Working with the Enneagram

Connecting Points: The "Neglected" and "Support" Strategies

Much is made of the inner lines of the Enneagram and how they connect the points to each other. These connections are often referred to as "stress" and "security" points or directions of "integration" and "disintegration." My good friend Jeff Keimer* has asked me to write a little about how I describe these connections.
    We are not always exhibiting behaviors solely related to our "type." We are not robots restricted to the use of our preferred strategy (e.g., striving to be perfect for Type One), we move around the Enneagram and adopt different strategies at different times according to different circumstances. No one really knows why this is so, though some try to put some sort of Enneagrammatic rationale on it; I am content at this point to attribute it to the as-yet-unexplained complexity of human nature and fall back on Walt Whitman: "Do I contradict myself? So, I contradict myself/I am large; I contain multitudes."
    Yet many, me included, refer to the Enneagram as a predictive model. A better term would be that it is a probabalistic model; it doesn't tell us what will happen, it tells us what is more likely to happen.
    The inner lines of the Enneagram point to type-specific probabilites, the likelihood that someone of a particular type is more likely to act a certain way than to act another way. Sticking with the example of Type One, it is more common for Ones to exhibit behaviors linked to the strategies found at the points that the One connects to than to exhibit behaviors related to other strategies. Thus, Ones, in addition to their striving to be perfect, will frequently demonstrate behaviors rooted in the strategies of striving to be unique (found at point Four) or striving to be excited (point Seven).
    When I first learned about the Enneagram 15 years ago it was common to say that a person moved one way along the connecting lines in bad times and the other way in good times. I had a difficult time reconciling this with my own experience. As an Eight, it was theoretically "bad" for me to seem "Five-ish" since Five is the stress point or direction of disintegration for the Eight. As an MBTI introvert, and a fairly book-ish one at that, I didn't feel like I was being unhealthy when I wanted a little peace and quiet to read. In fact, I often felt at my best at those moments when I could unplug and become absorbed in something intellectually challenging. This hardly felt like "disintegration." Further, I often "went to Two" is ways that contradicted the literature: rather than striving to connect in only positive ways I observed that sometimes I was needy and emotionally demanding. By observing myself and others I realized that movement happened in both directions along the inner lines in both adaptive (i.e., positive) and maladaptive (i.e., negative) ways.
    When Bob Tallon and I were writing "Awareness to Action" we wrestled with what to call to call the connecting points because neither of the commonly used terms captured what we were most concerned about in our work with our clients. Because we were primarily interested in how to help people improve, we focused more on the maladaptive behaviors at the connecting points and the terms we chose reflect this to some degree. If we were writing "AtA" today, I would place more emphasis on the adaptive ways we connect to the other strategies rather than focusing on the maladaptive ways. That said, I think the names still work.
    Bob and I decided to call what is typically called the "direction of integration" or the "security point" the "neglected strategy" and what is typically called the "direction of disintegration" or the "stress point" the "support strategy."
    We chose "neglected strategy" because there is a significant probability that we will get into trouble--that is, act in ineffective and and maladaptive ways--because we neglect using this strategy at relevant times.
    Ones will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be excited" (found at Point Seven); they will be negative and pessimistic at times when others are counting on them to be happy and positive.
    Twos will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be unique" (Point Four); they will flatter and comply when others are counting on them to express their own voice.
    Threes will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be secure" (Point Six); they will pull away from the group when others are counting on them to be part of the team.
    Fours will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be perfect" (Point One); they will emphasize and embrace their flaws when others are counting on them to be practical.
    Fives will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be powerful" (Point Eight); they will disengage and step into the background when others are counting on them to step up and champion ideas or causes.
    Sixes will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be peaceful" (Point Nine); they will work themselves into an anxious frenzy when others are counting on be calm and poised.
    Sevens will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be detached" (Point Five); they will impulsively pursue whims when others are counting on them to exercise restraint.
    Eights will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be connected" (Point Two); they will be insensitive and demanding when others are counting on them to be empathic and understanding.
    Nines will get into trouble because they neglect "striving to be outstanding" (Point Three); they will minimize their contribution or avoid challenges when others are counting on them to demonstrate leadership.
    Please note that I am not saying that we never use our "neglected strategy;" even though I am an Eight and my neglected strategy is striving to be connected, I am connected to my wife and children and friends; in many ways, I (and most Eights) value relationships more than most. However, if I am doing something wrong there is an awfully good chance it is because I am either overdoing my preferred strategy or under-doing my neglected strategy. This is the same for almost everyone.
    And it's why the Enneagram is so valuable: it points to the probabilities.
    My next blog entry will look at the support strategies.
Mario Sikora

