Genius, Myers-Briggs, and Kiersey
A colleague once described the methodology contained in my forthcoming book, Is Your Genius At Work?, as “Myers-Briggs without boxes.” She was referring to the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory, frequently called the MBTI. It and its cousin, the Kiersey Temperament Sorter, are well respected questionnaires that offer you a window into yourself. The MBTI, based on questions concerning your mental make-up, and the Kiersey Temperament Sorter, based on questions concerning your skilled actions, both classify you as one of sixteen types. Both are very useful tools; I have used them often in my coaching and consulting practice.
My colleague meant that the methodology of genius also offers a window into yourself, but that it does so without the restriction of classifying you as this or that type of person. The aim of the methodology is to discover a unique name for your genius. Activities may consist of coaching, reading, examining the past, noticing the present, completing structured exercises, feedback from other people, attending a workshop, etc. It is more work than filling out a questionnaire, and it is also more engaging and self-directed.
The fact that the methodolgy of genius is more engaging and self-directed than filling out a questionnaire is one of two reasons why people who use it almost always recall the names for their geniuses many years after having found them, while people often forget their MBTI or Kiersey profiles within months. People are much more likely to remember their own conclusions than those handed to them.
The second reason is that genius lies closer to spirit and soul than it does to mental make-up or skilled action; it lies deeper within, in a place that is quite probably unmeasurable and thus immune to the science of questionnaire development. Your name for your genius will be memorable because it describes something that is fundamentally you, and that connects you to something larger than yourself. Those who do come to recognize their geniuses often use terms such as “life-changing” and “profound” to describe the experience. One person described discovering his genius as, “Looking in the mirror, seeing myself for the first time, and really liking what I saw.”
Thursday, July 14th, 2005 at 4:45 pm ◊ Comment or trackback◊ Send this post to someone who will thank you for it »
◊ Filed in: Is Your Genius At Work?
Drop-down feed menu
July 20th, 2005 at 4:35 am
Sounds interesting - I’ll have to add this book to my wish list - I use the Kiersey-Bates and/or Myers-Briggs in some of the work I do (I’m a campus minister), and this sounds like an excellent resource to add - thanks!
Blessings & Peace,
Hugo
July 30th, 2005 at 7:45 am
I walked away from reading this and picked up an old book I had purchased recently and not yet opened _Sensitivity Training and Group Encounter: an Introduction_ edited by robert w. siroka, ellen k. siroka, and gilbert a. schloss, copyright 1971. On page 5, I read “In the late fifties, a distinct dichotomy crystallized between those working with organizational skills, and those emphasizing personal growth. Industrial and business firms, always significant patrons of sensitivity training, were not receptive when their managers returned more concerned with personal development, than with effective organization and production. Trainers wishing to continue working with industry once again focused training on vocational and organizational skill-learning, rather than on personal exploration. Trainers more concerned with self-awareness felt that whatever skills emerged from the group were secondary to emotional and sensual experiences. They attracted to their workshops primarily functional, productive, and often creativer individuals, who were looking for a more meaningful and emotionally enriched life.” synchronicity at work!
July 30th, 2005 at 11:12 am
That is how it went down Shari. It was (still is) a real shame that some folks set up a dichotomy between skill training and personal development, and, well…scissors cut paper. The dichotomy is artificial and dangerous, of course. Skills in the hands of underdeveloped people are pretty useless at best and destructive at worst. For example, many managers use measurement as a club and that precludes using it for its more important purpose—learning.
Don’t be sad though for all of those functional, creative, productive people. For the most part they abandoned the stifling places in which they were unwelcome for places of their own making or for places in which what they brought was valued.
August 4th, 2005 at 9:54 am
Okay, so this happens to be my point of entry into your world. I took the recommended Exercise to Recognize Your Genius despite the other things I intended to do with my time. (Ah, distractible, one of my negative labels.) I deduced from the exercise that my genius is “Doing What Works”. Thank you for the insight.
So far so good. But my epiphany is not in itself worthy of your reader’s time. Here’s where I go with it:
My consulting company name is Creating Sustainability. It is an approach I have been nursing for years, much like Richard has been nursing Genius. I can tell you how systems thinking and the art of blending peoples energy are just as important as biology and technology in making our world a better place.
Now, I will be adding another dimension: “Doing What Works.” It’s not a new concept. In fact it was a life philosophy of my high-school educated mother. But now that I have discovered it as my genius, why keep it to myself? This is a tool available to all.
Allow me follow that energy for a few lines. Doing What Works cuts across the conservative and liberal divide. It appeals to the I’m From Missouri Show Me people. It honors empirical evidence, appealing to scientists and engineers. It is equally accessible to the farmer and the tradesman. It is compatible with one of my favorite activist lines, “If it has been done, it must be possible.”
High level stuff. Yes, and I have turned this “distraction” into a complement to my business plan, which I probably wouldn’t have gotten around to for months. That’s being practical. That’s Doing What Works. Eventually (”slowness” is another of my negative labels), I’ll get around to applying Doing What Works to the water system for the City of Portland, Oregon.
Now, that kind of linkage of genius to business to doing good in the world may be worthy of your readers attention. Thanks again. Jon
August 4th, 2005 at 10:12 am
Nice work Jon! There is a caveat in the book that not every exercise works for every person (there are 32 of them). I guess though that this was the right one for you. Most people don’t “get it” as quickly as you did.
And you are right — an insight is just that until we actually do something; until we go the next step of “linkage of genius to business to doing good in the world.” The subtitle of the book is “4 key questions to ask before your next career move.” The questions are: What is your genius? Is your genius at work? What is your purpose? Is your genius on purpose? The term “purpose” is used to refer to a concrete contribution to something larger than yourself.
Also, about the business of your genius as “a tool available to all.” In almost every cultural and spiritual tradition in which a concept akin to genius appears, it is viewed as a gift to the community. In other words, there is a sense that “your” genius isn’t yours at all, but belongs to the rest of us.
The exercise Jon speaks of is Refute Your Disrepute.