Enneagram: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
=Comments= | =Comments= | ||
The common reproach of the Enneagram is that it is based on pseudoscience. Some believe the Enneagram originated with the Sufi traditions and is a tool for spiritual growth. Irrelevant of its multiple theoretical backgrounds and origins, most ot the measured Enneagram dimensions are comparable to those of other personality systems. They describe observable behaviors and are easy to understand. | The common reproach of the Enneagram is that it is based on pseudoscience. Some believe the Enneagram originated with the Sufi traditions and is a tool for spiritual growth. Irrelevant of its multiple theoretical backgrounds and origins, most ot the measured Enneagram dimensions are comparable to those of other personality systems. They describe observable behaviors and are easy to understand. In the end, people who use Ennegram will say it works: participants like it, it helps establish connections, and it helps them understand some aspects of others’ behavior. It helps team members appreciate their differences. | ||
In the end, people who use Ennegram will say it works: participants like it, it helps establish connections, and it helps them understand some aspects of others’ behavior. It helps team members appreciate their differences. | |||
Combining the dimensions helps bring nuances to each of them, similar to how other type systems have operated with fewer dimensions (three or four) or more (35): the types get combined. Although some Enneagram versions feature ipsative scales, which facilitate comparison between dimensions, it’s unclear whether they enhance their predictive validity compared to those versions with normative scales. | Combining the dimensions helps bring nuances to each of them, similar to how other type systems have operated with fewer dimensions (three or four) or more (35): the types get combined. Although some Enneagram versions feature ipsative scales, which facilitate comparison between dimensions, it’s unclear whether they enhance their predictive validity compared to those versions with normative scales. | ||
| Line 53: | Line 51: | ||
The Enneagram shares the same limitations as any other personality type system: overlap between the dimensions being assessed, a lack of orthogonality between dimensions, and a lack of scarcity of dimensions, as the above comparisons with the GRI factors suggest. | The Enneagram shares the same limitations as any other personality type system: overlap between the dimensions being assessed, a lack of orthogonality between dimensions, and a lack of scarcity of dimensions, as the above comparisons with the GRI factors suggest. | ||
The Enneagram doesn’t measure behavioral intensity, nor does it provide information about a person’s adaptation or the effort required to adapt one’s behavior, thereby further limiting the prescriptive abilities of the system. | The Enneagram doesn’t measure behavioral intensity, nor does it provide information about a person’s adaptation or the effort required to adapt one’s behavior, thereby further limiting the prescriptive abilities of the system. For the same reasons, the Enneagram cannot be used on roles and jobs, nor in recruitment. | ||
For the same reasons, the Enneagram cannot be used on roles and jobs, nor in recruitment. | |||
The lack of rigor in the nine dimensions is understandable, as the findings emerged early on and could not benefit from more recent discoveries from factor analysis. Research on personality factors suggests that nine dimensions may be too many and may not fully encompass the entire range of social behaviors, even when the dimensions are combined. | The lack of rigor in the nine dimensions is understandable, as the findings emerged early on and could not benefit from more recent discoveries from factor analysis. Research on personality factors suggests that nine dimensions may be too many and may not fully encompass the entire range of social behaviors, even when the dimensions are combined. | ||
Latest revision as of 00:20, 28 August 2025
Generalities
The Enneagram emerged in the 1950s with the work of Oscar Ichazo from Bolivia. At that time, Ichazo was teaching a system of self-development called "Protoanalysis," which included the Enneagram figure and concepts like ego-fixations, holy ideas, passions, and virtues. Claudio Naranjo, a psychiatrist from Chile who studied with Naranjo, further developed the Enneagram and played a key role in disseminating it to a broader audience, particularly in the United States during the 1970s.
Naranjo’s work was influenced by George Ivanovich Gurdjieff, a Greek-Armenian philosopher, who, although not directly involved in developing the Enneagram, incorporated it into his teachings and sacred dances in the early 20th century.
There is no single, standardized assessment of the Enneagram. Various companies distribute the technique. The Enneagram exists in various versions, including the Riso-Hudson Enneagram Type Indicator (RHETI) and the Integrative Enneagram Questionnaire (iEQ9).
