Showing posts with label 辅导技巧. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 辅导技巧. Show all posts

Wednesday, 22 January 2014

“YOU DON’T HAVE TO ATTEND EVERY ARGUMENT YOU’RE INVITED TO.”


“YOU DON’T HAVE TO ATTEND EVERY ARGUMENT YOU’RE INVITED TO.”  (你不见得一定要出席每一个争执的邀请)


“You mean I don’t have to defend myself or my point of view?  But what if they’re saying things that aren’t true?  Shouldn’t I correct them?” 
An argument is when two people are engaged in the process of making the other person wrong, thus proving that they’re right.  Both sides gather all the information they have and from their position, there is an attempt to get the other person to surrender to a new point of view.  It can be a fun, educational process, or it can be a hurtful process of separation. 
If the argument is an educational process where everyone gets to learn and grow, then what a wonderful thing!  This is where two or more are gathered and allows for a magical new perspective to emerge, where a third point of view is discovered that embraces both points of view, and a win/win situation is created.  Let’s enter into these types of arguments because it generates newness and expansion is experienced. 
If, however, the argument is a hurtful process of separation, where everyone holds onto their position of rightness, pretending they know all that is to be known, then no - let’s not attend to these types of arguments. 
The challenge often is:  How do we gracefully back out of the hurtful argument without insulting the other person, or further engaging them in their desire to make us wrong?  How do we walk away from an argument with dignity? 
You could simply say, “I want to take a break to think about this, let’s talk later.”  Or, “Can we agree that it is okay for us to disagree, because I sense this is going to be one of those areas that we are going to see it from different points of view?”  Or, “I’m not sure we are going to resolve this right now, let’s let the ‘dust settle’ and revisit this at another time.”

There are times when the other person insists on arguing their point.  These types of situations require another type of skill set.  The best thing to do here is to do the “active listening” technique I describe in The Keys to Joy-Filled Living.  It’s also helpful to remember it’s hard to argue with someone who does not want to argue with you. 
The key here is to stay in our power, our loving, our neutral, and our peace.  When we walk through life from this perspective, we can see the learning and what is for the Highest good for all concerned.  If we find ourselves being disturbed or knocked off our center, it is often best to take that break so we can regroup and re-center into the our power.  This is an ongoing process of choosing to let go of our position of rightness and moving back into our position of loving.

Thursday, 12 December 2013

同理(empathy)"与"同情(sympathy)




William Safire公认是词源学的专家,他在2008年给了"empathy"与"sympathy"清楚的界定。对观众来说,对角色感到同情是正常的,不过可别觉得这样就够了,如果这样的话,观众会将情感抽出。Safire说:如果你认为同理跟同情是相同的话,那么我很抱歉你搞混了,回到希腊时代,感伤力(pathos)就是情感(emotion),"同情"是因为你替别人的处境感到难过,算是"忠诚(allegiance)"这种感受的一种;而"同理"则是从别人的内心或是一件作品之中去感受,不管它是视觉艺术,戏剧或是歌舞剧,不管快乐或悲伤,轻松或是紧张。希腊"sym"这个字首意谓"一起或是靠着";而动词字首"em"更深入,指"在里面或是内部",当你感觉" 同情"的时候,你将手臂环抱着这个人;当你"同理"的时候,你脑袋里的想法或思绪跟对方的一致,两者差别非常大。


"If you think empathy is the synonym of sympathy, I’m sorry for your confusion. Back to the Greeks: pathos is “emotion.” Sympathy feels pity for another person’s troubles, secondarily a sense of allegiance; empathy identifies with whatever is going on in another’s mind or in a work of art — visual, dramatic, musical — whether merry or morose, hanging loose or uptight. The Greek prefix sym means “together with, alongside”; the verbal prefix em goes deeper, meaning “within, inside.” When you’re sympathetic, your arm goes around the shoulders of others; when you’re empathetic, your mind lines up with what’s going on inside their heads. Big difference; no nuance."

