E138 – Introversion & Extraversion (w Mark Gilroy)

Okay, so here we are in the main body of today's podcast, and this is a show I've been looking forward to doing for a little while. We're going to speak into Mark Gilroy today, and he's managing director of tmsdi TMS Development International. He's an all round psychology geek. He's really passionate about this stuff. And we're going to be having a conversation today about introversion and extroversion and some of those sort of ways that we think about ourselves and sort of divide ourselves and understand ourselves before we get into that conversation, though, Mark, would you be able to introduce yourself and say hi to the audience, please. Thank

you so much for having me. James, a pleasure to be on the podcast. Yes. So my name is Mark. I'm the managing director of this company called tmsti. We help L and D practitioners, coaches, HR professionals, improve the way that they think, the way that they talk, and the way that they lead by using a whole range of psychometric tools, some of which include extraversion and introversion. So that's one of the reasons we're going to be bringing some of that into the discussion today. And yeah, I am alongside my role. I've got a background in business psychology, and I work as an executive coach, training consultant and team facilitator. So you'll find me. You'll find me generally, tweeting, blogging, blogging about all of those sorts of things wherever you like. To find your content

brilliant. All that people stuff is so fascinating, and I often describe myself as like a fan of this psychology stuff. I'm kind of late in life to this stuff, but it's stuff, but it's fascinating. And as a sort of personal reflection, I believe that over the course of my life, my journey has moved from being quite extroverted towards increasingly being introverted, particularly as context change and things like that. And maybe we'll explore that in a little bit. But I'd like to just start off by chucking those words out there and asking you, what what really do they mean, right? We've got introversion and we've got extroversion, right? So could you just sort of summarize what they are, maybe what the relationship between them is, where they come from, just a bit of a 101, on introversion and extroversion? Yeah, it's

an interesting it's an interesting question to even summarize, because the words themselves come from Carl Jung, right? So they're from, they're from his own theory into sort of psychological typologies. And that in itself, is a bit of a challenge, because we're going back decades and decades of when, when his original thinking around Psychological Types was generated. And in my view, we're probably due to a rebrand of some of these characteristics. They're just words that are there to describe behaviors that we sense from ourselves, and behavior, importantly, that we observe in others, but critically, we're only seeing that behavior through our own lens of preference, be it extroversion or introversion. So it's it's kind of fundamentally flawed. So before I get to your your the answer to your question, I think that's really important to kind of caveat that we're talking about an aspect of bias here, before we get into defining it, we're saying that the it's important to say all of us have the psychological lenses that we wear that allow us to make sense of the world. We have to give ourselves a bit of permission to do that, otherwise the world will be a very daunting and intimidating and overwhelming place. But researchers and psychologists like young, there have been others as well along over the years, have sought to just help simplify and understand what we see in others in terms of behavior and in terms of thinking style, by coming up with some terms again. So we have extraversion and introversion, these are probably some of the most popular psychological terms that are used outside of our profession. I think that I'm aware of anyway. I think most people that you asked on the street would have a pretty firm idea of what somebody with an introvert approach or somebody with an extrovert approach might look like. Would you agree? Yeah, I would. I

mean, they're kind of like the gate, gateway drug words of leading into personality. Do you know? I mean, they're like little anchors, and also, I think they, they're so reflective of us as individuals when we look at them, that we're kind of drawn to that self analysis in time. So I think people are sort of inclined to to find, you know, to find the lens that turns the kaleidoscope of self awareness into meaningful pictures that helps us categorize and understand ourselves. And I think this language of introversion and extroversion is quite intuitive, or what they what they stand for, feels quite intuitive, though, as you say, it feels fairly reductive as well. So I guess there's a trade off between the simplification of what is fairly complex in terms of people into a fairly. Reduced definition, and the trade off between what you'd lose in that simplification potentially and what you gain from having that common language and simplicity and something that's maybe a sort of anchor point of understanding. Yeah,

and it is. It's a really fine balancing act of having a useful language that people can use to describe one another, and making sure that it's getting taken too far by oversimplifying or maybe over applying that thinking too broadly. I think fundamentally, we're very much tribal beings, and sometimes this language can be used to sort of segment and isolate people into certain groups based on those labels and language. And that's certainly something we get away from in our work, but it can be a danger of using that kind of language.

