June 7, 2023 • 16 mins
Frank DeDominicis is a vintage DiSC trainer, former Big Brother, and Global Goodwill Ambassador. His skills-based work empowers individuals and teams. Frank's fun, interactive, interdisciplinary teaching approach helps to develop strategic growth plans, untangle Gordian knots, and learn productive conflict and emotional intelligence skills to boost productivity and personal fulfillment. DiSC is the world’s most trusted behavioral profile instrument with over seventy million users and another million users per year. To receive a free mini-DiSC assessment, email Frank.
What does DiSC mean?
DiSC is an acronym that stands for the four main personality profiles described in the DiSC model: (D)ominance, (i)nfluence, (S)teadiness and (C)onscientiousness.
#DiSC #everythingDiSC #productiveconflict #personaldevelopment #professionaldevelopment
DiSC Site
LinkedIn
UNDER THE HOOD .pdf
CONTACT INFO:
frank@frankdedominicis.com 303.219.0792 https://www.frankdedominicis.com/
https://www.everythingdisc.com/frankdedominicisassociates
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:14):
This is Edwin k Morris,
and you are about to embark on thenext Pioneer Knowledge Services because
you need to know a digitalresource for you to listen to folks
share their experience and knowledgearound the field of knowledge management
and nonprofit work.
(00:37):
If your company or organization wouldlike to help us continue this mission and
sponsor one of our shows, email,
b y ntk pioneer k.org,
as we peel back the onion layers,looking at organizational behavior,
which are current model is human bound.
(00:58):
Let's talk about some of our pain pointsthat organizations suffer through,
such as compatibility and tension points.
How does this theory approach this?
Individuals have different styles.
The individuals also havedifferent levels of reflection and
competency in five differentareas that relate to compatibility
(01:20):
and here's what they are. Thefirst one is communication style,
understanding that we all talk, we allsend and receive in different ways,
and we don't always interpret on thereceiving side and we don't always
use a feedback loop, right? Assertivenessone-on-one I, I heard you said,
or do I understand that doesn'talways happen. Mm-hmm..
(01:41):
The next thing is decision making style.
A D could move quickly with a magic hunch.
An I people who are high empathy types,
they could quickly pull a team togetherwithout doing a lot of pre-screening.
This might not sit well with the highC, the conscientious one that's slower,
more critical, given more attentionto detail rather than personality.
(02:06):
The third point that's importantto compatibility is motivation.
Ds and Cs are product oriented.
I and SS are process oriented, sotheir motivations are different.
The I and S'S will feel likethe meeting's gone well.
If the feelings are good and we'recommunicating and there's a balance in
talking and listening,
(02:27):
whereas the Ds and Cs will be moreinterested in the meeting addressing the
product. What is the quality, thequantity, the delivery, et cetera.
The fourth thing that contributesto compatibility or not is problem
solving style.
And this is my favorite one cuzoftentimes the problems that come up,
we're not aware of the root causes.
(02:49):
We'll talk about usually phy retinalsymptom when there's a deeper underlying
issue. So it's important,
first of all to define the problemand mutually define the problem we're
fighting over. And oftentimes we'llfind that it's not really the problem.
It's a symptom that brings themind. Other symptoms or maybe not,
maybe it is the actual rootproblem, but oftentimes it's not.
(03:12):
The fifth thing is conflict resolution.How do we solve our problems?
Well, there's a time inmy youth when we,
when we solve problems onthe street with our fists,
we would just be street fighters, right?
And then later in lifeI'd use lawyers to fight.
Now I've decided who wins in thatsituation. The lawyers win.
(03:34):
So now I've decided communicationis probably the best way to do it.
And like most people I don'tlike conflict, have avoided it.
But I've also learned to be temporarilyuncomfortable for a short period
of time. While I say, Edwin, Ireally have a bone to pick with you.
I've got something on my mind.
Could we talk And I could use what werefer to as non-violent communications
(03:58):
to focus on the problem,not on the person,
not make the other person wrongor bad because we disagree.