Tuesday, 6 August 2013

Body Image, Emotions, and Identity

Body Image, Emotions, and Identity

September 1st, 2011
Contributed by Shirley Katz Leon, PhD, CCC
How do you know what you are, what you are not, and why? Where did you gain this knowledge and experience that influences your current behavior and choices? While in the process of developing your Self, did you consciously stop to think if you wanted to be shaped in a particular manner? Certainly there were moments where you may have wanted to stop an experience or avoid pain, but did those experiences shape who you are today anyway? Are you interested in shaping your experiences through re-authoring your Self? Some people look to the body to try to control their experience of self in the world. Does this have any merit? When does it become a problem?

Developing Self-Worth

You were born into the world with certain genetic traits. The environment you grew up in further shaped the development of your inherent strengths and weaknesses. As you grew, you learned values and concepts of self-worth from family, friends, and culture. You took this outline and began testing it on the world, editing bits and pieces of your Self as the ebb and flow of pleasure, pain and belonging shaped your self-narrative. Messages about self-worth are also based on the parts of your identity that have already been shaped. Sometimes without knowing what influences you, you draw a line around yourself that determines what you want to let in, who you will let closer, and what you want to keep out.
In adolescence, an exceptionally important stage for the development of identity and self-worth, you may have experimented with different ways of being, groups to belong to, and new pleasures and pains in your growing body— some of them dangerous— all in effort to solidify a sense of identity and belonging. Although we do this throughout life, it is with a special intensity in adolescence.

Emotions and Body Image

Ultimately, all of these influencing experiences were informed by messages. What kind of messages? Emotions.  Emotions are messengers that tell us if we are doing something right or wrong, frightening or pleasurable. They may be based on perceptions of need or values, and may be experienced in a range of intensities according to variables such as inborn traits or cultural and family norms. However differently we experience them, emotions are the messengers about the Self and are housed in the body. Sadness can be felt by having a heavy heart or lethargic energy. Fear can be experienced by having a racing heartbeat, heightened sensitivity to sensory information, or pulsating muscles ready to flee, fight or freeze. The body is the narrator of the Self, the text is emotion, and the story is You.
People dealing with challenges to their body image often don’t know how they feel. They have been taught somewhere along the line that their feelings are shameful or unacceptable, or that the needs behind the feelings will not be met. They often cannot differentiate what they are feeling from the feelings of others. This could be because of childhood experiences with frighteningly huge feelings, either their own or others’.  They are often unable to identify and fight for what they need as they don’t listen to the messages. They often don’t have a clear sense of who they are and are preoccupied and vulnerable to external messages about their worth. This can lead to an overly controlling focus on the body, a focus that often goes astray.

Learning to Listen

While the body is a good place to start in knowing and defining the self, it isn’t by controlling the shape of the body that identity and worth are strengthened. Getting to know the self by identifying and expressing the emotions in the body— by respecting the messages— is a much healthier and more effective way. A controlled approach to the body is one that doesn’t listen to messages out of fear or avoidance of pain. Avoidance of emotion is self-rejection and inevitably leads to low self-worth. Your body and the emotions housed within it author your life. What are the messages your emotions are trying to tell you? Have you been ignoring them? If you listen, you may learn more about what kind of experiences you want more or less of, how close or far you want certain people around you, and how you want to be treated. By practicing this listening, you will get better at advocating for your Self and hence feel much better about your own worth. You only have to attend to the story— what you do afterwards is your choice. Will you listen?
© Copyright 2011 by Shirley Katz, PhD, CCCtherapist in Toronto, ON. All Rights Reserved.