Yeah, absolutely. And I guess if we think about them, you know, one feels kind of internal focused, and one feels external focused at its simplest. Do you think that's, that's part of it? Yeah, I

think that's, that's absolutely, and that's the way I like to talk about it. And I think my my favorite way of defining those two terms is to think about an imaginary chord between someone's brain and their mouth. So somebody with a more extrovert approach, that chord exists, but it's quite a short chord, and sometimes with very extreme cases, it's a tiny little chord. And this is an individual who might like to go from thinking to speaking to externalizing their thought really quickly, and actually they have a high need to do that. And actually keeping all of those that thinking contained inside creates a level of discomfort that is unsustainable. On the flip side, somebody with a more introvert preference has a longer chord between the brain and the mouth, and actually lots of chatter and lots of activity and stimulation will happen, but it all happens internally before a conscious choice is often made to make that thinking external. But yes, it is, it's it's sort of it is external versus internal, and that can also be associated I've had heard people talk about it in terms of energy as well. The psychologist Hans Eysenck, he talked about this in terms of stimulation theory, in that, you know, as humans, we're almost a bit like Goldilocks. We're kind of we we want a level of stimulation that isn't just too much, not not enough, but just right and so Eysenck thought some of these differences actually stemmed from difference in the brain structure called the A, R, A, S. You have to be careful how you say that faster, it's the the arous. And so this is the kind of the excitatory system of the brain that causes people to feel alert and awake. And it also has little mechanisms that do the opposite, like feeling kind of calm or bored. So it kind of controls that for us. And I think thought that actually what we observe in other people's behavior is typically extrovert was actually the result of someone who was naturally under stimulated, so that they were actually, you know, moving themselves into situations and environments that naturally raise their level of stimulation to that just right temperature. And on the flip side, there was a more introverted approach. Were naturally over stimulated, and were creating environments for themselves that actually brought that level of stimulation down to a more acceptable, natural level. Yeah,

that's really interesting. But some, some great stuff in there. Firstly, I really like your reference to the chord, and the chord analogy between for brain and our tongues, because chords are scalar, so it's not this sort of binary piece, and that, that sort of elasticity and that infinite variety of distance gives an insight into, you know, the shades that exist within these concepts of introversion and extroversion, and that last point that you were speaking there about, about the neurology, I think again, it's really interesting. So if I were to play that back, having never heard it before with some sort of layman's terms, it feels to me like potentially, our behaviors can be thought of, to some extent, as a balancing mechanism for ourselves. Is that right? So, you know, I mean in the same way that physically, if I feel tense or worked up, I might run to release some of my physical energy and get some balance in there. Or if I'm hungry, I might choose to eat to retain some of my sort of nutrient balance. Does it feel like a sort of a similar sort of analogy there with our social balance, if you will, through our behaviors, and how that relates to introversion, extroversion? Yeah,

I totally agree. And from my perspective, it's all linked, right? So that aspect of knowing when you've you've expended too much energy, or that you need to go and recharge and charge back up your energy, whatever that means, whatever that looks like to you, is very valid in the sense of it. Sense of extroversion and introversion, you know. And you could take this stage further and say, well, which self are you talking about? And I think we see at TMS, we really make a difference between the kind of work persona and the work self versus the non work self, whether it's the Family Self. The social self, or the any other aspect of the identity that you want to work with, because, as an example, I very much resonate with the traditional definition of extroversion when I'm at work, when I'm doing this kind of thing, particularly but outside of work, I would not be described as I would not be described in that way at all by any of my friends, any of my family. I'm sure that wouldn't be the case. And I definitely identify with more an introvert preference in that space. My favorite hobby, for example, is going to the cinema by myself brilliant. And that is, that is absolutely how I recharge. If I don't have that in my life, I know that it's, it's something that's, it's a need that kind of draws me back to have that space where it's about reducing all stimulation down to one thing, which is quite rare actually, in most, most aspects of society. Now,

yeah, fabulous. And all those, I guess self regulatory behaviors are really interesting, and it does feel like the self regulation that we undertake is and that we're drawn to as individuals is probably shaped to some extent, by where we are on this the scaler between introversion and extroversion,

and I think that that distinction is so important. And actually describing you use the word Kaleidoscope earlier on about behavior, I think, and shades of preference. That's absolutely the way we like to talk about this with people. And often this involves undoing the work that people may have done using maybe different types of psychometrics, like, for example, Myers Briggs, which is very binary. You know, you are an extrovert and use that very labeling, pigeonholing language, or you are an introvert, without much consideration for any space in between. It's and, yes, that simplifies things and makes it easy to put people into these categories that are sort of helpful for having a discussion about difference, but long term, it doesn't really reflect the way things are. Doesn't reflect the reality of and the complexity of the human experience and human behavior. But also, behavior isn't binary and and it's really important, I think, in the context of something like this, whether it's introversion, extroversion, or any of Jung's, you know, typological work that we don't get sucked into this hook of trying to classify people by their behavior and saying, You are this or you are this, you can absolutely be both, and you can be varying degrees of both. Yeah,

