1 / 12

Multiple Patterns and iWAM Interpretation

Multiple Patterns and iWAM Interpretation. 2013 iWAM Professional Development Program. Multiple Patterns Agenda. Clarification More than one pattern . . . People (vs. Thing) “Insurance” (Protecting against mistakes) Your experiences. Clarification. jobEQ “Combination Patterns”

glenda
Télécharger la présentation

Multiple Patterns and iWAM Interpretation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multiple PatternsandiWAM Interpretation 2013 iWAM Professional Development Program

  2. Multiple Patterns Agenda • Clarification • More than one pattern . . . • People (vs. Thing) • “Insurance” (Protecting against mistakes) • Your experiences . . .

  3. Clarification • jobEQ “Combination Patterns” In addition to the 48 iWAM patterns (metaprograms), jobEQ computes 8 combination patterns based on the Operating Factor groups. • Institute “Multiple Patterns” By “multiple patterns” we are referring to several iWAM patterns that may simultaneously contribute to an individual’s behavior.

  4. jobEQ Combination Patterns Combination Patterns (BP1-BP8) provide the relative percent scores for the Operating Factors companion patterns: BP1: Action Level: Initiation vs. Reflecting & Patience BP2:Action Direction: Focus on Goals or on Problems BP3: Evaluation Reference: Individual Motives vs. External BP4: Task Attitude: Alternatives vs. Procedures BP5: Task Orientation: Breadth vs. Depth BP6: Communication Sort: Affective Neutral BP7: Work Environment Type: Group vs. Individual BP8: Work Assignment Type: Sole vs. Shared Responsibility

  5. iWAM Multiple Patterns “It is virtually impossible to understand complex human behavior on the basis of one variable or pattern.” Patrick Merlevede, jobEQ Conclusion based on experience: “We can often explain and understand why individuals behave a certain way in certain contexts based on the relative scores in their motivational and attitudinal patterns.”

  6. Multiple Patterns Data Sources jobEQ iWAM Management Report – Section 2 (Groups) “Social Behavior Patterns:” • Communication (Affective/Neutral) • Contact (Group/Individual) • Affiliation (Basic Motivation) • Assertive (Norms) • Indifference (Norms) • Tolerance (Norms) • Time (Interest Filter) Institute Application Papers http://www.iwaminstitute.com/iwam-multiple-patterns

  7. “People” vs. “Thing” • Affective Communication: May display more non-verbal communication behaviors than Thing-oriented individuals. • Group Orientation: Will tend to want more contact with others in the workplace than Thing-oriented individuals. • Shared Responsibility: May want to spread responsibility around rather than keep it to him- or herself. • Affiliation: Will tend to score higher on the scale that indicates a desire to belong and may reflect a tendency to care about what others think of or feel about them. • People: Will be more likely to want to work with people as part of their role or job

  8. Notes on People vs. Thing • First, given that about half, according to LAB Profile statistics, of the individuals will reflect either a People pattern or People/Thing combination, it may be a challenge to make some clear distinctions. • Second, having a Thing orientation does not necessarily equate to not caring about people. • Finally, having a Thing orientation in a people-related role is not necessarily a bad thing.

  9. “Insurance” Patterns • Problem Solving • Procedures • Past  • Achievement • Convincer Processes • Automatic (Low): Needs a lot of information to be convinced • Consistency (High): Needs to be convinced over and over • Period of Time (High): Needs time to consider information to be convinced

  10. Notes on “Insurance” • We tell every client that there are no right or wrong patterns—only patterns that work well or don’t work in certain roles and contexts or with certain individuals. • There is a possibility that one who had a number of patterns which assured a motivational base for avoiding mistakes could also be fairly rigid and inflexible. We find that to be the case with people who have the following combination of patterns: High Internal/Low External; High Procedures; High Sameness; High Past; and High Consistency. • If we were looking at leadership, we might find that such an individual lacked “agility.”

  11. Notes The session ended with a discussion of a participant’s client as example. He described the situation and noted that there was a high Consistency pattern and we asked what other patterns might you consider in trying to understand the situation? Here’s the list that emerged (and the individual’s relative %): • Internal / External (Low External – Saw it as criticism!) • Power (90%) • Affiliation (23%) • Achievement (56%) • Assertive (-12%) • Tolerance (17%) • Sole Responsibility (122%) A link to the GTM recording will be posted with this file on the web site.

  12. Institute for Work Attitude & Motivation 2510 South Brentwood Boulevard Suite 211 Saint Louis, Missouri 63144 314.961.9676 Phone 314.961.9678 Fax www.iWAMinstitute.com

More Related