Systems Research Vol. 13 No. 4, pp.

435446 1996

H Research Paper

On Pairs and Trios:

The Smallest Social Systems
Russell L. Ackoff
INTERACT, 401 City Avenue, Suite 525, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, USA

The psychological types of [Link]-introversion and extroversion-are expanded and

with appropriate hypotheses are used to explain the quality of the interactions between
members of pairs, trios, and larger 'small' groups. The application of these concepts and
hypotheses to cultures is also explored.

Key words psychological types; introversion-extroversion; pairs; trios; objective; subjective; extemali-
zers;intemalizers; cultures

INTRODUCTION types particular individuals fell. We learned

there were several such tests, and obtained
Those of us whose work focuses on social copies of each. Then we gave each of the tests
systems tend to be concerned with ones that are to each of a sample of graduate students. To our
large and complex, for example, corporations, surprise, different tests for determining what
institutions, govemments, nations, coalitions of were allegedly the same properties when applied
nations, and the world. There is nothing wrong to the same person yielded sisnificantly different
with this tendency, but because of it we miss an results. We discussed this with several clinical
opportunity to do some useful work and to have psychologists whom we knew and who were
fun by focusing on the smallest social systems: familiar with Jung's work. They expressed no
pairs and trios. The effort to do so described here surprise at our findings and explained that they
was carried out as a labor of love rather than as did not consider paper-and-pencil tests a suit-
professionally motivated research. Therefore, it able substitute for clinical interviews. Following
does not obey the rigorous demands of accept- their advice, we arranged for several of them
able science. For this reason I tell it as a story independently to determine the type into which
rather than present it as a research report. each of a set of graduate students fell. Once
again we obtained inconsistent results.
Churchman and I thought of two possible
BACKGROUND explanations of such inconsistency. First, per-
haps Jung's types were nonsense. We found this
In 1946 C. West Churchman and I were strongly hard to believe and, furthermore, if we accepted
attracted by C.G. Jung's (1924) personality it, it would leave us at a dead end. Second,
categories, introversion and extroversion. We perhaps Jung's concepts involved two or more
inquired as to whether any tests had been dimensions, and different tests and different
developed to determine into which of these clinicians were using one dimension to the

CCC 0731-7239/96/04043512 Received 2 August 1995

0 1996 by JohnWiley 8 Sons Ltd Accepted 5 September 1995
RESEARCH PAPER Systems Research

weight category would not. Their judgments

would be reversed for a person who was small
but heavy. Churchman and I suspected that
something like this was going on with respect to
introversion+xtroversion. Therefore, we directed
our efforts to determining what the underlying
dimensions of introversion and extroversion
might be.
Returning to Jung's writing we extracted every
one of his descriptions of the types and found
that they fell into two categories: those that dealt
with (1) how the environment affects an indivi-
dual, and (2) how an individual affects the
environment. Furthermore, it was apparent that
Jung took selfand the environment to be exclusive
Figure 1 Example of a huo-dimensional type and exhaustive categories. Therefore, the com-
plement of the effect of the environment on an
exclusion of the other@).This turned out to be individual is the effect of the self on the
the case. individual, and similarly, the complement of
To understand this type of explanation sup- the effect of the individual on the environment is
pose all males could be classified as either the effect of the individual on self.
(American)football players or not football players. We then developed ratio measures of each of
Suppose further that to be a football player one these effects. We took the function formed by the
had to be both big (over a specified height) and probability of an individual's response to
heavy (over a specified weight). Then we could environmental stimuli of different intensity
prepare a little table (Figure 1) showing the four (Figure2). This was a measure of an individual's
possible types of males. Four is the minimal sensitivity to his/her environment. Those who
number of types because each variable cannot be are more sensitive to their environments than
divided into less than two categories. their selves we labelled objectiverts, and those
Now imagine a person who falls in the big- more sensitive to self, subjectiverts. We took the
light category. An observer who employed only function formed by a plot of the cumulative
the size category would see this person as a probability of behavior against the intensity of its
football player, but one who used only the effect on the environment to provide a measure
of externalizution and internalization (Figure 3).
1.

w
OrRrponr

0 o r
0 1
y E M on Envlrwmrn
i n ~ (d
In*Ml(ydEmkfmwW8lknulU

Figure 2 E@t of environment on individual Figure 3 Effect of individual on environment

