Uncategorized | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 6 Uncategorized | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 6

a prehistory

     Once upon a time, in a land not very far from Clark’s house… there were three atypical college friends who engaged in many of the atypical activities of their day. They went to school; they played guitars at ear-splitting volumes in dorm rooms, and sneered derisively at those who objected; one drank too, too much; one not at all, but subsisted on Oreos and Coke. One became a Baptist with a capital ” B”. They played in rock bands, worked all sorts of jobs, one got married way too soon. They all wrestled with the Issues Of Their Day, with varying degrees of resolve and/or success.  And in spite of all the atypical ups and downs, they managed to form a very unique bond. And , to their surprise, the bond has lasted much longer than any one of them might have thought. Longer than some marriages, jobs, bands, or Baptist dogma. And after many hours of conversation about just about everything turned into years and decades of same, there came to be what was, and is now, referred to as … the Wakefield Doctrine.

     Psychology and psychiatry texts  make constant reference to type A/B/C personalities and their interactions. We are somewhat along those same lines. For us, those references have evolved into our Wakefield Doctrine, which we have found to be much more palatable. To err may be human, but to create a categorization system that explains all of human behavior in a somewhat cryptic nutshell is absolutely divine. And, we have noticed along the way, a heck of a lot of fun. In an “improvisational academia” sort of way, we gleefully invent terms as we go along to describe conditions and situations that may not have existed previously. And yet, our system also works perfectly well when taken perfectly and totally seriously. 

     The basic premise is that there are three fundamental personality types; and much can be known and discovered about oneself ( and any other aspect of life ) by learning to identify your own basic type; how to identify the types of others; and then consider all the ramifications of the interactions. In short…this explains everything, but only from a point of view that holds human dynamics as the prime component.

Share

who are these people?

 With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The three  ways of perceiving the world are referred to as: clarks, scotts and rogers. We all begin life with the potential of all three types. At some point we become predominantly one.

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that  behavior is a response to  perception (of the world). That we choose how to perceive the world means that we acquire a characteristic way of seeing the world and that leads to characteristic behavior.

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

 

If you are a first time visitor, above is an outline of the ‘purpose’ of this site. (Despite the title, please avoid the ‘FAQ’ page and the ‘So, Which Am I?’ page, until you get a sense of what this Wakefield Doctrine nonsense is all about.)

(quick intro…)

A clark is the person you have to make an effort to notice. In high school the clark is not clearly of one group or another. Not popular, not a jock, not a geek, not a hippie not one of those who seem to always be standing next to their cars in the student parking lot. In a workplace environment same thing happens, the clark is seen in any setting but is not a part of any of the normally identifiable groups. The thing about clarks is that they will be seen at one time or another in all of these groups! Not as a member, but apparently a part of whatever the particular situation is; clarks will be found in association with the ‘leader/alpha’ of whatever clique or social group. But only in a ‘situational’ sense, definitely not a member of that group.

A scott is the person you can’t not notice. In high school the scott is the class clown or leading hoodlum or the captain of the sports team or the head cheerleader. The scott is popular, the entertainer, the joke teller. In a workplace environment they are also the leaders, but limited by the extent of organizational complexity, white collar or blue collar the scott will lead as a pack leader. Scotts are not good managers, they require a great deal of freedom and latitude. A scott might be a ceo or an owner, but only if it is ‘all his’. Truly an example of a ‘cult of personality’.

A roger is/are the masses. The people who make up the circle around a high school fight, the people who know what you did last weekend and tell the other people at the office. In a workplace environment rogers are the middle managers or that person in charge of supplies that has always been there and insists that they follow the rules (always refers to it as ‘I call this the bible’ lowercase).  Rogers are the members of the cheer leader’s squad, the football team. Rogers are the crowd, the mob, the congregation, anywhere there are people with a common interest, most of the members will be rogers. They form the social fabric in every society.

So, hopefully your curiosity is piqued. Look around the site, look around where ever you are and you will them.

 

P.S. Given that this is a new site, there is a better than even chance that you are a clark. (and, yes, I know you have a system like this with different words etc).

Share

clarks and scotts and rogers, oh my!

