For use: Friday, October 27, 2000 and thereafter

 

mfinley.com: "Elect an Expressive"

by Michael Finley

Here's an irony. By voting for George W. Bush, we may think we are voting for a continuation of his father's high-minded Republicanism. But we will actually be voting for Bill Clinton's theatrics, thanks to the magic of personality types.

The personality scale we will be using here is the TRACOM personality test, created in part by my partner Harvey Robbins. It is described at length in our book THE NEW WHY TEAMS DON'T WORK, just out from Berrett-Koehler.

The book describes four basic personality zones. We all occupy a dot somewhere in this box:

Analytical Key Value: Work with existing circumstances to promote quality in products and services Orientation: Thinking	Driver Key Value: Shape the environment by overcoming opposition to get immediate results Orientation: Action
Amiable Key Value: Cooperate with others, make sure people are incluided and feel good about the process Orientation: Relationships	Expressive Key Value: Shape the environment by bringing others into alliance to generate enthusiasm for the results Orientation: Intuition

Typically, we derive our political leaders from the DRIVER zone. They are the take-charge, I've-got-a-vision guys (and um, gals). George Washington and FDR are archetypal DRIVERs.

But TV has made it hard to elect this kind of people because they are hard-edged and therefore divisive. The media make us hunger for candidates with a softer aura about them. Jimmy Carter was a pure AMIABLE -- so weak we knew he could not suborn the Constitution. Ronald Reagan was a pure EXPRESSIVE -- fun to watch, highly likable, an artist at heart. George Bush was a throwback to the old DRIVER days -- "This shall not pass."

Bill Clinton is the most radical departure -- strong in all four categories, but off the chart in EXPRESSIVE. We love him for being a wonk (ANALTICAL), and for being an exciting performer (EXPRESSIVE). But we have doubts about his ability to lead (DRIVER), and his need to be loved (AMIABLE) pretty much ruined him.

Which brings us to the current batch of candidates.

Curiously, Ralph Nader and Al Gore appear to both be ANALYTICAL-DRIVERs -- fact-driven, a little dull, but ferocious in their clarity and energy.

Dick Cheney is a straight ANALYTICAL -- he will never be president. Joe Lieberman is a mini- Clinton, but perhaps stronger in the AMIABLE department. One sense that he likes people just a titch more than he needs their approval. Pat Buchanan is an EXPRESSIVE, an artist like Clinton, but without any AMIABLE at all.

But George W. is the man to watch, because he clocks in as a embodying the worst of Bill Clinton:

He's a people person, and therefore an AMIABLE. Politicians love to kiss babies, but the need to be loved, or popular, makes them weak.

He's certainly enough of a DRIVER to seek the highest office in the land, incredibly so, given the thinness of his resume. But there is the suspicion that he feels obligated to play the DRIVER -- for family tradition's sake.

But his primary attribute is being an EXPRESSIVE. Observe how he is forever making faces, anticipating laughs from his jokes, how he draws himself full to take offense when McCain accused him of being like "just like Clinton." Well might he resent the resemblance, because both Clinton and Bush are artists at heart, like Reagan was.

Now, it is a great thing for an artist to be an EXPRESSIVE. They adore the spotlight, and the love the bathe in people's approbation. They are wonderfully future-oriented, and can give great inspiring "thematic" presentations. But is it a great thing for an EXPRESSIVE to be president?

Here are some of the downsides, as discussed in our book:

·        They talk about their thoughts and feelings. Boy, do they.

·        They love tall tales and anecdotes. They, not ANALYTICALs, are the quintessential embellishers and phrase-makers.

·        They use lots of adjectives and vivid descriptive phrases. They prefer metaphor to money.

·        They digress from point at hand – they just can’t help it.

·        They are the world's best salesmen. Which is fine, unless they are selling you a bill of goods.

·        They are fast talkers, even if they mangle an occasional syllable. They often get ahead of themselves and have to retract.

·        They are very animated, and use dramatic gestures and facial expressions.

·        They exude lots of vocal variety -- inflection, volume.

·        They smile and nod their heads a lot.

·        They can be stylish and fashionably current in appearance.

·        They move around a lot, and emit lots of energy.

·        They are easily bored. They hate ANALYTICALs like Gore and Nixon. But then, nearly everybody wrinkles their nose at ANALYTICALs because they come across as superior and unempathic.

·        They are selfish -- do not look to an EXPRESSIVE for altruism, because it is not in them. This is an important one.

·        If you do not pointedly like them, they become negative toward you, and harbor paranoid thoughts about your intentions.

·        They have high social needs. They love to chew the fat, and tend to be late for everything as a result. They love to make people laugh, cry, rise up in anger. When evil they are natural demagogues and manipulators.

·        They are pokey. EXPRESSIVES (think of Reagan's naps) do their best work when they aren’t in a hurry.

·        They're great at the big picture, crappy on the details.

·        They are prickly -- never show an EXPRESSIVE disrespect, for you risk a volcanic outburst.

Now, have I described George W. or not?

My hope is that you will take this new knowledge and apply it to your voting. Remember that no one likes ANALYTICALS like Gore because they are the essential nerds of the world -- the Bill Gateses and the John Kasiches.

Finally, if George W. is not a cutout of George Bush, where does he get his EXPRESSIVE Clintonesque side?

From his mother. She's the breezy one of the family. Did you hear her after the third debate? She said she was afraid Gore was going to punch her son!

Question: Do we really want a president whose mother is afraid that the class nerd will beat him up? And doesn’t mind telling the whole world so?