436 Russell L. Ackoff

Systems Research RESEARCH PAPER

uuk-

Figure 4 Four basic personality types Figure 5 Five basic personality types

By combining the two scales and the two we re-examined the tests for introversion-
categories associated with each, we obtain the extroversion and the recorded clinical inter-
four (basic) personality types shown in Figure 4. views that had been used earlier to classify the
students, we found that each test and inter-
0 Subjective-ZnternuZhm (Sls): characteristically view had a clearly discernible bias toward one
respond to internal rather than external of the two dimensions we had identified. This
stimuli, and do so by changing themselves. explained the inconsistency of both the test
0 Subjective-Extmlizers (SEs): characteristically results and the clinical judgments. For example,
respond to internal rather than external a test that focused exclusively on the effect of an
stimuli, and do so by changing their individual on hidher environment/self would
environments. judge an externalizer to be an extrovert. But if
0 Objedive-Zntmalizers (01s): charactenstically that individual were also a subjectivert, a test
respond to external rather than internal that focuses on the effects of environment/self
stimuli, and do so by changing themselves. on the individual, would judge that same
0 Objecfive-Extmlhm (OEs): characteristically individual to be an introvert.
respond to external rather than internal Churchman and I subsequently made h e r
stimuli, and do so by changing their distinctions in the personality space. First, we
environments. introduced a fifth type, the centravert, shown in
Figure 5. The centravert falls in the middle
Churchman and I equated the subjective- section of both scales. Then we divided the
internalizer with Jung's introvert, and the personality space into the nine types shown in
objective-externalizer with Jung's extrovert. We Figure 6. However, the four or five basic types
called these categories pure types and the turned out to be all we needed for most
other two, subjective-extemalizer and objective- subsequent applications.
intemalizer, mixed types. The pure types are
oriented to self or environment in both directions
(that is, as input and output), but the mixed SOME PROTOTYPES
types are oriented to self in one direction and
environment in the other. The nature of the types we came up with is
At this point in the development of our illuminated by the use of prototypes.
thinking we went back to the students used
in our earlier tests to determine where they fell Objective-Externalizer
in the 'personality space' we had constructed.
We found that about three-quarters of them The roles played by actor John Wayne in his
fell into the mixed types. Furthermore, when motion pictures, if not John Wayne himself, was

On Pairs and Trios 437

RESEARCH PAPER Systems Research
1.1
. .. while active in the performance of her
.
duties . . inwardly she was engrossed with
ob*o*rr
thought reaching far beyond the circle of
her daily concerns.
...she had become imbued with a sense of
having a mission to free France from the
English. She heard the voices of St Michael,
St Catherine and St Margaret urging her on.

- 1.0
(v. 15, p. 420)

Objective-Internalizer

Another heroine, Florence Nightingale, was a

model of the objective intemalizer. She was
Figure 6 Nine basic personality types extremely sensitive to the needs of others and
dedicated herself to satisfying them even at a
a model of extroversion, objective externalizing. considerable cost to herself. This accommodating,
In virtually all of his parts he was swept up in a self-sacrificing approach to external needs is also
cause not of his own making, but one presented reflected in the Encyclopaedia's description of her:
to or imposed on him by his environment. In From her earliest years.. . her great delight
each case he undertook doing something about was to nurse and bandage her dolls. Her
an undesirable external situation, usually manip- first living patient was a shepherds dog.
ulating or otherwise affecting others signifi- From tending animals she passed to human
cantly. The causes he supported were not beings, and wherever there was sorrow or
intellectual, not based on ideas but on environ- suffering she was sure to be found. Her
mental conditions. The characters he played most ardent desire was to use her talents for
were seldom seen in acts of reflection or
introspection. They lacked depth, subtlety, and
.
the benefit of humanity . . (v. 19, p. 684)
self-consciousness but they had big hearts and The story of Miss Nightingale's labours at
cared about the welfare of others. Scutari is one of the brightest pages in
English annals. She gave herself body and
soul, to the work. She would stand for
Subjective-Externalizer twenty hours at a stretch to see the
wounded accommodated. She regularly
Joan of Arc was a model of the subjective- took her place in the operation-room, to
externalizer. She was as dedicated to changing hearten the sufferers by her presence and
her environment as any of John Wayne's sympathy, and at night she would make
characters, but unlike them she was driven her solitary round of the wards, lamp in
from within, reacting to an inner voice or vision hand, stopping here and there to speak a
rather than an external state of affairs. This is
reflected in a description of her provided by the
..
kindly word to some patient . For a time
Miss Nightingale was herself prostrated
Encyclopaedia Britunnicu (11th edition):
with fever, but she refused to leave her
post, and remained at Scutari till Turkey
... her vivacity . .. was the direct outcome was evacuated by the British in July 1856.
of an abnormally sensitive nervous (v. 19, p. 685)
temperament . . .

