The idea of trait theory and determining my dominate style left many questions in my mind.  What are the styles of those I work with?  My families’ styles?  How do we work together despite differences?  Are there advantages to having teams composed of a variety of styles or will diverse teams not be as productive as teams where everyone is more of a similar style?

I started by having an open discussion with my husband and attempted to determine his style.  After determining where I believed he fell on the various traits, I read the summary handout to him.  He agreed with me, it was accurate.  Additionally, I read the summary about my style to him.  Again, he could see where I aligned with the description as well.  We are opposites in every way.  I am an ESFJ and he is an INTP.  The interesting thing is how obvious this is in many of our discussion and visions.  I look to him for the logic on decisions we are making jointly, I often use my heart.  I can see where that is a benefit and a trait where there is merit in relying more on his style in certain situations.  We have had, like every couple, difficult situations to deal with, and I can see how his ability to make the tough decision that adversely impacts people is advantageous.  Michael’s (2003) summary of the “thinking type” points to some real advantages in some of the challenges we face.

 In examining conversations with my husband, the difference in extrovert and introvert and the feeling versus thinking became clearer to me.  As an Extrovert, it is now more apparent to me how I might perceive Introverts as not interested or withholding information when they are processing internally.  I often think,” did he hear me?” or is it that he is just unwilling to participate in the conversation, when in actuality, he may be processing or composing thoughts.  I can see where I need to be more conscious about using patience and understanding.

Another difference that resonated with me is that as an “F” or feeling style it is common to believe that “T’s” are harsh or cold.  The approach to problem solving may seem to indicate detachment when in fact it is more of their logical straight forward way of handling an issue.  Again awareness and understanding should lead to more cooperative teamwork/working together.

I started to think much more carefully about others in my immediate circle.  I work with a diverse group of program assistants, County Directors, Family and Consumer Sciences Educators, Regional Directors and Assistant Directors.  A vast array of styles in those I work with for sure.   In an effort to keep this blog to a reasonable length I will focus on the trio in which I work the closest.

 I am a part of a great team, at least in my mind, of three Regional Program Specialists (in the SNAP-Ed area).  I started by trying to determine the styles of the other two program specialists whom I work with.    I believe we are in most contexts all Extroverts.   I do see where context is important in this work.  As stated in Michael’s article (2003) I believe there is some validity to the statement that there is a “middle ground” for those whose preferences are not habitual.   Can these traits be switched on and off at will as suggested by Jung and Garden in article?

 I also believe the three of us are all primarily sensing types.  Recently we decided to submit an article on our newly formed positions.  These positions were created and have evolved through trial and error over the past year.  We wrote a “Best Practices” article about those items that have worked especially well over this introductory year and the challenges we have had.  I really saw the similarities in our styles in that process.  Although we had met and worked together on other projects, this was the project in which our similar styles were most obvious to me.  We all draw from our experiences and standard operating procedures to solve problems.  We often compared and shared those experiences and brainstormed together to find a method to handle concerns.  In fact, we have gotten to the point where we share and compose standard personalized emails to our regions to all “be on the same page” and to ensure all the program assistants, spread throughout the state, hear the same message.  I also witnessed the step-by-step fashion utilized by the three of us.

I have worked on projects with other co-workers who really worked on the “big picture” focus rather than the step by step or details I experienced with this trio.  This article submission, like the grant submission that I mentioned in this weeks’ post was time sensitive, thus the fact that the three of us are more in line with the judging type rather than the perceiving type made the deadline within reach.

 I proceeded to think about others I frequently work with and beside.  I also read the Introduction to Type with special attention to the section on Using Differences Constructively.  (Myers, 1998)  I am especially interested in how to capitalize on those differences to improve outcomes and visions.  I have always been someone who believed that by using the individual strengths of the whole group, including and accepting all, as well as including those with opposite styles,   an overall improved plan/vision can result.   This week’s articles and PowerPoint increased my awareness and understand of this.  My challenge as I proceed in this line of work is to observe, analyze, and be more accepting of those styles that are not like mine.

Resources:

.

King, J. (2014, January) Video lecture. Trait Theory and MBTI, PPT.

Myers, I. B., (1998). Introduction to Type. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.

Michael, J. (2003). Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a Tool for Leadership Development? Apply With Caution. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 10 (1).

I watched the weekly video more than once attempting to figure out where my current role fits into the manager versus leader role.   I looked at my position description and really started thinking about the role the Regional Program Specialists (RPS) play in the SNAP-Ed program.   Since taking the Emotional Intelligence and Coaching course the idea of my role and how I interact with the Program Assistants (PAs) surfaces frequently in my thoughts.   I often reflect on the interaction I have had with the PAs after I leave the county observation.  Did I ask them what they thought?  Did I ask how they plan to approach the situation or issue, or out of time and habit do I go straight to fixing the problem or addressing their concerns?   Is the majority of my role an administrative position with little future planning and visioning or have I stepped out of the “comfort zone” of paperwork and answering routine procedural questions to a more visionary and futuristic functions.

