Sustainable leadership begins with understanding ourselves, but how do we do that? What do we need to know about ourselves to become sustainable leaders? We need to know our view toward our environment. Environment being the people around us, our preferred workplace, how we interact, relate and communicate with people. We need to understand what drives us and how we prefer to act on tasks, how we view teams and how we view reward. These and many other attributes and characteristics make up our core being; things we bring with us into a leadership role.
Sustainable leadership development begins understanding what we bring to the table that will affect our behavior and growth to successfully adapt in any environment. The first stage of development is what we already are, our core being that makes up or preferred behaviors and attitudes. We need to understand and grow from that point. The second stage of development is building our skills to be successful and sustainable leaders in the role we have or seek.
This blog focuses on the first stage of sustainable leadership. Fortunately, there are many types of tools based on a variety of theories that can be used to learn more about ourselves.
We will look at three theories and their related instruments that are popular in today’s workforce. There are many others; some that are not grounded in academic work, some that are accepted as theory but are just activities, and some are based on pop culture. The three theories discussed here have different levels of academic strength but all have strongly associated and popular instruments that transfer into practical applications.
The purpose of each of these theories is to explain, “In a systematic way to understand human behavior” (Inscape 1996) and each are grounded in some track within the field psychology.
The Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is based on the theories of Dr. Carl Jung. A plethora of books have been written and is generally known as Jungian Theory. MBTI measures how we renew our energy, either Introversion or Extroversion; how we take in information, either Sensing or Intuition; how we make decisions, Feeling or Thinking and how we go about living our daily lives, Judging (structured) or Perceiving (unstructured). (Briggs 2015) When combined, the respondent receives one designation from each of the four areas. For example, ENFJ. Through a facilitated workshop and resource materials an individual or a team can share the results to understand oneself, understand the differences in others and potentially use to improve workplace communications, workplace environment and strengthen teams.
These same potential uses are also true for the instruments.
The Personal Profile System (DiSC) is based on the theory and work of Dr. William Marston, also a psychologist. This instrument measures four different areas and is closely aligned with temperament theory (Keirsey 1984, 1998) than the psychological preferences theory of MBTI. MBTI has a possible 16 different types and although the DiSC is four, the results are arranged as a flow chart that clearly illustrates the dynamic nature of each of the elements. The DiSC does not address Introversion and Extroversion which I believe is a crucial factor in developing sustainable leadership. Through a comprehensive self and optional group report and a facilitated workshop respondents can gain insight into their personal results and its applications in the workplace.
Strength-Based Psychology is a theory developed from the life work of Dr. Donald O. Clifton who developed the Clifton Strength Finder. Today a variety of authors have captured the theory and have developed instruments for different purposes. Perhaps the most popular being Strength Finder 2.0. (Rath & Conchie 2008). This instrument helps a respondent discover a set of attributes and factors that when grouped identify categories of strengths as applied to leadership. There are some common attributes in Strength Finder with both MBTI and DiSC, however, I would choose MBTI or DiSC first for core personal and professional growth then would recommend Strength Finder as a follow-up tool for leadership development.
How do we build application and impact from the results of these instruments? In an action science project with three different organizations we found an initial one-time exposure did have some application for individuals; however, it was not transferred into the workplace. After a second workshop, a few months later, the use of the results increased among staff, mostly one on one or supervisor to employee. A third exposure with specific activities helped bring the results and applications into team and group work.
Each of these instruments are tools for growth. It is up to us to use and row from them. They do not explain everything about us and regardless if your results are exactly like the person sitting in the next office, everyone is still different. Each of these tools look at common attributes and do not measure intelligence, socio-economic background, life experiences or education.
Each can contribute to understanding ourselves and that concept is critical to sustainable leadership.
Keirsey, David (1984) Please Understand Me 5th edition, Prometheus Nemesis Book Co. Del Mar, CA.
Keirsey, Davis (1998) Please Understand Me II, Prometheus Nemesis Book Co, Del mar, CA.
Inscape (1996) A Comparison of the Personal Profile System and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Research Report. Inscape Publishing. Minneapolis, MN.
Myers, Isabel (2015) Introduction to Myers-Briggs Type 7th edition. CPP, San Francisco, CA.
Rath, Tom & Barry Conchie (2008) Strengths-Based Leadership. Gallup Press, New York, NY.