Recently I’ve been reading a little into DCNH theory. I’ve been trying to type people I know according to Gulenko’s descriptions.
I was just wondering if people have any comments about the relationships they have with people of each of the different subtypes?
I am H subtype and I have friends of all subtypes. I spend time mostly with H, followed by C/N and then D. I did used to have more D friends.
Atm I have 4 x H friends, 2 x N friends, 3 x C friends (one is my sister) and 3 x D friends. I am not that close to the D friends but they are newish friends/ an old friend who I don’t see much. I had 2 close friends in the past who were D type but for one reason or another I am not friends with them anymore.
H friends- I enjoy their presence, there is a gentleness in their manner and any differences in opinion/ moments of annoyance usually pass very quickly and don't cause tension. I almost instinctively know ‘where they are coming from’ and it’s not an issue. We have nice chats about life, common interests, sometimes our dreams. Supportive friends but not very good at giving practical advice. I don’t think we always understand each other’s problems but we are sympathetic.
C friends- I think of them as special and that I have a special bond with them. We have deep chats at times but it can be sporadic, other times it’s feels more awkward/ even dull, and we have misunderstandings in communications which can cause stress. One way or another, they make me feel alive. I might admire their manner, their humour, their intelligence or their approach to life. Advice on problems is hit and miss but generally I suppose it’s ok. Speak to them quite regularly.
N friends- Great for having in-depth conversation or discussion about personal views where there is a shared area of interest (e.g politics/relationships). There is a sense of respect and interest in each other’s views. Instinctively I think we know not to expose certain aspects of our true views/emotions (the parts that the other wouldn’t understand and wouldn’t know how to respond). Also good for chit chat and there are sometimes affectionate moments.
D friends- I think a good D type would be like a ‘best friend’. My best friends in the past have all been this type. But it’s not the easiest relationship as it can be quite intense. With friends in the past the relationship involved long, in-depth conversations about experiences, identity and our personal lives. Affectionate and some humour. I think we could be quite critical of each other, however and this led to misunderstandings and mistrust. There could also be a sense of competition. Also, we would spend a lot of time together- be part of the same ‘group’.
With D friends I have now- I’m trying to improve these friendships. They are people I go to for advice, to listen to each other’s dreams and woes, to have long catch ups about what’s going on in our lives. I feel quite energised by them. I think the end goal is to be comfortable with disagreeing with each other or in giving mutual constructive criticism. The honesty in the friendship can be healthy and lead to more openness. Also, we often have similar views about fairness and injustice.
I have provided some information below which people might like to read (take from Gulenko's site) about DCNH, also some info from an older article about DCNH relationship dynamics.
You can also find type specific subtype descriptions here: https://d3fnsdcdfam5fep5d4hhrc72oq-a...wledge/#podtyp
From Gulenko's site:
Today, the most common and used as a standard is the DCNH subtype system, when a subtype is considered as a strengthening of a temperamental pair of functions:
D (dominant) subtype (also sometimes referred to as a linearly assertive subtype) - as strengthening the functions of E + P - a variant of the sociotype, which is characterized by vigorous activity to achieve the set goals, and all possible resources, including human resources, are often involved in the implementation of these goals, in this way, such a person acts as a motivator for the people around him and the engine of the group;
C (creative) subtype (also sometimes referred to as a flexible and flexible subtype) - as strengthening the functions of I + F - a variant of the sociotype, which is characterized by non-standard perception of situations and non-standard reactions to them, the introduction of something new, that the group in which such a person is included, makes it possible to develop flexibly by choosing the direction of movement (moreover, such a group can be either an informal team or family, or a fairly large organization);
N (normalizing) subtype(also sometimes denoted as a balanced-stable subtype) - as an enhancement of the functions L + R - a variant of the sociotype, which is characterized by the identification, establishment and maintenance of norms and rules governing both the formal and informal side of life, the ordering of the surrounding space (in the broadest sense - from the allocation of a personal place for each thing to behavior in public places). This variant of the sociotype tolerates the situation of uncertainty and constant unpredictable changes in the rules worse than the others (however, it must be remembered that the comparison is between the variants within the same sociotype and the situation, which for the normalizing LSI will be perceived as a situation of uncertainty and cause comfort, for the normalizing LII may well be perceived as definite and regular,and therefore do not cause any moral discomfort);
H (harmonizing) subtype (also sometimes referred to as a susceptible-adaptive subtype) - as an enhancement of the functions S + T - a variant of the sociotype, which is characterized by sensitivity to changes in the broadest sense (from changes in one's own body to changes in the development of an organization), developed aesthetic flair. This variant of the sociotype tolerates aggravated conflicts and contradictions worse than the others, as a result of which it tends to "pour oil into a storm", and if it is impossible to eliminate the conflict, it tends to distance itself from the situation physically and psychologically.
The piece below is from an older article by Gulenko:
* Subtype relations that are symmetrical and attractive. Provisionally, this is called subtype duality. These relations appear between people of opposite subtypes and have a smoothing, harmonizing nature. They are difficult to start at first, but later partners begin to more deeply appreciate the advantages of the division of labor provided within these relations. The harder the conditions for existence - the more durable are these relations.
* Subtype relations that are symmetrical and repellent. They are called subtype identity. These relations appear between people of identical subtypes. These relations are characterized by creativity. Initially, these relations bring about a mutual uplifting, but over time differences accumulate within this dyad and mutual disappointment sets in. These relations typically don't pass verification for strength (of the relationship). They are useful for duplicating, reserve roles, preparation for rotation or change in leadership/staff.
* Subtypes relations that are asymmetric and attractive. Their applicable name is subtype benefit. Their nature includes pushing, urging, and one-sided activation. D-subtype prevails over C-subtype. C prevails over N-subtype. Normalizing, in turn, prevails over H-subtype. The harmonizer, by paradoxical means, influences the dominant participant. Thus the circle is complete [similarly to a benefit ring of sociotypes]. These relations are the main accelerating factor of group dynamics.
* Subtype relations that are asymmetric and repellent. To designate these relations we will use the term subtype supervision. They bear the nature of rate setting, retention within a framework, one-sided slowing down. They have the opposite direction compared to subtype benefit. They are useful in terms of correction and fixing of errors. Dominant inspects harmonizing. Harmonizing inspects normalizing. Normalizing impedes and corrects creative. And creative - dominant. Here we have the closing of the contour of the ring, only in reverse direction of the main vector.
Now for some brief conclusions on specialization of intertype relations:
* Identical subtypes contribute to each other's intellectual development (understanding, instruction, the generation of ideas in a region of interest);
* Benefit subtypes are most suitable for social activity, intensive work, outward expansion;
* Supervision subtypes are specialized for psychological stabilization, the balancing of dreams and reality; they are most suitable for friendship and training;
* Dual subtypes offer physical compatibility (lifestyle, intimate relations).