and on that, you know, I've wondered about this a little while, you know, I've done a range of assessment for myself and done some of these things with teams, and I guess I'm really interested in other domains, in the power associated with things like taxonomy and structuring, and the way that our language and the concepts that we Use as framing mechanisms can anchor us and and almost confine us. So I guess there's a question sort of exploring on on what you've what you've talked about there, do you feel that when we are identified as a personality type, or, you know, associated with certain traits, that that act of potentially being labeled or named as a certain thing. Does that go on to affect our behaviors? I mean, is it like cyclical like that? You know, if I'm told I'm an extrovert, do I adopt more extrovert behaviors? What's the sort of causal link or cycle there? If there is one, I'd

love to be able to say, yes, absolutely yes. It does. But I feel compelled to give you a very cop out answer there, James, which is that it kind of depends, it depends particularly on how you've been identified. So I remember a time where there used to be psychologists would come into a team environment, and they would start assessing people purely based on their observed behavior in an environment like a classic Assessment Center, for example, inherently flawed, of course, laden with bias, of course, and the same is true of self assessment. You know, if you're getting somebody to complete the questionnaire in a profile, you're asking them to self identify with some statements or some questions, and they will get a report based on their own answers to those questions, and depending on their level of self awareness insight, that report is going to be either incredibly accurate, or there may be some gaps. There may be some gaps that need kind of refining and discussion. I think if somebody was to receive their, you know, a psychometric report and their reaction was something like, oh, I don't know if I agree with this, in almost all cases, that can be sort of mirrored back and say, well, that's interesting. Cause you've just completed these questions. This is just, this is just a kind of a reconstitution of your own answers. So what is it about your own answers that you're not so sure about, in which case you're not telling them that they're an extrovert or an introvert, but actually you're helping them confirm their own self perception. And most people like that. Most people like to have their own view of the world, their own way of considering the world confirmed. Again, this is back to bias, right? Yeah, it's a confirmation issue. But I think on top of that, I the psychology of expectation kicks in. So if you were told by an expert, this is a set of behaviors that you seem to be exhibiting, and this is a kind of category of personality that you belong to, that seems to be part of your identity, chances are most people will work that into their narrative of who they are and how they operate in the world.

Brilliant. I mean, we love to reconstitute our past and reimagine our future and reframe our present all the time, don't we, particularly if

it's presented positively, right? So we all like, love to be the HERO and HERO in our own story. So, you know, if somebody tells you, James, you know, you've got a great, you know, a beautiful extrovert profile here and here are all the things that make you amazing, and all the incredible things that you bring to your work. Of course, you're going to want to listen to that, yeah. So you can say that again if you want. I've got loads

of time, yeah. So, so I guess thinking about that, and thinking about the positivity associated with some of those messages and associated with different aspects of personality. Here's a question for you. Are, you know, are some areas or domains more popular than others? I mean, do people hold up with more esteem the you know, the outgoing extrovert, or do they hold up with more extreme, more esteem the reflective introvert, what's more popular and does it change? Does it matter? What do you think?

I think it's a great question to ask teams, and we often do when we're working through this kind of thing about, you know, holding up, not just what's more popular, but just some general held principles of qualities and potential. Restricting behaviors that both of those aspects of personality can bring to a team, either as a team member or maybe even as a manager or a leader. And of course, you know, everything's just all different. And you know, there's no, not necessarily any good or bad, just different. And so, having said that, I would say by and large there, the trend is to bias towards more of an extrovert approach. And we see this in all of our research. So we've got 35 plus years of research. You know, two to 3 million people now have been through our our own profiling system around this, and we do see, on average, most people come out with a varying degree of extrovert preference, differs by industry, sometimes different by differs by profession, sometimes, but by and large, on average, there's some level of extra preference that comes out, and that, of course, means that you are more likely to meet somebody with some degree of extrovert preference. That has all kinds of implications for the way the culture of most workplaces is set up things like meetings, for example, you'll see that you'll, and you know you'll, you'll recognize that in a lot of team meetings, particularly in person meetings, they can tend to be dominated by people who like to externalize their thought, and don't really create lots of space for people who maybe prefer a different approach most of the time. And that's that's a challenge, I think, for for a lot of companies, to just embrace that. We talk a lot about diversity, but really doing diversity in terms of, you know, diversity of thought requires shaking up some very embedded structures in the way that most workplaces are set up.

