Imagine what would happen if you put together a committee consisting of a Dominant Style, an Influencing Style, a Steady Style and a Conscientious Style, and they all practiced The Golden Rule. I can see it all now: As they enter the conference room for the first meeting and the door closes, the Dominant Style says, “All right, everybody, let’s get this act together!  Here’s my plan.”

No sooner does the Dominant Style get the words out than the Influencing Style chimes in: “Who died and left you boss? We’ve got tons of time. Did you see what that manager was doing outside the room? It reminds me of a good joke I heard recently…” The Conscientious Style, who is patiently awaiting a turn in the conversation, says, “As I see it, there are three specific tasks we must accomplish in order to reach our ultimate objective. First …” The ever-patient Steady Style is likely the last one to speak, with, “Please, let’s not argue.  Let’s try to get along and work as a team.”

Some people might think that the committee would be much better off if all four members were of the same behavioral style. But, the best committee that anyone could choose would be a combination of all four Styles, as described above. Each particular style has strengths that complement the weaknesses of the others.

They would make an excellent team if they would all practice The Spirit of the Golden Rule. They should focus on each other’s strengths rather than criticize each other’s weaknesses or differences. These differences in style actually bring new perspectives to problem-solving,  creativity, and team-building that cannot be accomplished with a homogeneous group of Styles or a heterogeneous group of Styles that’s critical of each other’s style.