a stronger pull to ideas. In his technical work, he must develop program changes based upon the general idea behind the task. “What may be” has importance over the facts. This is consistent with the second sub scale of Standard VS New. While there is a preference for both, developing program changes requires developing new methods. He maintained that his employer appreciates his ability to solve problems with new methods. Discussing these ideas and new methods are an area where he feels comfortable in talking in smaller groups (gregariousness). Performing these tasks is affirming for him. The third sub scale of Observable VS Concept show a reported score close to an equivalent preference. He states that what he does at work typically involves making a concept usable (observable). The last sub scale of Orientation to Principles VS Possibilities show a clear pull to the preference of Principles. When asked to ponder the “what may be” part of New Ideas (sub scale 1 &2) and contrast that result with the orientation to principles, he maintained that the Principles are what was to take place and the New Ideas are the how. The Principles are given mostly by supervisors and they leave him with the creativity of solving issues (how).
S/N Sub Scales
Drawn to Facts 1.2 Drawn to Ideas 4.8
Choose the Standard 1.2 Try the New 4.2
Preference for Observable 3 Preference for Concept 2.25
Oriented to the Principles 5 Oriented to the Possibilities 1
The reported results for the T/F sub scales indicate where the balance in preference exists in this dimension. Sub scales One and Two are strongly toward the Thinking end of the index. Making decisions in a timely manner (decisive reasoning) being guided by Logic is the method of decision making that he learned as a child. His father, who he believes also has preferences for ISTJ, would reward him with attention when he made logical, quick decisions. Conversely, he would be reprimanded when decisiveness was slow or illogical. Sub scales three and four (Criterion VS Values and Outcome VS Process) reveal somewhat of a balance in preference. He is concerned with how his decisions impact others (Values Based Choices) and enjoys discussing his work with others (receives feedback in the Process). He states that he desires to be at peace with people regarding his decisions. He doesn’t want to make waves!
T/F Sub Scales
Focus on Logic 6 Focus on Ideals 0
Decisive Reasoning 4.2 Supportive Decisions 0.6
Criterion Based on Choices 3 Values Based Choices 2.25
Outcome Focus 3.6 Process Focus 2.4
The J/P sub scales were interesting and revealed some personal issues that challenged the client. He confirmed all three of the sub scales, demonstrating a preference for the Judging end of the index. He stated that he likes being organized, systematic, and structured in his approach to work and life. When we discussed sub scale three, he indicated that procrastination was a difficult issue for him. Whereas most Perception preferring individuals become excited and motivated by the goal, he tended to be paralyzed and avoidant. This issue became most relevant when the work causes him to doubt his abilities.
J/P Sub Scales
Produce by Organized Preparation 3.6 Produce by Emergent Methods 1.8
Systematic Priorities 4.8 Process Oriented Completion 0
Scheduling for the Goal 1.29 Motivated by the Goal 2.57
Motivated by Structure 3.5 Motivated by Flexibility 1
Sub Scale Summary:
From the reported scores on the Elements of Type Sub Scales and the client’s discussion of the results, it became clear that he is uncomfortable talking with others, unless he knows the subject matter well. Conditional affection that was demonstrated by his father has left him believing that he will be rejected should he make a mistake. This causes him to be vary careful about jumping into a conversation. His procrastination keeps him from trying and failing at tasks he does not hold a firm belief that he is able to perform. More information became apparent after reviewing the Personality Formation Scores and the 8-Process Scores.
The Personality Formation Score Results:
While the numeric scores for the Personality Formations are not to be given to the client, discussions of those results with the coach/counselor are an important component to feedback on the Elements. Should this be an area where the professional is not comfortable or competent, then the statements on the client report should be sufficient. The discussion that took place with the client regarding the scores is given below, followed by the scores. We must remember that no score in and of itself is good or bad. They all have a story behind them that is informative and explanative.
The area of General Perseverance Style is presented by a total score and three sub scales. Read the manual to understand score ranges and interpretation. The clients who reported results across this spectrum demonstrated a strong tolerance to pressure and problems. He reported that he viewed Pressure and Problems as a challenge, not an obstacle. Even though his Emotional Style is balanced, he stated that his driving through pressure and attempts to overcome problems can come at the expense to his health. He will become singularly focused upon the successful completion of a task to the point of not taking care of himself. When asked why he pushed at the expense of his health, he reported that he was trying not to be perceived as a failure. Therefore, adding some information from the sub scales to this revelation, I stated that “you will procrastinate to avoid being seen as lacking and work yourself sick to keep from failing.” He responded that it seems to get him in both directions. I suggested that in latter sessions we focus upon the origins of the fear that motivates these behaviors.