Yeah, and with all of this, of course, comes the, you know, the need to have a bit of an understanding of these different preferences and some of the, I guess, enablers for people of different preferences to bring their best and to to be their best in the different workplaces. I've got a question for you. My This is a reflection of me. It's not academic at all. It's just sort of my my thinking. It feels to me that over recent history, maybe the last 10 or 15 years, there's been potentially an upsurge in advocacy for the introverted type of behaviors in the workplace. Do you see that? I mean, it feels to me like if we were looking back in time, you know, the held up leader. And, you know, espoused behaviors in the workplace were more extrovert but but that's sort of been eroded through some of the some of the industries we've seen and some of the leaders we've seen, particularly coming out of maybe things like the tech space and design space and other places where maybe some of those other traits are or other ways of working. I should say other behaviors have led to success and fulfillment. Does that seem a fair assessment? I

think that's really fair. I think the work of someone like Susan Cain has done a lot of good in that space in terms of championing the benefits of a more introverted approach. So her book quiet does exactly that. It talks about why the workplace is is more configured for to cater for somebody with a more expert approach and and what you can do about that in order to encourage more from those who maybe have a more internalized way of of wanting to a more contemplative and more reflective approach. And I think what's where the challenge actually lies, if you get right to the heart of it, is that over the time, I think what we've done is we've created an association between ability and skill and some of those behaviors that's just not there. And again, in her book quiet, she she talks about just breaking all of that down, actually looking at some, you know, fantastic examples of leaders, of thinkers, of creators, who don't conform to that more extrovert model, and actually not that they don't conform to it, and they succeed, but they succeed over and above more extrovert counterparts. I think that's really important to not sort of lose sight of that.

Yeah, that's really interesting. Do you think, and this just popped into my mind when you were speaking. Do you think the change in balance and the type of roles that we do within our economies could be contributing to some of these, you know, change in advocacy around introversion and things like that, I guess I'm thinking about with things like the rise of, say, a knowledge economy, or some of those types of work. What do you think there's anything in there about, you know, association with different preferences that could be, you know, that could be a cul de sac of conversation. If so, just let me know, and I will reverse right out of there, and we can move on. Someone else. Let's drive in. Let's drive in. I'm up for that. I

think, fundamentally, yes. I think that what whatever we see in terms of demographics is reflective of how the world is. And that, of course, has changed. I think the shape of what kind of companies succeed now has changed, and the type of leaders that succeed in building those companies, has also changed. So we have seen the rise of a very different type of leader than you would have experienced in, for example, the 70s, 80s, maybe even the 90s, particularly with the emergence of not just the kind of knowledge economy, but the geek economy actually looking at, you know, various tech companies and very, you know, well established tech leaders, and looking at how they operate, how they present themselves, what their brand is, not a lot of those tech companies are led by people with, you know, strong extra preferences. And I think that that has, that has created a bit of a shift in the way people look at Oh, okay, so you know, there is, there is another model here, and actually that that then changes how people choose

to present themselves. I think one of the things I wanted to, you know, touch on, is the idea that, based on my experience of working with this construct, this is the one, probably out of all the personality characteristics that you can measure, that people tend to mask for whatever reason.

And I think you find that in on an ever increasing level, depending on how high you move up a business, so that kind of, that's actually probably kind of counters what I've just said, Actually, yeah, maybe, maybe that isn't, maybe that isn't representative of how the world is, and what, you know, what different models of leadership can look like, because people are still hiding this. Yeah, that's what they need. They feel they need from their teams. Yeah,

it's interesting, isn't it? And when you bring in, I guess, for position aspects and hierarchical aspects and, you know, leader decorum and all those expectations, it leads to an incentive to to mask some of this, which is, which is still there. Um, so, so we've talked to a little bit about masking and things like that, I guess. You know we're masking something, and if we're masking something, it's a thing that exists that we're choosing to mask. I guess I'd like to step back and think about this thing that exists. And I guess if I were to phrase this question in two words, it would be nature or nurture. And is this an evolving state, or are we kind of what we are through life? Is it an. Work on nature and nurture in this type of field. Do we know

Well, depends how fatalistic you want to be today, please. How fatalistic Are you feeling? I will go for seven out of 10. Fatalistic. Let's do that. Does that help the very unpopular view, particularly in our field,

and the prevailing view, in terms of the psychological research in general, about nature and nurture is that almost everything is nature. That's quite challenging to idea to hold in us, in our hands, because it comes with all kinds of where's my control, where's my autonomy, where's my choice. Can I change any of this? Yeah, why

don't I just give up now?

And yet, we do know that things can change, right? Because the person that you are now is probably different from the person you were five years ago, 10 years ago, and the person that you will be five years, 10 years from now is probably different from the person that you are now. That's that has to be true. So there is a middle ground. And I think we can always work with the assumption that these things can change. In terms of what our research has shown around these aspects of personality and measuring them over time, what we tend to find is that they're pretty stable, typically not inclined to change drastically over one to two years, especially if there's been no significant changes in somebody's personal lives or professional lives. But there is the capacity for change, and we do see sort of preferences shifting around. In fact, we do see a drift with age. So this speaks to something you mentioned right at the start, where you said that you felt that you maybe move from a more extrovert place to more introvert place with time. Can you say a bit more about that? Yeah.

