Summary
Points of Influence: A Guide to Using Personality Theory at Work
edited by Morley Segal
These theories of personality help in understanding the individuals and influencing these individuals through points of influence. These points affect the rest of the person and therefore affect behavior. The exploration of several theories and points develop concepts of different ways of influencing human behavior. These different ways also yield results in different contexts. These points of influence are important in helping individuals through the processes of joining, conflict management, and psychological growth in the context of organizations.
Understanding some of the concepts of Freud will help in dealing with an organization in the process of rapid change and under stress. Individuals respond to messages from their own unconscious mind creating anxiety and stress in the organization. Freud’s concepts come from his premise concerning the unconscious mind that consists of three parts: the id, the ego, and the superego. The id is the base nature, while the superego represents morality, though socially adjusted, and the ego, which is the arbitrator between the two or reason and the weakest part of the system. The ego at times will relieve pressure from anxiety created by the dissonance between the id and the superego by defense mechanisms. Two of these defense mechanisms important in organizations are projection and transference. As the consultant identifies and neutralizes the defenses in the group the stress in the organization is changed.
Jung develops concepts that identify the hidden side of the personality and he provides ways to develop lifelong psychological growth. This inner core of personality contains archetypes that are broad patterns and then behavior is a reflection of these inner patterns. This shadow archetype contains the unintegrated personal attributes that are negative to the individual. Organizations also have a personality that contains this shadow. This shadow is not evil but the less developed side of the personality. Using these concepts, myths help organizations to identify this underlying reality to tap into hidden sources of creativity.
Horney developed the concepts of the real self and the ideal self. The real self is the basis for growth and the ideal is the source of dysfunction. The ideal self is the idealized image of what the individual should be like in attitude and behavior, which lead to the despised self. However, organizations can bring out the potential of the individuals by encouraging the expression of the true thoughts and feelings not those of the idealized self. These concepts also help consultants work with the roots of dysfunctional behavior.
Ellis and Beck developed theories of influencing behavior by influencing thinking. Ellis deals with irrational thinking. Ellis teaches that action and its consequence have an intervening belief that affects the consequence. Many of these are irrational beliefs that need challenging. Beck challenges assumptions behind thoughts looking for personal biases. These methods of challenge can function in organizational contexts to influence behavior and feelings to help address the issues of the organization. Rogers identified organizational drive behind the human capacity to solve problems. These concepts find expression through feelings. The result of these theories is the methods of active listening and unconditional positive regard. Using these methods, the consultant can help the group discover their concerns, provide better communication, and resolve conflicts.
Skinner, Lewin, Perls, Perls, and Bowen developed concepts of the individual and the environment. Skinner looks to modify behavior through reinforcement of the behavior. Lewin developed useful concepts of change through the concept of life space. Then Perl and Perl developed Gestalt theory and how an individual can be unblocked to use the natural energy for change. Bowen utilized systems thinking in developing concepts for change related to the person’s family of origin as well as in the organization.
____________________________________________________________________
Response
I have completed reading the book "Points of Influence" by Morley Segal and I found his premise to be intriguing. That psychological theories and methods could be applied in organizations. I think there are some really good things here as tools for consulting with organizations. However, there are a couple of problems as I perceive it. The first is the underlying assumption that each of the theories are more or less valid and can simply be used in different contexts or by preferences of the consultant. The problem here is that I doubt the validity of some of the theories. For instance I think that some of Freud's concepts are flawed and others have thought this as well since they developed other theories based on this same thought. I do believe that Freud was a pioneer and started asking some of the right questions. One of the theorists talked about being able to diagnose a problem but struggling to resolve it. I think this is true in many instances with some of these theories. Just because a method works in a particular instance does not mean it is effective in the big picture. What are some of the long term results of some of these methods? This needs to be examined and discussed. Many of these theories were developed because the existing ones were not sufficient. Also some are quite distinct from others like Rogers and Ellis one starts from feeling and one from thought. I realize we must allow different worlds and different contexts and that there are nuances of truth but certain presuppositions preclude other presuppositions. Secondly, some of these theories are pretty profound and to deeply grasp all of them would be a difficult task indeed. But also some of the dilemmas can be answered with a good understanding of the depravity of humanity and the image of God in humans. I am not saying I have solved any human dilemmas it just seems that many of them are asking the same questions with different answers but they are missing a basic premise about humanity.
I was intrigued by two things. One is his connection between the theorists and the theories that were developed. This is an issue that I think has great importance and could be pursued further though I am sure someone has done that. I was particularly interested in the fact that at least two of the people were Christians or at least had Christian roots and yet felt they had to leave the concepts of the Kingdom to answer the dilemmas of humanity. There were others who were Jewish but followed a similar pattern. I find this troubling and yet interesting. The second issue of interest was the concept of Kurt Lewin's theory of life space and his teaching that behavior is a function of the person and the environment. I think some of his theories and concepts may be relevant to constructivist educational models with his use of feedback and dialogue. I am going to look into this more deeply.
Do not get the wrong impression I learned a great deal from this book and I think he has some good ideas and excellent applications. But it does raise questions in my mind. One of the questions is what happened to the believers in Jesus? Do we not have any legitimate thoughts in this area? At one time people like Augustine entered these kinds of discussions about human motivation and he was the pace setter for centuries. So why are there no Augustine's in this discussion?
Points of Influence: A Guide to Using Personality Theory at Work
edited by Morley Segal
These theories of personality help in understanding the individuals and influencing these individuals through points of influence. These points affect the rest of the person and therefore affect behavior. The exploration of several theories and points develop concepts of different ways of influencing human behavior. These different ways also yield results in different contexts. These points of influence are important in helping individuals through the processes of joining, conflict management, and psychological growth in the context of organizations.