Whether it's business orpolitics, it doesn't matter.
But we could address conflict resolutionby asking for something. Alright.
Let me just dance around that. Whatyou're saying is you're disarming and I'm,
this is my phrase, you're disarmingthe conversation by allowing good word,
(04:22):
the subject to be other than the twopeople or the people represented in the
discussion. You are trying to saythe issues over here. It's not this,
it's, that's the issue. Ihave a problem with.
It it disarms that defense mechanismthat some people have. That's.
Correct. Exactly right.
It might not immediatelylower the temperature of the conflict you might see in
(04:47):
a second meet in the temperatures lowered.But that's exactly what that will do.
And that's the purpose of whatI teach in productive conflict.
It's not conflict resolution, but it'smore so lower in the temperature. Yeah.
And intensity of the disagreement. You're.
Releasing that charge, right? You'rereleasing the electronic charge. Yeah.
Negative assertion. What'd I do wrong?Tell me. Cuz. Once people on the mode,
(05:09):
they can never go back tothat same level of intensity.
A good trick is to look forsome point of commonality.
No matter how hostile the,the conflict begins with,
we could say really anything cuz we havean innate need to connect with others.
We see twin babies hugging each otherright after they're born. Right?
So even if we're hostilewith someone, if we say, Hey,
(05:31):
we both like the colds or or.
Something. Yeah, anything.
We're both a member.
Some similarity.
Or we both value this. Anything,
it might not be seem tomake impact in the moment,
but that actually helps to make abridge to better communications.
Good word. Bridge. Bridge. I I just pulledup the, the definition of compatible.
(05:52):
Miriam Webster says,
compatible is capable ofexisting together in harmony.
I want everybody to think aboutthat as they're listening to this.
Is that the end state could beyour organization could actually
be in harmony with eachother. Intra organizational.
Exactly. Honda's an example.That's a disorganization.
(06:13):
And there's many construction,many, many, literally thousands. Uh,
there's been over 70million of these profiles.
It's the most recognized such tool forpersonality assessment in the world.
And given that high number of,uh, profiles in the database,
it also both a veryhigh validity. That is,
it does test what it presumes thetest and and reliability that is
(06:36):
fairly accurate. Most peoplewill agree when they read this,
that it describes in words what theyknow about themselves. Intuitively,
about 80%. They might disagree withwith some of it, but it's eerie.
Often I hear people say when, especiallyif they're new to this, they'll say,
well, geez, really nailed me. Good. Yeah.
But the positive thing is the,
(06:58):
the report going back to your organizationquestion. Mm-hmm.,
the report actually gives youadvice on how to make change. Okay?
And it even has a resistance meter.
It'll tell you you have this muchresistance to this movement towards
better compatibility. But that is soscary. I'll frame this in a visual.
(07:19):
Remember the circumplex, the circle?Mm-hmm. and the cross.
Imagine you're at three o'clock,you're a high sea, you're quiet,
you're observant, you're scientific,
you're not someone to rally the troopsor be emotional. You're not a driver.
But if you're pushed to acceptthings and you're pushed and pushed,
Marton documents this in hisbook, emotions of normal people.
(07:41):
If a dee pushes a C,
they'll eventually explode and they'lljump up and exhibit and a Barron D
behavior, they'll suddenly have a tempertantrum. And maybe it's justified,
but because they've been observingyou for so long and because they're so
intuitive, they'll know things aboutyou that will cut, that will hurt.
(08:02):
And because they're sospecific with language,
they'll use words that will cutyou deeply. So if you're a high C,
take heed when you lose your temper.
Count to 10 and choose yourwords carefully..
Did we finish your list ofthe compatibility factors?
Yes. The five compatibility factors arecommunication, style, decision making,
(08:22):
style, motivation, style,problem solving style.
And how we handle conflict.
Is compatibility. The other endof the seesaw of tension points.
Um, yes, actually it is.
Let's hear about tension points.Yes. I've had a few tension points.
