Thanks, everyone, for a great discussion to digest at the start of the workweek. I hope this is an appropriate time to remind interested community members that we're currently curating a special article series on "open organizations and cognitive diversity" and welcoming submissions on a wide variety of topics related thereto. Simply get in touch if you'd like to contribute!
I could see, for example, new writing from Heidi laying out the results of the exploratory research she's currently conducting, a piece from Laura on the dangers of dissociating "cognitive" diversity from larger sociopolitical contexts—even a rundown from Tory about the ways certain understandings of cognitive diversity can facilitate moments of productive collaboration. OpenOrg ambassadors and other community members have also suggested articles on topics like: - Psychological safety in open organizations - Cognitive bias in open organizations - Collecting feedback from a neurodiverse team - Running meetings for a neurodiverse team - Emotional intelligence and open leadership - The relationship between vulnerability and innovation Just a nudge! What kind of editor would I be if I didn't? On 3/25/19 6:33 AM, Laura Hilliger wrote: > Hey Heidi! > > I’m going to try and be brief because I can geek out on this all day. > > I wrote about MBTI (and the science and criticism of it) a little in > November: > https://opensource.com/open-organization/18/11/design-communities-personality-types > > Some of the criticisms of the MBTI stem from the fact that a woman who was > key in its development didn’t formally study psychology. She was theorizing > before women even got the vote. Katherine Myers, however, devoured Carl > Jung’s writings and nowadays we readily acknowledge the fact that people can > be experts in things they didn’t formally study. > > Regardless of the personality assessment tool used, it’s tricky (and IMHO > dangerous) to pull "cognitive diversity" away from D&I. Our beautifully f’d > up capitalist patriarchy has an effect on how women think and act (read about > gender priming), how stigma and stereotyping plays a role in a minority’s > ability to get a raise – things like this. > > In short - a female ENTP is not the same as a male ENTP, and a minority Big > Five is not the same as a cis male Big Five. > > To answer your second question, I call it “dangerous” to extrapolate > cognitive diversity because there’s the risk that people focus on it and > create D&I initiatives that forgets or exclude how cognitive diversity is > also related to the social and cultural context. > > —laura > > PS: Also interesting to think about on cognitive diversity is growth vs fixed > mindset and the relationships of political/religious views to cognitive > diversity. > > > Laura Hilliger > laurahilliger.com > <http://laurahilliger.com/>Twitter <> | Mastodon <> | LinkedIn <> > co-founder of weareopen.coop <http://weareopen.coop/> > > > <http://weareopen.coop/> > >> On Mar 22, 2019, at 9:07 PM, Tory Gattis <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> When I was at McKinsey, they taught MBTI as way of better understanding >> different client executives we might be working with and what kinds of >> arguments they do and don’t respond to (for example, the argument “others >> are already doing this” gets a positive response from some MBTI types and a >> negative response from other ones). The science behind it may not be rock >> solid, but the very big thing it does do is help people better understand >> the perspectives of others and where they’re coming from, and that’s half >> the battle in collaboration. The advantage of MBTI is that it’s very >> intuitive and with a pretty modest amount of training you can learn to >> identify others’ probable types after only a small amount of interaction >> (i.e. you don’t have to get them to take a test, which is usually not an >> option). >> >> On a lighter note, one of my favorite MBTI personality charts from the Star >> Wars universe (or maybe I just like that I’m Yoda, lol ;-) >> https://www.personalityclub.com/blog/star-wars-personality-chart/ >> <https://www.personalityclub.com/blog/star-wars-personality-chart/> >> >> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On >> Behalf Of Sam Knuth >> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 2:53 PM >> To: Heidi Hess von Ludewig <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Openorg-list] REQUEST: Thoughts on cognitive/personality >> typing tools and effect on D&I >> >> This is a great topic, Heidi. There is also the "big five", which goes by a >> couple of other names - >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits> >> >> Some recent writing on the topic has made me a bit skeptical of these tests >> in general (have you heard of the book "the personality brokers"?), and I >> think there has been some research into the negative impact these kinds of >> tests, if institutionalized and/or overly depended on, can cause unintended >> effects. >> >> On TILT 365, that one I have deeper knowledge of than others because it is >> used extensively at Red Hat. I've worked with the founder of Tilt, and I do >> believe it is based on research (whereas MBTI I believe was not, but I'm >> sure there has been a lot since it was created). There is info on the >> research behind tilt here: >> https://www.tilt365.com/Resources/Knowledge-Base/tilt-specific-character-science-research >> >> <https://www.tilt365.com/Resources/Knowledge-Base/tilt-specific-character-science-research> >> >> This article I found interesting - >> https://newrepublic.com/article/151098/personality-brokers-book-review-invention-myers-briggs-type-indicator >> >> <https://newrepublic.com/article/151098/personality-brokers-book-review-invention-myers-briggs-type-indicator> >> >> Sam >> >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 10:11 AM Heidi Hess von Ludewig <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Dear team, >> >> The Background >> I've been thinking alot about cognitive Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) after >> recently trying to run a meeting ( [1] more detail below) and I'm curious >> about the current tools used to measure/describe these differences. >> >> Typing tools >> From what I understand, there are two major personality/style/cognitive >> diversity tools, backed by research: >> Myers-Briggs - a conventional standard! Based on Jung's work on personality >> types. Useful, I think, but not well-rounded in that it doesn't consider >> motivation, or healthy/unhealthy versions. >> Enneagram - which I really happen to like as I feel it's thorough and >> useful, integrates relational aspects of each type, healthy/unhealthy >> versions, and I know several Silicon Valley companies using it, some in >> conjunction with The 15 Commitments of Conscious Leadership >> <https://www.amazon.com/15-Commitments-Conscious-Leadership-Sustainable-ebook/dp/B00R3MHWUE> >> >> I know of some less used / popular tools: >> DISC - assessment grounded in research focusing behavior preferences, how >> they change over time, and interact with group dynamics - very useful to my >> way of thinking. >> TILT 360 (used at Red Hat but not backed by research that I know of). >> >> The Request >> I am curious to poll this group in order to know your thoughts: >> What cognitive/personality/behavior typing tools do you or your workplaces >> use? >> How does using them help or hinder Diversity and Inclusion in your >> workplace? >> >> Best wishes, >> -- >> Heidi >> >> >> [1] As a program manager, I'm always trying to organize work, especially >> strategic, undefined work. I was in a meeting with support engineers where >> it became really obvious that I was an intuitive person -- who has a hard >> time trying to articulate my ideas on the fly [hello introvert!] - but who >> is very comfortable working with ambiguity and I was trying to organize a >> team where the majority of people who need details and definition, a clear >> path, before getting started. It's a relatively new team, so I learned a lot >> about how to work with them in that one hour time block... but it did spur >> curiosity on D&I and how different people can be from a cognitive >> standpoint. >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> Heidi Hess von Ludewig >> Senior Interlock Program Manager >> >> Strategic Services, Customer Experience & Engagement >> "Managed outcomes. Maximized success." >> >> Local time - US EST (Raleigh, NC) >> IRC: heidiHVL email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> _______________________________________________ >> Openorg-list mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list >> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list> >> >> >> -- >> SAM KNUTH >> SENIOR DIRECTOR, CUSTOMER CONTENT SERVICES >> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> >> What's App:: +1 (612) 840-1785 <tel:612-840-1785> >> <https://red.ht/sig> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Openorg-list mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list > > > > _______________________________________________ > Openorg-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list > _______________________________________________ Openorg-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/openorg-list