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The three  ways of perceiving the world are referred to as: clarks, scotts and rogers. We all begin life with the potential of all three types. At some point we become predominantly one.

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that  behavior is a response to  perception (of the world). That we choose how to perceive the world means that we acquire characteristic way of seeing the world that leads to characteristic behavior.

The Wakefield Doctrine describes personality on the basis of perception rather than a persons behavior that results.

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

So take a look around this blog. Think of it like a puzzle*.

The content of the blog is beginning to accrue and accumulate. The most recent addition is a film clip that shows a roger and a scott in conflict. (All examples are exaggerated for illustration purposes, your experience of being a clark, scott or roger may vary.) 

There is also a new FAQ page. Still in early stages, but don’t hestitate to leave a comment/reply.

One of the most frequent comment/questions we get is: ‘I can see all the characteristics of all three types in myself (or another person), how do I decide which group I belong to?’   The easy, but less satisfying answer is, ‘everyone has the qualities of the three types, just one (type) tends to dominate’. (Ed. note: at the start it is easier to determine who are clarks, scott or rogers among those around you, rather than yourself.)

So for the impatient readers (yes, I mean you, scott); following is a quick, ‘down and dirty’ guide to identifying the clarks, scotts and rogers around you:

  • rogers use the pronoun “I” more than the other three
  • scotts use nicknames (particularly diminutives ‘clarkie’, ‘phillie’)
  • clarks maintain the least eye contact when talking to you
  • scotts are the ones who can tell a joke properly and will insist you listen and (usually picks a joke slightly over the edge of appropriate)
  • rogers will always have the news on what so-and-so said to such-and-such
  • clarks have a posture that is hunched at the shoulder and when seated will appear too relaxed, to the point of slumping in the chair
  • rogers are very usually the ‘middle management’ types who will convince the upper management that cubicles are the best way to arrange an office space
  • clarks…conversations…sentence fragments…

 

 

 

 

 

*(The answer is: clark (or) scott (or) roger.)

 

Share

personality typology clarks, scotts and rogers

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that  behavior is a response to  perception (of the world). Allowing that we choose how to perceive the world means that we acquire characteristic (choices in perception) which is evidenced in characteristic behavior.

The Wakefield Doctrine proposes to describe personality on the basis of perception rather than the behavior that results (from perception).

Three distinct ways of perceiving the world are labeled: clarks, scotts and rogers. We all begin life with the potential/‘tendancy to perceive’ the world as any of these three types. At some point we become predominantly one.

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

There is a way of looking at people and their behavior that is based on  understanding of how (that) person perceives the world at large.  All of us choose  to see the world a certain, characteristic way. If you know (the way) a person sees the world, you can understand and even predict their behavior.

We call this, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers (the Wakefield Doctrine.)

Not rocket science, not even brilliant and insightful psychology. It is simply a matter of  knowing that if a person sees the world a collection of similar people with similar interests, acting with a non-specific and non-directive goal, then you are dealing with a roger.  If you are dealing with a roger then you immediately know certain things. And the things you know about this personality type will allow you to know how they will act.

That is what this blog is about.

clarks, scotts and rogers.

Know them, know yourself.

Know your future.

Share

clarks? scotts? rogers?

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that  behavior is a response to  perception (of the world). Allowing that we choose how to perceive the world means that we acquire characteristic (choices in perception) which is evidenced in characteristic behavior.

The Wakefield Doctrine proposes to describe personality on the basis of perception rather than the behavior that results (from perception).

Three distinct ways of perceiving the world are labeled: clarks, scotts and rogers. We all begin life with the potential/‘tendancy to perceive’ the world as any of these three types. At some point we become predominantly one.

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

This blog contains descriptions of the three personality types. Still very early in the process, the organization (of the information) is still pre-acceptable. But the core concepts are here. The way that we all see, experience and interpret the world can be put into three groups.

Much remains to be done, of course. But if you have anything to contribute in criticism or comment, suggestion or compliment please do so.

GUARANTEE! Give us information about your life and we will tell you more about your life experiences than we have any reason or right to know. (Offer not valid in states of mind that preclude entertaining such a notion, including but not limited to rogers and some scotts.)

Share