Let's hear what youthink tension points are.
I'll read my list and, andtell me when one pops out at you. Okay.
(08:42):
Usually in a training session, noone will speak up, you know, but I,
but I could see theeyebrows raised..
If you're more of the assertive,dominant style, and, and bear in mind,
this is about styles, nottypes. Too often I hear, oh,
disk is a test. It's not a test.
All it is is a snapshot of you and thehere and now of how you see yourself.
(09:05):
Your profile could look totally differenttonight when you're with your lover or
spouse. Okay? Right. Okay.Bear in mind, we are fluid.
The personality is dynamic. It'ssuch a beautiful thing. What we are,
we can't express it in wordsor a two dimension report,
but in terms of behavior, the dominantperson, their attention points,
(09:25):
their what they will dowhen they're pushed too far.
They're limitations under pressure.Are they overstep? Prerogatives,
they act restlessly. Theyinspire fear in others,
they override people. They mightbe blunt and sarcastic with others.
They sulk when they're not in thelimelight. This is mine by the way.
(09:45):
My report told me.
And I've noticed that when I'm in ameeting with colleagues and everyone's
talking about me and I don'tneed to, I realize, hmm,,
when are they gonna give me the mic?Even if I don't have anything to say,
my adolescent programmingis, oh, they're excluding me.
So you're like my cat. Then if acat's not in the middle of everything,
(10:06):
then she's very upset. Well.
I don't scratch.
an inducement or inducement is the actualword. And I'll explain more about the,
the word changes, as I saida little bit later. Okay.
But inducement means we're all aboutempathy, people, relationships,
we want to know testimonials,credibility, all of that.
(10:28):
But possible limitations underpressure of the inducement profile
is that we become more concerned withpopularity than tangible results.
We might oversell because ofthat high energy and and need for
self-agency to express what's in us.
We might just overtalk a subjectrather than say, here's my product,
(10:48):
it does this, it costs this.Do you want it? Number three,
we act impulsively with heart over mine.
We might be biased by personalitiesrather than actual performance.
This is something I caution middlemanagers for because we might marginalize
someone who has a awkward or quirkypersonality who has better work
(11:10):
performance. Uh,
another possible limitationis we might be unrealistic in
appraising people because we have atendency to look for the good for the
people. We only see the good.I'll go through the other two.
Steadiness or submission submissiveness.
They strive to maintain thestatus quo. They so resist change,
(11:32):
it frightens them. So if you'resuggesting change, take them carefully,
hold their hand and walk themthrough the process. Otherwise,
you're gonna see some behaviorthat's not cooperative on the team.
They might take a long time to adjustto new procedures, help them with that.
And they might be lacking in imagination.
They might want to stay withsomething that's steady and consistent
(11:56):
rather than a new plan, A new map.
That might seem scary only because it'snew and there's a resistance to change.
And the last one,
the possible limitations of pressurefor those who are compliant is they tend
to lean on supervisors.
They don't have as muchinitiative as the other styles.
(12:16):
They tend to hesitate toact without a precedent.
They don't want to do something newif they haven't seen it done already
successfully by someone else. Andthey also in the worst situation,
tend to pass the buck because they wantto be seen as perfect. They're very,
no perfectionism is part of thatprofile. So if something goes wrong, uh,
(12:39):
it wasn't me, it was, it was George.
Well, it sounds like as an organizationalconstraint, and I'll put it as such,
that it's a constraint oforganizational effectiveness because
everything you're talking about in acompatibility and tension probably equate
to the level of trust within anorganization. Is that a true statement?
(13:00):
Yes, that's absolutely true. What.
Does disk do for trust building?
Oh, that is a wonderful question.
Trust is built incrementallyin relationships.
I'll reference a good source bookregarding trust called the Evolution
of Cooperation by RobertAxelrod. He back in the eighties,
sent a test around the world toMensa groups and others asking
(13:24):
for a solution to theprisoner's dilemma riddle.
