I think it is all too easy to become involved with the LIFOŽ style labels for they catch something readily apparent, offer some simple ways of organizing a lot of diverse observations and even have predictive power. Fascination with the categories can create a hardening of the thinking processes and obscure the intent and philosophy behind the LIFOŽ method.
The ideas of Fromm, Rogers and Drucker underlie the method. Stuart and I were interested in finding a new way to leverage the talents and resources of people for synergistic productivity in organizations. Fromm's interlinking of the strengths and weaknesses provided insights about a variable dimension that could be managed, assuming knowledge of the intensity of the behavior in question and the nature of the environmental setting and stimuli. The valuing process that was described suggested the key for freeing the use of valuable characteristics and tying into the individual's own mode of expression to capitalize on resources.
Combined with a recognition of differences, appreciation of what different strengths can contribute, linkage to others (augmentation and blending) and integration of efforts can control excesses and allow individuals and groups to exceed their usual "grasps". This is the belief - the value of the approach that we are emphasizing. The processes of building acceptance and understanding that Rogers emphasizes, are some of the basic ones for individual and group growth - they guide the self and team developmental efforts that we encourage in our applications.
The inherent model of intention, behavior and impact relates to the issues of change conceived within a managerial framework. Over and over again, it is the measurement of impact viewed against the background of goals, wish, aims and desires that provides the basis for change (or the incentive), when discrepancies are encountered to examine the "unconscious forces" and complex personality issues that need to be understood before management and thereby change, is possible.
I would like us to present these ideas as forcefully and positively as we can - to examine their implications with our students. If the only thing that happens after one experiences a LIFOŽ seminar is a memory of four labels (and often poorly remembered - How many times have you heard someone say Conservative Holding?) then we have failed to communicate the message. Worse, we have contributed to an image of the LIFOŽ Method as merely a labeling device and thus source area.
In my own experience, it is the broader view that causes people to believe value has been offered. One of our Japanese managers wrote "For the first time, I realized that I do not have to apologize for myself - that there are some loveliness of being that I hold within myself - that there are stars in my heavens to view, despite the clouds." A couple told me that when they began to look at what they had to offer, instead of their faults, it provided a new bridge to a more satisfying marriage. Or another manager - a CEO of a company, proud of his human relations orientation, who sadly said he realized how little attention he had paid to the impact of what he did - he had fallen into the trap of believing that good intentions were enough. Or from a recent consultation where two hostile managers realized that their differences were not related to goals but styles and habits - and that there was room for both to provide significant contributions to the effort - not to forget the group of Bank executives who woefully realized that they really needed the missing strengths of Adapting Dealing that had led to horrible customer and public relations. I would like us to be known by the insights generated by the experiences we provide, the assistance given to solving problems more creatively and humanely and the ability to create appreciation for all of the different strengths there are around us. It is our mission to do no less!