CHAPTER 7

Personality and change

The purpose of this chapter is to share a fundamental understanding of the role personality plays in our response to change and how we as Change Superheroes need to balance the different needs of the different personality types and traits to keep the process on track for success.

Most of us would agree that everyone is unique to some degree and personalities vary. This means that our individual responses to change are likely to vary too, and there are a range of personality tools available that can be used to understand these individual differences. For every lover of a personality tool, there will also be a critic who doesn’t like to be pigeonholed or believes the tool isn’t well researched. I’m of the view that any theory or tool that helps us to understand how our preferences or behaviours may differ from those of others can be useful, as long as we engage with an open mind. This is because individual differences or personalities can often cause misunderstanding or conflict, particularly during change. Therefore, any framework that helps us to avoid misunderstanding and build relationships is going to be useful, particularly in highly charged, emotional environments such as those during change.

Type or trait

In psychology, individual differences or personality can be measured in terms of different ‘types’ or ‘traits’. Personality types are defined by binary dimensions – so people would be classified as one of two opposite types: introverted or extroverted, for example. Type theory can be criticized because people often dislike being pigeonholed into one of two camps and may believe that they exhibit different behaviours in different environments or are able to demonstrate both types equally. Trait theories measure the extent to which we demonstrate a certain personality type or behaviour.

Extroversion can also be measured on a scale, as a personality trait. Whether we prefer type or trait theory, the key is using the right tool for the right purpose. For recruitment or focused one-to-one development, I would recommend a personality trait tool because it can be explored in detail. However, when we are in group situations like managing organizational change or working with teams, an awareness and application of personality types can be helpful. This is due to the simplicity of a more binary approach, which helps us to deliver change in a way that is appropriate to most types and therefore likely to appeal to all.

Myers–Briggs type indicator

To further illustrate this point in our context of change, I am going to focus on the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) in this chapter. It was published in the 1960s based on work carried out by mother-and-daughter duo Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers (Myers, 1995). The origins can be traced back to original research by psychologist Carl Jung in the 1920s and Briggs and Myers developed it over 40 years. Since then, MBTI has been further researched and developed by what is now known as the Myers-Briggs Company, and is very popular.

MBTI uses four different dimensions of type, which are referred to by single letters. These dichotomies are classified as follows:

• where you focus your attention – extroversion (E) or introversion (I)

• how you take in information – sensing (S) or intuition (N)

• how you make decisions – thinking (T) or feeling (F)

• how you deal with the world – judging (J) or perceiving (P)

No single type is superior overall, although each one has different strengths that are helpful in different situations. If we were using MBTI in a one-to-one, we would group the dimensions together to give someone a four-letter type, e.g., ENTP or ISTJ. However, that is far too complicated for our purpose, which is first about understanding more generally how people respond to and process change and, second, being able to explain change in a way that is helpful to most types.

Extroversion or introversion

Let’s understand each dimension in turn and consider how to recognize or respond to these during change. So, extroversion and introversion can often, but not always, be recognized by how expressive someone is about their internal thoughts. An analogy worth considering is the difference between push and pull data on your phone inbox. The opinion of an extroverted personality is almost like data that is continually being pushed to a phone’s inbox (or out of their mouth!). There is practically no delay in accessing their viewpoint if you seek it. On the other hand, an introvert represents more of a pull approach to data synchronization; there may be a slight delay while they go inside (to the server) and synchronize. When they do respond, it is much more likely to be a fully thought through and reliable response.

What does this mean for us as Change Agents? Well, if we think back to the transition curve from the last chapter, then it is likely that extroverts are going to express their feelings about change sooner than introverts. It is likely that we will have a disproportionately high level of views from the extroverts, who are more likely to express their feelings voluntarily, than we do from the introverts. This could result in a distorted view.

So, an introvert may be in the resistance stage of the transition curve in their head but may not express it. The risk could be that we hear extroverts talking excitedly about the future and assume that everybody is on board. Extroverts can be very vocal and dominant and in an emotive environment of change this could mean that we only get to hear their side of the story; the introverts are not going to push themselves forward. Fundamentally, to be successful in helping everyone to process change effectively, we have to communicate in ways that allow both types to be heard.

