Teambuilding, Suitability & Role of Conflict
DiSC Team-building factors
Dominance, being the factor of control, is particularly suited to a leadership rôle within a team. Dominant people have a natural urge to take command, and will fit easily into such a position. An important consideration with individuals of this type, however, is that the number of highly Dominant team-members should be kept to minimum. Several people attempting to take leadership within a team will clearly have a negative impact on team performance.
Influence is the social cement of the team. Unless they possess specialised skills, highly Influential people often appear to have little practical part to play in team's proceedings, and are hence often undervalued. It is important to remember, however, that for a team to work effectively, its members must have a sense of cohesion, and this cohesion can often be achieved by the inclusion of one or two Influential individuals within the team. The communicative abilities of Influence can also produce a useful representative or spokesperson for the team, presenting their findings and ideas to others.
Steadiness represents the team's 'brake', holding the other members back from ill-considered conclusions or precipitous actions. This is an important factor, especially after the team has formed its internal social relationships and has begun to perform its real function. A consideration to bear in mind with Steadiness is their natural passivity, which can often prevent them from making input unless directly requested, and it is often helpful to develop the structure of the team in such a way that the Steady members feel that their contributions will be valued and accepted by the other team members.
Compliance is a factor important in actually achieving the results required from the team. Those members with high Compliance scores will tend to be the ones who generate ideas and produce materials and reports. The passive side of the Compliant type, however, will normally require more assertive teammembers (specifically Dominant and Influential types) to implement and monitor any plans or suggestions they may produce. The Compliant members of the team are often those who possess the specialised skills and knowledge appropriate to a project.
Suitability of Profiles
Two Drivers: Because it is in the nature of a Driver to seek authority and dominance, any relationship between two individuals of this kind will inevitably contain a measure of tension, as each vies for the dominant position, and not unusually this tension can break out into open conflict. Drivers can generally only work well together if they have goals in common, and each has a defined area of authority.
Driver and Communicator: As with two Drivers, this is often a difficult pairing, as each is assertive and demanding of the other. Because the Driver is interested in material and business success, while the Communicator focuses on social success. This means that a Driver and Communicator can make an effective partnership if carefully guided by a manager.
Driver and Planner: This is an effective pairing purely in terms of results, because the Planner, as their name suggests, is capable of preparing detailed plans and carefully considering their implications, while the Driver possesses the thrusting, assertive approach needed to put these plans into effect. On a personal level, however, the degree of difference between these two styles often makes it difficult for them to respect one another's abilities.
Driver and Analyst: This combination is often effective in a business sense. The Analyst's ability to work with structure and detail, coupled with the drive and determinism of the Driving partner, mean that each style covers many of the other's weaknesses. Both are Controlled in approach, and this often gives them enough common ground to develop a mutual respect, although this partnership will rarely be close in a personal sense.
Two Communicators: On a purely personal level, relations between Communicators tend to be good. The cheerful, outgoing style associated with the Communicators reacts to nothing so well as another person of the same type. On occasion, a sense of light-hearted competition can appear as they jostle for personal attention, but this rarely escalates into actual confrontation. The joviality and sense of fun connected with Communicator styles, however, means that such a pairing can have a negative impact on performance in purely business terms.
Communicator and Planner: This is generally a successful partnership. The Planner has the steady, reliable style to keep the Communicating partner from losing sight of their goals or intentions, while the Communicator has the social extroversion necessary to build a personal relationship. Under some circumstances, the Planning partner can become quite dependent on their more assertive teammember.
Communicator and Analyst: These are two diametrically opposed styles with entirely different sets of values, and hence it is often difficult for them to form an effective working relationship. Their relative skills and abilities, however, tend to complement each other well in a practical sense, and on the rare occasions where two people of these kinds are able to form a workable partnership, the results are often impressive.
Two Planners: Two solid, dependable and loyal individuals with open and sympathetic attitudes, a partnership of Planners will often work well together, and frequently form quite a strong bond. A potential problem here, however, is that each Planner's need for time to consider and plan will be increased exponentially by attaching them to another with the same need. Ideas or plans can sometimes be exchanged and corrected between the two partners over a very long timescale indeed before any action is finally taken.
