Are All Nine in There?

Transcription

1 Are All Nine in There? Why We Should Look at All Nine Strategies By Mario Sikora I think I m partly a Six and partly a One and partly a Three. Rich made this statement in a teambuilding session as we were discussing the various Ennea-types represented on the team. Later, almost everyone on the team privately relayed that they saw Rich as a Six and were surprised that he didn t see it. But they could relate to his comments because they too saw themselves as more complex than being one fixed personality type. Rich s statement is one I hear frequently when I explain the Enneagram to people they see other people s type clearly, but it takes them a while to see their type with the same focus. Traditionally, I have put their concerns to rest with a standard answer along the lines of, Well, we have all of the types in us, but one is dominant. But then I, like most others in the Enneagram world, go on to act as if I never said that and continue to focus on the person s type. What s going on here? In Character and Neurosis, Claudio Naranjo writes: We may say that the mental skeleton that we all share is like a structure that can, like a crystal, break in a certain number of ways that are pre-determined, so that among the set of main structural features any given individual (as a result of the interaction between constitutional and situational factors) ends up with one or the other in the foreground of his personality while the remaining features are in a more proximate or more remote background. (p. 12) Essentially, Naranjo proposes that the nine features are all there within a given individual but that one is in front and the others range in prominence behind the main feature. Notice that Naranjo does not say whether or not there is an standard ordering to this prominence; i.e., he does not say that if you are, say, a Nine, the next prominent type residing in your psyche will be Three, then Seven, then Four, etc. He probably avoids this topic because the interaction between constitutional and situational factors is so complex and potentially varied that there probably is no pattern to the order of the features. While every Enneagram teacher worth his or her salt would agree that all of the types are in there, I have yet to come across any who explore the significance of feature proximity (which types are closer to the front of our individual psyche and which are farther away) and how we can use that knowledge for growth. Instead, most teachers stay confined to the geometric dynamics of the drawing, explaining similarities across type in terms of constructs that are in some way wedded to the diagram. In other words, we explain why Nines sometimes look Three-ish by focusing on connecting lines, why they sometimes look Four-ish by talking about Hornevian groupings, etc. These explanations may be valid, but they can handcuff us into a model of existence rather than giving us the ability to see and experience our existence as it really is. If you tell someone often enough that as an Eight they need to focus on being more Two-like and less Five-like, they will begin to see it and then to believe it. Because the mind works in ways that seeks confirming evidence and ignores contradictory 1

2 evidence,* people will naturally become trapped in that limited view of themselves. What if our Eight really needs, based on the circumstances of his or her life, to be more Four-like? I have also seen connecting points, wings, Hornevian relationships, and the like used to explain any and all sorts of behavior in a person. In fact, I once listened to two Enneagrammers explain the behavior of a mutual acquaintance that went something like: Well, Jane is a Nine, and she was acting that way because she was disintegrating to Three. Actually, Jane is a Five. Oh, well Threes and Fives are both in the competency group, so I m not surprised Yeah, that makes sense. A model this malleable starts to loose value after a while; if you can make it do whatever you want and on its own it doesn t really do anything at all. Sometimes people simply do things because they seem to make sense at the time. I d like to propose another way of looking at feature proximity. First we must define what we talk about when we talk about type. Naranjo, refers to an adaptational strategy that leads to a certain fixity of obsolete responses ( Character and Neurosis, pp. 5-6). This phrase inspired Robert Tallon and me to adopt the term strategy for what lies at the core of Ennea-type. For example, the chief feature of the Three is their unconscious preference of the strategy of Striving to be Outstanding. This bias leads Threes to behave in ways suited to the strategy, the repetition and habituation of the.behaviors leads to the fixity that we refer to as Ennea-type. *See, for example, Stumbling on Happiness by Daniel Gilbert or Don t Believe Everything You Think by Thomas Kida In other words, Threes are driven by a need to be outstanding (I would conjecture that this need is due to some constitutional factors, but it is merely conjecture). They find certain behaviors that help them achieve this need. They repeat those behaviors. Those behaviors become habitual and fixed. They continue to exhibit traits consistent with the classification called Ennea-type Three. Thus, our definition of what constitutes type was based on the preferred strategy (what one was most frequently striving to be ) rather than on observable traits and behaviors. This is a significant distinction. No longer were Threes, for example, the successful, accomplished, hardworking, and image-conscious type; they became people who s preferred strategy was striving to be outstanding and this strategy could include all sorts of behaviors even those that didn t necessarily look Threeish. As we all know, Threes and Eights, for example, share many superficial traits. But they often do similar things for very different reasons: Threes because a behavior serves their preferred strategy of striving to be outstanding; Eights because the same behavior serves their preferred strategy of striving to be powerful. Some would argue that the nine types are real and objective, but such language makes me a little nervous. If this is meant in the sense of Platonic forms a concept popular in some Enneagram circles it means that the types actually exist in the universe independent of the people who display them. (Plato made this case for what he called forms, things like beauty and truth; some in the Enneagram make the same case for the Holy Ideas.) In other words: even if there where no people a Platonic view says that there would still be Ennea-types. A strategy, however, is a concept, an approach, or a method. It need not exist independently of humans because it is something that has evolved in humans over time and will probably continue to evolve. An Enneagram based on fixed traits will disappear over time because human nature is 2

