When I started my current work (Swedish software company) a few years ago, all new employees performed the “DISC” analysis (bought from a consultant firm). It was a fairly long questionnaire with situational questions and it was advised not to think too much about each question before answering. Stupid as it sounds.
Anyway, we got our profiles and at the follow up session we went through the colors and everything else about the model. Some of my colleagues were skeptical, some more enthusiastic (“this explains so much”). I was somewhere in the middle. For sure I recognize some of the behaviors with my profile, on the other side I questioned the validity mainly due to the way the foundation to the profile what conducted (the questionnaire). I also read the book but got the feeling that it was more of entertainment than the session and profiling we did (in the book it’s a lot of “real life” examples etc).
In work life we mostly used the “tool” to describe persons outside our organization. “The customers’ project manager in this project is very red”, would be something a sales rep could say at a hand of. They probably mean “He’s kind of a jerk but they pay so deal with it”. Although it was a pretty long time since I heard anyone use it. I also think that the article describes why the model is not sufficient even for describing people loosely.
Lastly I think that the article headline is kind of over exaggerating. I mean, yes many read the book and might have use it to talk about themselves and/or other people. Some organizations went to far and tax money was wasted. But mostly it was consumed as most other books and people got entertained. I haven’t encountered anyone who preached the message and method, more like a conversation starter. The people who swallow the message fully is probably already converted to the next personality model fraud. Or too busy reading other truths on Facebook.
Anyway, we got our profiles and at the follow up session we went through the colors and everything else about the model. Some of my colleagues were skeptical, some more enthusiastic (“this explains so much”). I was somewhere in the middle. For sure I recognize some of the behaviors with my profile, on the other side I questioned the validity mainly due to the way the foundation to the profile what conducted (the questionnaire). I also read the book but got the feeling that it was more of entertainment than the session and profiling we did (in the book it’s a lot of “real life” examples etc).
In work life we mostly used the “tool” to describe persons outside our organization. “The customers’ project manager in this project is very red”, would be something a sales rep could say at a hand of. They probably mean “He’s kind of a jerk but they pay so deal with it”. Although it was a pretty long time since I heard anyone use it. I also think that the article describes why the model is not sufficient even for describing people loosely.
Lastly I think that the article headline is kind of over exaggerating. I mean, yes many read the book and might have use it to talk about themselves and/or other people. Some organizations went to far and tax money was wasted. But mostly it was consumed as most other books and people got entertained. I haven’t encountered anyone who preached the message and method, more like a conversation starter. The people who swallow the message fully is probably already converted to the next personality model fraud. Or too busy reading other truths on Facebook.