Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Synergy: a) In the context of organizational behavior, following the view that a cohesive group is more than the sum of its parts, synergy is the ability of a group to outperform even its best individual member; 2) Group Polarisation is when individuals in a group begin by taking a moderate stance on an issue regarding a common value and, after having discussed it, end up taking a more extreme stance. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synergy …sort of)
Great Drive* last night. In attendecito: Jennifer, Cyndi, Molly and Denise. Topics flew like empty promises at a High School 5th Year Reunion.
Topic: Cyndi brought up the rogerian resistance to decisiveness, particularly in the context of staff meetings, this lead to a discussion of the style of management as manifested by the rogerian worldview; Molly, asked about aggressiveness as manifested by rogerian males versus females… in a word we tooled around the Wakefield Doctrine (metaphorical) Campus, like it was the Thursday night before Spring Break.
But of particular interest was the matter of scotts, (and as a subset to this discussion), the techniques employed by clarklike females when managing scottian men, then it got interesting! I would tell you all about it, but you really should have been there, the synergy referenced in the Title of today’s Post was very much in evidence. It was fun. Not to leave our ‘non-calling-in-to-the-Drive-my-god-how-simple-can-it-be-?’ Readers without at least one insight into the ways of clarklike females and scottian males, I simply say: ‘rolled-up newspaper‘
There were questions about how to identify scotts (and the other two) from physical appearance and it got me to thinking to write something on the primary identifying characteristic of the three personality types. So… to the bullet-list machine!
- clarks: posture-challenged (particularly the males), slow of movement and clearly relaxed when seated (whatever the antonym for fidgety is that would be clarks sitting); it is said that ‘the eyes are the window to the soul’, well with clarks simply look for the person with the ‘far away’ look in their eyes (very far away)
- scotts: the eyes are totally the first thing to identify them, but if the saying above is true, then you might want to brace yourself before looking in that window; scotts tend to be athletic and/or sexy, given to rapid and semi-graceful movement, (if they are male), languorous movements if they are not, the second most obvious thing about scotts is their self-confidence, very socially active, ( scottian men are funny, scottian women are sexy) and on the mercurial end of the emotional expression scale
- rogers: they make up the majority of the population (both genders) so if you know a person is not a clark or a scott then they must be a roger.
This is Sunday, so out in < 500 words!
Doctrine-favorite band, Halestorm to provide the closing tune.
* The Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive, of course!
About clarkscottroger
That WAS a fun call-in and it was great talking to EVERYONE! It’s also really fun to talk “Doctrine” so we can figure the world out. Totally fun stuff! I definitely enjoy identifying the fellow clarks, scotts and rogers. I will also keep the rolled up newspaper handy. It’s definitely good for more than a few things….
Happy Sunday!
@Cyndi
Totally agree on that assessment (of the call, well, and also the use for a rolled-up newspaper lol) I have to say, I really get a lot myself from these calls, it is the perspectives that you guys are bringing is allowing the understanding of the Doctrine to increase and ultimately improve it and it’s practical applications!
Thanks for the suggestions for road trip destinations too!
Sounds like an awesome Saturday night radio call-in and maybe one of these days I will have enough energy to make it to one, but for now living vicariously through the rest of you!! Have great rest of the weekend, now!! :)
@Janine
that would be fun for all of us! when the time is right!
It was a good call even if I was late to the party. I enjoyed listening mostly. There were very excellent topics being discussed. In particular, I enjoyed Cyndi’s question about how to spot a scott via their eyes. Not so easy to describe…intensity yes, directness yes and the absolute non wavering challenge is the gaze of a scott.
As a clark, what to do when a scott goes ballistic? lol Depends on the situation but either way there are only 2 options: you “walk away” or you rise to the challenge knowing at “the end” there will be a dominant and a submissive. (yo male rogers: heads up! not like that!!)