I mean, it kind of feels like it spans my entire lifetime. I think when I was very young, I was very extroverted. I was moderately extroverted in, you know, my I guess, my 20s, and as I get older, I'm increasingly, increasingly introverted in many ways. And that presents in a few different ways, but part of the way I notice it is the enjoyment I get out of deep focus on my work in my own domain, in my own space, where I can explore things richly and contemplatively and slowly. And another thing that I've discovered or realized that I very much enjoy is that in many ways, I find I do a lot of my best thinking and my best decision making unintentionally and subconsciously. So I will reach decisions while I'm doing something else, and that clarity that I get through through that decision making process that's unintentional or takes place in the background in my mind, has made me more appreciative of giving myself time and space alone for processing in the background and and so maybe there's a bit of intentionality in there about my sort of trend and direction. But certainly I'm increasingly, you know, drawn towards the deeper reflection that I get on my end. So yeah, that's kind of my journey.

See, that's, I think that really intrigues me, because back to the nature nurture thing, one theory could be you were always this way, and actually you've managed to sort of free yourself from the shackles of culture of society that made you want to conform to the more extrovert bias that we see out there, and you've just become more accepting of the way you are. Yeah, and,

you know, without this turning into without me getting out my couch and having a little lie down, I feel that there's very there is a lot of truth in that. And I think if I look back on myself and my behaviors and the types of things that I've done in the past, often I would find myself in situations where I adopted behaviors to overcome the fact that I didn't really like what I was doing, but I thought I should do and sort of that awareness has been part of that. And in some ways, I for again, you know, as a personal reflection, I have found aspects of lockdown, and specifically aspects of having left a large organization and working for myself hugely rewarding, and that they've taken away the expectation for so many of these socially intense interactions that that I anchored on to, and that, you know, I learned to behave well in, but I feel that I've been freed to do some of this integration things,

yeah, and that's, that's it, isn't it? It's that, that thing about you learn to behave well in those situations, people, people become these kind of chameleons sometimes, when it when, when these definitions and these archetypes are so prevalent, it's actually quite easy to mask them and not give away too much of what's really going on under the surface. Unless you. There's some event where it's suddenly revealed, for example, through going through some psychometrics, it's quite common that that comes up in a session where someone goes, That's not you. Surely, I don't, I don't see that behavior from you at all. I need the person's they go, no, no, that that's that's totally me. It's just that I don't choose to show that, that side of myself to you on most most days. So yeah, I think we're kind of skipping around here, but just coming back to this point around nature nurture, I think I do. We certainly see, in terms of our research, there is a drift towards introversion with age. So we, I mean, we have kind of analysis from like ages 20 or so, all the way up to, you know, 7980 years old, and we see very clearly there's a drift towards extraversion in the way it's presented in the profiles. And with some people, we don't really answer the question of why, yeah, is this nature on nurture? It is just that it happens. And for some people, it's a genuine shift that they're they're very conscious of. And it could be that they find themselves an environment where suddenly a more introvert way of working is either rewarded or just recognized and encouraged. And for others, it's just something that they go through, that they they they evolve into a different person, and they go through some level of change. Either way, it can be measured that shift in time, and we certainly account for that change to take place, which is different from some of the psychological models that are out there that say, Here's your stamp, you know, let's put this on your head. This exists forever and ever, amen, and it will never change, no matter what you do. Yeah, yeah.

That's interesting, that piece with age, because, of course, if you look at sort of like social interaction across society, you see sort of increases in loneliness and and sort of a retrenching of the individual, typically, as they progress through their lives. From, you know, broad social engagement at younger ages, as it diminishes. So in some ways, that's really quite a heartening message that you're sharing. There is if our preferences change along lines with our trend of, I guess, opportunity for social interaction within our lives. So it's great. That's all part of a balancing process and and sort of reaffirms for Wonder of the human adaptability that we have, which I think is pretty cool. One

of my favorite just on that note, about adaptability, my absolute favorite things to quote is a piece around neuropsychology, and I'm sure you'll have had people in the past talk about neuroplasticity, brain capacity of change. One of my favorite things there in that space is that the brain has more,

sorry, the nervous system has more abilities to create connections than there are atoms in the universe. It's

mind boggling, isn't it, right? I mean, it is mind boggling even like the variety and the types of neurons that exist is, you know, beyond my ability to grasp, it's fabulous, isn't it, and the ability to grow and change and and morph into all these things. So

if we, if we look at this, this channel, this, this channel of thinking to speaking, or thinking, thinking, thinking and then speaking as a neurological pathway, our preferences are just pathways that have been well trodden over time. They become rehearsed, they become comfortable, they become the quickest way for us to get to that space in our in our thinking. Doesn't mean that we can't change them. Yeah,

