Robert Leary

Curious take on personality typing. I've seen many over the years - quadrant based like Myers-Briggs, colors, lenses, ...colored lenses,... invariably based around the number four, which I always thought rather constraining. Well....this one starts with nine! and then goes geometric. I can see why this has a cottage industry selling it- jargon, complicated layers, tertiary analogues...

The subtitle says "The scientific Guide to...", well, it's rather proud of itself and you can read it faster than I can type it all out. BUT...in the introduction, the author says, "Like any personality typing system, the Enneagram is not a scientific method; it is subjective, and impossible to measure with any standard of precision or accuracy." So...a scientific guide to a nonscientific subject. (And it is impossible for any system to peg personality. The soft sciences can try, but all they can do is guess with statistical averages.)

The origins of the Enneagram theory are shrouded in mystery. There is some evidence to suggest that it originated in Alexandria, in the 4th century BC, evolving from the theories of Christian mystic Evagrius Ponticus (also known as “Evagrius the Solitary”)

Rather dramatic, that, and the typo should have been caught - Common Era, not Before Common Era!

Now, building on the nine (which aren't interconnected...look up "enneagram" and you'll see the arrows), there are "wing types, which are the adjacent numbers as influencers...how they came up with that idea is just one of hundreds of questions. And there are variants of the enneatypes and wing types. The author says "Some theorize that these variants are genetic remnants of our hunter-gatherer ancestors, reflections of the behavioral patterns that arose in the years before civilization." I'm curious as to who the "some" are. But not that curious. Anyway, nine types, eighteen wing types, each with their own names. AND the nine are grouped into triads! "It’s important to note that these triads are not meant to be interpreted in an exclusionary sense, which means that an Observer, for instance, as a part of the head triad, should not be presumed incapable of connecting with their own gut instincts or heart-felt emotions " Which clears things up quite well, right?

But wait! there's more! "For each enneatype, there are nine distinct possible levels of health." So we're tracking 81 flavors of types, not including variants, with three triads. Keeping up?

Based on the incredibly scientific single question typing provided, on the surface, I seem to fit into their "Reformer" category ("keen eye for small details and can see the big picture; this is the type that would recognize the one missing nail that could lead to the structural collapse of an entire eight-lane bridge. They want everything to be as good as it possibly can be, and hope to spare others from unnecessary pain and disappointment wherever possible (though they sometimes miss the mark here).", however, all the subtext stuff is way off for me ("idealists, optimists , and dreamers who believe in the possibility of a better world and a brighter future"). Reformers are "wonderful at quickly recognizing inefficiencies, inconsistencies, errors, and preventable delays; what’s more, given enough time and informational resource, Reformers are usually great at devising sustainable solutions for the problems they discover." BUT...I don't fit the "typically raised in environments where their perfectionism was rewarded." Not a perfectionist.

As to Observer, another of the types, "learned early in life that their minds were both their most secure fortresses and their most effective weapons for self-protection, so they’ve come to value knowledge, rationality, and logic very highly." Well, that works, too.Except..."Vice: Avarice and selfishness (desire to hoard knowledge and resources for the self in case of future scarcity problems). Ego fixation: Stinginess, retention. " Nope, nope, nope and nope.

Or, "Type 6 – The Loyalist Also known as: the devil’s advocate, the troubleshooter, the loyal skeptic, the questioner, the guardian, the pessimist, ". Going to give that a "check". "Loyalists are future-minded and focused on anticipation of that which is virtually impossible to foresee; typically, they are acutely aware of their surroundings, and have a highly developed sense of intuition." Okay, ixnay on the intuitionay... flies in the face of logic and reason. The author says "It is widely believed that Loyalists are the most common of all the enneatypes. (though this would be virtually impossible to measure with any certainty)." How is any of this certain?

The author does recommend seeking a "licensed Enneagram coach." Imagine my not surprised that there is an international organization that has accreditation programs. Seriously, they'd have to, and those people would have to do this full time to keep it all straight. The author says "The Enneagram isn’t only used for personal growth. It is often used by companies, organizations, schools, and religious institutions as a tool to improve group dynamics, encourage team-building, and remedy conflict." Of all the claims in this book, that one is a head scratchier (okay, most of this is): I have never seen or heard of this used anywhere but the one instance where I heard of it in the first place. I'm not a managerial hermit. As I said, I've seen lots of these typing systems. Just not this one.

Bottom line, like all of the other typing theories, if you think it works for you, then that is good. Just be aware that jargon means nothing to the layperson - "I'm a Gold", "I'm a Yellow" (different system), "I'm a thinking sensing judging introvert" - and don't think this is the only one. I've seen that a lot too.… (more)