Planner and Analyst: A fairly effective and complementary partnership, but somewhat unpredictable. The fact that both styles are Passive provides the foundation for a working relationship, but specific factors can sometimes work to undermine this (for example, the Planner might be looking for a strong personal tie, while the Analyst would have no particular interest in such a relationship).
Two Analysts: Analysts are not a naturally competitive style, and yet when two come into contact with one another, a type of competition can evolve. This normally consists of attempts on either side to demonstrate superior skills or knowledge. If they are able to overcome this tendency, however, Analysts can build a workable and productive team.
Changes in Profile
Dominance Shifted Upwards
An upward shift in Dominance suggests that the person concerned is attempting to present themselves as more direct and assertive than would normally be the case. This means that they perceive their rôle as requiring a more independent and self-motivated style that they are naturally comfortable with. This shift in Dominance is often difficult to maintain, and may result in stress over the long term.
Dominance Shifted Downwards
This effect indicates that a person is attempting to present themselves as less direct and assertive than would normally be the case. This means that they perceive their rôle as requiring a more submissive and compliant type of behaviour, often as a result of the need to work with even more highly Dominant individuals. Shifts in Dominance of this kind are not normally maintained in the long term, and more independent behaviour can be expected to develop.
Influence Shifted Upwards
This shift shows a perceived need for communication skills in an individual's current rôle, and they are displaying a more apparently confident and friendly approach than would normally be the case. The permanence of this shift varies according to circumstances - if the candidate perceives a positive response to this style, it is not unusual for it to continue in the long term, and the individual concerned may actually adopt this style as a true Internal factor.
Influence Shifted Downwards
A downward shift in Influence suggests that there is a perceived need for formality and discipline in this person's current rôle, and they are displaying a more structured and organized approach than would normally be the case. Extremely outgoing individuals trying to mask their approach in this way often find it hard to maintain this style over long periods of time.
Steadiness Shifted Upwards
This shift suggests that a steady, persistent style seems to be needed in this individual's work or, at least, they perceive this to be the case. An upward shift in Steadiness might also suggest a feeling that they need to adopt a more amiable, receptive attitude, depending on circumstance.
Steadiness Shifted Downwards
This relatively common shift, seen often in individuals with relatively high Steadiness on their Internal Profile, simply reflects the need in many types of work to react responsively and perform tasks within set timescales. It is usual for a Steadiness shift of this type to persist over time, and it may even be a permanent feature.
ComplianceShifted Upwards
Where this shift appears in a profile series, a focus on fact and detail appears to be necessary for the person concerned, to the extent that they feel the need to demonstrate a higher aptitude for this type of work than might be natural to them. Compliance will increase while this shift is maintained, often accompanied by a corresponding drop in assertiveness or apparent self-confidence.
Compliance Shifted Downwards
A drop in Compliance on the External Profile suggests that independence or self confidence appear to be necessary under this persons current circumstances, to the extent that they feel the need to demonstrate a higher level of these factors than might be natural to them. Compliance and co-operation will decrease while this shift is maintained, as the individual is attempting to demonstrate their ability to work without support.
Internal and External role conflict
Rôle conflict can arise from either of two sources. A person may actually be unsuited to their work, or their perception of that work may be at fault, forcing them to attempt to display behaviour inappropriate to their actual position. One of four situations is possible:
Dominance, being the factor of control, is particularly suited to a leadership rôle within a team. Dominant people have a natural urge to take command, and will fit easily into such a position. An important consideration with individuals of this type, however, is that the number of highly Dominant team-members should be kept to minimum. Several people attempting to take leadership within a team will clearly have a negative impact on team performance.
Influence is the social cement of the team. Unless they possess specialised skills, highly Influential people often appear to have little practical part to play in team's proceedings, and are hence often undervalued. It is important to remember, however, that for a team to work effectively, its members must have a sense of cohesion, and this cohesion can often be achieved by the inclusion of one or two Influential individuals within the team. The communicative abilities of Influence can also produce a useful representative or spokesperson for the team, presenting their findings and ideas to others.
