Keller Graduate School of Management

Life Styles Inventory: Self- Description

Examining and Explaining My Results

Emily Rector
emily_rector@sbcglobal.net
MGMT 591: Leadership and Organizational Behavior
Instructor: Professor Glen Palmer
May 17, 2015

Introduction

If ones goal in an organization is to lead, then it is important for one to understand how to
lead in a way that will breed success. A true leader needs to understand oneself and the people
and organization he or she leads. In order to lead well one needs to be aware of their own
thinking styles and how those styles may work for or against themselves in leading successfully.
A good leader will continually find ways to develop and enhance their skills. An LSI (Life Styles
Inventory) Survey is a good tool to help one find out how their personal and thinking styles
manifest in both their work and personal life. This survey is a good self-development tool that
can aide in ones ability to change what may be working against them in achieving true
leadership.

Primary and Back-up Thinking Styles

I will be examining and explaining my LSI survey results as they have been interpreted in
how my ways of thinking directly affect my behavior. This interpretation will allow me to
engage in a self- development plan to become a successful and efficient leader within my
organization, as well as, my personal life.
According to the circumplex I have two primary thinking styles that I scored the exact
same percentage in. I ranked in the 75 percentile for both the conventional and dependent
thinking styles. The conventional scale measures our tendency to act in a conforming way [1]
By conforming to how things have always been done it allows me to stay under the radar and not
rock the boat. I just follow the rules to maintain a low level of attention. This type of style has
manifested itself in all areas of my life. I tend to feel a sense of security when I follow rules and
it allows me to remain comfortable in my work and personal settings. I would rather maintain a
low profile then to deal with increased confrontation for possibly doing or saying something that
is outside the realm of the rules or what I think is normal behavior. Although, I seemed to score
in the medium range in this conventional thinking style I would say that many of the
characteristics describe me.
For example, here are a few characteristics listed in the LSI circumplex under the
conventional style that I feel are right on with my personal thinking style:
- A tendency to view rules as a source of comfort and security
- Unquestioned obedience to authority figures and rules
- A preoccupation with appearing average, normal, and like everyone else
- Feelings of security with a bureaucracy [1]

In a previous position as a retail co-sales manager, I always followed the rules set forth
by my organization and district manager. I wanted to make sure I was performing how they
expected me to perform so that I would keep my position. I wanted to appear like the other store
managers so I would fit in and be well liked amongst my employees. By knowing I was
conforming to these rules and expectations I felt a sense of comfort and security. However, by
doing this I was unable to be creative and initiate my own ideas and processes for the store. I
believe this held me back in my career because they saw me as someone who just followed the
rules and didnt show enough initiative to excel. Although, it was many years ago I remember
clearly that my district manager came to me with a leadership book to help with my selfdevelopment.
The second primary thinking style that I also ranked in the 75th percentile was the
dependent style. The dependent scale measures the degree to which we feel our efforts do not
count [1] I feel that this dependent thinking style correlates with the conventional style of
thinking in that it originates from my need to feel secure. This dependent style is one in which I
have previously relied on the direction and ideas of others to guide me in my work and quite
possibly in my personal life. I sometimes tend to agree with others ideas or thoughts and
convince myself that is how things should be. It seems to make things easier. The manifestation
of this type of thinking has definitely altered my behavior in the workplace and at home. It has
caused me to lack some self-esteem and fuels my thinking into believing that my ideas and
initiatives are not going to be well received or that they are not good enough. This causes me to
remain stagnant in reaching goals and achieving a higher level of success.
For example, here are a few characteristics listed in the LSI circumplex under the
dependent style that I feel are right on with my personal thinking style:
- An over-concern with pleasing people, and not questioning others or taking independent
action
- A passive attitude
- Feelings of helplessness
- A tendency to be easily influenced
- Difficulty in making decisions [1]
In a previous position as a marketing analyst I quite often had a passive attitude because I lacked
the self-confidence that I had enough experience in my position to take the initiative towards
developing new ideas for our products and services. I was overwhelmed by the shear amount of
tasks I had been given to complete and what I was expected to produce. My dependent thinking
style aided in my dependency on other co-workers to influence and guide my projects. The LSI
description for dependent thinking states that this dependent behavior is often a reaction to a
3

Power-oriented supervisor. [1] I would say that definitely holds true in both my personal
relationships, as well, as my work relationships.
My supervisor at the time was a bit egotistical and didnt seem to accept any of my ideas
as valuable. He had his own ideas and that was it. He had a way of evoking fear in me to speak
my mind. Maybe this was my own interpretation of him due to my lack of self-esteem I am not
quite sure. He looked more to his senior leadership for suggestions and ideas. He had a way of
making me feel that my hard work was unappreciated and never gave me a good word or pat on
the back for a job well done, even when others in the group felt my contribution played a large
role in the success of a product launch. This Power-oriented style is one in which I would rather
avoid coming in contact with. I would rather be dependent on others ideas and suggestions in
guiding my decisions sometimes because I have difficulty making important decisions. This
quite often results in a form of self-protection that ultimately deters me from taking action on
things that will eventually lead me to success. The LSI description for this dependent style states
that your cautious nature can prevent you from setting goals and taking risks [1] I would say
this this is definitely a characteristic of my behavior and I believe this is something that
unfortunately, holds me back quite often.

