In a featured article I recently wrote for Japan’s HR Magazine, The HR Agenda (http://www.danagallagher.com/downloads/Extroverts-Introverts.pdf), I shared observations about how to maximize introvert/extrovert contributions to teams.  In this post, I would like to expand on my article, and also invite your comments, so we can all learn more about this important topic.

Since Susan Cain’s wonderful book, “Quiet” was published last year, the discussion about introverts has been taken to a new level.  More research and discussion about the “introvert-extrovert difference” is being put out there, not just in the leadership literature, but in other industries as well.*

An intelligent line of inquiry about this aspect of personality is critically important because it impacts teams powerfully, and often in ways that they don’t understand, and therefore, can’t navigate.  Although research and discussion is crucial, what I’m interested in is applying this knowledge on actual teams in real, live organizations.

What got me interested in this introvert/extrovert difference was watching Japanese and American colleagues struggling with each other, both in Tokyo and in California.  We talk a lot about cultural differences, which are obviously significant and which must be acknowledged, respected, and explored.  But what I began to notice was that what most irritated each group about the other wasn’t necessarily “cultural” per se, it was also about Americans being predominantly extroverted and Japanese being predominantly introverted.  As I began to focus on this, I noticed that extroverted Japanese had their own difficulties on Japanese teams, and that American introverts in the States were often struggling and misunderstood by their colleagues too.  Once I figured this out, it became clear to me that we need to create teams in which members can be effective whether they be introverts, extroverts, or ambiverts.

This is a tall order, because whichever personality type dominates the team fosters a bias that reinforces that dominance, creating a team’s “blind spot.”  Extroverts, for example, tend to define “participation” in meetings as talking.  They do not tend to see participation in listening or thinking behaviors–and they will level negative judgments at their introverted peers who are not more verbal. Meanwhile, introverts seek quiet in order to integrate data–so talking actually derails them from processing information. They are likely to shut down in large groups where lots of talking is happening–precisely the environment in which extroverts thrive.  It is certainly useful for an introvert to understand that he or she is in the minority on a predominantly extroverted team and vice versa, but then what?

I believe that a team where both extroverted and introverted contributions are welcome would maximize the output (not to mention the engagement) of its members.  In order to do that, we have to bring awareness to team interactions, and provide the environment in which all can thrive.  We also have to educate (and sometimes even convince) the dominant personality type that their way is not the best/only way to run a team.  This can be hard to do, because our personalities are the air we breathe, the water we swim in.  To us, it is natural, so we may not even be aware that the conditions which suit us so well are imperfect or even bothersome to others.

In my experience, the teams who are willing to explore extrovert/introvert diversity are the ones who are either curious and open by nature, or, the ones who are so desperate that they will try anything. (Or both.) Sometimes it is an insightful leader who says, “I’m an extrovert with a management team full of introverts.  They’re so quiet!  I don’t know WHAT they’re thinking!  HELP ME.” Other times, it is a team member who makes an observation like, “I’m an extrovert and I could do so much more if you would stop making me sit alone, researching stuff.  Get me out there with the client!”

If we consider that the differences between extroverts and introverts are chiefly about being energized by others (or not so much), and how they process data (through talking or through quietly thinking), then it becomes more obvious what each needs.  Extroverts thrive on high people contact, and they discover what they are thinking by hearing themselves say it.  If this is true, then networking activities, brainstorming, and being situated in “high traffic” areas are some of the conditions that play to an extrovert’s strength.  For the introvert, working alone or with 1 or 2 others, with the ability to have private space and quiet time to read or think works best.

With this knowledge, we CAN create meeting agendas, work assignments, and even physical spaces that support extroverts AND introverts.

•It is not unusual in Japan, for example, for people to be quiet for 5 or more minutes during meetings as they think, and jot notes to themselves.  When the meeting resumes, people reference their notes, introducing new thoughts and topics they could not generate without having some quiet thought time first.

•In the States, brainstorming is a common activity, although recent research is calling its usefulness into question.  Know that there is more than one way to “brainstorm”–it can be done verbally, by talking in an enthusiastic free flow, or, in writing, by using Post-It notes that we prepare in advance, affix to the wall and read during the meeting.

•We can set up meetings so that the first 5 minutes and/or the last 5 minutes are for networking and socializing–and people can do so or not, without judgment or penalty.

•We can specifically ask each person who has not spoken in a meeting if there is something s/he would like to say.  (Sometimes introverts have difficulty getting the floor!)

There may well be other suggestions; these are some I have tried and have seen work well.

Lastly, a note about ambiverts.  If we consider that extroversion and introversion are the poles of a continuum, there are people who fall somewhere in the middle: ambiverts.  Since ambiverts have traits of both extroverts and introverts, they may be especially helpful to teams as we consider how to make the most conducive team conditions for all.

______

*”Should We Rethink the Promise of Teams?”  Working Knowledge, Harvard Business School, James Heskett.  1/21/13.  http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/7120.html?wknews=09052012

•”Death of The (Predatory) Salesman:  These Days It’s a Buyer’s Market,”  National Public Radio staff, 12/31/12. http://www.npr.org/2012/12/31/168132488/death-of-the-predatory-salesman-these-days-its-a-buyers-market

•”How to Manage an Extrovert…When You’re an Introvert,” Bloomberg Businessweek, Jennifer B. Kahnweiler.  4/15/11. http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/apr2011/ca20110414_185829.htm

•”Introverts:  The Best Leaders for Proactive Employees,” Working Knowledge, Harvard Business School, Carmen Nobel.  10/4/10.  http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6494.html