Steadiness represents the team's 'brake', holding the other members back from ill-considered conclusions or precipitous actions. This is an important factor, especially after the team has formed its internal social relationships and has begun to perform its real function. A consideration to bear in mind with Steadiness is their natural passivity, which can often prevent them from making input unless directly requested, and it is often helpful to develop the structure of the team in such a way that the Steady members feel that their contributions will be valued and accepted by the other team members.
Compliance is a factor important in actually achieving the results required from the team. Those members with high Compliance scores will tend to be the ones who generate ideas and produce materials and reports. The passive side of the Compliant type, however, will normally require more assertive teammembers (specifically Dominant and Influential types) to implement and monitor any plans or suggestions they may produce. The Compliant members of the team are often those who possess the specialised skills and knowledge appropriate to a project.
Suitability of Profiles
Two Drivers: Because it is in the nature of a Driver to seek authority and dominance, any relationship between two individuals of this kind will inevitably contain a measure of tension, as each vies for the dominant position, and not unusually this tension can break out into open conflict. Drivers can generally only work well together if they have goals in common, and each has a defined area of authority.
Driver and Communicator: As with two Drivers, this is often a difficult pairing, as each is assertive and demanding of the other. Because the Driver is interested in material and business success, while the Communicator focuses on social success. This means that a Driver and Communicator can make an effective partnership if carefully guided by a manager.
Driver and Planner: This is an effective pairing purely in terms of results, because the Planner, as their name suggests, is capable of preparing detailed plans and carefully considering their implications, while the Driver possesses the thrusting, assertive approach needed to put these plans into effect. On a personal level, however, the degree of difference between these two styles often makes it difficult for them to respect one another's abilities.
Driver and Analyst: This combination is often effective in a business sense. The Analyst's ability to work with structure and detail, coupled with the drive and determinism of the Driving partner, mean that each style covers many of the other's weaknesses. Both are Controlled in approach, and this often gives them enough common ground to develop a mutual respect, although this partnership will rarely be close in a personal sense.
Two Communicators: On a purely personal level, relations between Communicators tend to be good. The cheerful, outgoing style associated with the Communicators reacts to nothing so well as another person of the same type. On occasion, a sense of light-hearted competition can appear as they jostle for personal attention, but this rarely escalates into actual confrontation. The joviality and sense of fun connected with Communicator styles, however, means that such a pairing can have a negative impact on performance in purely business terms.
Communicator and Planner: This is generally a successful partnership. The Planner has the steady, reliable style to keep the Communicating partner from losing sight of their goals or intentions, while the Communicator has the social extroversion necessary to build a personal relationship. Under some circumstances, the Planning partner can become quite dependent on their more assertive teammember.
Communicator and Analyst: These are two diametrically opposed styles with entirely different sets of values, and hence it is often difficult for them to form an effective working relationship. Their relative skills and abilities, however, tend to complement each other well in a practical sense, and on the rare occasions where two people of these kinds are able to form a workable partnership, the results are often impressive.
Two Planners: Two solid, dependable and loyal individuals with open and sympathetic attitudes, a partnership of Planners will often work well together, and frequently form quite a strong bond. A potential problem here, however, is that each Planner's need for time to consider and plan will be increased exponentially by attaching them to another with the same need. Ideas or plans can sometimes be exchanged and corrected between the two partners over a very long timescale indeed before any action is finally taken.
Planner and Analyst: A fairly effective and complementary partnership, but somewhat unpredictable. The fact that both styles are Passive provides the foundation for a working relationship, but specific factors can sometimes work to undermine this (for example, the Planner might be looking for a strong personal tie, while the Analyst would have no particular interest in such a relationship).
Two Analysts: Analysts are not a naturally competitive style, and yet when two come into contact with one another, a type of competition can evolve. This normally consists of attempts on either side to demonstrate superior skills or knowledge. If they are able to overcome this tendency, however, Analysts can build a workable and productive team.
