Spectrum of Behaviors and Decision-Making Styles

In the last article, I listed a number of personality types:

• Dominant – Submissive
• Assertive – Passive
• Pleasant – Abrasive
• Outgoing – Withdrawn
• Risk Takers – Risk Averse
• Loud – Quiet
• Take Charge – Follower
• Impetuous – Thoughtful
• Planner – Charge Ahead

This week I want to look at how some of these can either encourage or inhibit good decision-making in groups. Remember, this is my list; behavioral experts may disagree with it.

In the pair Assertive – Passive, the spectrum at the Assertive side can span a broad range. At one end, the assertive personality is willing to put forth thoughts and ideas in any forum in a non-confrontational manner. Part of being assertive without confrontation is having the courage to put forward contributions without being fearful of negative reactions to the ideas and thoughts. This also means not being put off or withdrawing in the face of negative reactions, if they arise. This personality type can often encourage an atmosphere in which decisions can be made.

At the other end of the assertiveness spectrum, the confrontational and, often, unpleasant end, the behavior can border on bullying, with an insistence on being “right” and having all the answers coupled with being willing to shout down, either literally or figuratively, others and their ideas. At this end of the assertiveness spectrum, we find people who, usually for reasons of ego, want to be in control of the process and get their way. There are situations in which this behavior may be desirable but not in a group charged with making decisions and solving problems. It inhibits the contributions of other members of the group and therefore keeps good alternative ideas from serious consideration.

The Passive side of that pair ranges from the truly passive – those who will not offer any ideas or thoughts to the decision-making process and just accept what others contribute – to a form of passivity that manifests itself as not pushing, or even defending, their own ideas even though they may offer them up. The problem with passivity is that potentially valuable ideas and insights may end up not being considered because they never are introduced or simply pushed aside without real consideration.

Risk Takers – Risk Averse: again, this can be a spectrum. Often, people will be risk takers in some situations and risk averse in others, like the extreme skier who will not invest in the stock market “because it’s too risky.”

Risk Takers tend to plunge ahead without considering the consequences of their choices. Or, perhaps, irrespective of them. In fact, many seem to deliberately make the risky decision and push for the risky course of action. For the rest of us, while we recognize that the risky course may end up having the most reward, it should not be pursued without a clear understanding of the risks and, if possible, ways to mitigate them. This behavior leaves others not fully trusting the judgement of the Risk Taker. This type of personality may try to rush the decision-making process to limit the consideration of the possible downsides of risky courses of action.

The Risk Averse, on the other hand, can only see the downside – the risks – and will push for what they consider a safer decision. Once again, judgement is clouded and, once the Risk Averse is recognized as such, his input may be discounted or ignored. The Risk Averse participant may actually impede decision-making by delaying the process with excessive concerns about the potential downside.

The Pleasant – Abrasive spectrum again can be exhibited by the same person in different situations. However, in my observations and experiences, these personalities will generally act consistently and predominantly within a narrow range of that spectrum. Most of us would rather deal with those on the Pleasant end of the range, on the theory that they will be easier to get along with and will not engage in contentious interactions. At the Abrasive end, the reputation is one of contention and conflict, often leading to avoidance by others. It is easy to take offense and thus discount ideas and thoughts put forward by abrasive individuals, which, again, gets in the way of full analysis of the value they may offer.

Dominant – Submissive is a common mix, generally based on seniority or perceived authority/ power within a group. Dominant personalities usually get their own way and too often treat any decision-making group as a rubber stamp for their ideas. My personal experience with this situation is pretty negative since the submissive personalities do not challenge the dominant person’s position, even if there are other, potentially more viable, ones to consider.

Dominant – Submissive is, of course, a spectrum and involves, among other factors, pecking order. In the corporate world, pecking order is important, of course, but can impede detailed discussion when making decisions.

Impetuous – Thoughtful, in my experience, is more binary than a spectrum. Most of the thoughtful people I know are not prone to impetuosity in nearly any aspect of their lives. This, like any statement that seems absolute, is, of course, not 100% true and I can point to individuals I know who will normally be very thoughtful and then do something really impetuous, perplexing the dickens out of me. On the other hand, some very impetuous people will, in some cases, carefully consider their actions. But these non-typical behaviors are rare for these two personalities, as the basic approaches appear to be ingrained personality traits.

In fact, all of these paired types represent a spectrum under different circumstances, and it is important that we know this and learn to work with them when decisions must be made. How do we do that? Join me next week for some exploration of how we work together with a wide variety of personalities to make the decisions we need to make.