Watch out for different cultural styles!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a good, brief article by Maria Garaitonandia on pages 26 and 27 in the February 2026 issue of Toastmaster magazine titled Untangling cultural knots and subtitled How to turn misunderstandings into bridges between cultures. Also there is a 32-minute Toastmasters Podcast (on YouTube) with Bo Bennett titled #292 Untangling Cultural Knots to Create Mutual Connection – Maria Garaitonandia.

 

Maria talks about two different cultural types that focus on either relationships or tasks. She begins with an example of Mexican executive Pedro and his American colleague Owen in her second and third paragraphs:

 

“When an urgent matter needed Owen’s sign-off, Pedro hurried to his office, only to find him on the phone. Pedro peeked in, but Owen didn’t acknowledge him, so he walked in and interrupted Owen by signaling with his hand.

 

Taken aback, Owen interrupted his conversation and said to Pedro, ‘Can’t you see I’m on the phone?’ Pedro apologized and tried to explain, but Owen interrupted him and said, ‘When I’m finished, I’ll take care of it,’ and promptly turned his back on Pedro.”

 

Then Maria talks about cultures focused either on relationships or tasks. In cultures focused on relationships (like Brazil, Mexico or in the Middle East) trust and loyalty are the priorities. Communication is contextual and layered. Being attentive and available shows respect. In cultures focused on tasks (like Germany Switzerland or the United States) efficiency and results. Communication is direct, concise, and explicit. Following schedules and procedures shows respect. These differences are summarized above via my PowerPoint table based on her discussion. I think a similar table would have been a useful addition to the article, but could have been left out due to squeezing it into just two pages.

 

Of course, if we were doing a speech that table better would be a build with the following four PowerPoint slides – adding the new information in green and graying out the previous information:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Surrounded by bad books from Thomas Erikson

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Back on February 4, 2020 I blogged about how The Toastmasters Pathways Level 2 project on Understanding Your Communication Style says there are four communication styles. Where did they come from? In that post I discussed the DISC model from William Moulton Marston (Dominance – Influence – Steadiness – Compliance). I mentioned that a popular Swedish book from 2018 by Thomas Erikson, titled Surrounded by Idiots had restated those four categories as colors. Now there is a new 2025, fully revised and expanded edition of that book – Surrounded by Idiots: The four types of human behavior and how to effectively communicate with each in business (and in life). There is a preview at Google Books. He very briefly mentions the DISC model. But finally on pages 333 to 335 there is a short reflection on its history.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On page 37 of the book (and a color version at the inside front cover) there is a four-column table with Different Characteristics per Color, as shown above. The second row has wording for DISC, but there is no explanatory column at the left. Then, on pages 38 to 40, there is another excruciatingly long table listing Characteristic Traits with thirty rows that does include an explanatory column.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And on page 100 there is a 2x2 table (as shown above) with those four types. [He didn’t show the words for DISC, but I have added them].

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, in Chapter 22 beginning on page 251 Thomas discussed The Most Common Combinations of two colors, as I have shown above in another table.

 

The book jacket claims that:

 

“Thomas Erikson is a Swedish behaviorist and the bestselling author of the Surrounded By books, a series about human behavior and communication. The series, including Surrounded by Idiots, has sold more than ten million copies in 70 languages.”  

 

A half-dozen other books in the series are (in chronological order):

 

2020

Surrounded by Psychopaths: How to protect yourself from being manipulated and exploited inbusiness (and in life)

 

2021

Surrounded by Bad Bosses (and Lazy Employees): How to stop struggling, start succeeding,and deal with idiots at work

 

2021

Surrounded by Setbacks: Turning obstacles into success (when everything goes to hell)

 

2022

Surrounded by Narcissists: How to effectively recognize, avoid, and defend yourselfagainst toxic people (and not lose your mind)

 

2023

Surrounded by Energy Vampires: How to slay the time, joy, and soul suckers in your life

 

2024

Surrounded by Liars: How to stop half-truths, deception, and gaslighting from ruining yourlife

 

A post at Reddit pointedly asked Has it occurred to Thomas that he might be the problem?

 

Thomas did not bother to add information from his other books to his latest revised one about Idiots. I found at the public library and skimmed all his others except the Energy Vampires one. Here are excerpts from some of them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 54 of the Psychopaths book has a better 2x2 table (as shown above) with those four DISC types.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And pages 78 and 79 of his Setbacks book has a better table with a description of the four colors (as shown above). Thomas did not bother to repeat those two improved graphics in the revised Idiots book.   

 

Similarly, there is a better Description of DISC on pages 82 and 83 of Surrounded by Psychopaths:

 

“The DISC Model

 

Not everything in an individual’s behavior can be explained by the DISC model.

 

There are other models that explain behavior, but I use this as the basis because it is simple to digest and teach. There are more parts of the puzzle than the colors to map various behavior patterns.

 

The DISC model is based on thorough studies and is used throughout the world. It has been translated into more than fifty different languages.

 

Historically, there are similar views in different cultures – for example the four humors described by Hippocrates, who lived in Greece about 2,500 years ago.

 

About 80 percent of all people have a combination of two colors that dominate their behavior. Approximately 5 percent have only one color that dominates behavior. The others [15 percent] are dominated by three colors.

 

Entirely Green behavior, or Green in combination with one other color, is the most common. The least common is entirely Red behavior, or Red in combination with one other color.

 

There may be differences between the sexes, but I do not deal with the gender perspective in this book.

 

The DISC model does not work for analysing people with ADHD, Asperger’s borderline personality disorder, or other disorders.