For the clark who goes the confrontation route, there may at one time or other be a moment of, shall we say fugue, where your scottian self comes out of the closet and sets things right with the scott (“I just did what?”) The “walk away” seems to be much more the prudent thing most of the time. If you can yawn walking away so much the better. LOL
@Denise
…all very true, but you know what is sometimes un-emphasized? That we as clarks can be rather effective at getting what we want, provided 2 things happen, a) we believe we are entitled to getting whatever we are striving for and 2) we trust our instincts
Agreed. Especially to trusting our instincts which is to say trusting our bodies. By nature clarks are of the head/mind. Who hasn’t heard the phrase “they talked themselves right out of it”. Yes, that can be applied to rogers but you get what I mean. It’s in the moment of action for a clark, when there is no internal dialogue to muck things up, when “things happen”.
To end with your beginning, it is a challenge for clarks to put themselves first but it is necessary for survival to do so. scotts would agree but their rationale is different, rogers would agree because, well, because that’s how everybody is aren’t they?
The “deservation” is an abstract with clarks. We are an easygoing, affable people lol who most folks do not see in those rare moments of “fierceness”.
Yes…if I really do “want” something (going on the last two comments), I have ways of making it so. I kinda like that quality in myself. :P
@Cyndi
It is true. We have a kin of charmingly maniacal determination, once something has attained a certain status in our minds.
clarks, clarks, clarks… “rolled up newspaper” Do you really think that will keep us scotts down for long, if at all?
Seems to me that whenever scotts become the subject of discussion it becomes very degrading… Screw you.
@Jennifer
lol no! not true… we loves our scotts and the fact is there is no entirely bad among the three personality types. Hell, rogers probably are closer to be be entitled to feel that way than either of the ‘other two’.
Of course you do. Everyone does. Although the “rolled up newspaper” metaphor is often used in regards to scotts, for some reason it pissed me off on the Drive. That coupled with the fact that I was surrounded by a school of clarks. Talk about being bulldozed over by (a) clark leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. Guess I’ll bring a megaphone next time.
Don’t take my reaction on the Drive as not feeling confident. Quite the opposite. So I tune out, for the most part, and listen to the white noise while my eyes glaze over with a car full of clarks who seem, at least to me, to somehow put themselves in high regard. Whatever…
As to rogers I agree wholeheartedly. After all, they are the ones who “feel.”
And I wasn’t insinuating that any one type is better than the other two or not without faults.
After I read this, I decided I had more work to do and spent quite awhile perusing your site for more information. I could spend the whole day getting lost here! Such fascinating stuff, and such a change of pace from the other blogs I have read this week!
@Stephanie
I’m glad you enjoyed the Post (before today’s Post ‘hit the presses’). I extend the invitation to call us on the Saturday Night Drive…it’s not so much that there is more information available there (on the Drive) as it is that very often people will ‘get the Doctrine’ but then one aspect (that may not be immediately obvious, is the thing that opens a hold wide area (application of the Wakefield Doctrine).
Having said that, let me put out a couple of points (probably repetitious for you but, what the hell):
*everyone has the potential to experience the world as a clark, scott or roger
*even when you establish your worldview, you retain the capacity to see the world as ‘the other two’ (which explains why it would seem that you areat one time a clark and at another a scott
*there is such a thing as a secondary aspect (though this is a recent development and so a work in progress) the secondary aspect does not mean you jump from one reality to another, it simply means that, in certain circumstances, the secondary aspect can influence your responses to certain situations (this is especially seen in choices of solutions in problem-solving)
*when we say worldview, we mean reality… as in real (this is a key element to the Doctrine) it is not that clarks simply choose to make eccentric fashion choices, and perhaps might have decided that purple was not the ideal hair color for interviewing for a job in an engineering firm
* we deal in ‘preponderances’, there are hardly any perfect matches and it is not so much that any one job, interest, hobby, avocation or profession is exclusively one of the three, (in fact, we have a saying, ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’) which is a way of saying, it is not the activity, but what that activity means to (the person activitizing it).