As she grew to womanhood she became Subjective-Internalizer

inclined to silence, and spent much of her
time in silence and prayer. Most hermits and recluses are introverts,
438 Russell L. Ackoff
Systems Research RESEARCH PAPER

subjective-intemali. However, withdrawal thinking on this question began with two con-
from the environment and involvement with tradictory bits of so-called common sense: (1)
oneself does not have to be as extreme as it is in likes attract each other, and (2) unlikes attract
the case of hermits. Nevertheless, for Vincent each other.
Van Gogh it was fairly extreme. Although his We leaned towards the belief that unlikes
paintings were frequently of nature, they were attract each other and likes repel each other
not efforts to depict what he saw, but what he felt because we thought likes probably compete for
about what he saw. They were pictures of what carrying out the same functions, while unlikes
went on inside himself. He tried to satisfy his probably cooperate in this regard. For example, it
own needs, not those of others, or he would have seemed to us that an internalizer might be
painted more conventionallyand saleably, which perfectly willing to let an extemalizer manip-
he was very capable of doing. His few efforts to ulate the environment when such manipulation
form partnerships, as with Gaugin and Toulouse is necessary, as in repairing a defective faucet at
Lautrec, were very short-lived. He could not live home. Two externalizers, however, might con-
or work with others. He was unable to tolerate flict over who should make the repair. Similarly,
the disapline imposed by the many schools he a subjectivert is more likely to allow an objecti-
attended and, therefore, left all of them before vert to describe what happened in the environ-
completion of his programs. In April, 1889, he ment than is another objectivert. On the other
asked to be temporarily shut up in the asylum at hand, an objectivert is much more likely to allow
Saint-Remy-de-Provence. He spent much of the a subjectivert to plan their joint activity than to
following year in solitary confinement. allow another objectivert to do so.
His biography in the EncycZopedia Britannia To test these hypotheses it was necessary to
contains such descriptive passages and phrases develop a measure of the similarity/dissimilarity
as the following: of two types, that is, positions in the personality
space such as A and B in Figure 7. Two measures
... he wrestled with temperamental diffi- suggested themselves. The first had to do with
culties and sought his true means of self the distances of these points from the point of
expression . . . centraversion (C). We used the absolute differ-
ence of their distances from this point: JAC- BCJ.
. . . his love was rejected by a London girl in Obviously, if A and B are at the same point, then
1874. His burning desire for human affec- the difference between their distances from C is
tion thwarted, he became and remained zero. We said that such a pair was perfectly
increasingly solitary. balanced. Therefore, the absolute difference

[In 18801 he sank into despair, cut himself

off from everyone.

... he strove to respect natural appearances

and yet to convey by emphatic contours
and heightened effects of colour the reality
of his own feelings about the subject. (15th
edition, 1974, v. 8, pp. 231-233)

PAIRS

Once we had developed a satisfactory way to

type individuals, it was natural to ask how well
individuals of the same type or different types
interact. What are the characteristics of the w w ObWW