3 continually (albeit gradually) evolving; an Enneagram based on strategies has room for evolution. Another problem with an approach to a real and objective Enneagram based on traits is it becomes harder to explain the existence of all types inside of our psyche and for variable feature proximity (i.e., the ordering of the strategies or types as they are found in an individual). Here s what I mean: I am an Eight. When people who know me observe me, they see my Eight-ness. But they can also find Five-ness, One-ness, and Three-ness pretty close to the surface on most days (in both positive and negative ways). Thus, using Naranjo s terms, it could be said that the features of Five-ness, One-ness, and Three-ness are more proximate for me than are the other strategies. Other Eights, however, may display more proximate Seven-ness and Two-ness. If the nine types are real and objective, how does one explain such variation? By looking at adaptational strategies influenced by interaction between constitutional and situational factors, however, it becomes easier to account for the variation. I display more Five-ness than other Eights because my constitution and circumstances made those strategies rise to the fore (not necessarily because I m psychologically unhealthy as some views would have it). Humans are adaptive creatures and we all use different strategies at different times under different circumstances; our problem is that we don t do it flexibly or frequently enough. Once we establish strategy as the root of what we call Ennea-type (as Naranjo seems to) we can now move on to the significance of what it means to have all of the types in us. What we really have, of course, is access to all of the strategies. The degree to which we use those strategies, which is determined by constitutional and situational factors, leads to the degree of fixity of the various traits that stem from those strategies. In other words, even though I am an Eight (with a preferred strategy of striving to be powerful), I also demonstrate Five-ish (striving to be detached) traits because I use that strategy a lot and behaviors inspired by it have become conditioned into the wiring of my brain. Other Eights look different because their strategy preference order is different and they develop different fixed traits. This opens up a whole new way of looking at the Enneagram. Rather than focusing on the geometry of the diagram and working on oneself in a prescribed pattern, it becomes possible to focus on one s real needs if we understand how each of the nine strategies exhibits itself in our lives. Typically, people taking an Enneagram type indicator are told to look at their highest score as an indication of their type (or to pick it out of the top three scores) and then to ignore the other eight scores as irrelevant (or else some lip-service is paid to all the types being in us ). If, however, there is any relevance to your top score on a valid and reliable test, there must be some relevance to the lower scores as well. By examining your scores on such an assessment you can see which strategies are proximate and which are recessed. This allows you to look specifically at your life and see if you have a tendency to over-do or under-do a particular strategy and develop a plan for growth. My associates, Mark Bodnarczuk and Elin Larson of the Breckenridge Institute TM, and I have just developed an on-line tool called the Sikora SPI TM ( Strategy Preference Indicator ) that indicates preferences in both Ennea-type strategies and instinctual preferences. The report includes scores plotted on a radar graph for easy visual representation of not just the preferred strategy but the ranking of all of the strategies in order (see Figure One and Sidebar). The radar graph, in a sense, becomes a snap-shot of the psyche in terms of the strategies and Ennea-types. (Figure Two shows an example of the instinct profile, which I will write more about in a future article.) (A copy of the Sikora SPI TM Reliability and Validity Report is available by sending an to mark@breckenridgeinstitute.com.) 3

