.intro
{Group or team type is determined by taking the larger number on each of the dichotomies (e.g., 16 Es and 11 Is would be an E group; 17 Ss and 10 Ns would be an S group).  If a dichotomy has an equal number of participants (e.g., five Js and five Ps), the group type is a tie rather than one specific type.  As an example, the group/team type could be ESTJ/ESTP.<R>
<R>
Modal type is the largest single number within a distribution or a four-letter type that is most represented within a group.  (For example, if you have a group with six INTJs and no other type has more than five represented, then the modal (most common) type will be INTJ.)<R>
<R>
If a group has two types, each of which is the most represented (e.g., six INTJs and six ISTJs) then the group would be bimodal (INTJ/ISTJ).}
.one
{<I>Training when group/team type and modal type are the same<N>}
.onea
{Everything that fits for the group applies to the largest single sub-set of the group and it moves the group dynamics to a more intense level (e.g., the noise level of an E group will be even more accentuated if the modal type is also E).}
.oneb
{This may make for lopsidedness of the group for which you may need to compensate or at least be aware of in terms of group dynamics (e.g., the group may appear to want the training to be very structured (16 Js) when some people are really desiring more flexibility (the remaining 10 Ps).}
.onec
{The group may be influenced more by similarity than by difference, which may shortchange its ability to learn from itself.}
.two
{<I>Training when the group/team type is different than the modal type<N>}
.twoa
{Determine if the difference is in an Attitude (E/I or J/P) or in a Jungian Function  (S/N or T/F) so...}
.twob
{Whatever generalizations fit for the group type may not fit for the largest single sub-set within the group (the modal type). For example, you may assume that an ENFP group type will be outgoing, personable, flexible and more concerned with relationships than structure.  However, the ISTP modal group may demand more reflective, analytic time than is built into the design.}
.twoc
{Keep in mind that there is a significant minority within the large group, and they can be seen as a problem or become scapegoated.  Depending on where the differences exist they could have significant implications for the workshop.  For example, consider an ESTJ group type (dominant extraverted thinkers) and an INTJ modal type (dominant introverted intuitives), without appropriate introverted time the modal INTJ group could be viewed as always trying to change the group's ideas and never being satisfied with the end product.}
.three
{<I>Training when the group/team and modal types are four letter opposites<N>}
.threea
{There will be a sub-group of significant size that will be constantly working contrary to whatever the group type desires. For example, an ISTJ group type will be driven by structure, and following the agenda.  Yet the largest single sub-set [ENFP] will find these group desires to be stifling and rigid, curtailing creativity.}
.threeb
{In this case, the very gift of the modal type, which is their difference in the group, can be easily labeled as negative to how the group or team is directing their energies. }
.four
{<I>Training when there is no significant modal type<N>}
.foura
{This means that there is a relative spread of each of the types so that no one type is a predominant sub-set.}
.fourb
{Workshop participants could experience a much wider array of different behaviors, all of which may not be perceived positively by the group or by individuals.}
.fourc
{With no significant modal type there will still be a group type with all of its influence on the large group which must be considered.}
.fourd
{Groups may feel scattered with no real direction, unless the J contingency begins to dominate.}