Illustration of My Limiting Style

The third style that I scored in the medium range on the LSI Survey was the Avoidance
Style. I ranked in the 70th percentile which seems to be pretty close to my conventional and
dependent thinking styles. Which I would assume yet again correlates rather well with my two
primary styles. This Avoidance style fits directly into my conventional thinking and dependent
behaviors so I dont rock the boat or seem to come out of the normalcy of a situation as to draw
attention to myself. As stated in the LSI description The Avoidance scale measures our tendency
to use the defensive strategy of withdrawal [1] This Avoidance style contributes to my sense of
having to protect myself , remain in my comfort zone, stay away from situations or people that
may make me feel threatened and aides in my behavior to not take risks. [1] Two main
characteristics of this thinking style that I think align with by behavior are as follows:
-Fear of failure
- A preoccupation with ones own concerns
- Feelings of guilt over real or imagined mistakes [1]
I believe that the characteristics stated above have a direct relation to limiting my professional
effectiveness. I feel that by having a sense of avoidance it limits my success and achievement not
only in the work place but in my personal life also.

The behavior that stands out to me the most that comes from this avoidance style is the
fear of failure. My fear of failure is something that has always held me back from achieving the
types of success that I ultimately would like to achieve in the workplace. This fear of failure
tends to make me feel overwhelmed and not able to accomplish goals. This results in me giving
up because it just too stressful and I feel like I am not able to succeed at certain things. For
example, wanting to get promoted into management is something I have always wanted in my 12
year career at AT&T. However, even when I knew what I had to do to get there my fear of failure
of how I would actually handle the positon and responsibilities when I got there held me back.
This avoidance style has limited my ability to perform at a level that would eventually bring me
success. This limitation that this avoidance style and fear of failure behavior have put on my
career goals is definitely something I would like address and change. I believe by changing this
style of thinking my behavior would otherwise create results that would ultimately lead me in the
direction I want to go to achieve success in the workplace and in my career. If I dont fear
success then maybe I would strive harder for it. Quite possibly I would engage in behavior that
greatly influences me to initiate my own ideas while increasing my level of self-esteem. This is
something I greatly look forward to implementing in my self-development.

Impact on Management Style

Personal thinking styles can directly impact ones management style and could either
hinder or contribute in a positive manner. The three primary thinking styles that I scored highest
in on the LSI Survey are the Conventional, Dependent and Avoidance styles. All three of these
styles can lead to ineffective management within an organization. These three thinking styles all
fall into the passive/ defensive category. A conventional thinking manager tends to manage by
the book and follows all the rules set forth by their organization and supervisor. This type of style
ultimately affects the creation and innovation of new ideas that are outside of the box. By not
allowing their employees to pursue a different way of thinking it holds them back from achieving
their goals. This characteristic or way of thinking results in ineffective leadership amongst their
employees. A good leader must lead by example and allow the growth and development of their
employees. By allowing them to think outside the box and step outside the boundaries of the
exact rules could help in creating a more efficient and successful organization. This is where new
ideas and innovative products and service come from.
The Dependent thinking manager tends to have difficulty in making decisions and emits a
sense of helplessness. They have a passive attitude that reflects directly on their ability to plan
and organize within their organization. An effective manager needs to be able to be independent
in their decision making and be able to make decisions on their own that propel their
organization and employees forward to success. If a manager cannot plan well or make their own
decisions it can alter the success of a project or process within an organization. If they feel that
their ideas do not matter then how do they positively control situations that arise well? Put quite
simply they are unable to effectively control and handle situations that could ultimately cause
5

problems. Any successful leader should be able to take risks, clearly make decisions based on
their own beliefs and ideas and have a sense of control this will allow them to lead by example
and achieve success.
The Avoidance thinking manager has a fear of failure and tends to get overwhelmed easily with
their responsibilities. This form of thinking can lead to behaviors that ultimately have a lack of
organization and structure. They tend to communicate in a non-direct way to avoid any
confrontation. By managing this way it can negatively affect your employees. They will lack
direction and organization from their superior and not know what is exactly expected. This can
cause a lack of planning, organization and effectiveness. A good manager needs to be able to face
situations head on and communicate directly with their colleagues and subordinates to foster an
effective open form of communication and set a level of expectations to guide their employees.
If I continue to inhabit these forms of thinking styles then I will not be able to effectively
and efficiently manage a team within an organization. The styles will deeply impact my success
and achievements. I need to find ways to alter my fear of success and find the root cause of these
thinking styles to move forward in my career.