yeah. We've just got wider neural channels in some instances than in others. And if we use the others, we'll just flex those muscles, and before you know, it will be something different. I've got a question for you, a topic that I've been interested in recently that I think sort of links with some of what you've been speaking there about. You know, the sort of neurology of us as individuals in relation to our work is this concept of flow and getting to be states where we kind of shut off our chatter and voices and are fully absorbed in what we're doing, which is one of the indications of being in that sense of flow. Do you think that introverts and extroverts experience flow in different ways? Is there a relationship between the types of activities that lead to a flow state for introverts and extroverts? And if so, could you say a little bit about what you think some of those

differences might be? Yeah, I think there is absolutely a relationship. And you will also see relationship between the edges of the flow state. So when you're getting into kind of boredom, discomfort, I think that can be there. And also, if you're getting into kind of anxiety, stress, and stretch a little bit further down that there's you can work in that space as well when you're thinking about these constructs, I think the danger with considering things like personality profiling, psychometric profiling, with regard to flow, is that there's a temptation to try and create such. Operations and environments that absolutely appeal 100% to somebody's preferences. So, you know, for as an example, let's say somebody comes out with a more extra introvert approach in their profile. Oh, yeah, we'll just pop them for lots and lots of time for contemplation and reflection and consideration and quiet, you know, in inverted commas, quiet work. And we know from our research that, yeah, that might be comfortable for a little while, but actually, long term, that's really, really terrible for somebody's sort of mental well being and psychological health. Actually, flow state is more about playing with the two and trying to get Yes, an element of comfort, an element of familiarity, thinking about the stimulation theory, but also stretching enough into that opposite space that it provides additional challenge, which we crave as human beings. It's almost this kind of weird paradox of something we we want, the thing that this test says we are, or this psychologist says that we are, but also we also crave the other thing as well. This is why we have to explore the spectrum, rather than just, you know, two labels typically with, with, you know, the way we work. And this is a very broad brush, right? So just as a heavy caveat, this is very broad brush. Of statement is we tend to find about a two thirds overlap is about right to be in flow state. So in other words, two thirds of what you're doing or how you're working to be catered for in the way that you prefer, in your style. But a third of your time, a third of your work, third of your behavior could be in a totally separate space, and that seems to be about right for most people.

That's fascinating. So we need that variety to to bring us back to a place of, I guess, optimal functioning or optimal it

certainly seems. So you know if that drops down. So let's say that percentage was more like, I don't know 20 or 10 that. Have you ever been in that sort of space? Well,

I I certainly know that I can get to the stage where I'm far too sort of introverted in my environment, and I go a bit crazy, and then I'll go and seek something to, I guess, rebalance me and bring me back into a different, different state. So, yeah, I can relate to that. What about you?

Oh, yeah, exactly the same. Yeah, I am I pre COVID. I used to do lots of travel, and for me, that was kind of my third space where, typically I went spending lots of time talking to people or having meetings. But actually that was just pure thinking, processing time, working out problems, imagining new things, maybe even creating things. But I couldn't do that all the time. Absolutely not. I always felt like there was pull back to Okay. And now I need to externalize this with somebody or I need to charge myself up by doing something else. So, but, yeah, typically, you know, we find that that kind of picture, loads of people do it, though. You know, people are in that position all day, every day, for years of their lives without really realizing it and knowing that there's something not quite right, but not being able to quite put the finger on why. And that can lead to, you know, in extreme cases, work related stress, so that there's this sort of physiological response to a psychological disconnect that goes on.

Yeah, yeah. And I guess, you know, it feels like it could lead to that sort of burnout state, as you said, with that stress, but, but I also wonder if there's almost the inverse of burnout, where it almost becomes about over sedate, under stimulated, type of space that leads to stress from the absence of of that alternate state. If that makes sense, I can imagine, or something

like that on and that's, that's, that's that weird paradox, isn't it? Like, intuitively, he's like, the more of this we give to somebody, the more comfortable they should be. But yeah, we certainly find that that's not a good picture long term at all. There are certain situations where it can be so let's say, for example, somebody's got loads going on in the personal lives and work is is a safe place where they know that they can have a good sense of self worth, have a good sense of productivity and reward and getting things done and being recognized for what they're where they're bringing to the table. In that sort of situation, they might be, you know, it might be really comfortable to spend lots of time in that preferred style. But long term, yeah, it will lead to boredom. It will lead to disengagement,

yeah. And I guess even in that example, it sort of reflects where you draw for boundaries. If you draw the boundaries around the whole person, then they are getting that balance by having, you know, challenge elsewhere and things like that. So we've spoken a lot about what introversion and extroversion are, where they come from, you know, a sort of scale of relationships, their fixedness, the sort of predetermination of them, or not, the views and perceptions of. Them. I guess I'd like to just sort of turn it around and do a little bit of a so what on some of this. So we've learned all this. I guess I've got a question. If somebody is out there and they're not sure where they are on this sort of spectrum, there are lots of tools that will help them do this. Why should they do that? You know, what's in it for them? If they go out and maybe take a test or get some feedback and understand what they are. What will they get from doing that? How will that help them in their personal lives or in their work life? Oh,

