Do you dive headfirst into conversations, or do you wait for someone else to break the ice?
We asked our community whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement “You do not hesitate to lead in most activities and interactions with other people,” and the results were telling. The greatest division among personality traits was, unsurprisingly, between Extraverts and Introverts, with 83.93% of the former agreeing with the statement, while only 33.92% of the latter agreed. However, there was also a wide gap between Assertive and Turbulent types (71.27% agreeing vs. 51.08%).
Below, we break down the numbers by strategy and role – but before we get there, here is a chart showing the reactions of different personality types:
Strategies
The four strategies, dependent on a person’s Extraversion or Introversion, and Assertiveness or Turbulence, seemed to have the most impact on a person’s willingness to take the lead in social settings. Most inclined to do so are those embracing People Mastery, with an overwhelming 86.77% of respondents agreeing. Extraverted and Assertive, these types are energized by social contact and are less concerned with others’ opinions of them, making it that much easier to put themselves out there.
Those following the Social Engagement strategy, as Extraverted Turbulent types, tend to care much more about what others think of them. With 80.66% agreeing that they would opt to take the lead though, it may be the case that people fitting into this strategy value social leadership just as much as those of the People Mastery strategy, but are more likely to recognize that not every social situation demands their personal touch.
At the other end of the scale, a minority of the Confident Individualist types surveyed (43.12%) agreed that they would not hesitate in taking the lead in social interactions. As Introverted Assertive types, it could be that those who follow this strategy have no problem starting conversations and activities, but simply see no need to be the one to do so.
Finally, we have those following the Constant Improvement strategy, only 29.71% of whom feel comfortable being the first to get things going in social situations. Introverted and Turbulent, people following this strategy tend to take a “wait and see” approach, listening to what others have to say before venturing their own ideas.
Roles
There was much less of a disparity among roles than among strategies, with Analysts, Sentinels, and Diplomats scoring very similarly (64.26%, 61.00%, and 59.02% agreeing, respectively). The only outlier was the Explorer role (53.28% agreeing). Observant and Prospecting, Explorers have a flexible yet pragmatic view of life, which may cause them to be a bit more likely than the other roles to hold back and wait for the best opportunity to emerge. Nevertheless, it appears that strategies are of far more importance than roles when it comes to social initiative.
Conclusions
In social leadership, the statistics seem to show that it’s not who we are that matters nearly so much as how we are. In other words, our perceptions and analysis matter little when compared to the ways we show ourselves to the world. Take two Thinking types: one may embrace People Mastery, always ready to spark a discussion or activity with a confident declaration, while the other may favor Constant Improvement – just as logical, but much preferring to keep decisions and opinions to him or herself. Because both may have valuable contributions, it is important to consider their different approaches, to place what they say – or refrain from saying – in the proper context.
Comments
Please to join the discussion.