Validating Feelings:Helping People Feel Understood

Validating Feelings:Helping People Feel Understood

Validation is a powerful communication skill. Its usage can dismantle power struggles, resolve arguments, and build deeply trusting relationships. Technically, validation is an advanced skill, because it builds upon the more basic skill of "reflective listening". While reflective listening is frequently taught in communication workshops or classes, validation is less well understood, even by many professional marriage counselors.
Validation is called for when reflective listening fails to be enough to help a speaker feel truly understood. Before delving into more about validation, however, a review of reflective listening is in order.

Reflective Listening

The goals of reflective listening are several:
1. To facilitate the expression of someone else's feelings.
2. To enhance a speaker's problem-solving ability by helping them move through "stuck" feelings; and
3. To generate a feeling of warmth and understanding between listener and speaker.
The technique of reflective listening is deceptively simple to describe, and challenging to master. The listener must identify the primary feelings the speaker is having and then reflect back that understanding with an empathetic tone. For example:
Wife: If that neighbor parks in my space again I'm going to let all the air out of his tires!
Husband: Sounds like you're angry that he keeps taking your spot.
Wife: You bet I am. I've told him not to ten times! But I don't want to get him mad at us because I know what a jerk he can be.
Husband: You're afraid of what else he might do.
Reflective listening avoids the many pitfalls listeners tend to fall into: judging, minimizing or discounting feelings, giving advice, or not responding at all. One of the most common pitfalls is trying to help “solve the problem”. Speakers are often just looking for empathy, a chance to vent, and to clarify their own thinking. They may consider it an insult to their intelligence for the listener to offer solutions. And if the solutions posed seem simple, the speaker may feel like her feelings are being judged as being irrational.
Reflective listening is not simply repeating or paraphrasing what a speaker has said. Most speakers don't question your comprehension of their words, but they need to know that you know how they feel.

Reflective Listening Is Not Always Enough

While reflective listening is arguably the single most important communication skill taught, sometimes the technique falls short of its goals. When the feelings expressed are quite strong, or the speaker carries some doubt or shame about their feelings, a neutral reflection by the listener can miss the mark, even if the feeling reflected is accurate and the tone is empathetic. For example:
Worker: I can't believe the secretary hasn't finished my report yet. What the hell is the matter with her?
Co-worker: You're angry that she's not done.
Worker: Angry? Oh no. I'm sure she's got her hands full like all of us. But damn it, I've got to present that report in half an hour!
Co-worker: You are afraid you won't have it in time.
Worker: No. It doesn't matter. I can present the bulk of it without having it in writing. ...Damn!
The worker in this example is embarrassed by his own feelings as they are reflected back to him, and he denies them. He is not convinced by the reflective listening that his anger and fear are understandable. An empathetic tone of voice is not always enough to communicate that someone's feelings are okay. The empathy in the tone, however, can be put into words. This is where the skill of validation comes in.

Validation Defined

Simply put, validation is the message, "Your feelings make sense. Not only do I hear you, but I understand why you feel the way you do. You are not bad or wrong or crazy for feeling the way you do."
This is a message people often need to hear, especially when they are rocked by strong feelings. No one is going to sound authentic, however, parroting these exact words. The art of validation is in tailoring the essence of this message to the specific feeling and situation the speaker is experiencing.

The Need For Validation

To understand why people need to be validated requires us to look at how often our feelings get shamed. As a society we have very few places where feelings are welcomed. We learn that strength means not crying, bravery means not feeling fear, and maturity means never being angry.
Showing strong emotion tends to make the people around you very uncomfortable. Usually, they will attempt to get you to stop as quickly as possible. They may try to convince you that your feelings are inappropriate. Or they may try to reassure you. Even if their intent is to help you feel better, often the message is that it's not okay to feel bad.
Consequently, we have all accumulated many messages that our feelings are wrong. We yearn, therefore, for acceptance of our feelings, especially when our feelings are strong. Whatever else someone may be saying when they vent their feelings, they are probably also implicitly asking, "Are my feelings okay?" Validation answers this indirectly asked question, and provides satisfaction for a profound, though often unconscious, need.