although I mean all kinds of reasons why it could help in the personal lives, I think for me, looking at that picture, you have to also zoom out to look at how it can help other people. So as an example, there could be somebody in your team who you would just love to improve your relationship with, but for whatever reason, it's just not happened. More often than not. When we work with teams, there's this phrase that comes back around like a personality clash, and I've never really found that that exists, if anything, it's just, it's always about misunderstandings people have, have misunderstandings about the intentions behind the behavior that they see from other people. So this is back to bias, right? So you know, our interpretation of other people's behavior has to be guided by our own sort of psychological lenses that we wear. So it's really helpful first of all to know what those lenses are and how mindful we need to be of them. So if Are there any behaviors that we're likely to just sort of over, kind of emphasize, reward, recognize, prioritize above others, do we need to do anything about that? But also, I do need to be careful about how I

take meaning from other people's behavior based on my own?

let's say a relatively unsure manager was conducting a meeting, and her approach was tending more towards the extrovert side. She might well be thinking to herself as a colleague in the room hasn't said anything for ages, seems to be lost in their own thoughts. And every time I go to them and ask them what they think about this, they just come up and they're giving me nothing. She could be taking all kinds of meaning from that behavior that is entirely not intended, and therefore forming this story about this person in their mind, about who this person is in the team, what their value is, what their role might be in any given project, and again, that could be just totally down the wrong path. So what I'd be keen to do is, you know, in that kind of situation, demystifying all of that behavior, de personalizing all of that behavior, and just giving some explanations as to what's going on, and how can we understand that in a much more strategic way and a much more helpful way. Yeah, in

that example that you spoke about there, I could really imagine, you know, with my sort of more team leader, extroverty hat on, from times when I've been there, maybe thinking that this person's demotivated. They don't want to be there. They're holding back, you know, they're intentionally not contributing all this kind of stuff, and you could pigeonhole their, you know, their behaviors into potentially, the way that that you would be feeling, were you behaving that way in that instance? Right? And you like, I'm resentful in it, so I'm not going to share, and I'm intentionally doing that because I'm in this bad place, or whatever it is. So you might, you know, push that onto them, when, in reality, they're just thinking and reflecting and waiting till they've got more clarity and really engaged, and they've just got one of those resting faces. But maybe it doesn't look that way. So yeah, interesting and in terms of shaping activities within a team. So if you're a team manager or team leader and you're looking to create, or, you know, shape or CO create, or whatever phrase we want to use, ways of working that would be supportive of a blend of people within your team or your organization. What are some things that you could do, or things that you should think about in terms of creating opportunities for introverts and extroverts to be at their best and to really both contribute well, but be fulfilled and rewarded and in their work.

I think it doesn't need to be rocket science this one. It can be really simple, practical changes that take place, that suddenly shift everything so and this is, this is the kind of consultant in me, the facilitator in me. I, my first thought is to ask,

it always sounds so simple, doesn't it, right?

How do you want to work with me? How do, how do we want to work with each. There, can we come up with some, not necessarily some rules, but just some guidelines about how we think we can work with each other in the best way, most, most teams get by on that front with just guesswork? Yeah, and it doesn't work, yeah?

Well, it's got all that assumption in there, right? It's got all that assumption about what behaviors mean and what actions mean, and what inaction means, and all of that. I guess starting those conversations can be a little bit intimidating if they're not things that people have done before, and if those questions are really quite broad. So how do we want to work together? Can be like a really broad question.

categories that people could break that down into, that that might be helpful within teams. Have you got things that people might use as levers to open that conversation

up and shame? This plug here, right? This is, this is where profiles come in. They can be really helpful because they help take the complexity out of that conversation really cleverly, a they make it less personal, or you can dial up the person if you wanted to once you got there. But actually, even just most psychometrics that you work with will have an element of this where there might be some, like communication tips. So like, something that we would typically do the team is to get a team to sort of pick out five or six of those that really resonate with them, share them with the team, and then as a group, we'll go through them all together so we can get some clarity. So you know, James, you can see you put in your profile. This is something that you picked out. You really love it when people are punctual to meetings. What does that mean to you? What does punctual look like? You know, if we're having a meeting at nine o'clock, do I need to be there at nine? Does it do I need to be there at five to nine? Do I need to be there? Understanding that most meetings start with talking about what we watched on Netflix last night at maybe 10 past nine. Can I understand that better? Can that? Can I get that? Can you give me that so that I can be more strategic in the way that we are working together as an example, and then as a group, we can then look at all of those different tips and say, Well, are there any patterns and trends there that say something about what we're like as a team. You know, if somebody new is joining our team, is there a way that we can quickly accelerate them to a new level of understanding about what it's like to work with us all and what it's likely to to deal with us as a community? So it can be really helpful. I think again, there's something that's practical and applied is usually the best way to move those conversations forward and try and break down the apprehension that somebody might have to getting into that space with somebody or a group

