keirsey temperament analysis

Ersin GEZER
Keirsey Temperament and Self-Analysis Paper
In the Pursuit of Self-Awareness
ENGR 408
15 October 2007
“…You can read a thousand books and have a thousand people tell you what the
right methodologies are–but to be anywhere, you have to start from your center
and your core. It’s from that place of stillness where you’ll know how to move
forward and how to move others with you.” -Karen Tse
Seems to me that we are all victims to our own comfort zones and beliefs as we get lost
in the long pursue of finding the precise "right" definition of the profile of a true leader. On the
other hand, we overlook more important point that in life, knowing who you are or even how
others identify you as a person is most critical to success as a leader. Are you introverted?
Extroverted? Whimsical? Deliberate? What kinds of things drive your decisions? … Total of 70
interesting questions from online “Keirsey Temperament Test”, simple road map which helps one
to discover oneself. By taking the temperament test offered by Keirsey we were able to begin
delving into who we are—particularly, by how we act and go about our decisions. The analyses
herein examine my temperament, its associated behavioral patterns, a self-reflection on its
accuracy, and its leadership implications. These analyses are followed by a temperament
interaction matrix, and concluded with the comparative analysis of the temperaments onto the
current ENGR-493 project group to which I currently belong.
The Keirsey Temperament Sorter , which is a self-assessed personality questionnaire,
designed to link human behavioral patterns to four temperaments and sixteen character types. For
better visualization I have summarized all 4 different temperaments with their each 4 sub-
divisions in following table.
Temperament Types

Subdivisions
ENGR 408
15 October 2007
Artisan (SP) Guardian (SJ) Idealist (NF) Rational (NT)
Promoter(ESTP) Supervisor(ESTJ) Teacher(ENFJ) Fieldmarshal(ENTJ)
Crafter(ISTP) Inspector(ISTJ) Counselor(INFJ) Mastermind(INTJ)
Performer(ESFP) Provider(ESFJ) Champion(ENFP) Inventor(ENTP)
Composer(ISFP) Protector(ISFJ) Healer(INFP) Architect(INTP)
Among the four possible temperaments (Guardian, Artisan, Rational, Idealist), Keirsey
Temperament Sorter decided I was of the “Rational” temperament type. According to the
temperament mini-report, “Rational” temperament is described as the “problem-solving
temperament.” In further analysis of my temperament, it conjectures that I enjoy analysis of
systems in order to make them better. It highlights that these systems can range from
environmental or biological ones to technical ones depending on my personal interest... My given
Keirsey temperament type also indicates when I am selecting my solving approaches; I am likely
to look at theoretical and underlying concepts as well as pragmatic applicability of the solution to
the problem. The last part of the assessment believes that I do work efficiently and steadfastly,
without any regard to political correctness, often using innovative ideas. As a result of the
aforementioned, one might infer that I am more prone to act a certain way in specific situations.
Based on my Keirsey temperament type one might expect that I’m addicted to work, I am unlikely
doing non-academic things. Advancing its claim one step further, my Keirsey type may even
interpreted in a way that I’m a loner. Another presumption made by the Keirsey analysis is that
during the period when I seek a result, I am likely not to care about the way I arrive at it. Perhaps
my temperament might also lead one to think that because of my pride and strive for highly
effective work that I’m dogmatic and rude in my decision making processes and consequently
that I don’t work well in groups.
One might argue that only four possible temperaments and total of 16 personality types
as the possible combinations of the basic preferences, Keirsey Temperament Analysis is being
ineffective. At certain degree I believe that lack of depth to the analysis might leave some room
for an error which might result in inaccurate assessing the certain personality. On the other hand
not to forget Keirsey temperament sorter is not concerned with "what's in mind", but what people
do. It is interested in what are the long-term behavior patterns: temperament. As for my personal