The "Natural" Validation

Validation comes naturally whenever a listener feels the same way as the speaker. If Tom describes his anger at the invasiveness of telephone marketing and Corrine hates telephone marketing too, then all she has to do is express her feelings and Tom will probably feel supported that his feelings are okay.
Often someone needing validation will tell their story over and over again to different people, unconsciously searching for someone who feels the same way they do. Natural validation works well and does not require any specific skills. It is limited, however, to situations where the speaker and the listener feel the same way.

The Skill of Validation

When you do not feel the same way as someone you are listening to does, you can still validate their feelings. Doing so requires that you identify in yourself "sub-feelings" or different parts of yourself. While you may have a primary or dominant feeling about something, you can often have sub-feelings that are quite different.
When a friend moves away, a person might say she feels sad. While sadness may be the largest single feeling she has, she may have sub-feelings as well. She might feel angry at the friend for leaving. She might feel relieved that the friend is finally going to do what he has been talking about for years. Or she might feel afraid that her friend may be making a mistake.
There is a common misconception that we only feel one thing at a time. This error can make it difficult for a person to articulate his feelings. As soon as a person identifies one feeling, he hears a nagging voice inside saying “Oh no you don’t, you feel just the opposite!” Trying to decide on a single feeling with which to represent oneself can result in a confusing inner conflict, causing a person to become tongue tied. By allowing for the existence of sub-feelings, even contradictory ones, we can identify and express a more thorough picture of how we feel.
Identifying sub-feelings can also help us validate someone whose predominant feeling is different than our own. Imagine someone describing to a friend how angry he is at the thief who just held up a store he was in:
"I was so angry I just wanted to follow the guy out and beat him up!"
Imagine that the listening friend, however, identifies how scared she would be in that situation. She can't imagine the desire to pursue the thief. The idea sounds quite stupid to her. She can still validate her friend's feeling, however, by identifying her own sub-feelings.
She might ask herself, "Have I ever felt angry enough to want to fight back against someone?". She may then remember wanting to slug a guy who harassed her with catcalls on the street the other day. Having contacted a similar anger within herself she can then validate her friend by saying something like:
"I can understand being angry enough to want to strike back".
This validation is likely to feel genuine to her friend because she was willing to feel a similar anger inside her-self before she said it. If she had just said, "You are angry about the hold-up," without identifying any sub-feelings of anger within herself, her response would likely seem mechanical and not very validating.
Some readers might fear that validating someone's anger will make them more likely to act it out. Quite the opposite is true. When someone's feelings are validated the urge to act them out actually lessens. The validation helps them let the feeling go and begin thinking more clearly about a wise course of action.
The art of validation, then, requires that you actually feel some aspect of the emotion the speaker is having. Your feeling does not have to be the main response you would have to the situation they describe. It can be a sub-feeling, or it can be a feeling you would have in another situation that has some similar elements. What makes a validation authentic is your willingness to call up and experience a part of yourself that can connect with the emotion being described. When you speak from that willingness, your message that the emotion in question is understandable or okay will be truly validating.

Can All Feelings Be Validated?

