Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] roles was: Object Mentor mentioned ...

Expand Messages
  • yahoogroups@jhrothjr.com
    From: Keith Ray Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:16 AM Subject: [XP] roles was: Object Mentor mentioned
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 28, 2003
      From: "Keith Ray" <keithray.at.mac.com@...>
      Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 11:16 AM
      Subject: [XP] roles was: Object Mentor mentioned ...

      > >> Check this
      > >> http://www.mef.to/seven_roles/the_roles.html
      > >
      > > [snip]
      > >
      > > Hmmm... 'Sage', with 'Scholar' a close second. And throw in a little
      > > bit of 'Warrior' just for fun! :)
      > A site that talks about channeling "Michael" sounds kind of weird.

      Yup. It certainly does, which is why I didn't reference JP's site
      One of the things I've found out about personality classification systems
      over the years is that all of them work to some extent, and none of
      them are really comprehensive in that they give you everything you
      ever want to know about a person.

      Myers-Briggs classifies personality into four binary categories, for
      16 types. Michael uses 7 categories, most of which have 7 distinct
      choices (although one has 5 and one has 3.) There are a number of
      other auxuliary distinctions as well. While Myers-Briggs makes a
      number of distinctions that people have found useful, Michael lets
      me get much further into the maelstrom.

      For example, I can describe XP itself as a process that will appeal
      to people with a Relationship perspective, based strictly on the war
      room atmosphere, pair programming, onsite customer and other
      high communication attributes. I can also make pretty good
      predictions about what problems people with Security, Achievement
      and Wisdom perspectives will have with it. (People with Survival
      perspectives won't make it in software development, and there
      aren't that many of them around today anyway.)

      Knowing a person's basic perspective, I can also come up with
      an approach that will frequently get them on board, or will
      cleanly come up with a reason that they don't want to.

      > Another source of 'role'/personality testing is the book "Now Discover
      > Your Strengths" -- Gallup polled thousands of people in many jobs and
      > professions and then extracted patterns from the data. I wrote about
      > that here:
      > <http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/blog/2003/06/15/index.html>
      > Now Discover Your Strengths identifies thirty-four "themes" or basic
      > strengths
      > (which I'll call "StrengthFinder types") that people have in varying
      > degrees,
      > and provides an on-line test to find your top five strengths. It says
      > that the
      > strength that managers must have to be good managers is
      > "Individualization,"
      > which is the natural ability to observe and identify people's
      > strengths, style,
      > motivation, and other unique qualities. Ironically, in a book about 34
      > generalized
      > "types", it says that people with the talent for "Individualization"
      > are impatient
      > with generalizations and "types."

      I wouldn't call that ironic at all. People who are good at
      dealing with individuals *as unique individuals* are usually
      impatient with typologies. They're way beyond such things;
      if they use a typology at all, it's as training wheels to teach
      someone else how to see that people are, in fact, different.

      It's simply the expert syndrome: typologies are for people
      for who a personality classification system tells them something

      > See also <http://student.gallup.com/strategies.html>
      > Since Gallup wants to make money off of this, there is no free test for
      > determining your StrengthFinder types.

      Of course not. Myers-Briggs is all over the place. While there's
      no online test for Perspective in the Michael system, Maslow's
      Hierarchy of Needs will get you close enough for all practical
      purposes, and there may very well be online tests for that

      John Roth

      > --
      > C. Keith Ray
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.