This means accepting that introverts may take longer to process information and longer to share how they feel, and we need to create safe environments that allow them to do that. Processes like the blue-bag-and-potato exercise use a structured way of eliciting concerns from a group and may be helpful. If we imagine sitting around the table, we would go to each person in turn, asking for their thoughts and concerns, which would give both introverts and extroverts a fair hearing. The method of capturing all the thoughts in the bag rather than responding directly allows the manager or Change Agent to digest the concerns, preventing an extroverted ‘off-the-cuff’ and possibly unhelpful response. If the Change Agent is more introverted, it also gives them chance to reflect and give a considered response.

Sensing or intuition

So, having considered the impact of extroversion and introversion, the next MBTI type concerns how we take in information, via either sensing or intuition. A sensing preference is characterized by a preference for more practical, detailed processes, whereas intuition is more vague, futuristic and ‘big-picture’. If we consider these differences in relation to change then we could theorize that someone with an intuition preference might be predisposed to change as they seek it out and are attracted to it. If this is correct, then those with an intuition preference are likely to accelerate through the transition curve into commitment ahead of those around them. If accurate, then we can encourage people like this to be great Change Agents in their own right.

On the other hand, someone with a sensing preference is going to require lots of structured information. They will want to understand the process step-by-step before they can move forwards. So, if we think back to the transition curve, these are the sort of people who may seem to be stuck at the resistance stage because they are questioning all the facts. But when we realize this is just how they process the world, and provide them with the detail they need, then they will happily move on.

Thinking or feeling

The third dichotomy is about how we make decisions, either by thinking or feeling. If I have a thinking preference, then I base my decisions on facts and logic and am less likely to involve emotion in this process. If I understand the logical argument for a change then I am likely to just accept it. Someone with a thinking preference presented with a potentially emotive change like redundancy is likely to just accept it, if supported by a logical rationale. Their focus will be on the practical realities such as timings and redundancy packages as opposed to how they feel about it.

On the other hand, someone with a feeling preference makes decisions based on values and feelings. In the same situation they will often be concerned for other people, not just themselves, and may appear quite emotional. They may start asking questions on behalf of others, which may not even be their own concerns.

Obviously as Change Agents we need to respond appropriately to both these styles and should have thought through the logical argument, treating people fairly in any change situation. However, this preference can also make a difference in those delivering or managing the change. A Change Agent with a thinking preference may be very matter-of-fact about change, which could appear cold. On the other hand, someone delivering change with a feeling preference may empathize too much and bring too much emotion to their communication. Both risks can be avoided with self-awareness.

Judging or perceiving

The final set of MBTI preferences concerns judging or perceiving, described as ‘How we like to live our lives’, which is rather general. It is important to understand that judging doesn’t mean being judgemental in this context – it actually means that people like closure. Those with a judging preference like to make decisions and have plans and structures agreed. They also like to have time to plan, and don’t appreciate last-minute changes. Changes to carefully thought-out plans can be highly stressful to a person with a judging preference. Having said that, once they have had time to come to terms with the change, they are likely to achieve closure and accept the change as a new reality.

People with a perceiving preference, on the other hand, are always open to new experiences; they like to leave their options open, are flexible and tend to see a change of plan as an opportunity. They seek out change and are likely to move quickly through the transformation curve to the exploration stage, looking for the positives that the change may bring. They can be helpful to others by spotting the positives in change and helping others to come to terms with it. In my experience, people with a perceiving preference are also likely to be natural Change Agents.

There are many other different personality tools available that can also be applied to change in order to provide equally helpful insights. The tool doesn’t really matter; what matters is our ability to recognize how different personality types are predisposed to change. This helps us to understand different reactions to change and to plan our communication in ways that are likely to appeal to the majority. Remember that our own personality type will play a part in the way we respond to and communicate change as well. Appreciating how our preferences may differ from those of others gives us insight into the experiences and realities of others. Delivering change effectively requires us to take the majority with us and understanding and adapting to individual difference is another way of doing this.

Quick recap on personality and change • Different personalities will respond differently to change. • Change Agents need to appreciate these differences and flex their style accordingly. • Certain personality traits may make people natural Change Agents. • Our own preferences may bring bias to the way we communicate change. • It doesn’t matter which personality tool we use; the key is appealing to the majority.

Online toolkit The following free change resources can be downloaded via: www.changesuperhero.com • MBTI and change overview