Are you one of those creative types that have problems with time management? Or are you a business leader or manager who struggles to cope with the “always late” attitude and rather chaotic work styles of your creative subordinates? If you answer any of these questions with yes, then get into a series of three articles on the important topic of effective time management for creative people. Today, let’s start by understanding the time management dilemma of the innovation economy.
Understanding personality types
People differ greatly in their approaches to life and work; understanding one’s own preferences and those of your colleagues is key to effectively and productively managing yourself and others. Nowadays, the most popular instrument to measure and describe differences in the personalities of people is the so-called “Myers-Briggs Personality Type Inventory.”
The framework was mainly developed by the Swiss psychologist Carl Jung, who suggested three different dimensions to capture individual differences: The first dimension looks at how you get energy, and characterizes you as either an Extravert or Introvert (E vs. I). The second preference captures how you gather and give information, which assesses the difference of being iNtuitives and Sensors (N vs. S). Thirdly, how you make decisions largely depends on whether you are a Thinker or a Feeler (T vs. F). Later on, Isabel Myers-Briggs added a fourth dimension that describes how you prefer to live in the world, thereby classifying you as either a Judger or a Perceiver (J vs. P).
As a result, the four dimensions with their different expressions lead to a four-letter combination that describes one of sixteen different personality types. I am an ENTP, a personality type that is known as the Visionary or the Inventor. If the concept is new to you and you’ve become curious about your own type, then google “Myers-Briggs Personality Type” on the internet and do one of the free online tests.
Personality Types and Time Management
Within the Myers-Briggs framework, two dimensions mainly explain the different approaches of people toward time management at work: N vs. S and J vs. P. Let’s talk first about the differences between iNtuitives and Sensors (N vs. S): iNtuitives are radiant big picture thinkers who prefer to have their heads high up in the clouds. They are good at conceptualizing, imagining possible solutions, envisioning the future, sensing patterns and connections, and so on. On the other side, Sensors firmly stand with both feet on the ground. They are very practical, pay attention to the details and get the job done by sequentially moving forward step by step.
The second dimension describes the different ways of Judgers and Perceivers (J vs. P): Judgers are always punctual, honor and set deadlines, create a daily work plan with a To-Do-List that they can go through item by item, and are gratified by ticking off a completed task. In contrast, Perceivers have an extremely flexible approach to time, which is typically expressed by their coming late to work and meetings and their great dislike of deadlines and planning. Instead of following a steady work pace like Sensors, Perceivers work in leaps and bounds and alternate periods of idle time and relaxation with periods of intense, frantic work. They like to work on many projects at the same time — often without completing any job.
Now guess which combinations describe the best and worst combinations when it comes to time management? You’re right: SJs are natural time managers par excellence, while NPs are notoriously bad at it, as the rigid constraints imposed by most time management approaches go against those core preferences of their personality type that lead to their higher creativity.
The Time Management Dilemma of the Innovation Economy
The twentieth century saw the end phase of the industrial age and, during the last 3 decades, the rise and maturity of the information age. Most companies promoted the smart, reliable, organized and diligent “work horses” into the management positions. In other words, most managers nowadays are SJs, who reliably get things done and personify the efficiency paradigm that dominated both the industrial and information age.
Upon entering the 21st century, however, we’ve moved into a radically new era, the age of creation intensification. In the coming Innovation Economy, the basic means of production are not machines, land and people anymore as in the industrial economy, nor data, computer and networks as in the information economy, but ideas, concepts, know-how and theories. The dominant paradigm is in the process of shifting from efficiency to creativity — and guess who is best at doing radiant thinking: NPs.
As most companies now put more spotlight on — and hire more — creative types, an interesting situation arises at work: Being passionate time managers who focus on deadlines, results and productivity, most (SJ) middle and senior managers get immensely frustrated by the apparent lack of organization, time discipline and results orientation of their more creative subordinates. And most creatives intuitively resist being forced into a rigid corset of fixed working hours, deadlines and meetings, work etiquette that they feel suppresses their individuality and creativity.
Many managers want to help their creative subordinates to speed up and improve their efficiency and time management, so they send them to seminars or give them books on time management (such as Stephen Covey’s The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People). Unfortunately, this tactic usually doesn’t work and leads to one of two undesired results: Either the company spends money on relaying the traditional time management concepts that their creatives abandon after a short time of fruitless experimentation; or even worse: they make the creative employees lose their “creative mojo.”
Why is this? Covey’s concept and similar time management approaches were written for the efficiency-focused industrial and information ages. While they come naturally to SJs, they don’t work for creative NPs. The classical time management literature emphasizes effectiveness and efficiency and doing things habitually. This goes against the very essence of creativity, which is all about playing with concepts in a free, unconstrained environment that allows one to do things differently in order to produce radically new ideas and output.
Outlook on part 2: What are the motivations, needs and wants of both camps, managers and creative employees? And how can these two opposite interests be effectively united for the sake of the firm? Find the answers to these questions in two weeks from now in this column.
© Dr. Detlef Reis 2010. This article was published in parallel in the Bangkok Post under the same title on 4 February 2010.