Changes in Profile
Dominance Shifted Upwards
An upward shift in Dominance suggests that the person concerned is attempting to present themselves as more direct and assertive than would normally be the case. This means that they perceive their rôle as requiring a more independent and self-motivated style that they are naturally comfortable with. This shift in Dominance is often difficult to maintain, and may result in stress over the long term.
Dominance Shifted Downwards
This effect indicates that a person is attempting to present themselves as less direct and assertive than would normally be the case. This means that they perceive their rôle as requiring a more submissive and compliant type of behaviour, often as a result of the need to work with even more highly Dominant individuals. Shifts in Dominance of this kind are not normally maintained in the long term, and more independent behaviour can be expected to develop.
Influence Shifted Upwards
This shift shows a perceived need for communication skills in an individual's current rôle, and they are displaying a more apparently confident and friendly approach than would normally be the case. The permanence of this shift varies according to circumstances - if the candidate perceives a positive response to this style, it is not unusual for it to continue in the long term, and the individual concerned may actually adopt this style as a true Internal factor.
Influence Shifted Downwards
A downward shift in Influence suggests that there is a perceived need for formality and discipline in this person's current rôle, and they are displaying a more structured and organized approach than would normally be the case. Extremely outgoing individuals trying to mask their approach in this way often find it hard to maintain this style over long periods of time.
Steadiness Shifted Upwards
This shift suggests that a steady, persistent style seems to be needed in this individual's work or, at least, they perceive this to be the case. An upward shift in Steadiness might also suggest a feeling that they need to adopt a more amiable, receptive attitude, depending on circumstance.
Steadiness Shifted Downwards
This relatively common shift, seen often in individuals with relatively high Steadiness on their Internal Profile, simply reflects the need in many types of work to react responsively and perform tasks within set timescales. It is usual for a Steadiness shift of this type to persist over time, and it may even be a permanent feature.
ComplianceShifted Upwards
Where this shift appears in a profile series, a focus on fact and detail appears to be necessary for the person concerned, to the extent that they feel the need to demonstrate a higher aptitude for this type of work than might be natural to them. Compliance will increase while this shift is maintained, often accompanied by a corresponding drop in assertiveness or apparent self-confidence.
Compliance Shifted Downwards
A drop in Compliance on the External Profile suggests that independence or self confidence appear to be necessary under this persons current circumstances, to the extent that they feel the need to demonstrate a higher level of these factors than might be natural to them. Compliance and co-operation will decrease while this shift is maintained, as the individual is attempting to demonstrate their ability to work without support.
Internal and External role conflict
Rôle conflict can arise from either of two sources. A person may actually be unsuited to their work, or their perception of that work may be at fault, forcing them to attempt to display behaviour inappropriate to their actual position. One of four situations is possible:
- The 'Internal' and 'External' Profiles both match closely against the Job Profile. This indicates that rôle conflict, at least as far as the behaviour is concerned, is unlikely to be a cause of the difficulties being experienced.
- The Internal Profile matches the Job Profile closely, but the External Profile does not. This would suggest that the person concerned misunderstands the requirements of their position. By checking the shifts in style (see Changes), it is possible to see exactly which areas are the source of a particular problem.
- The External Profile matches the Job Profile closely, but the Internal Profile does not. This situation is indicative of an individual who is not well suited to their work, but who understands its requirements and is attempting to adjust their behaviour to compensate. If their problems can be addressed adequately in the short term, it is possible that their Internal Profile will adapt to meet this new challenge, given sufficient time.
- Neither the Internal or External Profile match the Job Profile. This final scenario indicates that not only is a candidate unsuitable in terms of behaviour for their rôle, but also that they feel unable to adapt themselves to the demands of their situation. In all these cases, remember that the picture presented by DISC can only describe the condition of a person's behaviour, and is unable to address specific events. Current problems with the behaviour may have their roots in outside factors, and these should be explored before making a final decision.