I know that diagrams of LIFO profiles help some people understand the combination of styles that comprise a person's repertoire. Yet, every time I look at them I am bothered by the sterility of the picture. It's as if we are using a still photograph to capture a living person. While a good portrait can capture some signal qualities, it can only freeze frame existence and fail to provide the richness of the living texture of life.
We get a little closer to the truth by obtaining large sample sets of styles. If you've completed the learning style, selling client style, stress style, negotiation style, time style, reaction to change style, marriage style and parent style questionnaires, a suggestion of Gloria Katcher would help you realize a truer picture. She suggests creating the LIFO graph on celluloid - a separate one for each style and then laying them on top of one another. The static set now begins to take on a more changeling image. The boundaries of styles overlap, lengthen and shorten as you move from one set of situations to another. If one could create a computer graphic it would probably represent an ameba like configuration - clearly identifiable in one situation or another but shifting as the significance of situation, role and personal history come into play.
I recognize the profundity of this when I try to generalize from the general style to all situations. Looking at my own profile, Controlling-Taking and Supporting-Giving orientations dominate (for managerial situations, yes) but my Learning Style shows a shift a preference for more Conserving-Holding orientations, especially when I encounter difficulty. In negotiations my style becomes more Adapting-Dealing. When encountering stress my style combines the Controlling-Taking and Adapting-Dealing orientations, but under unfavorable conditions, the Conserving-Holding rises sharply. All this is true, despite the fact that overall the Life Orientation Survey predicts with a fair degree of accuracy. Try this for yourself and see what sense it makes for you. To increase the accuracy of prediction and understanding it is absolutely essential to know more about the reasons for variations of style from one situation to another and the interactions of the relevant forces.
Think, too of another factor. How come I am highly adapting-dealing in negotiation but not so much so normally, or when sailing I am very Conserving-Holding? Also, the fact I can be highly vested in an orientation in one situation while sparse in another, holds a fascinating implication. To change, then means not trying to build skills that are not there but rather trying to recognize the situational equivalence of meaning that allow me to transfer more readily the skills I do possess, to a situation where I am not utilizing a resource I already possess (an interesting thought for change management)?
One's intensity of orientation use can also change depending upon the interpersonal milieu. I find that my use of adapting-dealing behavior changes markedly if I am in the presence of others who are adapting-dealing. My score of "20" can soar to the heights of "30" or more. I am lively, humorous, quick with repartee - behavior which seems sadly absent in other conditions. It becomes exceptionally low when dealing with people heavily consumed with a Conserving-Holding orientation. Defensiveness when criticized doesn't seem to emerge when another person's intentions to help become perceived - a tone of voice, a smile, a grimace or fiery eyes evoke quite different behavior, despite the style preference.
In short, while the LIFOŽ provide striking illustrations of differences and predictive validity, they become seductively simplistic when trying to cope with the complexities of individual behavior. The model has to be dynamic- and so, too, the thinking of the licensee applying the method.