There is a logic to every feeling we have. The source of each feeling, however, is partly due to present circumstances and partly due to our past. To varying degrees, all feelings are influenced by both. Events in the present can trigger old feelings that a person may be unconscious of. When someone is not aware that his past feelings have been aroused, he may be especially confused by the intensity of his emotional response. This confusion will lead him to seek validation.
For example, Bob, a young man, may be terrified of asking an acquaintance, Courtney, on a date. This fear may seem unreason-able to Joan, a mutual friend who has often seen Courtney con-spicuously flirting with Bob. Bob may agree that he is stupid to feel so shy. Only when Bob and Joan take into account the painful rejections Bob has experienced in the past does Bob’s present level of fear make sense.
It is hard to figure out, for any given feeling, what percentage of that feeling is due to the present, and what percentage is fueled by the past. Usually the present holds an understandable trigger, and past experiences account for the intensity of a given feeling.
It is usually not helpful for listeners, however, to offer their assessment of the relative influences of past and present. This is too often perceived as a way of implying that the speaker’s level of feeling is inappropriate.
“I think you must feel that way because of something your mother did to you.”
This is likely to generate defensiveness in the speaker. Listeners who try to gauge the influence of the speaker’s past may be accused of acting like an uninvited therapist. Only when the speaker is genuinely interested in facilitated self-exploration of this type can a listener play this role effectively.
Validation, however, is a safe, effective, and less intrusive method of helping the speaker reflect on the source of their feelings. When a listener simply validates that the essence of a feeling could conceivably come from aspects of the present situation, the speaker usually relaxes. He begins to feel that he is not “wrong” to feel the way he does. He may then spontaneously begin to explore how the intensity of his feelings may also be due to past events.
When the listener restricts her comments to validation of the present trigger, she helps create the safe and accepting atmosphere the speaker may need to engage in such spontaneous self-exploration. Usually, this is all that a speaker is asking for.

Beyond Validation

If validation is insufficient in helping a speaker come to acceptance of his feelings, then further counseling techniques may be needed. If the speaker and listener are both willing, then the listener can probe respectfully about the possibility that past events may be adding intensity to present feelings. Examples of this may be:
“Have you had to deal with this kind of thing before?”
“Have you felt like this in other situations?”
“Are there any experiences or needs you have had that make you particularly vulnerable to this feeling?”

Choosing Feelings?

Another roadblock to good validation is the fallacy that we "choose our feelings". Listeners can shame speakers with this misconception.
“So you are choosing to be upset with your husband. I guess that’s your right. How is it working for you?”
This approach may be well-meaning, but it is likely to be poorly received. The power of examining our choices is a valuable tool, but we must be clear about what we have choice over and what we do not.
Our feelings are bodily experiences that we perceive, rather than choose. The only direct choice we have over our feelings is whether to be aware of them or to repress them. Either choice may be appropriate, given the situation. Sometimes it is best to put your feelings aside and focus on a particular task. At other times, knowing how you feel is important so you can make good decisions, or so you can connect meaningfully with others.
There are choices we make, however, that affect our feelingsindirectly. Our feelings spring from our needs, our experiences, and our interpretations of them. How we interpret events affects how we may feel about them. Our interpretations, and the beliefs upon which we base them, are subject to our choice. By changing the way we look at a situation we can change how we feel about it.
Unfortunately, many of the beliefs that underlie our interpretations of events are either not conscious, or resistant to change. The pessimist, for example, is unlikely to simply decide to suddenly believe that “things will all turn out okay”. Many past experiences have formed the basis for his pessimism. Perhaps, for instance, a pessimistic attitude was once an effective way to cope with a series of disappointments.
Changing one’s belief systems, therefore, can be a difficult process. First the underlying belief must be identified. Then, a more functional belief must be proposed, and finally, experiential evidence supporting the new belief must be accumulated. Only then do feelings begin to change.
Hence, it is unrealistic to expect someone to change their beliefs whenever challenged. Listeners who do this may appear callous and uncaring.

Feelings and Needs

Feelings are also a factor of whether a person’s needs are being met or not. Marshall Rosenberg, founder of Non-violent Communication, explains that good feelings are the response we experience when our needs are being met and uncomfortable feelings are the result of our needs going unmet.
Feelings that spring from unmet needs are often difficult to accept, particularly if one does not believe that the needs they have are legitimate. Whether they believe it or not, all people have needs for connection, autonomy, mastery, physical comfort, and meaning. An under-standing of these universal human needs can help people give themselves more permission to have their needs and the feelings generated when those needs go unmet. Such self-acceptance can help a person soothe themselves when they cannot find validation for their feelings from someone else.