system created by their interactions? Our Figure 7 A symmetrical balanced pair

On Pairs and Trios 439

 RESEARCH PAPER Systems Research
IAC - BCJ was taken as a measure of imbalance. measure permitted a reformulation of the pairing
Note that the imbalance is at a maximum when hypothesis:
one individual is at the point of centraversion
(C) and the other is at one of the comers of the The ability ofa pair to get along together is inversely
space. proportional to the distance of their pair-point fiom
Second, the angle between lines AC and BC the point ojcentraversion.
also seemed relevant. If A and B lie on the same
straight line drawn through C, but on different Three characteristics of this measure are
sides of it, then the angle between them was important. First, the pair-point of two people
taken to be 180". (Figure 7 shows a balanced pair who are at the same location in the personality
with a 180"angle between them.) Where A and B space is the same as that of the individual points;
are not on the same straight h e through C, we second, a pair-point falls on a boundary only if
took the smaller of the two angles they form as the position of the pair-points of both members
the relevant one. This meant that 180" was the of the pair fall on the same boundary; and, third,
maximum angle and O", the minimum. This the pair-point of two people who are perfectly
minimum occurred for two points on the same balanced and perfectly symmetrical will fall at
line through C on different sides of C. We used the point of centraversion, hence their distance
the size of this angle as a measure of the pair's from that point is zero.
symmetry or complementarity. A pair whose angle This last condition means that a pair whose
was 180" was taken to be the most symmetrical positions are equidistant from the point of
or complementary; a pair whose angle was 0" centraversion, and are on different sides of the
was taken to be the least symmetrical or same straight line through that point, is the most
complementary. compatible pair. This condition is satisfied, for
We initially hypothesized that the greater the example, when both individual personalities lie
imbalance of a pair and the less symmetrical they were, on the point of centraversion.
the more di&ulfy its members had in getting along The pairing hypothesis seemed plausible to us
together. because we reasoned as follows. Consider a
Since one of the relevant measures was in relatively compatible pair, the subjective-
terms of distance and the other in terms of externalizer (A) and objective-internalizer (B)
angular degrees, initially we had difficulty in shown in Figure 7. If an external problem
seeing how to combine them into a single involving the pair arises, the objective type, B,
measure, but a single measure was clearly is more likely than A to be aware of it. If so,B will
desirable. A way was suggested to us by one of try to solve the problem by adjusting him/
our colleagues-a physical test. He suggested we herself. In this case B would 'see' and 'solve' the
think of the personality space as on a solid plane problem without involving A; there would be no
balanced on a point under it at the point of conflict between them. If, on the other hand, the
centraversion; and of the individuals located in extemalizer A perceives this problem he/she is
that space as weights of equal magnitude. Then more likely to try to solve the problem by
the measure of the rotational force they would manipulating B than him/herself. B is likely to
create would be a measure of their incompatibility. respond cooperatively to A's effort to change
This force is proportional to the distance from C him/her because he/she is an internalizer.
of a point half-way between the positions of Conflict does not arise here either.
the two individuals. We called this midpoint Consider a pair consisting of an introvert, A,
the pair-point. The greater the angle between the and an extrovert B. Because B is sensitive to As
individual points (the more symmetrical they reluctance to be changed by others, B will try to
are) and the less the absolute difference of the solve the problem by manipulating things in
distance between them, the closer their pair- their environment, not A. In this way B acts as a
point is to C. Therefore, the distance of their moat around A protecting him/her from the
pair-point from the point of centraversion can environment. On the other hand, if A perceives
be used as a measure of their incompatibility, that the problem, he/she will try to solve it by
is, their inability to get along together. This changing hirn/herseIf. Should A try to change
440 Russell L. Ackoff
Systems Research RESEARCH PAPER

B, B will respond favorably because he/she is

objective. In such a pair A serves as a substitute
self for B, a self for B to be aware of.
I ran across a case very much like this during a
clinical interview of a married couple in their
fifties. The husband was a postman and
extremely introverted. His wife was a house-
keeper and extremely extroverted. When they
entered the interview room she took the most
comfortable chair and instructed him to sit at her
side in a less comfortable chair than was
available, which he did. The interview began
with her. She answered questions easily and
quickly but tended to talk too much. The Bu
bwn [Link]
interviewer frequently had to cut her short in
order to move on. Eventually, her interview was Figure 8 An asymmetrical unbalanced pair
completed and the interviewer told the husband
that it was now his turn. Up to that point he had intensity that has increased over time, and
not said a word, and he had not looked directly therefore may appear to A to be an over-reaction.
at the interviewer. He continued to avoid looking
at the interviewer even when he was being
questioned. When the first question was Testing the Pairing Hypothesis
addressed to him, his wife immediately
answered it. The interviewer asked her to refrain Our first effort to test the pairing hypothesis
from answering for her husband. She apologized consisted of identifying pairs of faculty members
and said she would. When the second question in our university who had jointly authored one
was directed to him, he did not answer or more published articles. Then we interviewed
immediately. His wife watched him impatiently those involved and estimated their types sub-
and finally could no longer tolerate the delay; jectively. Using these estimates, we determined
once again she answered for him. Although the their pair-points and the distances of these points
interviewer cautioned her again, the same thing from the point of centraversion.
happened on the next question. The interviewer We divided the collaborating pairs into two
then asked the wife if she would mind leaving groups: (1) those who had collaborated only
the room and waiting outside until the interview once; and (2) those who had collaborated more
of her husband was completed. Before she could than once. Then for each group we determined
reply her husband spoke up for the first time. He the average distance of its pair-points from the
said that he would not stay if his wife left. Their point of centraversion. This distance was sig-
division of labor was close to perfect. nificantly larger for those who had collaborated
Consider a less well-matched pair, the objec- only once than for those who had continued to
tive-externalizer (A) and objective-internalizer collaborate after their first experience of it. This
shown (B) in Figure 8. Both are sensitive to the result, of course, was consistent with our
environment and will compete with respect to hypothesis.
interpreting what is going on out there. The Next we had clinical psychologists interview
externalizer (A) will keep trying to correct the and determine the personality type of each
internalizeis (B’s) interpretation of what is going member of a number of married couples and a
on. This can become a bone of contention number of divorced couples. The interviewers
between them. B may not react overtly to A’s had no knowledge of the hypothesis being
criticism but, because B is sensitive to criticism, tested. Once again, the location of the pair
he/she will resent it. Such resentment may be points and the average distance of those in each
internalized and accumulate over time. When it group of subjects were estimated. The average
does come out it is likely to do so with an distance of the pair-points of the divorced
On Pairs and Trios 44 1
 RESEARCH PAPER Systems Research

