Stephen R Covey

[UDP]

From what little I know about his personal side, he sounds like an I type. INTj?

[anndelise]

From what little I know about his personal side, he sounds like an I type. INTj?

Mormon

I've read some of his stuff...it's helpd in many ways...like the first 3-4 habits (I can't seem to make it past that though). I never thought to try typing him. I'll be interested in what others have to say.

[UDP]

My friend is a Mormon and E type.

(I can't seem to make it past that though)

You've got to get better at Habits 1-3!

I never thought to try typing him. I'll be interested in what others have to say.

Originally I thought Sj, but the more I actually opened the book, there was some T, and even NT. Maybe ENTj.... but I am not so sure. Seems to be very much a rational, as opposed to p type. I don't know anything about him, though, really.

[UDP]

Bump

[FDG]

At first sight I would have said ENTj. But if you think he's your identical, I'll agree with you.

[Rick]

Some years ago I was very much into his Seven Habits. I thought he could likely be an IEE with his emphasis on empathy and understanding other people's position, and also his friendliness and warmness on pictures.

However, eventually his philosophy began to seem more rational to me. I don't know if that's because he is a product of American or Mormon culture or because he is a rational.

So basically, I don't know! But I'd like to know.

Here's a great interview with him (start 35:00):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...en+covey&hl=en

[UDP]

He reminds me of a more matured UDP, with his emphasis on empathy.
I very much like his extensiveness and concise summation in terms of The Seven Habits. Reading some other "great" management/leadership books, like "LEADERS", it is completely not the same, not nearly as "Yeah, that's pointing at real stuff". In particularly, the way Covey very clearly saw how the same principles can apply in so many situations. That was very important to me.



I don't really know if he's an Identical,
but I doubt he's an ethical type.

Some years ago I was very much into his Seven Habits. I thought he could likely be an IEE with his emphasis on empathy and understanding other people's position, and also his friendliness and warmness on pictures.

Like I said, a more mature UDP, in terms of really understanding empathy and its usefulness towards the goal. The friendliness and warmness on pictures, though, hmm........ I don't know what to say about that. That may be a non-LII indicator of course, or perhaps one that has grown used to being in the spotlight so much. I don't know either.

[Topaz]

I read 7 habits and it didnt strike me as IEE but more EIE if anything. I see him as being rational in his approach for the most part. Lots of structure and focused planning. There is something very corporate, very business-ethics, very lets all pull together, institution something about him that seemed Beta to me. :wink:

[UDP]

I don't know. I think people fail to see the logic behind his "ethics".

[Rick]

I read 7 habits and it didnt strike me as IEE but more EIE if anything. I see him as being rational in his approach for the most part. Lots of structure and focused planning. There is something very corporate, very business-ethics, very lets all pull together, institution something about him that seemed Beta to me. :wink:

Could be. Perhaps we can separate out some of his "typocentric" or "culture centric" stuff from the universal principles?

Most of the things he talks about are universal principles that are in major religions and spiritual teachings (first independence, then interdependence, etc., "proactiveness," "win-win," "sharpen the saw," etc.) in some form or another.

Obviously, the planner stuff is a product of modern western culture and does not sound like something out of the mind of an IEE . Also, I found his examples of "empathetic listening" too rational and technique-oriented, despite the fact that this was what he was trying to get away from (the principles behind it seemed sound, though).

I don't know if his focus on synergy is a universal teaching. Some people seem to be naturals at the type of synergy he describes (esp. some IEEs I have known), while others seem to have a hopelessly different approach to group interaction. Maybe the idea of synergy is universal, but the emphasis on group synergy is his own twist (but then, he does give an example of one-on-one synergy).

Also, what he has done with his teachings (turn it into a business empire with all sorts of goods, gadgets, and promotional methods) does seem to be different from what an IEE would want to get out of life (more opportunities for individual contact with interesting people who can expand his experience). By building an empire and focusing on business consulting, he has somewhat removed himself from his audience in a way that would suit an LIE or EIE more (and probably other types).

[Topaz]

Also, what he has done with his teachings (turn it into a business empire with all sorts of goods, gadgets, and promotional methods) does seem to be different from what an IEE would want to get out of life (more opportunities for individual contact with interesting people who can expand his experience). By building an empire and focusing on business consulting, he has somewhat removed himself from his audience in a way that would suit an LIE or EIE more (and probably other types).

