??? 個(gè)性在某些方面就像一個(gè)管弦樂(lè)隊(duì)。正如一個(gè)管弦樂(lè)隊(duì)擁有打擊、弦樂(lè)、木管、銅管和鍵盤等樂(lè)器，以及指揮一樣，個(gè)性有其動(dòng)機(jī)和情緒，知識(shí)和智能，對(duì)行動(dòng)的規(guī)劃和自我管理。個(gè)性演奏著我們的生活樂(lè)章。

????我跟耶魯大學(xué)(Yale University)的大衛(wèi)?卡魯索和北卡羅萊納大學(xué)( University of North Carolina)的阿比蓋爾?潘特一起觀察人們理解個(gè)性的能力是否始終如一地呈現(xiàn)多樣化。我們測(cè)試了人們?cè)?2個(gè)與個(gè)性有關(guān)的領(lǐng)域（或更多，這取決于研究階段）解決問(wèn)題的能力。我們?cè)诿恳粋€(gè)研究中都發(fā)現(xiàn)，擅長(zhǎng)解決某一領(lǐng)域問(wèn)題的人也擅長(zhǎng)解決其他大多數(shù)領(lǐng)域的問(wèn)題。例如，一位懂得愛(ài)說(shuō)話與精力充沛往往相依相伴的測(cè)試對(duì)象也更擅長(zhǎng)發(fā)現(xiàn)存在問(wèn)題的目標(biāo)——比如“永遠(yuǎn)講真話”，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)目標(biāo)可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致一些不得體或以其他方式造成傷害的言論，具體取決于一個(gè)人對(duì)真相的認(rèn)知(personal truths)。那些在某一特定領(lǐng)域的推理能力差強(qiáng)人意的人士，往往也不擅長(zhǎng)分析所有其他領(lǐng)域的問(wèn)題。它表明，人們理解個(gè)性的知識(shí)能力存在很大差異，一些人在這方面的能力高于其他人。

????現(xiàn)在，讓我們回過(guò)頭來(lái)談?wù)勀俏浑y以想象自己對(duì)其他人造成的影響的工程師，以及那位厭倦板凳科學(xué)的化學(xué)師。

????熟悉那位工程師的人都明白，他并沒(méi)有意識(shí)到他的選擇引發(fā)了其他人的猜疑——他無(wú)意妨礙別人，也根本不明白在這件原本很容易解決的人際關(guān)系問(wèn)題上，他已經(jīng)打亂了其他人的生活。

????讓熟悉那位化學(xué)師的人們非常高興的是，她終于意識(shí)到，當(dāng)一個(gè)板凳科學(xué)家并不是她的人生使命，但出于為她著想起見(jiàn)，他們真希望她能夠在職業(yè)生涯的早期就意識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)。

????一旦我們認(rèn)識(shí)到，人們理解個(gè)性的能力存在顯著差異，我們就可以采用一種新視角來(lái)解讀下面這種現(xiàn)象：有些同事表現(xiàn)得非常出色，而其他同事卻時(shí)常做出次優(yōu)選擇，他們的行為總是適得其反。僅僅知道這一點(diǎn)就可以幫助我們應(yīng)對(duì)他們的缺點(diǎn)，同時(shí)理解他們可能面對(duì)的挑戰(zhàn)。

????企業(yè)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者和人力資源教育者也可以采用一些方式來(lái)增強(qiáng)員工對(duì)個(gè)性的理解：

????1. 我們可以制定培訓(xùn)項(xiàng)目，向人們傳授涉及人的個(gè)性和我們?nèi)绾慰创舜说闹R(shí)。這些項(xiàng)目可以包括對(duì)個(gè)性線索，個(gè)性特征及其影響，人們?nèi)绾卧O(shè)定合理與有問(wèn)題的個(gè)人目標(biāo)等問(wèn)題的概述。一些依托于學(xué)校開(kāi)展的社交和情緒學(xué)習(xí)課程（這些課程經(jīng)常包括與個(gè)性相關(guān)的信息）的研究表明，相對(duì)于沒(méi)有學(xué)過(guò)這些科目的學(xué)生，那些有機(jī)會(huì)學(xué)習(xí)的學(xué)生往往會(huì)表現(xiàn)出行為上的優(yōu)勢(shì)。旨在向成年受眾傳授個(gè)性知識(shí)的培訓(xùn)項(xiàng)目或許也可以產(chǎn)生類似的積極作用。

