DataDome Blog

DISC profiles are incredibly useful tools to aid in the understanding of people’s behaviors, but it is not uncommon for characteristics in some of the DISC categories to be confused. Even those who work frequently with DISC assessments will occasionally confuse High S behavior for High C and vice-versa. S stands for Steadiness and C for Compliance, but it might be helpful to think of these terms in the context of Pace and Procedures: The S indicates how you respond to the pace of the environment, while the C indicates how you respond to rules and procedures set by others. The High S sees rapid change as disruptive and therefore reacts with resistance, the High Chas a high regard for policy and procedure and is dismayed, even outraged at times, by perceived disregard for proper or logical steps in a process.

To illustrate this idea let’s examine the birth of one magazine and the reaction of another. When the Consumers Union Reports first appeared in 1936 with the mission of providing “information and counsel on . . . goods and services” and to “maintain laboratories . . . to supervise and conduct research and tests” they ended up causing a bit of a stir: An article in the Reader’s Digest came out quite strongly against the fledgling organization. In an article entitled “Guinea Pigs, Left March!” by Stanley High, Reader’s Digest attacks Consumer Reports science-based approach to testing and recommending products based on the test results, claiming “They are out to discredit, if not to destroy, the system.” Good Housekeeping went so far as to accuse Consumer Reports of extending the Great Depression. Relations between the magazines were not helped by the fact that Consumer Reports dismissed Good Housekeeping’s Seal of Approval as a “fraud.”

Vindication and acceptance of Consumer Report’s once-heretical approach came through consistent adherence to scientific testing and verifiable data. In 1953, it reported that smokers were exposed to as much nicotine when they puffed a filter-tipped cigarette as they were when they lit up an unfiltered Lucky Strike. The U.S. Surgeon General’s advisory committee cited the magazine’s research in its landmark report warning of the dangers of smoking in 1964. Consumer Reports’ toy testing helped pave the way for the 1969 Child Protection & Toy Safety Act, which passed a year after the magazine tested a group of electric toys and found a quarter of them hazardous. These and many other examples helped prove the case for the magazine’s data-centric approach.

Consumer Reports approach from the start has been grounded in a deep-set respect for scientific process and adherence to policies designed to avoid the potential taint of unfair influence that might derive from accepting payment from a motivated manufacturer. This is exemplar of the High C behavioral style. On the other hand, the depression-era staff of Reader’s Digest and other magazines such as Good Housekeeping saw this new paradigm as threatening to the status-quo of the advertiser relationship, which funded their magazines, and their own role in that relationship among magazines, advertisers and consumers. The sudden emergence of a new approach and business model that Consumer Reports represented was threatening to the established norm and without adequate time to adjust, the magazine exhibited a similar behavior as a High S individual might when faced with an environment that is changing faster than one can comfortably adjust to.

To summarize:
The High C‘s want the data and will act on it.
The High S‘s want things the way they’ve always been and will defend the status-quo, even sometimes when there is proof available of viable (and sometimes superior) alternative.

The DISC behavior of the High C Consumer Reports is to value the process for it’s analytical rigor and to hold it’s independent procedure as sacrosanct to it’s mission. Reader’s Digest representing the High S DISC style, reacted negatively to the sudden shift in the environment of the magazine industry and the disruption of the relationship norms it was comfortable with. Hopefully this example helps clarify the difference between a High C and a High S – While people aren’t magazines, applying the insights of DISC behavioral profiles can help you and your team avoid the kind of conflicts associated with clashing communication habits expressed by differing DISC behavioral styles.

Bookmark It

Our very own DISC Behavioral Expert and founder of Data Dome, Arthur Schoeck, was recently interviewed by personal branding expert David Cohen for the Internet radio program “Be a Beacon: Personal Branding with David Cohen.” The 35 minute discussion covers topics ranging from establishing yourself as an expert in your field to how DISC profiles and assessments designed to measure values and motivation can be helpful in understanding your personal strengths and weaknesses, an essential foundation for establishing your personal brand.

Schoeck and Cohen also discussed how DISC assessments can provide insights into preferred communication styles – valuable information for aligning your intentions with the reputation that you are building with each interpersonal interaction.

The show recorded on July 26, 2010, is available for listening by following this link: Be a Beacon – Personal Branding with David Cohen – Special Guest: DISC Expert Arthur Schoeck

Bookmark It

Last post we discussed how behavioral style analysis is an instinctive part of parenting – at least the observational skill, if not the vocabulary and structure. In the discussion we mentioned that the parent’s own behavior profile can indicate a tendency to “side” with one child over another if that child’s communication preferences are driven by a similar behavior style as the parent’s style. It is important to realize that behaviors are not necessarily inherited. Just because Mom is a High D, doesn’t mean that her kids will share that behavioral emphasis.

A parent’s style might match one child, but not another. On the one hand this similarity might make for a strong bond of empathy with the one child, but on the other hand could lead to behavior-based communication problems with the other. Stress will induce different communication issues among people with differing DISC profiles, regardless of whether the relationship is between parent and child, siblings, or among co-workers.