General Perseverance Style 6.67
Response to Pressure
Stop and Avoid 1.66 Drive and Thrive 6.66
Emotional Style
Low and Cautious 2.5 High and Adventurous 2.5
Orientation toward Problems
Pull Back 1.66 Overcome 6.66
The Level of Adaptation results are presented by a total score and four sub scale scores. The total score (Level of Adaptation) would indicate that the client may have some challenges adapting/interacting with others. When asked if he felt comfortable openly discussing issues and projects with others, he confirmed that was an element of his preferred teaching role. He added that he tends to be very transparent. The balance in communication interpretation result led him to tell of learning not to openly trust, without first becoming comfortable with the person. He also mentioned that he tends to be outcome oriented and will evaluate individuals when he first meets them, including how they look and act. This will inform how much he will trust them. He tries to be discerning about people. He was clear indicating that there are matters in life that he is not open to changing. This third scale reported is balanced, indicating a healthy attitude about change. The fourth scale reveals that he believes that all of his relationships will eventually fall apart. I asked him if he believed this was true. His response was that he tends to be preparing for when things will go wrong. I then asked if he believes that things will go wrong in relationships. He stated that they probably will. He also believes that he has always thought that way. I asked if he knew why he believed this way and he said that he does not believe that he is a very good person. When we got into further detail, he said that he felt that he was a timid or weak individual and wishes to be more assertive. He confessed that no one has ever told him that he appeared timid or weak, but he has felt that way about himself. As we discussed this result, he confirmed that relationships have always been difficult for him. He stays closed off to people to avoid being rejected. Fear of making mistakes often keeps him from engaging with others. These relationship beliefs are the intended focus of his coaching involvement.
Level of Adaptation 4.29
Interaction Orientation
Guarding Self-Interest 0 Trusting Others 8.75
Communication Interpretation
Suspicious of Motives 2.5 Accepting at Face Value 2.5
Belief Orientation
Rigid 3 Open to Change 4
Relationship Interpretation
Negative Voice 3.33 Optimistic Voice 0
The last scale in the Personality formation dimension of the Elements is the Believed Ability to Succeed. His score is moderately elevated and when asked, he reported that he is comfortable accomplishing things on his own. However, this has left him being physically and emotionally burned out. He wants to know how to get connected to people in a healthy way.
Believed Ability to Succeed 10.96
Summary of the Formation Scores:
Results for the reported scores from the Personality Formation Scores gives more clarity into the style in which the client interacts with life. He pushes himself to the point of exhaustion when attempting to finish a task and never asks for help. His fear of developing close relationships makes it difficult to interact with others beyond being in a teacher role. The blockages to his expression of personality are rooted in his fear of not performing successfully, and thus being rejected. He dislikes the overly intensive focus that consumes him on projects and desires more healthy balance in life. We will be confronting his faulty self-image of being weak and timid.
Majors/Jungian 8-Process Scores
The 8-Process Scores given below are the access and utility that the client finds with each of the Jungian mental functions. They are the client’s expression of the function as developed in life. The nearly 25-point difference between the Si and the Fe was explained to him. He confirmed that he spends too much time over thinking past mistakes and becoming consumed with his shortcomings (perceived by him not me or others). The contrasted lower score on Fe is consistent with his inability to express himself in a relational way in relationships, beyond a teaching role. Most of his overt thinking and expression is limited to logical process (Ti & Te). He is comfortable with logical interactions but knows that it does not make for a good relationship. He reports that he is not sure at all how to develop a sense of harmony and caring with others. When asked if he blamed himself for all of his issues, he reported that it is his shortcomings which are the issue. When pressed, he agreed that he was not exposed to good interactions growing up. He home schooled all 12 years, with only mom and dad as examples. It left him without opportunity to develop peer relationships. He was never afforded the opportunity to observe his father or mother in interpersonal interactions with others.
Extraverted Sensing 54.85 Introverted Sensing 70.99
Extraverted iNtuiting 51.57 Introverted iNtuiting 67.47
Extraverted Thinking 64.54 Introverted Thinking 65.71
Extraverted Feeling 46.68 Introverted Feeling 47.13
Summary of feedback session and continued work:
This client came in for work on his interpersonal relationships. The results of the Elements allowed me to begin to uncover some of the developmental experiences that left him stuck in life. I have had several more sessions with this individual and found the information that I learned from the Elements results was a very accurate pointer to the intervention process. We have begun to repair his distorted self-image and I have given him simple interaction techniques to begin the process of gaining confidence in interactions with others. He is actually having fun learning and growing. Care must be taken to not assign behaviors that unnecessarily put him at risk for failure.
This blog bypasses much of the 16-type introduction in the feedback session. Because of his prior exposure to type, other than the confirmation process, I chose to skip over much of what I typically do. This is intended to give a quick simple example of how to use the other scales on the Majors Elements. Much more can be gained from the scales in other cases. This was chosen for the sake of brevity.
Blessings, Dr. Mark