That's the situation where severalpeople are caught by the cops,
they're isolated, they're allgiven incentive to tell the truth,
to tell the story.
There's penalties and there'sadvantages to them cooperating or not.
If they all cooperate andsay nothing to the cops,
(13:45):
then they all get off and they all win.
If one of them decides tocooperate and the other doesn't,
then one gets punished andthe other does not as much.
So this is kind of the situation.Every time we meet someone,
people are not reallypredictable, I should say.
Behavior is not really predictable.
So we can only count on lastbehavior what Robert Axelrod found
(14:07):
in receiving these solutions,thousands of solutions to this contest.
How do we build trust?
What he found was that ininteracting with people,
we either give people a full sack orwe pass neutrally by them or an empty
sack. People either feel nurturedor received an idea or a benefit,
or it was a good exchange. There'sgood energy. Or some people,
(14:30):
when we leave them, it feelslike we took a veritate.
He developed this concept of trustbuild in by observing the last
behavior of the person.And if it was a full sack,
if it was good responding kind oreven better. But if it was negative,
if it was a a take or an attack,then simply decide to if you can,
(14:50):
to not work with that person or not dealwith that person or to respond in kind
to set boundaries, to set limits.
So it's an excellent source interms of trust with D I S C,
I must say, uh, and this isnot scientifically proven,
I'm just referring tostudies in my own experience,
observing thousands of people,
(15:11):
theses have trouble with trust more sothan the others because they're very
egocentric. They know it mustbe a good idea because by golly,
I thought of it. So it mustbe my idea to build trust with them.
It's important. First of all,
know your own style in terms ofhow to approach them. And secondly,
to get them to open their mind topossibilities rather than a fixed point of
(15:34):
view. Trust with the high eyeis easier. In fact, high eye,
a high empathy person mightdivorce someone and forgive and
return again and again.
Elizabeth Taylor syndrome because therelationship is more important than the
event. Trust with the S isthe most important thing.
Loyalty is one of their highestvalues. And if you screw up on loyalty,
(15:57):
forget it. They're the ones who saygoodbye and they mean goodbye. Delete,
you're gone. And then in terms oftrust for the C, you've gotta prove it.
Gimme some facts, be consistent,be on time, be accurate.
And these are some tips on how toapproach trust as regards to these styles.
Well.
Thank you Frank.
I'm anticipating a deeper dive inour next segment when we talk about
(16:20):
productive conflict.
Thank.
You. Thank you, Frankie.
You have just finished our latest becauseyou need to know a public service of
Pioneer Knowledge Services.
Please join us on LinkedInand find us@pioneerks.org.
This is Edwin k Morris,
and you are about to embark on thenext Pioneer Knowledge Services because
you need to know a digitalresource for you to listen to folks
share their experience and knowledgearound the field of knowledge management
and nonprofit work.
(00:37):
If your company or organization wouldlike to help us continue this mission and
sponsor one of our shows, email,
b y ntk pioneer k.org,
as we peel back the onion layers,looking at organizational behavior,
which are current model is human bound.
(00:58):
Let's talk about some of our pain pointsthat organizations suffer through,
such as compatibility and tension points.
How does this theory approach this?
Individuals have different styles.
The individuals also havedifferent levels of reflection and
competency in five differentareas that relate to compatibility
(01:20):
and here's what they are. Thefirst one is communication style,
understanding that we all talk, we allsend and receive in different ways,
and we don't always interpret on thereceiving side and we don't always
use a feedback loop, right? Assertivenessone-on-one I, I heard you said,
or do I understand that doesn'talways happen. Mm-hmm.
(01:41):
The next thing is decision making style.
A D could move quickly with a magic hunch.
An I people who are high empathy types,
they could quickly pull a team togetherwithout doing a lot of pre-screening.
This might not sit well with the highC, the conscientious one that's slower,
more critical, given more attentionto detail rather than personality.
(02:06):
The third point that's importantto compatibility is motivation.
Ds and Cs are product oriented.