Genesis of Personal Style

It takes many years and experiences to form our thinking styles. All of our life
experiences contribute to how we as human beings think. I believe the main contributor in the
formation of our thinking styles stems from our childhood. To better understand how we think
we need to understand why we think the way we do. What roles have our past experiences
contributed to the formation of our primary thinking skills?
I am going to say that the role of my family and relationships within it have a lot to do
with my thinking styles. My parents were married young and divorced when I was at a very
young and impressionable age. I believe the split of my parents and the absence of my father for
a few years in my life was a contributing factor in all of my dominant thinking styles of
conventional, dependent and avoidance. I formed separation anxiety from this separation and I
felt a sense of abandonment, helplessness and lack of control. I feel that this impressionable
situation contributed to my thinking style to fall into the security needs section.
I also feel that being raised amongst women who were less assertive in nature and
seemed to have more relationships with which they were dependent upon influenced my
development of these thinking styles. These behaviors stemmed from my Grandmother, Aunts
and my Mother. For example, my Mom re-married almost immediately after my Father. The
man she married was very authoritative and used fear to get people to do what he wanted. My
Mother was still pretty young and seemed very dependent upon him and conformed to his
thinking, ideas and beliefs. I believe watching their relationship for most of my childhood
impacted my thinking styles.
6

My relationship with my step father also was not very good. He was very strict and
always hard on me. He always criticized me for just about everything from what I wore to telling
me I couldnt be the things I wanted to be when I grew up. He wasnt a very supportive or
positive person. The relationship I endured with him growing up caused me to lack self -esteem
and feel as though I wasnt good enough to achieve certain levels of success. I also believe this
relationship contributed to my avoidance and conventional thinking styles. I tend to move away
or avoid any situation that feels threatening to me. I also tend to be a rule follower because of
this relationship. Therefore, I try to remain in my comfort zone.
There are a few other situations in my childhood that I remember quite clearly that
involved teachers and caregivers. For some reason I had multiple situations with teachers in
grade school that belittled me and made me feel embarrassed. I also had a caregiver that used to
watch me before and after school and she also used fear to control me and was very strict and
critical. Across my childhood I encountered many experiences and relationships that have
contributed to the development of all three of my main thinking styles described in the LSI
survey. As an adult I have recognized many of these characteristics about myself that the LSI
survey revealed. Many of them a stepping stone to cause behaviors that have crippled my success
at the level I would like to achieve.

Conclusion and Reflection

In order for one to lead successfully they need to be aware of their personal thinking
styles and what behaviors have caused them to succeed or fail. Creating an awareness of these
issues will help one in their journey to self- development. If ones goal is to lead and lead well
they need to adapt their thinking styles to a way that will help them to become an effective leader
in an organization. The LSI survey opened my eyes and helped me become more aware of my
own personal thinking styles. It helped me to gain a better understanding of how those
passive/defensive thinking styles may have held me back in my career. If my goal is to lead and
it is, then I have to put myself on a path to self- development to rid myself of these old thinking
styles and create new ones that will help me to succeed as a leader in an organization. My goal is
to change my thinking styles from the passive/defensive type to the constructive type. Changing
ones thinking patterns that have taken years to develop is a challenge but isnt the challenge
worth it if your goal is to become a great leader?

Your LSI Styles Circumplex

For detailed descriptions of each of these 12 styles,
click on the circumplex graphic in each of the 12 sections.

Name: D40453874

Date Survey Taken:

Your LSI Styles Profile

The raw and percentile scores in the table below and the extensions on the circumplex shown below
depict your perceptions of how you think and behave.
The CONSTRUCTIVE Styles (11, 12, 1, and 2 o'clock positions) reflect self-enhancing thinking and
behavior that contribute to one's level of satisfaction, ability to develop healthy relationships and work
effectively with people, and proficiency at accomplishing tasks.
The PASSIVE/DEFENSIVE Styles (3, 4, 5, and 6 o'clock positions) represent self-protecting thinking and
behavior that promote the fulfillment of security needs through interaction with people.
The AGGRESSIVE/DEFENSIVE Styles (7, 8, 9, and 10 o'clock positions) describe self-promoting thinking
and behavior used to maintain status/position and fulfill security needs through task-related activities.
Position

Style

Score

Percentile

Humanistic-Encouraging

21

Affiliative

30

50

Approval

10

32

Conventional

18

75

Dependent

19

75

Avoidance

70

Oppositional

50

Power

Competitive

10

Perfectionistic

11

Achievement

16

12

Self-Actualizing

17

15

The raw scores potentially range from 0 to 40. The percentile scores represent your results compared to
those of 9,207 individuals who previously completed the Life Styles Inventory. For example, a percentile
score of 75 means that you scored higher along a particular position than 75% of the other respondents in
the sample and, in turn, indicates that the style represented by that position is strongly descriptive of you.
In contrast, a score of 25 means that you scored higher than only about 25% of the other respondents
and therefore indicates that the style represented by that position is not very descriptive of you.

Source

[1] http://www.survey-server2.com/lsiuniversity-sso/pers_report.asp

10