An OK Personality Theory for Recruiters

An OK Personality Theory for Recruiters Im OK, make sure youre ok..no matter how long it takes.lyrics, Im OK, Youre OK, by the 70s punk group the Dickies KNOT OK/ansehen Michael MoffaGiven that there are so many personality-type classifications that are floated, many of which sink after even the casual scrutiny test, its nice to find one that is at least on intelligent inspection leid only interesting and fun, but also useful and durable.One in particular that Ive always found helpful in describing, explaining and predicting behavior and motivation is the Transactional Analysis theory of (notlage) OK interactions between and among people. Simple, clear, easily remembered, logically structured and empirically well-supportedby common sense and daily observation as well as by clinical psychological analogues, what I shall call the (bedrngnis) OK Theory may be very helpful to you in identifying and ma naging your recruitment interactions with the Big Three Cs candidates, clients and colleagues.A Brief OverviewA classification of 2-person interactions inspired by Eric Berne, author of the best-selling Games People Play, and developed by Thomas Harris in his book Im OK, Youre OK, the 4-fold 1970s categorization of types of interactions is utterly simple and mnemonic (easily remembered). Just imagine any two people and their attitudes toward each other on any specific occasion (a state) or their habitual attitudes and dispositions toward each other (as traits of personality or character).Adapting the Harris-Berne framework for the purpose of this explication, here OK can be informally and approximately rendered as notlage viewed with negative emotions, such as suspicion, blame, hate or doubt and not regarded as inferior.1. Im OK-Youre OK2. Im OK-Youre Not OK3. Im Not OK-Youre OK4. Im Not OK-Youre Not OKThe first one, Im OK-Youre OK describes the attitude that I dont blame, or have d oubts, hate, suspicions or a sense of inferiority regarding either you or me. An applicant who landseems at ease with a recruiter, doesnt put on airs, is not suspicious, guarded, critical, rude, defensive, self-deprecating, insecure, obsequious, unctuous, hostile, aggressive, or otherwise off is in all likelihood approaching the interaction with a very egalitarian, democratic, fair-minded and open attitude.Not only is this a cultural ideal in democratically-minded eqalitarian societies like that of the U.S., it is a common clinical and therapeutic ideal for people striving for self-help and self-improvement and not a bad goal to aim at for the rest of us.Sex in the City, Patterns in the OfficeMy hunch is that the enormously popular Sex and the City TV series and movies had the character Carrie Bradshaw, played by Sarah Jessica Parker, narrating each episode because she seemed to have most closely approximated this very even-handed, fair-minded type and ideal role-modelor so I and va rious female friends have thought.On the other hand, Samantha Jones (Kim Cattrall), the most sexually predatory of the four characters in Sex and the City is, by consensus among those Ive asked and in my judgment, the Im OK-Youre not OK typebut mostly in her situations and dealings with men, which, of course, did not exhaust her interactions with people, even if they exhausted the men (in both senses of exhaust).For her, the Im OK-Youre not OK stance was much more than an occasional state It was a pronounced trait, but one most prominently displayed in her frequent encounters with men.herbei Im OK-Youre Not OK counterpart in recruitment is best exemplified by a writer I interviewed in Tokyo for a position with Business Insight Japan Magazine, for whom I was the editor-in-chief in the late 90s. Not an apprentice writer, he had strong street cred, having been, as he was quick to mention, published in Newsweek, an accomplishment of which he seemed inordinately proud. The problem was th at he regarded his talents as a license, not as a gift.Confidence that had mutated into arrogance was evident the moment I offered him a coffee As I did so, he said with a clearly imperious tone of voice, Do you have real cream, or crap? For me, the interview was basically over at that point, and we didnt hire him, Newsweek or no Newsweek. What went wrong?As I saw it, he was approaching the interview from the Im OK-Youre Not OK positionsomething a job applicant should never do, unless its for a posting as strutting SS Obergruppenfhrer and the placement is a shoe- or boot-in.Of course, labeling his attitude is not enough. But it is a good, insightful first step in understanding the dynamics and revealed patterns of behavior in situations like that.Making Use of the LabelsFirst, it makes it clear how relational interactions are. Instead of trying to figure him out by making him the entire focus of your reflections, your task becomes trying to make sense of the relationship with you an d what would tempt a candidate to try to run that kind of Im OK-Youre Not OK scenario with you, given that, like Samantha of Sex and the City, the targeting is likely to be selective. Of course, that unwelcome OK/Not OK strategy could be a blanket one, used on everybody. In that case the trait is pervasive, persistent and more likely to be incorrigible.Another benefit to be derived from the OK model is that it can sharpen your detection skills You may be able to extrapolate something very important from an otherwise ostensibly innocent and innocuous bit of behavior that seems to raise no red flags, e.g., an applicant telling you that although the prospective employer companys total sales belastung year were pretty good, their rate of growth was flat. Of course, the facts are the facts. But the way in which they are cited, e.g., the tone, intent or the timing and context of the comment, e.g., anything that suggests the applicant is too good for the company, can serve as a coal mine c anary warning of possible trouble on-site, after placement. Moreover, identifying the pattern as OK/Not OK may facilitate the connection of previously unconnected dots of the applicants behavior.The Unhappy Dream EmployeeThe Im Not OK-Youre OK applicant can, for certain kinds of companies or bosses, be the dream employee Saddled with self-doubt, or shaky self-esteem, someone with this stance is very likely to make strange efforts to please to fear, as opposed to simply dislike, confrontation and conflict with anyone with whom he interacts on this Not OK/OK fundament and to waive various rights.Symptoms of the pattern might include hesitating to take earned time off, hesitating to voice any complaint or criticism, tolerating abusive co-workers, or in extreme instances displaying a pronounced tendency to fawn or grovel.On the positive side, a milder version of this can be manifested as a consistently sunny disposition and willingness to pleasewhich, of course, certainly does not mean that any given happy person must feel he or she is not OK. Just as two men may refuse to fight each other for totally opposite reasonsone from fear, the other from the self-discipline of a martial artist, any two employees can display the same behavioral trait, such as a pleasing manner, but from entirely different, indeed opposite motives and self/other-perceptions.To intelligently apply the OK Theory perspective, you must apply it to discern underlying motivation and emotions as well as to raw behavior, such as tone of voice, body language and actions.Of course, helping an employee change his or her stance from Im Not OK-Youre OK to Im OK-Youre OK can benefit everyone, e.g., through encouragement of a more proactive approach to work and workplace relationships. Sometimes this can be as simple as sincerely complimenting the employee for a job well done other times the Not OK/Ok stance will require prolonged and varied efforts that may nonetheless not effect significant or enduring change.Welcome to Our NightmareThe final category, Im Not OK-Youre Not OK is the nightmare pattern. The analogue of this in clinical psychology seems to be that of the hopeless and panicked hysteric who doubts, fears, suspects or is otherwise negative about not only himself or herself, but also youand possibly everyone else, as well as the situation. Interestingly, some classical clinical psychology classifications, viz., the schizoid, manic-depressive and hysterical, plus the well-balanced personality seem to roughlyonly roughlymap into these four (Not) OK types, as OK/Not OK, Not OK/Ok, Not OK/Not OK and OK/Ok patterns, respectively.The Im Not OK-Youre Not OK stance is likely to be manifested as on-the-job hopelessness, helplessness and a tendency to catastrophize and see problems as unmanageable crises. Thats because, from the perspective of this pattern, there is no one to turn to or depend on for a way out of real or imagined emergenciesthe latter being more likely the more hel pless and hopeless one feels.On the positive side, the Im Not OK-Youre Not Ok posture does have one thing going for it.Its very democratic.