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
experience, the basic profile description provided through the analysis was over 90 % consistent
with my perceived personality. The most outstanding description was the part Keirsey indicated
that in working with problems I often look first to abstract theory and concepts where I try to find
solutions that have application in the real world. This is truer than true as I often spend as much
time researching a problem rather than actually solving it which creates great conflict to meet
some strict pre-set due dates. While this does detract from my overall efficiency, I am often able
to attack the problem from different angles than someone who just simply plugs and chugs
numbers into an equation. It is this look to fundamentals that leads to what I’d describe as
innovative solutions. I cannot even function without first attempting to see how something works
and why it works the way it does. Another relevant or maybe scaring part of the profile description
was I as a part of rational temperament group having an insatiable hunger to accomplish goals.
Certainly, it is true because it is likely for me to work on the given project two straight nights with
no sleep just to accomplish it in a fashion that from every little piece of the work I can get same
amount of satisfaction and enjoyment.
Regardless of the given profile description is being applicable to me for the most part,
there were some points Keirsey Analysis made some major errors. Rather than being
condescending while interacting with others as it is described, I am mostly sympathetic toward
the problems of others and in group work especially, I’d rather make sure everyone understands
what is going on than moving forward with the project. As for the second solid error in the
analysis was that being an introverted and loner type. Introverted maybe but loner I do not think
so. Despite my time to time arousing timidity, when I need to work in groups it’s generally not a
very trying task. I don’t mind sharing my opinions with others, especially if I feel I have something
to offer the team.
After reviewing the simplest possible profile description through the Keirsey
Temperament Analysis, I decided to look a little further and take the whole assignment to the next
level with little cost of 4.95$. Even making this decision was good indication that I was truly part of
the “Rational” temperament group. Further detailed Keirsey profile report indicated that I was
placed in the “Inventor (ENTP)” as a part of subgroup of “Rational” temperament. “(ENTP)”,
in which each letter stand for;

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
In addition to having profile description to “Rational Inventor”, I get to see the short
analysis of my Career Considerations, Love and Relationships, and Learning Style. As a Rational
Inventor I was described to have an entrepreneurial spirit and enjoy inventing prototypes, gadgets
and systems that help solve problems. Rather than being the designer of the system or project, I
am likely want to find an ingenious way to make it happen. Most importantly through venturing
further analysis of my profile description, I have realized the Keirsey Temperament analysis being
more effective than ever. At the end I think Keirsey did a pretty good job of, at least in my mind,
describing my personality with good amount of details.
Some of the behaviors I’m prone to display according to Keirsey could have beneficial or
adverse effects on my capability of being a leader. As being part of the sub- temperament group
“Rational Inventor (ENTP) “, I might have head start based on leadership capability compared to
other three subgroups within the “Rational” main temperament. Based on the description, I tend
to focus on outer world of people and things rather than turning totally into my inner world.
Extraverted leaders are drawn to interact with the external world and to bounce ideas off people.
They are likely to bring people together to explore issues. However, on the other hand the
extraverted executive may overwhelm and intimidate people, push ideas prematurely, and
unintentionally reveal confidences. While introverts seek out solitary time in order to process
internally, this may cause others to perceive them as aloof, distant, unapproachable and even
arrogant. As for the decision making I tend to be primarily relying on the logic and objective