I and SS are process oriented, sotheir motivations are different.
The I and S'S will feel likethe meeting's gone well.
If the feelings are good and we'recommunicating and there's a balance in
talking and listening,
(02:27):
whereas the Ds and Cs will be moreinterested in the meeting addressing the
product. What is the quality, thequantity, the delivery, et cetera.
The fourth thing that contributesto compatibility or not is problem
solving style.
And this is my favorite one cuzoftentimes the problems that come up,
we're not aware of the root causes.
(02:49):
We'll talk about usually phy retinalsymptom when there's a deeper underlying
issue. So it's important,
first of all to define the problemand mutually define the problem we're
fighting over. And oftentimes we'llfind that it's not really the problem.
It's a symptom that brings themind. Other symptoms or maybe not,
maybe it is the actual rootproblem, but oftentimes it's not.
(03:12):
The fifth thing is conflict resolution.How do we solve our problems?
Well, there's a time inmy youth when we
when we solve problems onthe street with our fists,
we would just be street fighters, right?
And then later in lifeI'd use lawyers to fight.
Now I've decided who wins in thatsituation. The lawyers win
(03:34):
So now I've decided communicationis probably the best way to do it.
And like most people I don'tlike conflict, have avoided it.
But I've also learned to be temporarilyuncomfortable for a short period
of time. While I say, Edwin, Ireally have a bone to pick with you.
I've got something on my mind.
Could we talk And I could use what werefer to as non-violent communications
(03:58):
to focus on the problem,not on the person,
not make the other person wrongor bad because we disagree.
Whether it's business orpolitics, it doesn't matter.
But we could address conflict resolutionby asking for something. Alright.
Let me just dance around that. Whatyou're saying is you're disarming and I'm,
this is my phrase, you're disarmingthe conversation by allowing good word,
(04:22):
the subject to be other than the twopeople or the people represented in the
discussion. You are trying to saythe issues over here. It's not this,
it's, that's the issue. Ihave a problem with
It it disarms that defense mechanismthat some people have. That's.
Correct. Exactly right.
It might not immediatelylower the temperature of the conflict you might see in
(04:47):
a second meet in the temperatures lowered.But that's exactly what that will do.
And that's the purpose of whatI teach in productive conflict.
It's not conflict resolution, but it'smore so lower in the temperature. Yeah.
And intensity of the disagreement. You're.
Releasing that charge, right? You'rereleasing the electronic charge. Yeah.
Negative assertion. What'd I do wrong?Tell me. Cuz. Once people on the mode,
(05:09):
they can never go back tothat same level of intensity.
A good trick is to look forsome point of commonality.
No matter how hostile the,the conflict begins with,
we could say really anything cuz we havean innate need to connect with others.
We see twin babies hugging each otherright after they're born. Right?
So even if we're hostilewith someone, if we say, Hey,
(05:31):
we both like the colds or
Something. Yeah, anything.
We're both a member.
Some similarity.
Or we both value this. Anything,
it might not be seem tomake impact in the moment,
but that actually helps to make abridge to better communications.
Good word. Bridge. Bridge. I I just pulledup the, the definition of compatible.
(05:52):
Miriam Webster says,
compatible is capable ofexisting together in harmony.
I want everybody to think aboutthat as they're listening to this.
Is that the end state could beyour organization could actually
be in harmony with eachother. Intra organizational.
Exactly. Honda's an example.That's a disorganization.
(06:13):
And there's many construction,many, many, literally thousands. Uh,
there's been over 70million of these profiles.
It's the most recognized such tool forpersonality assessment in the world.
And given that high number of,uh, profiles in the database,
it also both a veryhigh validity. That is,
it does test what it presumes thetest and and reliability that is
(06:36):
fairly accurate. Most peoplewill agree when they read this,
that it describes in words what theyknow about themselves. Intuitively,
about 80%. They might disagree withwith some of it, but it's eerie.
Often I hear people say when, especiallyif they're new to this, they'll say,
well, geez, really nailed me. Good. Yeah.