*Visit Jeff at www.stanfordinvestment.com

Nines and Self-Deprecation

I work with a lot of Nines, which surprises some people.
    Nines get the reputation as being lazy underachievers in the Enneagram literature, not corporate vice presidents. It wouldn't seem to make sense to find them in senior leadership positions in large companies.
    This characterization of Nines is simply not accurate, however, and I find that Nines can make very good leaders because they tend to be good at building consensus and putting people at ease, critical competencies for leaders. I've worked with Nines who lead multi-billion dollar organizations and numerous U.S. presidents were probably Nines--Lincoln, Eisenhower, Ford, and Reagan come to mind, and my initial hypothesis is that Obama is a Nine as well.
    There is one subtle behavior that I often see holding back even high-functioning Nines, however: a tendency to self-deprecate.
    Self-deprecation is the act of down-playing one's accomplishments, insights, or contributions, and it is an almost knee-jerk response that Nines have when they're in a position to talk about themselves. It is often difficult to see the harm in self-deprecation; it comes across as a mark of humility and as a welcome contrast to all of the people we interact with who are only too willing to regale us about their successes, no matter how limited.
    In fact, self-deprecation is one of the basic tools that Nines use to ensure that others see them as likable and unoffensive: They will qualify statements they make so they don't sound like a know-it-all ("Well, I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but here's what I think...."); they will shrug off compliments ("It wasn't me, the team did it...."); or they will simply not speak up when there is an opportunity to point out an accomplishment.
    There are a number of problems with this behavior, however.
    While their self-deprecation may make Nines less offensive, it also subtly undermines the perception that others have of their value and can hurt their career growth. If someone continually tells you he is not the smartest guy in the world, you will begin to believe it. If someone tells you "the team did it" all the time, you will begin to wonder what you need her for. These perceptions of the Nine can take hold unconsciously. It is often the case when a Nine gets passed over for promotion at senior levels that no one can quite put their finger on why. Explanations tend to be along the lines of "He has all the right skills and abilities, but there's something missing; he just doesn't seem to be the senior leadership type...."
    Beyond hindering career development, self-deprecation paints an inaccurate portrait of the resources of the organization. If someone is capable of more than her bosses and coworkers realize, the organization misses out on the opportunity to utilize those capabilities. In other words, the company does get the chance to maximize its resources if it doesn't understand what those resources are.
    The most significant effect that self-deprecation has, however, is to signal a lack of self-confidence to others. A confident person states their point of view without qualification or hesitation (and also without false bravado); they don't adopt an aw-shucks humility.
    The fear that Nines often have is that if they are not self-deprecating they will seem arrogant. We all create these sort of false-dichotomies and resist change based on a fear that if we are not one thing we will automatically be it's opposite. Philosophers call this error the "fallacy of the excluded middle;" we rarely have only two choices of behavior, but we have a tendency to believe we do. The truth is that there are a variety of positions between self-deprecation and arrogance.The position I recommend to my Nine clients is simply telling the unvarnished and undiluted truth. They should not feel compelled to boast, they should simply resist self-deprecating.
    They should delete qualifying statements from their conversation (that is, simply say "Here's what I think...").
    They should take credit when credit is due. When someone compliments them they can say, "Thank you. It really was a team effort...."
    They should speak up and let people know when they have ideas or expertise that is not being utilized so everyone can benefit.

    Self-deprecation can be a tricky area for Nines because it is so ingrained in their psyche (they typically don't even know they do it until it is pointed out to them) its affects on them and their career are so subtle. This subtlety is what makes it so important to pay attention to, however. The more common weak areas for Nines, such as conflict avoidance, are more obvious and they tend to get more feedback on those areas. Self-deprecation goes unnoticed at a conscious level but registers unconsciously, making it that much more problematic. At the same time, I have seen overcoming self-deprecation to be one of the single most important behavioral improvements a Nine can make.

