The Living Rockumentary

Well, Henning maintains Ken will probably skip the worker personality test so here are the results for the other four of us. If Ken does throw down, I'll be sure to compute his scores, too. The way it turned out so far, I wonder if Ken is maybe our missing ingredient (the methodical worker) and if so, perhaps he's being true to his nature and is actually still working on the test, going over and over his answers, testing them out at work to make sure he's accurate, etc. as a methodical might. Because, as it turns out, we have three of the bases covered.

Our bassist Max is what you'd call an INTERACTIVE, which means he's a good initiator, is particularly good at working with others, especially in the arena of getting the best out of his teammates, motivating them while being sensitive to their needs, too. Max also thrives on change, looks for new angles, is good at adapting and using intuition. The only downside of interactives is that they depend on frequent contact with their teammates to judge the status of their relationships and work. They might also move too fast for others, especially methodicals. But they are also great leaders, since they are equally good at inspiring themselves as they are at inspiring others. Interactives are best at keeping things moving and not panicking when things get rough.

Henning and Brian are both PRACTICALS. They are problem solvers- they get results and like to get things done and off the proverbial plate. Relying on facts, they use trial and error, testing their ideas, taking control and generally approaching work without much emotional baggage. Often they prefer to work independently, able to work on theories, facts and ideas and seeing them through. Since they can get the job done on their own, they tend to engage others only when necessary and need to maintain a shared focus when working with others. In other words, if there's a negative attached to practicals, things have to be going the way they like them to or they're outta there. Not the best compromisers, one could say. But there's a good reason for this- they stay true to the vision of the goals in place and are passionate about what they do. In this sense, you have to have a practical in any group or you'd be hurting- they are the glue, the meat, the meaty glue, the gluey meat (this is not exactly verbatim from the literature but something along those lines). Brian, Henning and Max are all action-oriented workers. One interesting note: both Brian and Henning saw themselves as folks who were good self-starters who might not finish the job. As it turned out, according to this test, they should actually be good at seeing things through, in addition to being self-starters. The real culprit at not getting things done is, ahem, me.

Your writer Tony here is a CREATIVE. I'm a good listener and observer. I appreciate aesthetics in all areas and use all my senses for understanding situations. My greatest strength is brainstorming ideas, using imagination and visualizing possibilities. Creatives tend to be calm and as team players are supportive of others and although it seems strange, we are good at collaborating with others, yet prefer to work alone for most of the job (though not the entire process). This does make sense in that, as workers, we brainstorm independently for a long time but then rely on the help of others to complete our tasks and goals. And like Henning and Brian, creatives are only good team players if there is an effectiveness to the relationship. However, while practicals might call off a team effort if things aren't done their way, creatives are more compromising, sometimes to the detriment of what they might want to personally accomplish- in other words, they'll sacrifice their own ideas and goals sometimes just to ensure the job gets done. We are good at 11th hour blasts of inspiration, as the wheels are always turning in that department. As you can tell, our downside is that as primarily idea men, we're the least action-oriented of all four. The final group, METHODICALS, are slower workers in general since they like to plan carefully before starting something and are detail-oriented and also like to develop several different models before settling on one but eventually get the job done. Us creatives, on the other hand, start lots of projects we don't finish and I certainly can admit to this myself. Just ask me woife. Or flip through a Westcott songbook- there is probably a 3 to 1 ratio of one verse/chorus incomplete song ideas to every finished one. I wonder of Ken is also a creative- certainly this is true of his songwriting as well.

So what does this mean for SFTD? Not taking into account what Ken brings to the table, superficially it appears we've got it all wrong. Max might not have a methodical in the group to knock heads against and disagree with but he should be the leader of our group, with Tony as his right-hand man. We're the most compatible, given that Tony is good at generating ideas and Max is good at getting the ball rolling and knowing when to shift gears when necessary. We also would be most supportive of each other and could easily tell which one of the two of us would be best for what facet of the job we're working on. Henning and Brian don't have their methodical mate in the band- instead they have their polar opposite in Tony and their usual authority figure in Max. Of course, in SFTD, Max is not the leader, Henning is, and Tony is not the idea man, that's also Henning. It's all wrong, all wrong! Tony should be writing the songs, Max should be the leader and Henning and Brian should just shut up and do what we tell them to do!
But seriously, it's interesting to see how we approach this band as individuals. For Max, Henning and me, our roles seemingly go against our true natures as workers and yet things come out pretty good nonetheless. Our born leader Max is happy working out his bass lines and learning Henning's songs, content to not be calling the shots (but hey, he is an adapter), Tony also is happy to just spray some tinsel on Henning's songs, not resenting that his own ideas are not in the spotlight. (However, as a creative, he can entertain himself and others with the little things he comes up with to add to what's already there). And Henning, although he might rather be working alone, has instead assembled a good band and working in interactive mode, gets the most out of his teammates. But then, as is the wont of practicals, he is good at recognizing the strengths of others and enlisting them to his vision. So even if the three of us seem to superficially be at the wrong posts, we have apparently used some of our strengths in our areas to fit ourselves into these new roles. So does that mean that Brian, who perhaps is too comfortable a fit, is the most unhappy of all? And wherefore Ken?