But the positive thing is the,
(06:58):
the report going back to your organizationquestion. Mm-hmm.
the report actually gives youadvice on how to make change. Okay?
And it even has a resistance meter.
It'll tell you you have this muchresistance to this movement towards
better compatibility. But that is soscary. I'll frame this in a visual.
(07:19):
Remember the circumplex, the circle?Mm-hmm.
Imagine you're at three o'clock,you're a high sea, you're quiet,
you're observant, you're scientific,
you're not someone to rally the troopsor be emotional. You're not a driver.
But if you're pushed to acceptthings and you're pushed and pushed,
Marton documents this in hisbook, emotions of normal people.
(07:41):
If a dee pushes a C,
they'll eventually explode and they'lljump up and exhibit and a Barron D
behavior, they'll suddenly have a tempertantrum. And maybe it's justified,
but because they've been observingyou for so long and because they're so
intuitive, they'll know things aboutyou that will cut, that will hurt.
(08:02):
And because they're sospecific with language,
they'll use words that will cutyou deeply. So if you're a high C,
take heed when you lose your temper.
Count to 10 and choose yourwords carefully.
Did we finish your list ofthe compatibility factors?
Yes. The five compatibility factors arecommunication, style, decision making,
(08:22):
style, motivation, style,problem solving style.
And how we handle conflict.
Is compatibility. The other endof the seesaw of tension points.
Um, yes, actually it is.
Let's hear about tension points.Yes. I've had a few tension points.
Let's hear what youthink tension points are.
I'll read my list and, and
(08:42):
Usually in a training session, noone will speak up, you know, but I,
but I could see theeyebrows raised.
If you're more of the assertive,dominant style, and, and bear in mind,
this is about styles, nottypes. Too often I hear, oh,
disk is a test. It's not a test.
All it is is a snapshot of you and thehere and now of how you see yourself.
(09:05):
Your profile could look totally differenttonight when you're with your lover or
spouse. Okay? Right. Okay.Bear in mind, we are fluid.
The personality is dynamic. It'ssuch a beautiful thing. What we are,
we can't express it in wordsor a two dimension report,
but in terms of behavior, the dominantperson, their attention points,
(09:25):
their what they will dowhen they're pushed too far.
They're limitations under pressure.Are they overstep? Prerogatives,
they act restlessly. Theyinspire fear in others,
they override people. They mightbe blunt and sarcastic with others.
They sulk when they're not in thelimelight. This is mine by the way.
(09:45):
My report told me.
And I've noticed that when I'm in ameeting with colleagues and everyone's
talking about me and I don'tneed to, I realize, hmm,
when are they gonna give me the mic?Even if I don't have anything to say,
my adolescent programmingis, oh, they're excluding me.
So you're like my cat. Then if acat's not in the middle of everything,
(10:06):
then she's very upset. Well.
I don't scratch
an inducement or inducement is the actualword. And I'll explain more about the,
the word changes, as I saida little bit later. Okay.
But inducement means we're all aboutempathy, people, relationships,
we want to know testimonials,credibility, all of that.
(10:28):
But possible limitations underpressure of the inducement profile
is that we become more concerned withpopularity than tangible results.
We might oversell because ofthat high energy and and need for
self-agency to express what's in us.
We might just overtalk a subjectrather than say, here's my product,
(10:48):
it does this, it costs this.Do you want it? Number three,
we act impulsively with heart over mine.
We might be biased by personalitiesrather than actual performance.
This is something I caution middlemanagers for because we might marginalize
someone who has a awkward or quirkypersonality who has better work
(11:10):
performance. Uh,
another possible limitationis we might be unrealistic in
appraising people because we have atendency to look for the good for the
people. We only see the good
Steadiness or submission submissiveness.
They strive to maintain thestatus quo. They so resist change,
(11:32):
it frightens them. So if you'resuggesting change, take them carefully,
hold their hand and walk themthrough the process. Otherwise,
you're gonna see some behaviorthat's not cooperative on the team.