coupIes from the point of centraversion was

significantly greater than that of the still-married
couples. The results were consistent with our
hypothesis, but they suggested a much stronger
test of it.
We used married couples again, but this time
we used only those that had been married for 10
years or more. Clinical interviewers, who were
not informed of the hypothesis being tested,
typed each member of each couple. Then we
used two marriage counselors to interview each
couple together. The interviewers knew nothing
of our hypothesis but were asked to make the
following judgment: Would the couple remarry if I I I

they were to learn at this moment that their marrkge Subjoctlw Objrctiw

was not valid and there were no external pressure on

them to remarry? The interviewers had to answer Figure 9 Pair-point P(AB)and trio-pint P(AB-D)
this question independently of each other. Then The principle used in defining the trio-point
we used only those couples on which the was used to define points characterizing larger
interviewers had agreed. (This included most of groups. For a quartet, two exclusive pairs are
them by far.) Then once again we compared the defined-it does not matter which pairs are
average distances of the pair-points from the selected--and their pair-points are determined
point of centraversion and obtained a sigrufi- (Figure 10). Then the pair-point of these pair-
cantly larger average distance for those couples points is the quartet-point. For a quintet, first a
that the interviewersjudged would not remarry quartet-point is determined for any four of the
voluntarily. five. Then the quintet-point is one-fifth the way
from the quartet point on a straight line from it to
the position of the remaining person in the group.
THREE A N D MORE Using this measure, we generalized the
pairing-hypothesis as follows:
It occurred to us that if we could characterize the
compatibility of pairs, we might be able to do so The ability of the members of a group of n directly
for larger groups, so we turned to trios. First, we interacting members to get along together is
had to define a trio-point. We did this by fmding
a point to characterize the relationshipbetween a
pair (A and B) and a single individual (D) (see
Figure 9). Let P(AB) represent the pair-point of A
and B. Then we could find the pair point between
P(AB) and D but this would not reflect the fact
that P(AB) involves two people and D only one.
Therefore, instead of taking a point midway
between P(AB) and D,we took a point one-third
the way from P(AB) along the straight line
connecting P(AB) and D.
ouvhf Polnf
I
I
Such trio-points always fall within the person-
ality space. They can only fall on a boundary of the
space when all three points fall on the same
boundary. Finally, the trio-point of three people all
of whom have the same position in the personality ObJ88llw
mwv.
space is at that position. This is the same as it is for
two people with the same position. Figure 10 A quartet-point
442 Russell L. Ackoff
Systems Research RESEARCH PAPER

inversely proportional to the distance of their n- 1 1 1

point from the point of centraversion.