Mario Sikora

Thinking Scientifically About the Enneagram, Part Two

    In the last post I discussed thinking scientifically; now let's look at some ways we can apply that mindset to our work with the Enneagram. This post will look at four ways this can be done, but the list is certainly not exhaustive and I'm sure the topic will come up again.
    The first way is to challenge the received wisdom of the Enneagram, the statements we take as truths because they were made by an Enneagram teacher we admire. One example that sticks in my mind is a Type Nine client I worked with some years ago. We had typed him as a Nine, but then he read a book by another author and became troubled.
    "When you and I talk about the types I clearly see myself as a Nine," Art said, "but when I read this book it says I'm supposed to like camping, gardening, and self-help workshops. I don't like any of those things."
    We spoke further and agreed that no other type seemed to fit him, and that everything else about the Nine seemed to fit. The conclusion that we drew was that while some Nines, and perhaps even many Nines, enjoy camping, gardening, and self-help workshops, it would be false to say that all Nines enjoy them.
    (To give another example, I was recently told that "everyone knows that Eights don't read." Since I'm an Eight, and an avid reader, it was easy to see that this notion is nonsense; received wisdom passed down to someone who accepted it unquestioningly.)
    A second way to think scientifically about the Enneagram is to challenge any theories or opinions you form independently about the types. When Bob Tallon and I set out to write "Awareness to Action," we decided we needed to come up with a concept that could be used as a unifying descriptor for everyone of a given type. After a lot of discussion we settled on the idea of the strategies, that "something" that each type was striving to be. (I have written about this idea in other posts.) We created our initial hypothesis about what that "something" was for each type and then made lists of everyone we knew of a given type and tried to falsify our premise. For example, our initial hypothesis about the Type Four was that they were striving to be creative. However, upon examination of the Fours we knew we observed that while creativity was important to many, it was not crucial to all of them. Eventually, we settled on "striving to be unique" as the strategy for Fours and could not find any examples to falsify this hypothesis.
    I encourage you to apply the same methodology to your theories and observations about type.
    Typing clients is a third way to think scientifically about the Enneagram.
    Here is my process for typing clients: I start off by asking them very general questions ("What do you do here?" "What do you do for fun?" "Tell me about your family?" etc.) to get them talking comfortably and spontaneously. I start to look for patterns that correspond to type: Is the client emphasizing power and control (which is Eight-ish), achievement (Three-ish), self-deprecation (Nine-ish), and so forth. Once I see a pattern I create a hypothesis ("I think Harry is a Nine"), and then I set out to falsify it, to look for evidence that my hypothesis is wrong. I'll ask Harry how he feels about drawing attention to himself. If he seems to enjoy it, I've pretty much falsified my initial hypothesis and need to create a new one. If I have an opinion on someone's type at the end of our first meeting, I will describe the types to them and ask if they have an opinion on what type they are. Then I share my observations and see if we are in agreement. If not, we start the process over, going into more specific and type-related questions. If we are in agreement, I tell them to hold it as a provisional hypothesis, to read about their type in my book, and that we will revisit it in the next session to see if any new observations or data justify a change of mind. If not, we continue on the assumption that we have the correct type until something contradicts it.
    The key, when typing someone is not to try to prove our initial hypothesis; rather, we should be seeking to disprove it. If the hypothesis holds up to all reasonable challenges, we have identified the client's type.
    A fourth way to apply scientific thinking to the Enneagram is to be wary of other methodologies or sciences that get combined with the Enneagram. For example, some writers try to create a direct correlation between the Enneagram and Myer-Briggs typology, saying that Ennegram Eights are going to correlate to, say, a Myers-Briggs ENTJ. Simple observation will falsify this view (I have met Eights of a variety of MBTI type).
    Further, the Enneagram attracts seekers of all sorts, and many of its adherents will try to draw correlations to all sorts of alternative therapies and medicines and new-age philosophies. I encourage you to challenge these correlations when you see them and don't accept anything that doesn't pass the tests of the scientific method described in part one of this post. I'd also like to recommend Dr. Steven Novella's "Science-Based Medicine" blog (www.sciencebasedmedicine.org) and Dr. Stephen Barrett's site www.quackwatch.com as good primers on how to think about these topics.
    As a final thought on this topic, I caution the reader to exercise critical thinking when thinking about theories of the origins of the Enneagram. It is currently popular to say things like "the Enneagram is an ancient system because a thousand years ago St. So-and-So wrote about ideas found in current Enneagram theory, so he must have known about the Enneagram and therefore the Enneagram is at least a thousand years old." This is fanciful thinking that confuses correlation with causation. Just because things are similar does not mean they are directly related.

Mario Sikora