They might take a long time to adjustto new procedures, help them with that.
And they might be lacking in imagination.
They might want to stay withsomething that's steady and consistent
(11:56):
rather than a new plan, A new map.
That might seem scary only because it'snew and there's a resistance to change.
And the last one,
the possible limitations of pressurefor those who are compliant is they tend
to lean on supervisors.
They don't have as muchinitiative as the other styles.
(12:16):
They tend to hesitate toact without a precedent.
They don't want to do something newif they haven't seen it done already
successfully by someone else. Andthey also in the worst situation,
tend to pass the buck because they wantto be seen as perfect. They're very,
no perfectionism is part of thatprofile. So if something goes wrong, uh,
(12:39):
it wasn't me, it was, it was George.
Well, it sounds like as an organizationalconstraint, and I'll put it as such,
that it's a constraint oforganizational effectiveness because
everything you're talking about in acompatibility and tension probably equate
to the level of trust within anorganization. Is that a true statement?
(13:00):
Yes, that's absolutely true. What.
Does disk do for trust building?
Oh, that is a wonderful question.
Trust is built incrementallyin relationships.
I'll reference a good source bookregarding trust called the Evolution
of Cooperation by RobertAxelrod. He back in the eighties,
sent a test around the world toMensa groups and others asking
(13:24):
for a solution to theprisoner's dilemma riddle.
That's the situation where severalpeople are caught by the cops,
they're isolated, they're allgiven incentive to tell the truth,
to tell the story.
There's penalties and there'sadvantages to them cooperating or not.
If they all cooperate andsay nothing to the cops,
(13:45):
then they all get off and they all win.
If one of them decides tocooperate and the other doesn't,
then one gets punished andthe other does not as much.
So this is kind of the situation.Every time we meet someone,
people are not reallypredictable, I should say.
Behavior is not really predictable.
So we can only count on lastbehavior what Robert Axelrod found
(14:07):
in receiving these solutions,thousands of solutions to this contest.
How do we build trust?
What he found was that ininteracting with people,
we either give people a full sack orwe pass neutrally by them or an empty
sack. People either feel nurturedor received an idea or a benefit,
or it was a good exchange. There'sgood energy. Or some people,
(14:30):
when we leave them, it feelslike we took a veritate.
He developed this concept of trustbuild in by observing the last
behavior of the person.And if it was a full sack,
if it was good responding kind oreven better. But if it was negative,
if it was a a take or an attack,then simply decide to if you can,
(14:50):
to not work with that person or not dealwith that person or to respond in kind
to set boundaries, to set limits.
So it's an excellent source interms of trust with D I S C,
I must say, uh, and this isnot scientifically proven,
I'm just referring tostudies in my own experience,
observing thousands of people,
(15:11):
theses have trouble with trust more sothan the others because they're very
egocentric. They know it mustbe a good idea because by golly,
I thought of it
It's important. First of all,
know your own style in terms ofhow to approach them. And secondly,
to get them to open their mind topossibilities rather than a fixed point of
(15:34):
view. Trust with the high eyeis easier. In fact, high eye,
a high empathy person mightdivorce someone and forgive and
return again and again.
Elizabeth Taylor syndrome because therelationship is more important than the
event. Trust with the S isthe most important thing.
Loyalty is one of their highestvalues. And if you screw up on loyalty,
(15:57):
forget it. They're the ones who saygoodbye and they mean goodbye. Delete,
you're gone. And then in terms oftrust for the C, you've gotta prove it.
Gimme some facts, be consistent,be on time, be accurate.
And these are some tips on how toapproach trust as regards to these styles.
Well.
Thank you Frank.
I'm anticipating a deeper dive inour next segment when we talk about
(16:20):
productive conflict.
Thank.
You. Thank you, Frankie.
You have just finished our latest becauseyou need to know a public service of
Pioneer Knowledge Services.
Please join us on LinkedInand find us@pioneerks.org.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.