We have had no opportunity to test this hypo-

thesis either formally or informally, but the
personnel department of one large company
did. It was interested in using this hypothesis
in forming small task forces and teams. We
trained some of the members of this department
in the use of our clinical interviews and our self-
administered test. They later reported to us that
they had formed groups using our hypothesis
and were convinced that they had obtained more
effective teams than they would have obtained
otherwise.
Figure 11 An increase in R couple's (A and B) stability by
the addition ofa child (D)
THE FAMILY
Families are, in a sense, small teams. Like some to form at or near the point of centraversion. To
but not all teams, families grow and contract, but the extent that the first-born's personality is
unlike most other teams their additions are conditioned in this way, that child can convert
usually infants whose personalities have not yet even a very poorly matched pair into a better
taken shape. Therefore, we began to focus on the matched trio. It is in this sense that a child can
effects on a family of the addition of a child, and stabilize an otherwise unstable marriage.
the effect of a family on the formation of the However, there are couples so badly matched
child's personality. that the addition of a third person cannot bring
Adding a member to a team is an opportunity their trio-point to the point of centraversion,
that may either increase or decrease its compat- although it can bring the trio-point significantly
ibility. It seemed to us that in a family situation closer to the point of centraversion. The most
the formation of the personality of a child is extreme case possible is shown in Figure 12. In
influenced significantlyby how the family treats this trio, the addition, 0,is located as well as
the child. Therefore, we suspected that families
tend to shape the personalities of their children Parents
A6
so as to increase the compatibility of the family,
making it easier for its members to get along
together. We also suspected that the influence of
a family on the formationof a child's personality
was unconscious. Speculation along these lines
led to the following psychogenetic hypothesis:

The personality of a child added to afamily tends to

be formed so as to increase the stability ofthefamily.
Inlomallxor
If, for example, the personalities of the married
couple, A and B, are as shown in Figure 11, then
the personality of the first-born will tend to be in
0 Chlld
the vicinity of D which would place the trio-
point, P(ABD),at the point of centraversion, C. If SubJoctlw ObJoctiW

the couple is well balanced, as they are in Figure 12 The largest possible improwment to the worst
Figure 7, the first child's personality will tend possible couple

On Pairs and Trios 443

RESEARCH PAPER Systems Research

possible, but still cannot bring the trio to the in the life of a married pair, either divorce or
point of centraversion, C. But note that the renewal is quite common.
addition of another child, E, located where D is,
would bring the family-point to the point of
centraversion. Unfortunately, this would occur CULTURES
at a cost to the children D and E they are too
much alike to get along well together. Given the apparent applicability of our typology
In a family with good but not perfectly to groups of increasing size, it was natural to
matched husband and wife, the personality of extend our thinking to societies and their
the first child tends to be closer to the point of cultures. In another place, Emery and I (Ackoff
centraversion than either of the parents. Where and Emery, 1972) wrote that culture is to society
this is the case, the personality of the second what personality is to the individual. This
child is likely to be even closer to the point of suggests that the personality types may also
centraversion than that of the first child. In serve as cultural types.
general, then, for reasonably well-matched I was able to explore this idea while working
couples-ones whose pair-points, say, are no on a project for the Arms Control and Disarma-
more than halfway to a boundary of the ment Agency in Washington, DC. With the help
personality space-each successive child will of our project officer, Dr Thomas Saaty, a group
have a personality closer to the point of centra- of experts on foreign countries were brought
version than those who preceded him/her. This together. They were exposed to a detailed
may help explain why large families tend to be exposition and discussion of our personality
more stable than small ones, and why divorce types. Then each expert was given a list of 25
rates are higher among childless couples than countries and asked to identify the type of any
among ones with children. Note also that as they felt they knew well.
family size increases, the probability of the We obtained complete agreement on about
family containing a well-matched subgroup 75% of the countries on the list. There was
increases. essential agreement on about half of the remain-
We never tested the personality formation der. Of significance was the fact that the
hypothesis rigorously. But we did test it inform- countries on which there was little or no
ally on families we knew well. The results agreement were ones with which the USA had
certainly seemed to support our hypothesis. interacted little in recent years.
It should be emphasized that the effects of a We then identified a number of international
family on personality formation are almost negotiated agreements, such as treaties, invol-
always the result of pressure applied uncon- ving only countries on which our experts had
sciously. For example, a child born of two reached agreement. For each negotiation we then
introverted parents learns rapidly that he/she estimated the group-point and its distance from
can win approval most easily by handling a large the point of centraversion. Simultaneously, we
part of the family’s interactions with its environ- arranged for a group of political scientists to
ment. In this way he/she alleviates the parents’ determine whether each agreement on our list
problem with the environment. If he/she were to had been successful or not. We then calculated
become introverted, he/she would exacerbate the average distances from centraversion of the
their problem and create one for him/herself. successful and the unsuccessful groups. The
Sensing what types of orientation make the average distance of the unsuccessful groups
family members more compatible, the child’s was significantly larger than that of the success-
personality tends to move in that direction. ful groups.
As the members of a married pair grow older
their personalities tend to change. They may
become either a better or worse pair. Therefore, Some Examples (Figure 13)
when children grow up and leave home, the
parents may find themselves either on a second There was complete agreement among our experts
honeymoon or in need of separation. At this time that the USA was a subjective-externalizing
444 Russell L. Ackoff
Systems Research RESEARCH PAPER