Validating Feelings about You

One of the greatest challenges of good communication is validating the feelings someone has about you. When someone has a negative feeling toward us our first impulse is usually defensiveness. It makes sense that we would feel defensive because rarely do we do something with the intention of hurting someone else.

In order to respond to such feedback it is useful to make the distinction between the intention you had and the impact of your actions on someone else. Intent does not always equal impact. Only you know what your intention really was. Only others know what your impact on them really was.
Good communication can be defined as creating the impact that you intend. In order to communicate well, you have to be willing to listen to ways that your impact may have varied from your intent. Such feedback can help you make the proper correct-ions. Often, however, your first impulse may be to defend your-self. Consider the following example:
Customer: Where's my car! I've got to go! It's supposed to be ready by now! It's been an hour!
Tire Salesperson: You have to give us some leeway on our estimated time for a job!
The customer here may feel that the salesperson is invalidating her feelings. If so, she may insist that her anger is justified and an argument may ensue.
Validating someone's feelings about you requires that you temporarily quell your impulse to explain yourself. Internally you may respect your intent and hold yourself blameless. Meanwhile, you focus your attention on what the other person felt and try to find something in your actions that could plausibly set off the feel-ings they describe. For example, our tire salesperson could say:
Tire Salesperson: Our estimate was off. I can see how that would be upsetting if you're in a hurry.
It is helpful to acknowledge what you did or said that sparked someone's feelings toward you. You do not, however, have to hold yourself accountable for the full intensity of their response. Your actions may have simply triggered strong feelings from their past. Pointing this out to someone, however, is likely to make them defensive unless you cop to your own involvement first. If you validate your contribution to their feelings they are often freed to look more closely at their own contribution.
After you have validated someone's feelings about you and allowed some time for those feelings to release, you can explain what your intention was without appearing defensive. Here are a few examples of the difference between defensiveness, reflective listening, and validation:
Example A:
Sister #1: Jackie! You pig! The pie is almost all gone!
Sister #2 (defensive): I didn't eat it all!
Sister #2 (reflective): You're angry about how much pie I ate.
Sister #2 (validating): Oh. I wasn't keeping track of how much I was eating. But if I had more than my share it makes sense that you'd be pissed.
Example B:
Child: This is a drag. You never take us anywhere fun.
Dad (defensive): What do you mean! What about last weekend!
Dad (reflective): You are bored with what we are doing.
Dad (validating): I can see how it might get pretty boring just hanging around here all day.
In both cases the validating response goes beyond the reflective response to include the message that the feelings expressed are understandable. The validating response thus addresses the unconscious question, "Are my feelings okay?" Because the need to be validated is so universal among people, those who gain proficiency at this skill can become very popular indeed.
Copyright: Tim Hartnett, 1997
Revised 2007

Wednesday, 9 January 2013

封闭与开放式问题

封闭式问题 (closed-ended questions)通常可以是选择性的以“是”、“不是”或以一个标准的回答作答。例如:你今晚是来我家吃饭吗?“是”。用10分钟的时间就可以到达你家了吗? “不可以”。


相对的,开放式的问题(open-ended questions)提供较广阔的作答空间。较大的思考空间与伸缩性。例如:你今晚想到哪里吃饭?“嗯,我想去你家”或“嗯,今晚我约了朋友”。从你家到学校需要多少时间?“大概是20分钟吧!”或“如果没塞车,就20分钟,有塞车就可能要1个小时了。”

我的MBTI图形

09.11.2013

ISTJ 检查员型——细致、谨慎地执行好现有规则

报告接收人:才储成员1243714日期:2013-01-09
一、你的MBTI图形


MBTI倾向示意图(类型:ISTJ 总倾向:54)
外向(E)

(I)内向
实感(S)

(N)直觉
思考(T)

(F)情感
判断(J)

