After three meetings discussing the marketing campaign for the company’s most recent product, team leader Jerry’s (ESTJ) frustration was reaching a tipping point. The team conflict over which specific strategies and tactics to use to launch the product brought decision-making to a stalemate. Knowing how vital it is for the team to embrace the strategy and to be fully committed to implementing specific action steps, Jerry needed the team to “gel” and move forward.

Eric (ENTP) consistently challenges everyone’s assumptions and insists on more data. Nancy (ENTJ) argues that the plan is ready to implement as it is. Daniel (INFJ) reports that the proposed plan and most of what has been discussed is out of alignment with overall product goals. Jerry (ESTJ) expresses worry that the plans being put forth are not based on sufficiently reliable market data.


Jerry decided to use TEAMOSITY™ to both understand what is going on and initiate some actions to break the stalemate. He learned:

  • His own type (ESTJ) typically worries about the reliability of data used in decision making; tends to be impatient with what appears to be slow movement; frustration results in over-using tendencies to gather more data and analyze more finite details.
  • Eric (ENTP) is naturally inclined to question others thinking and urges more discussion in the belief that more useful data will emerge.
  • Nancy’s (ENTJ) need for action is intense when she feels a workable plan is ready to use.
  • Daniel (INFJ) pushes any group to look at how the actions and choices align with the stated goals and organizational context.


Relying on his strengths, Team leader Jerry briefly presented specific, concrete observations to the group about team member tendencies and asked that the team adopt a set of guidelines for collecting relevant data on available options and for prioritizing criteria that will be used to facilitate a decision.

Jerry realized his needs for specific information to be sure about the decision was the most extreme.  Since he was the team leader and was ultimately responsible for the marketing plan’s success, he explained to the team that they all needed to be a little more data based to get through the task.

Using the type-to-type tips in TEAMOSITY™, he tried to adapt to each member’s special needs and contributions.  He put time on the fourth meeting agenda for Eric to spin around consequences and all possible avenues.  He called on Daniel to be the gate keeper for clearing possible Eric thoughts through the strategy and organization culture filter.  He charged Nancy with keeping the group on agenda.  Jerry took responsibility to evaluate the level of supporting data.

Although the meeting took longer than the first three, the group worked the agenda, each member took their special role seriously and the team came to a decision.  A decision Jerry was not his usual 100% sure but that’s the life of diverse teams!

Explore Next Steps for Jerry and the rest of the members of the team?

What would TEAMOSITY™ Type to Type tips suggest for Jerry to pay attention to when communicating with Eric, Nancy, and Daniel?

What specific meeting preferences do the team members have and how can Jerry use these trends to lead future team meetings?

Consider the team needs from the perspective of each team member.  If each team member used TEAMOSITY™ to understand their reactions and the styles of their teammates, what key tactics would each member need to consider?

Jerry has one opening for the team.  What type would be best?