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
analysis of cause and effect. As a potential leader being “Thinking” oriented all the time might be
very annoying because by doing so logical decisions may seem to be missing the boat by
ignoring values and ideals, when seen through the perspective of a person who is more of a
feeling oriented person. For the final stage of critical analysis of my leadership capability; I tend to
favor flexible and spontaneous approach to life and like to keep my options open. This means
that by giving me a lot of extra space I mostly put myself under pressure and seek the ability to
continually succeed during crunch time. This is one of the trait leader should have but constant
pressure might create a lot of stress which might have long run effect on the efficiency at the work
place. Additionally, another possible drawback of my temperament type might be my seeking of
fundamental concepts. Not only does it slow down the process of projects, but it’s often
something other people aren’t interested in. Leaders need to be efficient and effective. Many
people do not want to follow someone who goes slowly, even if it means they will have a greater
understanding of their purpose. This quality just makes it a little more difficult to get people on
board with me. Therefore, as evidenced by the aforementioned, my temperament type makes
me susceptible to behavior that can be both good and bad, depending on the situation, and the
degree to which I exhibit the traits. The question, what type makes the best leader, cannot be
answered out of my critical discussion. The only question that can be answered at the end is
which type is more predominant in leadership positions.
On the following page “Keirsey Matrix” can be found showing what I believe the result
would be between different temperament types. My main starting point to generate this little
matrix was my ENGR- 493 Project Group. Teaming up with 3 “Guardian” temperament types of
people Moses, Gina and Caitlin, really made it easy to set up the interaction chain between
“Rational” and “Guardian” types. From there I moved to thinking of strengths and weaknesses of
the combination of different temperament types. To draw an example from the matrix, one of the
weaknesses I have between “Idealists” and “Guardians” is a conflict of core values. This conflict
might cause problems in the beginning, but in the end both parties will adapt. The relationship
will ultimately teach the “Idealist” to deal with conflict, and the “Guardian” that creativity and
imagination are important in the production process. I believe that in all cases each side will in
due course help the other in areas they are lacking, even if only moderately. Not forget to

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
mention, as we discussed in class partnerships are all about making concessions and making
compromises. Even though I have things separated as strengths and weaknesses, I believe
they are only short-run problems. At the end all can be summarized into a pot game where the
Idealist wants to stir the pot, the Guardian wants to keep everything in the pot, the Rational wants
to analyze what's in the pot, and the Artisan wants to tip the pot over.
In conclusion, this assignment has provided important new perspectives on
understanding personality analysis and temperament conflicts. In the trials and tribulations of life,
every one of us develops some areas of ourselves more thoroughly than other areas. With this in
mind, it becomes clear that we cannot box individuals into prescribed formulas for behavior.
However, we can identify our natural preferences, and learn about our natural strengths and
weaknesses within that context. Furthermore repetitive critical analysis throughout the paper
helped me in great deal because it allowed me to see and understand the weakness in my own
leadership characteristics, which now enables me to see those crack points and try to strengthen
them. Keirsey Temperament Test provided some sort of baseline to my very own personality
where I have felt awake; knowing who I am and what I enjoy doing, and being able to recognize
my very own skills, strengths and weaknesses, as well as my potential effect on other people.
The more you know yourself, the more effectively you can adapt, change, grow and become
powerfully more effective to give inspiration to those who
KEIRSEY
MATRIX
My temperament
type
RATIONAL
STRENGTHS
ARTISAN
STRENGTHS
GUARDIAN
STRENGTHS
IDEALIST
STRENGTHS

RATIONAL
WEAKNESSES
ARTISAN
WEAKNESSES
GUARDIAN
WEAKNESSES
IDEALIST
WEAKNESSES
1. Critical
2. laid back
3. Arrogant
4. Stressed by
incompetence
1. Impulsive
2. Require
attention
3. Impatient
(Playful)
4. Stressed by
constraint
(can be
inattentive or
unstable)
1. Hesitant to
change
2. Poor
improvisation
skills
3. Can be
intolerant
4. Stressed by
abandonment
1. Unrealistic
2. Withdrawn
3. Impractical
4. Upset by
conflict (selfpitying)
1.Focused
2.Strategic
3.Pragmatic
4.Hunger for
achievement
Integrate their
intuitive ideas
during strategic
planning; promote
logic when
impatient
Include them in
strategic planning
sessions; integrate
old procedures
with new systems
to ensure solid
structure and focus
on the given task
Use logic to
navigate through
abstract ideas;
extract positives
from unrealistic
suggestions to
obtain symbolic
awareness
1.Motivating
2.Optimistic
3.Skillful
4.Present time
oriented
Discourage
pessimism
towards
change; utilize
their critiquing
skills; provide
motivation in
difficult
situations
Provide them
structure
during
changes;
encourage
trailblazing in
leadership
context;
recognize their
work
Promote team
optimism when
acting selfabsorbed;
encourage
thought
even when
unrealistic
ENGR-493 Project Group Temperament and Intelligence Analysis:
1.Organized
2.Cooperative
3.Reliable
4.Cautious
Listen to their
ideas;
permit
independence
but
maintain
structure
and involvement
with team
processes
Give
leadership
responsibilities;
Promote team
loyalty;
hard to avoid
Speed conflict
"An institution is the lengthened shadow of one person..." −− Voltaire
Promote creative
solutions; keep
grounded on the
present tasks and
goals, use team
meetings when
acting withdrawn
ENGR 408
15 October 2007
1.Perceptive
2.Ethical
3.Diplomatic
4.Compassionate
Promote team
ethics when they
are uncooperative;
be diplomatic
when they criticize
others
Analyze
underlying truths
behind impulsive
actions; be a
model exhibitor of
patience
Give
responsibilities;
provide structure;
act as a mentor in
new scenarios;
promote ethics