(P)知觉



  • 倾向示意图表示四个维度分别的倾向程度。从中间往两侧看,绿色指示条对应下面坐标的哪个区间。
  • 本报告地址不会长期有效,请复制报告内容到本地或自己的博客。


  • 二、基本描述

    才储分析:您的性格类型倾向为“ ISTJ ”(内向 实感 思维 判断 倾向度: I86 S71 T71 J71  不假思索指数:7)
    沉静,认真;贯彻始终、得人信赖而取得成功。讲求实际,注重事实和有责任感。能够合情合理地去决定应做的事情,而且坚定不移地把它完成,不会因外界事物而分散精神。以做事有次序、有条理为乐—不论在工作上, 家庭上或者生活上。重视传统和忠诚。
    ISTJ型的人是严肃的、有责任心的和通情达理的社会坚定分子。他们值得信赖,他们重视承诺,对他们来说,言语就是庄严的宣誓。 ISTJ型的人工作缜密,讲求实际,很有头脑也很现实。他们具有很强的集中力、条理性和 准确性。无论他们做什么,都相当有条理和可靠。他们具有坚定不移、深思熟虑的思想,一旦他们着手自己相信是最好的行动方法时,就很难转变或变得沮丧。ISTJ型的人特别安静和勤奋,对于细节有很强的记忆和判断。 他们能够引证准确的事实支持自己的观点,把过去的经历运用到现在的决策中。他们重视和利用符合逻辑、客观的分析,以坚持不懈的态度准时地完成工作,并且总是安排有序,很有条理。他们重视必要的理论体系和传统 惯例,对于那些不是如此做事的人则很不耐烦。ISTJ型的人总是很传统、谨小甚微。他们聆听和喜欢确实、清晰地陈述事物。ISTJ型的人天生不喜欢显露,即使危机之时,也显得很平静。他们总是显得责无旁贷、坚定不变 、但是在他们冷静的外表之下,也许有强烈却很少表露的反应。
    您适合的领域有:工商业领域、政府机构 金融银行业、政府机构、技术领域、医务领域
    您适合的职业有:
    · 审计师
    · 会计
    · 财务经理
    · 办公室行政管理
    · 后勤和供应管理
    · 中层经理
    · 公务(法律、税务)执行人员
    · 银行信贷员
    · 预算分析师
    · 保险精算师
    · 税务经纪人
    · 税务检查员
    · 机械、电气工程师
    · 计算机程序员
    · 数据库管理员
    · 地质、气象学家
    · 法律研究者
    · 律师
    · 外科医生
    · 药剂师
    · 实验室技术人员
    · 牙科医生
    · 医学研究员
    · 信息总监
    · 电脑编程员
    · 证券经纪人
    · 会计
    · 文字处理专业人士

    三、气质类型

    根据大卫.凯尔西(David Keirsey)气质与性情理论,你属于“传统主义者”,下面是对“传统主义者”的描述:

    “传统主义者”相信事实、已证实的数据、过去的经验和“五官”所带给他们的信息,喜欢有结构有条理的世界,喜欢做决定,是一 种既现实又有明确目标的人。

    “传统主义者”是最传统的一类人,他们坚定、可靠、可信。他们重视法律、秩序、安全、得体、规则和本分。他们被一种 为社会服务的动机所驱使。他们尊重权威、等级制度和权力,而且一般具有保守的价值观。他们很有责任感,而且经常努力去做正确 的事情,这使他们可以信赖和依靠。

    “传统主义者”需要有归属感,需要服务于别人,需要做正确的事情。他们注重安稳、秩序、合作、前后一致和可靠,而且他们严肃 认真,工作努力。“传统主义者”在工作中对自己要求十分严格,而且他们希望别人也是如此。“传统主义者”喜欢那些与他们一样 具有奉献精神、尊重权威和尽自己的本分的同事。

