Surrounded By Idiots

One of Erikson’s key recommendations is to shift away from the "Golden Rule"—treating others as you want to be treated—and toward what he calls the “Platinum Rule”: treating others as they would prefer to be treated. This paradigm shift is based upon the premise that each individual best responds to approaches that match their unique interpersonal needs, as defined by the DISC framework. To incorporate the system’s premises into practical, everyday communications, Erikson advises adjusting your language, tone, and behavior to adhere to the needs and biases of the listener's personality. For instance, when dealing with a Red personality, Erikson advises being decisive and assertive, while Yellow personalities prefer communications that are warm and expressive. Likewise, precise and well-prepared proposals will receive a more favorable reaction from Blues, while Greens respond best to a patient, gentle approach. This practical advice is especially useful in negotiating client relations, creating a more positive work environment, and facilitating sales. For example, a customer service representative might actively mirror a client’s communication style in order to build rapport and reduce potential resistance. The DISC framework ultimately promotes the idea that emotional intelligence is not an innate trait and must be strengthened through practice and the willingness to adapt.

Because the DISC framework promotes greater self-awareness, Erikson encourages readers to reflect on the effects that their own tendencies may have on those around them and remain cognizant of the potential for conflict or miscommunication. For instance, a Red's assertiveness and ambition may come across as domineering, while a Yellow’s enthusiasm might be perceived as self-centeredness. Similarly, a Green’s innate calm could be condemned as passivity in situations that require decisive action, just as a Blue’s attention to detail might be seen to cause unnecessary delays or complications. Erikson contends that by remaining aware of the disagreements that can arise between different personality types, leaders and managers can proactively avoid triggering interpersonal blind spots and can design projects and assignments to play to the individual strengths of their team members. This approach will also aid managers in developing accurate performance reviews, as they will be less likely to undervalue a Green’s quiet reliability or misunderstand a Yellow’s spontaneous ideas as disorganization. Instead of labeling these differences as flaws, Erikson prefers to leverage them constructively, allowing the strengths of one personality type to compensate for the weaknesses of another. In this way, Erikson’s typology empowers people to apply nuance and humility to their assessments of others.

Given the contrasting strengths and weaknesses of different personality types, Erikson contends that homogeneous teams—those consisting of similar personality types—frequently tend to underperform. Erikson demonstrates this dynamic through a workshop experiment in which groups composed entirely of one personality type failed to produce satisfactory outcomes. Specifically, the Red group was fast but careless, while the enthusiasm of the Yellow group was undermined by its unfocused approach. The Green group was so concerned with remaining agreeable that the members could make little decisive headway, and the Blue group, while detail-oriented, showed the slowest progress in completing the stated objectives. By essentially pitting each of the four personality types against one another in a practical setting, Erikson implies that the most effective teams will feature diverse communication styles, accommodate different energy levels, and allow for a range of cognitive approaches. His thoughts on this point are designed to influence project management in real-life scenarios, and managers can use this framework to guide team composition. For example, pairing a Red project lead with a Blue data analyst and a Green coordinator can help ensure that the team dynamics reflect balanced measures of drive, accuracy, and collaboration. Rather than defaulting to hiring for "culture fit," Erikson argues for "culture complement"—building teams that challenge and balance each other.

Erikson posits that many interpersonal conflicts stem from mismatched communication preferences rather than a sense of malice. Because people are predisposed to react to others based upon their own interpersonal norms and standards, a Red may seem aggressive to a Green, while a Blue’s detailed critique may feel demoralizing to a Yellow. To prevent such breakdowns, Erikson suggests practicing what he calls “behavioral empathy”—the ability to observe, interpret, and respond to others based on their personality cues. To implement this plan effectively, it is important to assess not only what someone says, but also how they say it, as nonverbal cues such as tone, body language, and emotional signals can have an outsized effect on the essence of any given message. Additionally, the same outward signs should be interpreted in different ways, depending upon the individual’s personality type. For example, during a tense meeting, recognizing that a Green employee’s silence signals stress, not disengagement, can prompt managers to conduct a follow-up in a safer, one-on-one setting. Similarly, giving a Blue time to process rather than expecting an instant decision can prevent them from developing a sense of resentment. With these behavioral practices firmly in mind, it is possible to improve clarity, trust, and morale across professional relationships.