Agreed. From my experience I notice that IEEs like to keep things to a size they can personaly manage. When things begin to go beyond that I think they would rather someone else take over and reserve for themselves the position of consultant or guru. Businesses, esp. empires call for a lot of focus and control over the product and others lives. Personally, that would drive me crazy. Id be overwhelmed with all the information and decisions Id have to constantly make as well as intimidated by the people that would be counting on me. But thats just me .

[Rick]

Also, what he has done with his teachings (turn it into a business empire with all sorts of goods, gadgets, and promotional methods) does seem to be different from what an IEE would want to get out of life (more opportunities for individual contact with interesting people who can expand his experience). By building an empire and focusing on business consulting, he has somewhat removed himself from his audience in a way that would suit an LIE or EIE more (and probably other types).

Agreed. From my experience I notice that IEEs like to keep things to a size they can personaly manage. When things begin to go beyond that I think they would rather someone else take over and reserve for themselves the position of consultant or guru. Businesses, esp. empires call for a lot of focus and control over the product and others lives. Personally, that would drive me crazy. Id be overwhelmed with all the information and decisions Id have to constantly make as well as intimidated by the people that would be counting on me. But thats just me .

I think that's all pretty typical for IEEs. But I don't know how much of a management role Covey himself has. When you watch him in interviews (see my link above), he is clearly focused on the principles themselves (psychology, in essence) and doesn't make any mention of the whole business aspect.

[UDP]

I think that's all pretty typical for IEEs. But I don't know how much of a management role Covey himself has. When you watch him in interviews (see my link above), he is clearly focused on the principles themselves (psychology, in essence) and doesn't make any mention of the whole business aspect.

Which is probably why I like T7H + 8H so much.
The principles transcend mere 'business'.
But he also sees that any organization basically opperates in the same way.

It reminds me a lot of how LII's extinguish negative emotions through logic, as strati wrote. But of course, I could very well be using Covey's material for my own ends.

[Rick]

I'm retracting my version of IEE for Covey. I've been watching some videos of him in Spanish to practice my Spanish, and when he is teaching he always has a very stern expression that would be impossible for an IEE to keep up. (referring to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BK0EPXTOVJ0 - sorry for the wrong language), despite the fact that he smiles a lot on his pictures. Also, I think there are quite a few more arguments for a rational type than an irrational one. I had a socionics friend look at a video, and she said he looked like an LII, but I would still consider LSI, LSE, and even ESI (there's a lot of moralizing in the way Covey speaks, but maybe it is the Mormon overtones). Covey in his book refers to himself as being rather distant and aloof compared to his warm and personable wife. This suggests logic, or intuition, or both (and an argument against ESI, for sure). So basically, I think LII is likely, but I'm still considering a few other options.

One observation that goes against LII is that he seems physically quite sure of himself and uses wide, vigorous gestures. Also, in the video above he has chosen a format where is entire body is in view and he has nothing to hide behind, and he seems very sure of himself.

[aestrivex]

wow, looking at some of these videos, his philosophy couldn't be much dumber. but i can definitely see him as LII.

[Gilly]

For starters, I see lots of Anthony Hopkins in him.

His gestures are small and precise; not sweeping, but short and confident. His expressions hardly change at all, and he looks rather harsh. I would say probably LSI.

[Rick]

For starters, I see lots of Anthony Hopkins in him.

His gestures are small and precise; not sweeping, but short and confident. His expressions hardly change at all, and he looks rather harsh. I would say probably LSI.

Yes, the comparison with Hopkins is very good. I think LSI is at least as likely as LII. He's still an enigma to me. On the one hand, he seems to be talking about abstractions. On the other hand, he has a very strict and forceful delivery and has percussive speech like an SLE or LSI. Also, note that in the first video posted he has a sinister laugh -- he chuckles about things that aren't meant to be jokes, and has a heavy gaze.

[FDG]

LIE

[Rick]

I have no idea who Red Foreman is, but UDP suggested him in an LSI thread, and he sure looks like Covey:
http://images.google.com/images?hl=e...-8&sa=N&tab=wi

[Rick]

LIE

What are your reasons?

This is a bizarre case where Covey's pictures (at least those here) are totally different from his actual expressions in interviews and during speeches.

[aestrivex]

looking at that video again, LSI makes a lot of sense.