Understanding some of the concepts of Freud will help in dealing with an organization in the process of rapid change and under stress. Individuals respond to messages from their own unconscious mind creating anxiety and stress in the organization. Freud’s concepts come from his premise concerning the unconscious mind that consists of three parts: the id, the ego, and the superego. The id is the base nature, while the superego represents morality, though socially adjusted, and the ego, which is the arbitrator between the two or reason and the weakest part of the system. The ego at times will relieve pressure from anxiety created by the dissonance between the id and the superego by defense mechanisms. Two of these defense mechanisms important in organizations are projection and transference. As the consultant identifies and neutralizes the defenses in the group the stress in the organization is changed.
Jung develops concepts that identify the hidden side of the personality and he provides ways to develop lifelong psychological growth. This inner core of personality contains archetypes that are broad patterns and then behavior is a reflection of these inner patterns. This shadow archetype contains the unintegrated personal attributes that are negative to the individual. Organizations also have a personality that contains this shadow. This shadow is not evil but the less developed side of the personality. Using these concepts, myths help organizations to identify this underlying reality to tap into hidden sources of creativity.
Horney developed the concepts of the real self and the ideal self. The real self is the basis for growth and the ideal is the source of dysfunction. The ideal self is the idealized image of what the individual should be like in attitude and behavior, which lead to the despised self. However, organizations can bring out the potential of the individuals by encouraging the expression of the true thoughts and feelings not those of the idealized self. These concepts also help consultants work with the roots of dysfunctional behavior.
Ellis and Beck developed theories of influencing behavior by influencing thinking. Ellis deals with irrational thinking. Ellis teaches that action and its consequence have an intervening belief that affects the consequence. Many of these are irrational beliefs that need challenging. Beck challenges assumptions behind thoughts looking for personal biases. These methods of challenge can function in organizational contexts to influence behavior and feelings to help address the issues of the organization. Rogers identified organizational drive behind the human capacity to solve problems. These concepts find expression through feelings. The result of these theories is the methods of active listening and unconditional positive regard. Using these methods, the consultant can help the group discover their concerns, provide better communication, and resolve conflicts.
Skinner, Lewin, Perls, Perls, and Bowen developed concepts of the individual and the environment. Skinner looks to modify behavior through reinforcement of the behavior. Lewin developed useful concepts of change through the concept of life space. Then Perl and Perl developed Gestalt theory and how an individual can be unblocked to use the natural energy for change. Bowen utilized systems thinking in developing concepts for change related to the person’s family of origin as well as in the organization.
____________________________________________________________________
Response
I have completed reading the book "Points of Influence" by Morley Segal and I found his premise to be intriguing. That psychological theories and methods could be applied in organizations. I think there are some really good things here as tools for consulting with organizations. However, there are a couple of problems as I perceive it. The first is the underlying assumption that each of the theories are more or less valid and can simply be used in different contexts or by preferences of the consultant. The problem here is that I doubt the validity of some of the theories. For instance I think that some of Freud's concepts are flawed and others have thought this as well since they developed other theories based on this same thought. I do believe that Freud was a pioneer and started asking some of the right questions. One of the theorists talked about being able to diagnose a problem but struggling to resolve it. I think this is true in many instances with some of these theories. Just because a method works in a particular instance does not mean it is effective in the big picture. What are some of the long term results of some of these methods? This needs to be examined and discussed. Many of these theories were developed because the existing ones were not sufficient. Also some are quite distinct from others like Rogers and Ellis one starts from feeling and one from thought. I realize we must allow different worlds and different contexts and that there are nuances of truth but certain presuppositions preclude other presuppositions. Secondly, some of these theories are pretty profound and to deeply grasp all of them would be a difficult task indeed. But also some of the dilemmas can be answered with a good understanding of the depravity of humanity and the image of God in humans. I am not saying I have solved any human dilemmas it just seems that many of them are asking the same questions with different answers but they are missing a basic premise about humanity.
I was intrigued by two things. One is his connection between the theorists and the theories that were developed. This is an issue that I think has great importance and could be pursued further though I am sure someone has done that. I was particularly interested in the fact that at least two of the people were Christians or at least had Christian roots and yet felt they had to leave the concepts of the Kingdom to answer the dilemmas of humanity. There were others who were Jewish but followed a similar pattern. I find this troubling and yet interesting. The second issue of interest was the concept of Kurt Lewin's theory of life space and his teaching that behavior is a function of the person and the environment. I think some of his theories and concepts may be relevant to constructivist educational models with his use of feedback and dialogue. I am going to look into this more deeply.
Do not get the wrong impression I learned a great deal from this book and I think he has some good ideas and excellent applications. But it does raise questions in my mind. One of the questions is what happened to the believers in Jesus? Do we not have any legitimate thoughts in this area? At one time people like Augustine entered these kinds of discussions about human motivation and he was the pace setter for centuries. So why are there no Augustine's in this discussion?
1 comment:
You raise some very good points, I especially liked the query about where are the philosophical giants like Augustin in the historical epoch in which we now live. I am sure that you have probably considered already that the moral relativism that so plagues our western post modernistic world in which we in America now live has had an impact,reducing the desire of great minds to no more than that of shallow pondering. This fact of modern existence coupled with a seeming addiction to be entertained by external stimuli as opposed to a hunger for learning and the enrichment by education of the inner man. It has also come to pass that the system of education that has been operating for the past 30 to 40 years has served more to control, rather than liberate, the minds of the future and so it is that self motivated educational advancement and free thought are no longer in vogue. This sad state of affairs has not however, dampened the spirits of the Christian leaders striving against the norm for the deeper things of great value, even though they face fervent opposition from a system built on a world view that has shown itself to be against their efforts.
Post a Comment