What if the parent’s DISC behavior differs from all the children? Imagine a High C father with a High D daughter and one son who is a high S and another who is a high I. The father values credibility, procedures and attention to detail, the daughter is bold and authoritative, one son is gregarious and demonstrative, the other is passive, but resistant to change. So what happens when each of these kids breaks their curfew? The father is irate because of the disobedience and disrespect for established rules, He’s perhaps overly critical of the excuses: well not in the daughter’s case because as a High D she offers no excuses – simply states what her objectives in staying out late were and has difficulty understanding why they are an issue. The High I son stayed out late to curry favor with his friends, he’s extremely apologetic and willing to make amends with his father, because that’s who he is in front of right now, but he is likely to bend to the peer pressure again should the occasion arise. The High S son on the other hand probably only stayed out past curfew because of some unusual stress or necessity – it’s not in his nature to break routine – his father’s frustration is only compounding an already distressed state.

Of course this is a hypothetical scenario, but the point is that for all of us, behavioral patterns can lead to very different perspectives on a given situation. Parents that are aware of this can provide guidance that is aligned with the child’s behavior instead of carrying an expectation based on the parent’s own DISC profile. By recognizing the daughter’s competitiveness and boldness, the one son’s political behavior, and the other’s tendency to be non-demonstrative, he will be on the path to attaining the insight to temper his initial over-critical response with one adapted to each child’s individual DISC style.

Bookmark It

Often when I give lectures or training classes I’ll ask the parents in the room, “for those of you with more than one kid, at what age did you realize they didn’t act the same?” Usually they laugh and say they realized in the first few months, some even say they noticed the difference before the younger child was even born. I tell them, “see… you’re already practitioners of behavioral style observation.”

If you’re a parent it’s only natural, you’re going to become out of necessity a keen observer of your children’s behavior. Day after day of close inspection and interaction are bound to define your reflexes based on behavioral expectations: you figure out that your daughter is very detail-oriented in the way she carefully arranges her doll collection, or you note that your youngest son always seems to be directing his friends as to which game they’re going to play today. Or another parent realizes that his daughter always wants the same peanut butter and jelly sandwich for lunch every day, while his son never cares because he always swaps his lunch because he seems to be friends with every kid in school. Mothers and fathers get to put in lots of hours observing and comparing, but what they may not have is the vocabulary to identify that the girl with the super-organized dolls is a high C, the boy who is setting the playtime goals is a high D, the girl who likes to stick to the same routine for lunch everyday is a high S, or that the boy who knows every kid in school is a high I. Yet vocabulary aside, the parents clearly understand the differences that each child expresses through his or her actions, but without the blueprint of a structured approach to understanding behavior as provided by DISC profiles, they are in a disadvantaged position when handling collisions of behavioral style.

When the High I boy with tons of friends takes his sister’s PB&J sandwich to trade with his buddy who said he likes peanut butter, he’s just following his impulsive behavioral pattern of trying to please and influence, not realizing that he may be creating an avalanche of stress for his sister, the High S, who is now very distraught to have the reassuring stability of her expected sandwich being unexpectedly replaced by her brother’s turkey on wheat. Further, if the parent is unaware of his or her own behavioral style they may fall into a biased reaction to the incident. If the mother is also a High I, she might be led by her behavioral disposition to take the son’s side, while the High S father might see the issue as stress-inducing his daughter does.

The parental dilemma grows as the kids get older and are exposed to an increasing number of influences and experiences that are outside of the parent’s sphere of observation. Expectations set by past patterns of behavior may be jarringly disrupted by the emergence of behavioral shifts so often seen during the teen years. Here again, the trained DISC behaviorist has an advantage in deciphering the puzzle of disruption due to inconsistent behavior. Proper DISC profiling examines and charts both natural and adapted behavioral profiles – shifting environments and peer dynamics are as likely to cause behavioral adaptations as any stressful office – understanding modifications of behavior and the gap between natural and adapted styles can give the experienced behavioral strategist data points for understanding that a typical parent wouldn’t have at their disposal.

On the other hand teenagers are just weird

Bookmark It

When you start talking about DISC assessments and DISC behavioral styles it is inevitable that you end up in the land of adjectives: The high D – Active, Direct, Forceful; the high I – Fast-Paced, Emotional, Impulsive; the high S – Agreeable, Cooperative, Friendly; and the high C- Thoughtful, Careful, Thorough. Add a little stress to the mix and some new adjectives from the DISC profile step to the front of the line: D – Impatient; I – Disorganized; S – Possessive; and C – Overly Critical. These words, when included in a DISC profile, are intended to be useful and cautionary – guides, if you will, for gaining insight into your own behaviors and the necessary data to intentionally adapt behavior for improved communication, team building and performance. Yet sometimes these words can be misused as an excuse, a convenient crutch to sidestep taking responsibility for the outcome of behavior. There is a world of difference in the statements “I’m a low C, so I should team with someone who can help me stay organized” and “I’m a low C, so don’t expect me to be organized.” That difference is in the attitude.

Understanding behavioral style via a DISC assessment is tremendously valuable, yet it is still an incomplete predictor of an individual’s impact on a team or success in a position. Going beyond the DISC profile by gauging awareness and attitudes provides vital insight into that individual’s effectiveness and willingness to change – especially when confronted with a behavior that is causing (or caused by) a negative issue. It can make the difference between a team full of “My way, or the highway” dysfunction or a team that embraces the platinum rule: behave unto others in the style that suits them, even if it isn’t the style that naturally comes to you. DISC assessments make you aware of your own behavioral tendencies so when you recognize the styles of others you can behave with intention: more productively and harmoniously.

Bookmark It