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
As Voltaire once said, people bring their past experiences; people come with their
personalities (their perceptions, attitudes and values). People also come with a particular set of
expectations. The priorities and expectations of persons comprising a group can work effectively.
My understanding of personality theory took a giant leap forward as I decided to analyze
our ENGR-493 Project Group to foresee any personality or interest conflict problem between
individuals which might be the reason of recent drop in the group efficiency. Through critical
analysis of the case at least at the very personal level I would like to expand my understanding on
our group working dynamics and personality differences based on the Keirsey Temperament
types. With a solid understanding of group dynamics as I will have a better understanding of how
my team is progressing and what I personally can do extra to facilitate positive outcomes.
My intended plan for this analysis;
1- Create Keirsey Temperament Pool
2- Based on prior group experience and given Keirsey Temperament place each individual
into sub- temperament groups
3- Finalize temperament + intelligence analysis and draw conclusions from whole
experience and share observations with the rest of the group next meeting.
Over the weekend I have contacted each individual group member and recorded their
Keirsey Temperament Type for further analysis in following rough data pool;
Group Member Name Keirsey Temperament Type The Notion
Ersin GEZER RATIONAL (Inventor) (ENTP) NT = “THINK”
Gina ANSELMO GUARDIAN (?)(?) SJ = “HAVE”
Caitlin ZANKOWSKI GUARDIAN (?)(?) SJ = “HAVE”
Moises EDELMAN GUARDIAN (?)(?) SJ = “HAVE”
My primary data collection result indicated that there are two main Temperament
dynamics exist in our group. These dynamics are always operating in a situation, and if we
become polarized along these dimensions as we interact with others, communication can

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
become extremely difficult. On the other I believe that is false perception to start with analyzing
based on “GUARDIAN” and “RATIONAL” main group descriptions. For more accurate analysis, it
would be almost necessary to place every individual one of the sub- temperament categories
under the Guardian main group.
Before I start making any type or level of comparison I have set up following table which
includes 16 possible character types based on Keirsey Temperament Analysis.
ISTJ GUARDIAN
Inspector
ESTJ GUARDIAN
Supervisor
ISTP ARTISAN
Craftsman
ESTP
ARTISAN
Doer
ISFJ GUARDIAN
Nurturer
ESFJ GUARDIAN
Provider
ISFP ARTISAN
Gentle Artist
ESFP ARTISAN
Performer
INTJ RATIONAL
Mastermind
ENTJ RATIONAL
Field marshal
INFJ IDEALIST
Counselor
ENFJ IDEALIST
Teacher
INTP RATIONAL
Architect
ENTP
RATIONAL
Inventor
INFP IDEALIST
Healer
ENFP IDEALIST
Champion
Starting with Moises Edelman each turn I’ll match each individual with an appropriate
sub-group. Based on my group work experience with Moises he seems stable and practical, he
values security very vividly. On the other hand time to time he is depended on to some degree of
follow through. Based on my reasoning and personal experience with him NURTURER (ISFJ)
seems very applicable to his overall virtual performance on this class project. Following Moises, I
started recalling some information about Gina Aselmo. She is the only group member beside me
holds special ENGR-493 project folder. This is a good virtual indication for me that she is well-
organized person and takes the assignment at hand seriously. In group dynamics, she seems
hard working towards identified goals. When she is given to search for map, I was expecting that
she is going to work steadily toward this identified specific goal. With overall her performed
qualities in mind, I could confidently put her under the Inspectors (ISTJ) sub-group under the
temperament type called “Guardians”. As for our last remaining group member Caitlin, she is not
much of a technical person but rather she seems to be good at a broad range of interpersonal
skills. During our very recent decision making process in which we have to pick between drilling a
well or just focusing on existing chlorinator to redesign. To defend her side of an argument, she