When these positions were being created, our Community Nutrition Leader was much more of what I would term a “micro-manager”.  Many of the routine administrative tasks were being handled at the state level.  In November of 2012 when the new/ current Community Nutrition Leader joined OSU Extension, the Regional Program Specialist positions were also starting.   I had kind of functioned as a guinea pig before the Regional Positions came to fruition in two EERAs and due to the success of the trial the RPS role came to be.    So these positions are still somewhat of a trial and error and learn as we go model.   Some of what I see happening is that we have created the best practices as we have moved along, but clearly the financial and administrative work has now flowed from the state level to our level.

My concern is that I want to make sure I am leading and coaching more than just doing the routine approvals, financial work, and procedures and processes.  Although that part of my position is very time consuming and necessary, I am more interested in how I can be increasing involved in the “big picture”.     I would like to be making my footprint on the overall program success.

One method I have found to allow us (the three RPS) to move beyond the manager function and become involved in the leadership portion is through conversations in our weekly staff conference calls.  Pushing issues such as the completion of the adult lesson plans that are written by the state staff was one pursuit that the three of us undertook.  These are a necessary tool the program assistants need to do their job well.

The next project I am concentrating on is the lack of an evaluation tool for the preschool to second grade students.  In the past, the only youth we worked with were in the summer food program and that same evaluation that has been used with the summer program is to be used within the school or after school settings.  The data shown from the summer programming is not showing the impact or positive behavior change that  I believe our program is delivering, so I have spoken up on conference calls and face to face meetings about the need to make changes in that tool.  Some of the history of the state team shows a defensiveness to make the change to the tool as it was a time consuming tool to create and validate.  Although I can empathize with those who spent time and effort to generate it, if the results from the collected data are not useful or functional in showing behavior change a new approach needs to be explored.  Consequently, as a leader rather than a manager I am using persuasive techniques and creativity to move a little outside the box and use a research experience that may lead to a positive field tested tool that can be more useful for all, as well as a new and impactful peer mentoring delivery mode that SNAP-Ed can utilize as well.  

In conclusion, I would say a bulk of my current position is managerial in nature, but I am trying to be creative and innovative in finding ways to steer more leadership functions into what the Regional Program Specialists do.  As the confidence and trust level rises from the state staff, I am sure our RPS team can be more a part of the leadership and change agent than not.

I have a variety of ideas of what I plan to learn and take away from this course.  After attending the Effective Coaching and Emotional Intelligence Leadership Session I realized I had only skimmed the surface in terms of what there is to learn about myself and the way I interact with others.  Those others include my co-workers, supervisors, as well as my family and friends.   Many of the topics in the syllabus really interest me and can be applied to my daily tasks and encounters.  I am very interested in the personality types and trait leadership topic.  I work with program assistants and state staff with a wide variety of strengths and challenges.   I am especially interested in how to help bring out the strengths in the various persons I work with and utilizing my strengths to develop those I come in contact with through feedback and delegation rather than doing for them. 

Effective decision making is of interest as this is a daily skill that I am tasked to accomplish.  I want to learn to empower those I work with to have the confidence and competence to make those decisions on their own.  Having program assistants excited and enthusiastic about the changes and challenges of the future involves them taking ownership and buying into the process.  I am interested in developing my skills in helping them grow through feedback and trust.

The topic of leading change is most interesting to me as the past two years have been a time of non-stop changes and uncertainty.   The roller coaster of additional funding to the polar extreme of potential time off without pay has provided much variability to the position I am in, but has certainly added to the challenge of keeping program assistants focused and moving forward in day-to-day program delivery.  Such challenges as having to work with limited resources and no food for class demonstrations, has led to much creativity and ingenuity in many program assistants who may not have realized they could do so much.  From program assistants calling or writing about agencies donating ingredients for recipes, to agencies donating all the copies for classes, or crockpots for participants, many PAs have proven when the going gets tough they can persevere.  These are examples of the confidence and competence that many of the PAs I work with are starting to build.  Learning to continue to enhance and build on that is a goal that I have for myself in this class.   This leads into the topic of leading teams and team science, which is something I am excited to discuss with others on the discussion posting.  With the program assistants in remote locations, finding ways to allow them to share and collaborate most effectively and positively to challenge their status quo is really exciting to me.

I am really interested in learning so much more about my strengths as a leader and how I can continue to strengthen all the areas of my leadership life.  I am aware of some of the items I need to strengthen and am looking forward to increasing my awareness in all areas of my leadership style.  I really enjoy learning from the discussion posts and have learned so much from my classmates in the classes I have completed to date.   I am excited to apply what I learn and for the challenge of growing in a real world scenario daily!