and with those conversations. Do you think that you know reaching an outcome is the most important bit, or do you think having the conversation is the most important bit? Is it the journey? Is it the destination, is it both? Does it depend? I like? Does it depend? Answer, of course. But I was just wondering. A strong, strong view,

depends on the team. Depends. It depends on the group that you're working with. Some of those, some groups absolutely like the outcome to be, we've done the important thinking, and we've started the conversation. Other groups need to walk away with, oh, okay, so I've got a list of everybody in my team, and I've got top three tips for working with every single one of them, and I'm happy with that, and I'll go away and I'll and I'll achieve those by the next three months. So it's, it's, um, I think it does depend, I think, but I, my personal belief, is, yes, the conversation is important. Starts with the conversation, but it also starts with this sort of process of so I'm a big believer in systems thinking, so actually holding a mirror to an individual or a team and saying, What do you see here? Does this explain anything that's been happening lately? Does this give us any extra information about how we need to conduct ourselves over the next six to 12 months, that's a really important first step about revealing the system to itself. Once that's happened, the conversations will happen very organically and naturally, and the action or change that's required will happen very organically and naturally. Once this the system has understood what's going on within it?

Yeah, brilliant. That's really helpful. In the interest of time, I'm going to start to wrap us up a little bit, but I've kind of got one, one last question before we go into checking out, and that's, I just my guess is that, having listened to this, a few people will go out and do some, you know, some self assessment, or take a personality test or do a little bit in in that self discovery space. I guess I just wanted to ask you, what does that journey feel like to people? What's the sort of emotional process that people can go through when they see written back on paper a summary of themselves? What does that feel like for people? What are the different types of responses you've seen in people very wide I've had

this may be a surprise given that, you know, in this case, we were talking about, you know, a popular kind of personality profiling tool tears, is relatively common for someone who's not had this kind of feedback before. For someone who's not had their reality explained in that way, using that language, or maybe they've just suddenly understood something about a colleague, that just unlocks a bit of learning. And it can be transformational. Can be nothing short of transformational. On the other hand, it can also be purely confirmatory. It's not uncommon to find people who've been through these things for decades, and they've been tested and retested, and they've tried this test and this profile and the other and they've roughly come out the same on all of them. And of course, it just becomes this self propagating wheel of, oh, I'm a bit like little anti and the more likely I am to see that question, the more likely I am to say, Oh yeah, I'm a bit more like that now, because I've been doing more of that. And this profile keeps telling me that I am more of that. So I think and everything in between more more often than not, though, and this is always surprises me, is this phrase of I cannot believe how accurate this is almost as though they were expecting it to be quite, you know, wooly or more, like Barnum statements about about themselves, whereas actually, you know, a good psychometric should be yes, it should be valid. It should be reliable. It should have good research underpinning it, but it also it should have high utility. It should work. It should be practical and usable. So I think if somebody's reaction is I can't believe how accurate this is, they can then get over that hurdle of right? So this is what I'm going to do about it, and this is how I'm going to apply this learning to my next project that I'm working with my team, or my relationship with my boss, or this individual who I'm struggling with as a stakeholder group. So I think for me, that's my favorite response, is somebody who says, Actually, yes, I can. This is so me, I can't wait to share it with somebody, and I can't wait to see theirs. So actually, I can learn a bit more about them. And it becomes this sort of, you know, community of sharing and building trust. Essentially, as we get to there's

something really powerful and validating about feeling seen and understood. And I've heard people talk about seeing their results, and I think your phrase was, you know, this is so accurate. This is so me. I think there's something really validating for some people about seeing this written down and feeling understood and the, you know, that sort of creating a reality of their sense of self that can be really, really powerful for some people, brilliant. Okay, well, I think we're gonna wrap stuff up there. How can people learn a little bit about more? Let's try it again. How can people learn a little bit more about you and the stuff that you do, and maybe get in touch and generally learn a bit more about what you're up to?

Well, you'll find all that you need to know about our company and our products@www.tmsdi.com we're also on Twitter at tmsdi. As for me, you'll find me tweeting, blogging, blogging about all things psychology at that. Mark Gilroy, same handle on Twitter and Instagram, but yeah, if you want to join me in any psychological geek free, you'll find me there anytime.

Brilliant. Well, you guys can all have a geek off online that sounds, sounds very good, and I'll be there too. So it's just a big thank you for me. That was great fun. So thanks very much, Mark. Thank you, David. I really enjoyed that.