.title
{THE TEN COMMANDMENTS OF TypeWatching}
.intro
{TypeWatching, like any good value system, has its own Ten Commandments.  These are guiding principles that can help you use TypeWatching most effectively.  They can also prevent you from using TypeWatching recklessly, inappropriately, and unethically.}
.one
{<b>Life tends to support our preferences, making us even more distrustful of our non preferences.<n>  Whatever your type, you will find that the day's events seem to take place according to your preferences.  So if you are a Judger, you will be glad at day's end that you had a structured plan, for it likely saved your hindquarters more than once.  And if you're a Perceiver, you'll sigh at day's end that you were able to hang loose and cope with the many surprises you encountered.  This will be true with each of the eight preferences.  In a stressful situation Thinkers will be glad their objectivity helped to keep them cool under fire whereas in the same situation Feelers will be equally glad that they were able to be supportive to the people who needed them, and so on.}
.two
{<b>Your strength maximized becomes a liability. <n>  It is perfectly natural for us to rely on that part of us with which we feel most comfortable.  But by doing so, we can further neglect other parts of ourselves, which eventually become uncomfortable, underdeveloped, and unskilled. So, while Extraverts, for example, can bring excitement to any situation, they can become poor listeners or can overpower others.  Introverts, on the other hand, have good listening skills and the power of concentration, but when maximized these strengths can lead to isolation and avoidance of controversial issues in the external world.  Thinkers, for their part, bring objectivity and rationality to any situation, but when these qualities are maximized, they can lead Thinkers to disregard others' likes and dislikes.  Feelers, meanwhile, bring subjectivity and people concerns to a situation, but when these qualities are maximized, Feelers can over-personalize and can carry grudges for years.}
.three
{<b>TypeWatching is only a theory; it takes real life to validate it. <n>  Once you have a sense of your type preferences - or those of others - it still must be validated against actual behavior, experience, and self-awareness.  For many reasons, we often see ourselves or others differently from how we really are.  For example, if you are expected by others in your organization to be objective, analytical, and organized, you may simply be adapting to the environment.  Or you may assume that someone will be outgoing and assertive in a situation because you know him to be an Extravert.  However, if for whatever reasons, his behavior doesn't match his preference, you have either mistyped the person or there is some other extenuating circumstance that is causing him to behave differently from his preferences.  In any case, it is essential to validate one's observations with one's experience before leaping to conclusions or making false assumptions.}
.four
{<b>TypeWatching is only an explanation; it's never an excuse. <n>  There's nothing more offensive in TypeWatching than the neophyte's readiness to excuse all bad behaviors as the result of his or her personality preferences.  For example, "I meant to return your call, but I'm an Introvert, and we don't return phone calls." or, "I meant to be on time today, but I'm a Perceiver, and we're always late."  Such excuse making may be acceptable in small doses or in special circumstances, but in the day-to-day workplace, it's an unacceptable cop-out. Seasoned Typewatchers will use such occasions as the basis for genuine negotiations about differences.}
.five
{<b>The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. <n>  No doubt you've heard this before, but nowhere is this more true than in TypeWatching.  This is both good news and bad news.  The good news is that the "parts" of TypeWatching - the four pairs of preferences - make TypeWatching easy to apply instantly.  You may not easily be able to distinguish whether someone is an ENTJ or ESTJ, for example, but you may readily spot their Extraversion (their constant thinking out loud), or even their preference for Extraverted-Judging (their constant complaining about everything).  On the other hand, the complexities of putting all four preferences together are immense.  The ENTJ, to use the example above, is a big-picture person who wants to improve the whole world; the ESTJ. in contrast, is a hands-on person who prefers to establish an administrative procedure for the world's good.  So, two people who look so similar can end up with severe disagreements.}
.six
{<b>TypeWatching is only one lens through which to view human personality. <n>While facilitating, affirming, and dramatically insightful, the four-letter descriptions of TypeWatching are only door openers to understanding the people behind the letters.  Gender, ethnicity, values, socioeconomic factors, and many other things combine to make us who we are.  One of the dangers of TypeWatching is that there's a tendency to take the four letters as gospel.  That not only violates some basic ideals of TypeWatching but in the business world often causes more harm than good.  There's nothing that can turn off any level of employee more quickly than being put into a four-letter box as the sum and substance of his or her humanity.}
.seven
{<b>To be effective, TypeWatching must begin with yourself before you can apply it to others. <n>  The more you know about yourself, the more you will be in a position to collaborate and negotiate with those who are different.  The process must begin with self-understanding and self-awareness before it can become a frame of reference for collaboration.}
.eight
{<b>TypeWatching is easier said (or thought about) than done. <n>  We'll admit that TypeWatching can present some difficult challenges.  There's a natural tendency for people to want to stick with what works.  If your preference is always to be in control, for example, it will likely be difficult for you to concede that control to others, even when such an action might be in everybody's best interest.  To make the most constructive use of differences involves commitment, personal skill, and an underlying trust that the process will lead to a better result.}
.nine
{<b>Don't blame everything on your opposite type. <n>  This is a natural thing to do.  It's easy to believe that everyone who doesn't agree with you is your typological opposite.  For one thing, some types naturally disagree or are prone to arguing.  That doesn't necessarily mean they are against an idea; arguing is sometimes a means of sorting things out.  Moreover, some types need to see a bottom line - where a discussion is leading, for example.  In their quest for direction, they may continually raise questions that sound like disagreements.  When something doesn't go as expected, don't leap to assume that it was sabotaged by someone of another type.}
.ten
{<b>TypeWatching can't solve everything. <n>  Because TypeWatching is very positive and because it explains many parts of everyday behavior, there is a tendency on the part of enthusiasts to use it as an explanation for everything.  Such a tendency moves beyond TypeWatching's original intent and may add meanings to behavior that cannot be explained by type.  Sometimes, for example, people have physical or psychological problems that are outside the realm of "Normal" behavior.  Some people have personalities that are so complex - or so simple - as to defy simple analysis. TypeWatching doesn't have all the answers.  It is legitimate and even professional for a Typewatcher to declare occasionally, "I can't explain that," or simply, "I don't know."}
.close
{<b>Excerpted from <u>Type Talk at Work,<n><b> Copyright 1992 Delacorte Press<n>
(c)1996, Otto Kroeger Associates}
