.intro
{Sometimes you will work with a group that lacks diversity of type.  In this case, the issue is that the group's <U>similarity<N>, not difference, must be managed.}
.one
{As a trainer, it is important to first look at any preference in which you might have a difference.  This represents an area to conduct an exercise.  Usually if there are any preference differences they are most likely to be on E/I and or S/N preference dichotomies.}
.two
{When dealing with similarities, a starting frame of reference is that there is an issue of self selection of the people in the group.  For example, if a group is predominately SJ, as might be the case with an accounting firm, you can anticipate that there are both overt and covert norms in place that have rewarded SJ behavior in the company.  And perhaps there have been some messages that have encouraged other types to leave that organization or profession.}
.three
{The training challenge is to recognize the group's lack of diversity and to heighten their understanding of what preferences are missing in their group.}
.four
{When an exercise does not have representatives on both sides of a preference dichotomy (e.g., six T's and no F's or five Is and no Es), you must be prepared to bring in outside resources to balance the group's deficiency.  A lack of diversity in an intact group or team can blind them to their weaknesses.  Consider the following approaches when working with non-diverse groups:}
.five
{Choose exercises for the one or two preferences that you think may work best.}
.six
{Conduct any one of the exercises to demonstrate a preference (see Exercises section of Workshop), but bring along flipchart paper or an overhead transparency of the results produced by the non-represented preference at a previous workshop.}
.seven
{Allow for the group's defensiveness about their blind spots, and try to help them see these.  This may be difficult as it is harder for a group to understand its weaknesses if they are not allowed to discuss them with people who would defend preferences that are different.}
.eight
{If group members continue to have difficulty with the information you present to them, it might be wise to pause and discuss the group dynamics that are present.  There may be issues such as trust in the outside trainer or consultant, validity of the training event, stereotypes that are blocking learning, or unwillingness to look at themselves in a meaningful way.}
.nine
{If there is a wide range of scores or clarities on a particular preference, you might able to highlight the difference between slight clarities or preference scores (those under 9 on Form G) and very clear clarities or preference scores (those over 29 on Form G).  If this is the case, divide the groups by the same preference to demonstrate the differences in the slight versus very clear clarities or scores.  Still remember to bring along flipchart paper or an overhead transparency of the results produced by the non-represented preference that you saved from previous workshops.}
.ten
{Work with the similarities by having, for example, three groups of Ss or STs do the same exercise.  This can be very instructive, especially when their final products are virtually identical.}

.eleven
{Remember when working with type-alike groups, you may lose the richness of the discussion in which different types naturally engage.  This may result in quicker or less interesting discussions of the preferences and may impact time allocated to the workshop.}
.twelve
{To reinforce learnings with a non-diverse group, you should consider including a brief presentation and discussion about Temperaments.  This often helps enrich participants' understanding of their four-letter type.  You may decide to utilize the OKA Temperament Video Tapes (see Resources) as a training aid to stimulate discussion and to provide a different training medium.}