Assessment
The Enneagram questionnaire can include forced-choice statements, sliding scale responses, indicating agreement or disagreement with statements on a scale, or a comprehensive questionnaire. For instance, the RHETI developed by the Enneagram Institute uses 144 paired statements. In any case, the nine Enneagram types are the following:
| Dimension | Description | GRI a priori |
|---|---|---|
| Reformer | The rational, idealistic type: principled, purposeful, self-controlled, and perfectionistic | Low 2, high 4, High 1, 4 higher thaan 1. |
| Helper | The caring, interpersonal type: Generous, demonstrative, people-pleasing, and possessive | Low 1, high 2, |
| Achiever | The success-oriented, pragmatic type: Adaptive, excelling, driven, and image-conscious | High 1, hIgh 2, 1 higher than 2, very low 3, moderately low 4. |
| Individualist | The sensitive, introspective type: Expressive, dramatic, self-absorbed, and temperamental | Very high 1, very low 2, high 3, very low 4. |
| Investigator | The intense, cerebral Type: Perceptive, innovative, secretive, and isolated | Very high 1, low 2 |
| Loyalist | The committed, security-oriented type: Engaging, responsible, anxious, and suspicious | Low 1, very high 4, moderately high 2, moderately low 3 |
| Enthusiast | The busy, variety-seeking type: Spontaneous, versatile, acquisitive, and scattered | Extremely or very low 3 |
| Challenger | The powerful, dominating type: Self-confident, decisive, willful, and confrontational | Very or extremely high 3, low 2 |
| Peacemaker | The easygoing, self-effacing type: Receptive, reassuring, agreeable, and complacent | Low 1, high 2, high 3, lower 4 than 3 |
The nine types are analyzed by taking into account the following concepts that help combine the types together: The wings are the two adjacent types, as indicated in the Enneagram figure. The nine types are grouped into three triads, which are known as the intellectual, emotional, and instinctual centers. The intellectual center is associated with types 5, 6, and 7. The emotional center is associated with types 2, 3, and 4. The instinctual center is associated with types 8, 9, and 1. Those centers are related to issues and fear, anxiety, depression, or anger. The lines connecting the points add meaning to the information provided by the descriptions of the types. Some analyze them as contributing to a person's overall personality. The lines are sometimes referred to as the "security" and "stress" points, or the points of "integration" and "disintegration."
Each of the nine types has three "instinctual subtypes," which are formed according to which one of three instinctual energies is developed and expressed. They are called "self-preservation" (the need to protect oneself), "sexual" (or "intimacy" or "one-to-one", the need to connect with important others), and "social" (to get along or succeed in groups). There are thus 27 distinct personality patterns.
Usage
The Enneagram is recommended by its publishers for various applications, including personal development, self-discovery, coaching, team-building exercises, and marriage counseling.
Comments
The common reproach of the Enneagram is that it is based on pseudoscience. Some believe the Enneagram originated with the Sufi traditions and is a tool for spiritual growth. Irrelevant of its multiple theoretical backgrounds and origins, most ot the measured Enneagram dimensions are comparable to those of other personality systems. They describe observable behaviors and are easy to understand. In the end, people who use Ennegram will say it works: participants like it, it helps establish connections, and it helps them understand some aspects of others’ behavior. It helps team members appreciate their differences.
Combining the dimensions helps bring nuances to each of them, similar to how other type systems have operated with fewer dimensions (three or four) or more (35): the types get combined. Although some Enneagram versions feature ipsative scales, which facilitate comparison between dimensions, it’s unclear whether they enhance their predictive validity compared to those versions with normative scales.
The system lacks predictive validity and utility, thereby limiting the Enneagram’s applicability to many other applications. You cannot be sure about the quality of descriptions stemming from the Enneagram. It’s sufficient to spark a discussion. It is not enough to make recommendations.
The Enneagram shares the same limitations as any other personality type system: overlap between the dimensions being assessed, a lack of orthogonality between dimensions, and a lack of scarcity of dimensions, as the above comparisons with the GRI factors suggest.
The Enneagram doesn’t measure behavioral intensity, nor does it provide information about a person’s adaptation or the effort required to adapt one’s behavior, thereby further limiting the prescriptive abilities of the system. For the same reasons, the Enneagram cannot be used on roles and jobs, nor in recruitment.
The lack of rigor in the nine dimensions is understandable, as the findings emerged early on and could not benefit from more recent discoveries from factor analysis. Research on personality factors suggests that nine dimensions may be too many and may not fully encompass the entire range of social behaviors, even when the dimensions are combined.
Enneagram training prices vary widely, ranging from as low as $20 for online modules to certification costs of $6,000 or more. There are also similar wide variations in the price of the survey, including free options.