4 Figure One: Sikora SPI TM Strategy Profile TM Figure Two: Sikora SPI TM Instinct Profile TM Interpreting the Radar Graphs The radar graphs seen in Figures One and Two are trademarked visual representations of the nine Ennea-type strategies and the tree instincts at play. These graphs show the results of my scores on the Sikora SPI TM Enneagram test. The dots at each of the nine points of the diagram represent my scores in each of those strategies. The image created by connecting the dots is a snapshot of my personality, one that is much more accurate and much more useful than merely seeing ourselves as one type. I can look at my graph and see that, yes, I am an Eight, but that I am much more. I can see that I also rely on the strategies of striving to be outstanding (Three), striving to be detached (Five) and striving to be perfect (One) and that I should probably be careful about how I over-use those strategies. I can also see that I may under-use the strategies found at Nine, Six, and Four. Likewise, the graph in Figure Two portrays my scores on the instincts section of the Sikora SPI TM. (We use the words preserving, navigating, and transmitting for what are generally referred to as self-preservation, social, and sexual/one-to-one, respectively. I will explain those word choices in an upcoming article on the instincts.) This visual shows that my dominant instinct is navigating while my preserving instinct is underdeveloped. Take a moment to look at the graphs and then think about your own experience of your inner landscape. Do you see yourself as a single point on the diagram, or do the visuals here resonate more? 4

5 In addition to descriptions of the Enneatypes, the report provides guidance on how to tell if you are over- or under-developed in any of the strategies and what you can do about it. This approach is not simply a matter of staying stuck in the realm of ego fixation by in some way increasing fixation on another type. In the spirit of Aristotle s Golden Rule, happiness and effectiveness in life grow from effectively applying the right strategy in the right amount under the right circumstances. There is nothing wrong with, say, striving to be powerful. There is something wrong, however, with striving too much to be powerful in the wrong circumstances, or not striving hard enough to be powerful under appropriate circumstances. The ability to calibrate the strategies in real time (business-speak for being present and flexible ) leads to the dissolution of the fixity of obsolete responses that Naranjo wrote about. It is important to point out that this is not an abandonment of traditional Enneagram theory. Sunryu Suzuki said that the first mistake is to believe that there is a self; the second mistake is to believe that there is not. In the same both/and mindset, we are a particular personality type and we are not. Our preferred strategy (or our type) is the root of the bulk of our problems. It is a large part of the story, but it is not the whole story. I also agree that, as a general rule, there is value in looking at connecting points of the Enneagram as a guide for growth. That is, a Five generally needs to work on becoming more comfortable with applying the strategy of striving to be powerful, which is found at Point Eight of the Enneagram. However, that is a generalization and it s great for a lifetime plan for development. In reality, however, a particular Five may actually need to focus more on another strategy given the specific demands of his or her life. Learning to look at the Enneagram as if we really do have all nine strategies and that we really do demonstrate traits of all nine of the types allows us to plot a course for growth that fits the reality of our experience rather than the mathematical structure of the model. For additional information on the Sikora SPI TM, see the ad on page XXX, info@sikoraspi.com, or visit For a copy of the Sikora STI TM Reliability and Validity Report, please send an to mark@breckenridgeinstitute.com. The author welcomes feedback at Mario@mariosikora.com. 5