Abstract
or
Concrete?
ENGR 408
15 October 2007
stated that having a working system at hand we should not waste time on researching possible
better solutions which might require existing system to be replaced. She thought the idea of
replacing the whole drinking water system was carrying too much risk that we won’t be able to
carry on within this project. With her valuing personal security over taking risk type and, practical
and traditional ways of dealing with conflicts patterns in mind, I believe Supervisors (ESTJ) sub-
group would be highly applicable for her.
At this point of analysis each group member was identified with one of sub temperament
groups. According to existing types of temperaments within the group, I have modified
Temperaments and Intelligence Types Matrix as follows;
Martian (N)
Introspective
Earthling (S)
Observant
Temperaments and Intelligence Types
Temperament Role Role Variant
Cooperative
or
Utilitarian?
Rational (NT)
Strategic
Guardian (SJ)
Logistical
Directive
or
Informative?
Engineer (NTP)
Constructing
ERSIN GEZER
Administrator (STJ)
Regulating
GINA ANSELMO
CAITLIN ZANKOWSKI
Conservator (SFJ)
Supporting
MOISES EDELMAN
Expressive
or
Reserved?
Inventor (ENTP):
Devising
Supervisor (ESTJ):
Enforcing
Inspector (ISTJ):
Certifying
Protector (ISFJ):
Securing
By using the Temperaments and Intelligence Types tables, I have created “Group
Internal Work Flow Schematic”. One of the main advantages of this schematic is that it provides
clear visual of group task interdependency. Furthermore, when I present my newly generated

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
theory about group task tackling strategy during our next group meeting, schematic is designed to
be user friendly enough so that anyone could print out, understand and return with feedback with
no time wasted.
ENGR-493 PROJECT Group Internal Work Flow Schematic
With each member directly entitled to their role in group dynamics, I see that nice blend
of people, each contribute a special talent. As my role of as an engineer I expected to be more of
a task-oriented team member who enjoys providing the team with good technical information and
data does his or her homework, and pushes the team to set high performance standards and to
use their resources wisely. As for Gina and Caitlin who are listed under Administrator role, they
are expected to be process-oriented members who are an effective listener and facilitator of
involvement, conflict resolution, consensus building, feedback, and the building of information,
relaxed climate. Lastly Moises being under the Conservator role, he is expected to be more
skeptic member who questions the goals, methods, and even the ethics of the team is flexible
and open to new ideas; is willing to pitch in and work outside his or her defined role; and is able to
share his personal vision on any given decision making process with other team members.

ENGR 408
15 October 2007
In conclusion with this personal analysis, I have tried to utilize the information gathered
from the Keirsey Temperament analysis into efficient use by implementing into my group
individual role analysis. My main theoretical concentration for this work was that the notion;
effective leaders synthesize complex information from various, and sometimes conflicting,
sources into basic, actionable principles and determine who could realize these principles.
Therefore, effective leadership includes having great insight and understanding of group
processes and dynamics (i.e., how to do it) and people (i.e., who can do it). I thought this would
be a wonderful opportunity to deepen my understanding of these kinds of conflicts and group
dynamics by actually analyzing my own project group.