[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-293564-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-293564-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","project-teamwork-personality-profiles-and-the-population-at-large-paper","Project Teamwork, Personality Profiles and the Population at Large - paper","","Project management success depends on the people in project teams, not only on tools and techniques. This paper identifies four project leader profiles aligned to characteristics used in the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) matrix, based on a prior study using a Focus/Approach 2x2 framework. By comparing the traits underlying these profiles with Keirsey and Bates’ MBTI distribution, the study assesses likely compatibility for teamwork and highlights personality types less suited to project teamwork.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/project-teamwork-personality-profiles-and-the-population-at-large-paper/293564/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/project-teamwork-personality-profiles-and-the-population-at-large-paper/293564.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Liam","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-18","2026-09-17",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"Why does the paper argue that project success depends on people, not just tools?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It states that drawing chart bars, even when automated, is not enough. The people working in project teams with their leaders are the ones that count under stressed, constraint-heavy project environments.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How are the four project leader profiles defined in the paper?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"They are derived from a Focus vs Approach 2x2 grid. Focus contrasts “Problem” with “People,” and Approach contrasts “Receptive” with “Directive,” yielding the styles Explorer, Driver, Coordinator, and Administrator.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What method does the paper use to compare project leader suitability with the general population?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"It uses the MBTI distribution across the sixteen cells of the MBTI grid, treating the shared attributes behind the four project leader profiles as predictors of compatibility and suitability for teamwork.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},293564,1789665656,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":55,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":80,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},8796095461564,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","Project Teamwork, Personality Profiles and the Population at Large:  \nDo we have enough of the right kind of people?  \nR. Max Wideman, FPMI, AEW Services, Vancouver, BC, Canada  \nThis paper was first published in the Proceedings of the 29th Annual Project Management Institute Seminar/Symposium \"Tides of Change\", Long Beach, California, USA, 1998  \n(Updated for web presentation, April 2002)  \nIntroduction  \nThe tools and techniques of project management are sweeping the western world in a frantic race by enterprises to remain competitive in a global market. No doubt this rush has spawned the feeling of\"Tides of Change\". However, there is also increasing recognition that the art of just drawing bars on charts, however electronically automated, is not enough. The people that work in project teams together with their leaders are the ones that count. The question is, what sort of people make for successful teams—and do we have enough of them in the typical organization?  \nOver the years, many efforts have been made to classify different types of people, especially according to their effectiveness and suitability in a corporate organization. The tacit assumption that everyone belongs somewhere is often made, and it isjust a question of finding where. This is not necessarily true of the project world. This environment generates stress in meeting specific goals often within severe constraints, plus the conflicting stresses of serving across organizational boundaries, to say nothing of a frequent overlay of multiple projects. Not everyone is comfortable in this atmosphere.  \nThe purpose of this paper, therefore, is to focus on those characteristics most relevant to a successful project management team and how these people compare to the population at large. Four project leader profiles have been identified in a previous working paper using the Myers-Briggs typology as a structural basis but using vocabulary more appropriate to project work.1 While the project leader profiles are very distinctive, the attributes that make up these profiles are more generally spread throughout the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) matrix.2 We make the usual assumption that people with these same attributes are more likely to be compatible while working together on a project team.  \nKeirsey and Bates have identified the distribution of personality types through the sixteen cells of the four-by-four MBTI grid.3 By using this as a basis for comparison, we can gain an interesting insight into the availability of people suited to various roles in project work. By deduction, we may also infer which personality types are not at all suited to project teamwork.  \nAEWServices, Vancouver, BC © 1997, 2003 [Email: max_wideman@sfu.ca](Email: max_wideman@sfu.ca)  \nProject Teamwork, Personality Profiles and the Population at Large Page 2 of 11  \nGeneral Personality Characteristics Suited to Successful Project Management Work  \nIn our 1996 paper \"Dominant Personality Characteristics Suited to Running a Successful Project (And What Type are You?)\", we described four types of project leader we considered best suited to different project circumstances. These types were derived from a 2x2 grid formed by two axes consisting of\"Focus\" and \"Approach\". Focus reflects the choice between \"Problem\" versus \"People\", while Approach reflects the choice between being \"Receptive\" versus \"Directive\". These axes, their general descriptions, and the four consequent project manager styles of \"Explorer\", \"Driver\", \"Coordinator\" and\"Administrator are shown in Figure 1, Identification of Project Manager's Style.  \nFigure 1. Identification of Project Manager's Style  \nYou will see that we use the term \"Adhocracy\". This is a label coined by Robert Waterman to describe a particular type of loose and flexible project team environment. According to Waterman, under certain project conditions, it is necessary to lend some semblance of structure to travel the apparently unknown route towards the proj","cbCaioXL4iLBvSht","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaioXL4iLBvSht","pdf",246714,11,"English","# Introduction\n# General Personality Characteristics Suited to Successful Project Management Work\n## Project Manager Styles Identification (Figure 1)\n## Explorer Profile\n## Driver Profile\n## Coordinator Profile\n## Administrator Profile","[{\"question\":\"Why does the paper argue that project success depends on people, not just tools?\",\"answer\":\"It states that drawing chart bars, even when automated, is not enough. The people working in project teams with their leaders are the ones that count under stressed, constraint-heavy project environments.\"},{\"question\":\"How are the four project leader profiles defined in the paper?\",\"answer\":\"They are derived from a Focus vs Approach 2x2 grid. Focus contrasts “Problem” with “People,” and Approach contrasts “Receptive” with “Directive,” yielding the styles Explorer, Driver, Coordinator, and Administrator.\"},{\"question\":\"What method does the paper use to compare project leader suitability with the general population?\",\"answer\":\"It uses the MBTI distribution across the sixteen cells of the MBTI grid, treating the shared attributes behind the four project leader profiles as predictors of compatibility and suitability for teamwork.\"}]","Project Teamwork, Personality Profiles and the Population at Large - paper | PDF",28]