    “传统主义者”往往是组织机构的主要支持者,不论他们是在领导层还是处于被领导的位置上。他们最常扮演的角色就是“稳定器” ——传统和现状的维护者。 大多数“传统主义者”(不论他们是属于什么判断偏好)最喜欢的是组织结构稳定、清楚、目标明确 的岗位,不喜欢处在不断变化和杂乱状况之中的职位或组织。

    “传统主义者”包括思维型传统主义者和情感型传统主义者,这两种传统主义者之间又有很明显的不同。情感型传统主义者常常不象 思维型传统主义者那样明显地表现出传统主义者的一般特征。在做决定时,情感型传统主义者把与别人的关系和人放在首要位置,本 能地努力寻求与他人更和睦的关系,同时不断寻找着使他们能够通过有形的方式帮助他人的机会。

    对于不同的性格类型而言,没有“好”与“坏”之分,每一个人都是一个独一无二的个体,都有其特别的优势和劣势,但问题的关键 在于如何认识这些优势和劣势。基于MBTI模型职业规划的核心法则是:“扬长避短”,学会了这一点将会影响到你的成败及你对工作的正确选择。

    对你的总体描述

    1. 实际,有条理,认真仔细。
    2. 注重规则、政策、契约、例行习惯和时间要求。
    3. 一旦他们承诺一件事情,总会坚持完成它。
    4. 在跟进、规范方面做得很好。
    5. 以第一次和每一次都做了正确的事情为荣。
    6. 对需要注意的事情有敏锐的洞察力。
    7. 善于尽可能有效地利用现有资源完成工作。

    你潜在的弱点 

    1. 容易只看到事情有黑和白两种情况,而看不到中间的灰色地带。
    2. 可能不能很快地做出改变和适应。
    3. 有些此类型成员不擅长变通、缺乏想象力。 

    四、优势与劣势

    ISTJ的特质: 检查员型——细致、谨慎地执行好现有规则
    优势:
    你是一个认真而严谨的人,勤奋而负有责任感,认准的事情很少会改变或气馁,做事深思熟虑,信守承诺并值得信赖。
    你依靠理智的思考来做决定,总是采取客观、合乎逻辑的步骤,不会感情用事,甚至在遇到危机时都能够表现得平静。
    你谨慎而传统,重视稳定性、合理性;你天生独立,需要把大量的精力倾注到工作中,并希望其它人也是如此,善于聆听并喜欢将事情清晰而条理的安排好。
    你喜欢先充分收集各种信息,然后根据信息去综合考虑实际的解决方法,而不是运用理论去解决。你对细节非常敏感,有很实际的判断力,决定时能够运用精确的证据和过去的经验来支持自己的观点,并且非常系统有条不紊,对那些不这样做的人没有耐心。
    劣势:
    你非常固执,一旦决定的事情,会对其他的观点置之不理,并经常沉浸于具体的细节和日常的操作中。
    你看问题有很强的批判性,通常持怀疑态度,你需要时常的换位思考,更广泛的收集信息,并理智的评估自己的行为带来的可能后果。
    你非常独立,我行我素,不能理解不合逻辑的事情,忽视他人的情感,并对与你风格不同的人不能理解,非常挑剔;你要学会欣赏他人的优点并及时表达出来。
    你非常有主见,时常会将自己的观点和标准强加给别人,而且无视那些不自信的人的建议。在处理问题时,强求别人按照自己的想法来做,对于未经检验或非常规的方法不加考虑。若能在以后多尝试和接受新颖的、有创造性的方法,你就能做出更有效的决策。



    你是最重要的一个人,停下来,思考一下自己:在世界的历史长河中,没有人与你一模一样,在未来所有无限的时间里,也没有另一个人..... 你可以指引自己的思想,控制自己的情绪,决定自己的命运,以积极的心态去思考。
    ———— 拿破仑.希尔


    分享这个测试给好友?       请打开测试地址:www.apesk.com/mbti/dati.asp ,点击页面左上角的分享按钮。


    ©版权声明: 本作品著作权以及版权属于才储公司,并受法律保护