They were both manipulative of their environ-

us.s.R
ments and therefore competed for control of it.
The Soviets, however, were primarily driven by
external events to which they were much more
sensitive than Americans, who were primarily
driven by internal conditions.
On the other hand, the UK was uniformly
judged to be objective-internalizing (01),
although it was also judged to have been
klern(lllmr U.K.
subjective-externalizing during its ’empire
days’. This would explain the current friendship
FRANCE of the USA and the UK (SE and 01), and the
earlier enmity between them when they were of
the same type. This also indicates that the UK
[Link] ObWIW
had problems with the USSR, but that these were
different from those that the USA had. To the UK
Figure 13 7’he ‘persomlity’ofsome nations the USSR appeared to be excessively mani-
pulative, and to the USSR the UK appeared to
(SE) nation. It was seen as driven by its own be excessively passive, reactive as opposed to
opinions, perceptions, needs, and desires rather proactive.
than those of others (subjective), but it is France was typed by our experts as introverted
manipulative of others and its environment (SI). This would explain why it got along with the
(externalizing). USSR better than either the USA or the UK. It also
For example, in India in 1957 I found that the explains why no three of these four countries
USA was characterized as a nation that was formed a very stable trio, but that the four
willing to give India anything that it wanted to formed a relatively stable quartet. France’s
get rid of, whether or not the Indians needed or introversion also explains a frequent complaint
wanted it. At that time the Indians had asked the about the French by American tourists: they are
USA to sell it liberty ships that had been built for inhospitable and resent the American presence.
use in World War I1 and were then being To the French, on the other hand, Americans
decommissioned. India wanted these ships for seem loud and brash, too conspicuous and
intercoastal shipping. However, the USA, fearing intrusive.
that this would enable India to compete with US Canada was seen to be like the UK. objective-
international shipping, turned down the Indian internalizing. This is consistent with the tradi-
request and instead offered to sell India its tional friendship between the USA and Canada.
surplus of butter at a bargain price. It made this It also helps explain the internal strife in Canada
offer despite the fact that India did not use much between the British derivatives (01), and the
butter because of lack of refrigeration equipment. French derivatives (SI). The desire of French
The Indians contrasted this attitude with that of Canada to secede from the rest is consistent with
the USSR which, they said, was very sensitive to its introversion.
Indian needs and desires. They also said that West Germany was seen as similar to the
although Soviet aid was only a fraction of that USA: subjective-externalizing (SE)but not as
given by the USA, it was much more effective extremely so. This explains why the West
because it was sensitive to Indian needs and Germans have had less difficulty in getting
desires. Whether or not these opinions and along with the British than with the French or
attitudes were justified was not as important as Americans.
their existence. One of the most persistent conflicts in the
Experts in the Arms Control and Disarmament world today is that between the Israelis and the
Agency classified the USSR as extroverted, [Link] surrounding Arabs. Both were seen by our
correct, this explained in part the difficulty the experts as subjective-externalizers (SEs), each
USA and the USSR had in getting along together. trying to manipulate the other to its own ends.
On Pairs and Trios 445
RESEARCH PAPER Systems Research

There is very little ground for cooperation narcotic addiction. We suspect the concepts can
between them. When the USA enters their provide useful insights to the use of any
conflict in an attempt to facilitate negotiation, it products, things, or services that affect the way
is not likely to succeed because it is another a person feels about him/herself.
SE. In this situation the UK would be a much Clearly, there is a large opportunity for
more effective negotiator or arbitrator than the expanded and rigorous work on the effect of
USA. personality on small and large groups, and on
cultures.
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
The personality types that have been described
here have been used to explain consumption of a Ackoff, R.L., and Emery, F.E. (1972). On Purposeful
variety of p r o d u c t d e e r , headache pills, tran- Systems, Aldine Atherton, Chicago.
quilizers, candy, and pet food-and also to Jung, C.G. (1924). Psychologi~[Link] Brace,
explain the selection of pets and alcohol and New York.

446 Russell L. Ackoff