????2. 我們可以讓員工接受有效的人機(jī)智商心理測(cè)試，比如我正在與卡魯索和潘特開(kāi)發(fā)的“人際智商測(cè)試”(TOPI)。這些尺度使得人們用來(lái)理解個(gè)性的推理類型變得明確可見(jiàn)，有助于確認(rèn)在這方面表現(xiàn)強(qiáng)勢(shì)的人士。無(wú)法使用這類尺度之前，我們可以暫且使用那些測(cè)量情商的有效工具。研究心理測(cè)試的心理學(xué)家們現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)發(fā)現(xiàn)，光是接受測(cè)試就能帶來(lái)一定的好處：平均而言，如果一個(gè)人接受優(yōu)秀的心理測(cè)試，得分獲得周到的解釋，他或她的幸福感往往會(huì)得到提升。

????3.我們或許可以重構(gòu)聘請(qǐng)專家?guī)椭俏换瘜W(xué)師這類人力資源活動(dòng)，轉(zhuǎn)而致力于解決與個(gè)性有關(guān)的問(wèn)題。理解個(gè)性的規(guī)律是一項(xiàng)并非每個(gè)人都具備、但人人都需要的技能，需要時(shí)尋求這方面的幫助合情合理。

????

????

????Personality is in some ways like an orchestra. Just as an orchestra has its percussion section, strings, woodwinds, brasses, keyboards, and a conductor, personality has its motives and emotions, knowledge and intelligence, plans for action, and self-management. Personality performs the music of our lives.

????I joined with David R. Caruso of Yale University and Abigail T. Panter of the University of North Carolina to see if people varied consistently in their ability to understand personality. We tested people's problem-solving about personality in 12 areas (or more, depending upon the research phase). In each study, we found that people who were good at problem-solving in one area were good at problem-solving in most of the others. For example, a test taker who understood that talkativeness and high energy-level often go to together was also better at identifying problematic goals such as "always telling the truth" -- which can lead to tactless or otherwise hurtful remarks, depending upon one's personal truths. Those who reasoned poorly in a specific area tended to be less good in all the other areas. This suggested that people possess a broad intellectual capacity to understand personality -- and that some people are better at it than others.

????Now, consider that engineer who had trouble imagining his impact on other people and the chemist who had tired of bench science.

????Those who knew the engineer understood that he was unaware of how dubious his choices seemed to others -- he hadn't intended to disturb others and simply didn't appreciate the disruption in their lives he had caused over what might otherwise have been a readily solved personnel issue.

????Those who knew the chemist were delighted she finally realized that being a bench scientist was not her calling, but wished for her sake she had realized it earlier in her career.

????Once we recognize that people vary dramatically in their abilities to understand personality, we have a new explanation of why some of our colleagues do so well, whereas others make sub-optimal choices and behave in counterproductive ways. Just knowing that can help us deal with their shortcomings and understand the challenges they may face.

????There are also ways for business leaders and HR educators to foster understanding in this area:

????1. We can develop training programs that teach people about personality and how we perceive one another. These programs could include overviews of clues to personality, of personality traits and their implications, and of how people set reasonable vs. problematic personal goals. Research on school-based social and emotional learning programs -- which often include information about personality -- indicates that students who have the opportunity to learn these subjects go on to exhibit behavioral advantages relative to those who don't. Programs aimed to teach personality for an adult audience may well have similar positive effects.

????2. We could provide employees access to valid mental tests of personal intelligence like the Test of Personal Intelligence (TOPI) that I am developing with Caruso and Panter. These scales make tangible the kinds of reasoning that people use to understand personality and help to identify people who are strong performers in the area. Pending the availability of such scales, valid measures of emotional intelligence may serve as a stopgap. Today, psychologists who study psychological testing have found that testing alone confers benefits: People who take a good mental test and receive a thoughtful interpretation of their scores benefit on average in their sense of well-being.

????3. We might reframe the relevant HR activities such as the expert who helped the chemist, as problem-solving about personality. Understanding the rules of personality is a skill set not everyone has -- or needs to have -- and it's reasonable for people to seek help in this area when they need it.???