Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Found in translation’ | the Wakefield Doctrine Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Found in translation’ | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Found in translation’

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

20170619_084630

Just happened past this field of cows and such this morning. No! Seriously I had no idea that I’d be writing this post as I took the photo.

As we all know, ‘clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’.

We (also) all know that…with the perspective afforded by an appreciation of the three predominant worldviews that comprise the personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, we can know the people in our lives better than they know themselves. Even better, will can know what they will (decide to) do before they themselves do’.

So, you’re thinking, all this is well and good, so how come I still have trouble communicating with my clark/scott/roger?

There is the topic of today’s post. Communicating between personal realities, worldviews.

First: accept that your reality is manifested in a manner fundamentally different from that of the clark or scott or roger with whom you are exchanging ideas, interviewing for a job, asking for a date, coaxing into doing chores, making a pass at and offering your condolences. If you are a clark these things/ideas/thoughts are in the form of knowledge/information; if you are a roger then they are (to you) emotions/feelings/consensus and if you are a scott they are the things you do/your acts/your appetites.

Second: accept that, since you’re the one with the Doctrine and, apparently, the ambition, to get across an idea to a person, despite their different experience, it is up to you to translate what you think, (or feel or do), into something more compatible with that person’s reality.

So, how is that translation done? Well, for the moment, we’ve discovered one of the three (necessary) transformations: from a clark to a roger. For a clark to communicate an idea that they have to a roger, they, (the clark), should take the thought/idea and transform it into an effective metaphor. It is not overly helpful to say to a roger, “Here’s what I think”, or “The best thing you can do about your problem is realize that,” or even, “Have you ever stopped to think that…”

Much better to say, “Hey! that girl you want to ask out, thats a lot like,”  or “Your boss is giving you a hard time, that’s similar to”

(Astute Doctrine followers are thinking, ‘I get it! rogers deal in emotion, so I need to give them a situation that they can identify with on an emotional level.’  Exactly!)

 

Share

clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one

Comments

  1. I love Doctrine primer posts! Such excellent reminders :)

    So (as a clark), if I’m telling a story to a roger and I say to them, “I’m sorry,….. I think I’m going to cry” and end my telling (cuz, yeah, I was near tears for real) and they say to me “you’re making me want to cry!” then I’ve effectively communicated with a roger?

    scotts “act”, they are of the here and now, so how is it I get a scott to identify with me? Infuse short, concise sentences with energy and excitement?!

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      yeah… work to do (to acquire a richer vocabulary of metaphor and simile (and made even learn the difference!) lol

  2. phyllis says:

    Exactly!

  3. Thank you Phyllis. It’s not exactly 2nd nature for a clark to communicate in this fashion, but I would say – it is possible to develop one’s rogerian aspect :)