 

There are always exceptions to what I claim in this book. People are complex – even Red people can be humble, and Yellows can listen attentively. There are Green people who deal with conflict because they have learned what to do, and many Blues understand when it’s time to stop fact-checking. Problems in communication arise when people lack self-awareness.

 

My own colors are Red and Blue and a bit of Yellow. No Green to speak of. Sorry.”

 

An article edited by Lotten Kalenius from the Swedish Skeptics Association (VoF) on April 15, 2024 is titled One of Sweden’s biggest scientific bluffs which discusses the book and Thomas Erikson. It has a section titled Is Erikson an authority in behavioural science? When he was looked up:  

 

“So, we used Ladok, the register of everyone who has studied at Swedish colleges and university, to see if we could find the courses taken by Erikson. There was no-one with his name and birthdate registered. In fact, Erikson’s professional background is in sales, first for the bank Nordea and then running his own business training salespeople. It is most likely that his only educational background is, at best, the Swedish equivalent of a high school diploma.”   

 

Lotten noted that Erikson was named Fraudster of the Year in 2018 by VoF and also added:

 

“He has as much right as my poodle to call himself a behavioural scientist.”

 

Erikson is quite glib as illustrated in a 12-minute YouTube video titled Red behavioural profile DISC | Dominant people | Surrounded by Idiots. But what he mostly says is Ipse Dixit – dogmatic expressions of opinion asserted without proof. I will ignore all of it. Think carefully before you accept any of it.

 

A jester statue was adapted from one at Wikimedia Commons.

 

 

More about the Toastmasters Pathways Level 2 project on Understanding Your Communication Style

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On February 4, 2020 I blogged about The Toastmasters Pathways Level 2 project on Understanding Your Communication Style. Then I was working in the Presentation Mastery path. Now I’m working on Visionary Communication, and doing the styles project once again. The project has a twelve-item quiz for determining how you rank on the four communication styles shown above – Direct, Analytical, Initiating, or Supportive. I’ve shown them with a character from the original Star Trek TV series who displays that style. You can remember them via the acronym DAIS (which also is the term for a raised platform larger than a podium). The division into styles is a useful tool for thinking about how you communicate, but it should not be taken too seriously.

 

Recently there have been two articles in Toastmaster magazine about this project. The first, by Bill Brown, is on page 9 of the May 2022 issue, and is titled Understanding Your Communication Style. The second, by Greg Glasgow, is on pages 20 to 23 of the June 2022 issue and is titled Direct, Initiating, Supportive, or Analytical? Mr. Glasgow’s article has a section titled A Short Style History which begins with a paragraph stating:

 

“The concept of communication styles has been around for a long time. In 1928 the American psychologist William Moulton Marston published Emotions of Normal People, a book in which he described four primary behavioral styles: dominance, influence, steadiness, and compliance. From this book a world of different communication style families was born.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But he omits stating the acronym DISC, which is how these styles currently are described, or telling us that there are doubts about them. My blog post discussed more history, and referred to a New York Times article on September 17, 2019 by Emma Goldberg is titled Personality Tests Are the Astrology of the Office, and subtitled Psychometric tests like Color Code, Myers-Briggs and DiSC have become a goofy part of corporate life. There is another article by David Burkus on April 6, 2020 titled Personality Tests are Useless (Most of them anyway). He also has a thirteen-minute YouTube video titled Personality Tests Are Useless | DISC, Myers-Briggs(MBTI), Enneagram and almost all the others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The division into four styles used by the Pathways project is not the worst classification. That dubious honor goes to the one in the Wikipedia article on Behavioral communication. As shown above, it says the four styles are Assertive, Aggressive, Passive, and Passive-Aggressive. Assertive is the only desirable one. They must never have heard the Sesame Street song One of These Things (Is Not Like the Others). This classification also turned up in an article by Julia Martins at Asana on June 6, 2023 titled The 4 communication styles every manager should know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even worse there is another version with five styles in an article by Don Weber at Entrepreneur on February 2, 2023 titled How your communication style affects your sales performance. As shown above, it adds a Manipulative style and renames Passive as Submissive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The three or four styles other than Assertive surely would be summarized by Daffy Duck with his famous catchphrase - that You’re Despicable. (The image of Daffy came from Wikimedia Commons).  

 

The Toastmasters Pathways Level 2 project on Understanding Your Communication Style says there are four communication styles. Where did they come from?

Last week I gave a speech for the Understanding Your Communication Style project in Level 2 of Pathways. The project can be downloaded here. That project contains a 12 item quiz for determining your communication style(s). My results are shown above in a bar chart, with references to characters from Star Trek. Taking the quiz was useful. At 50%, my most predominant style was Direct (for which the best adjective is decisive) – and is to be expected for someone who spent a couple decades doing engineering consulting on failure analysis, involving figuring out why stuff busted or rusted. At 42% my second style was Analytical (logical) – reasonable for one who spent his decade long first career as a metallurgist doing research at two large corporations. The other 8% was Initiating (enthusiastic). I got a zero for Supportive (approachable), although long ago I was a medic in the Air Force Reserve (from 1972 to 1978). The project was useful for getting me to stop and think about whether I should continue with the Direct and Analytical styles I had while working - now that I have been retired for a couple years.     

As shown above, the project mentions four styles, which can be described by boxes and with the acronym DAIS. When I see four boxes arranged to form a rectangle, then I also expect to see an explanation using perpendicular axes for two factors at low and high values. 

As shown above, I have added them for another four different types used in the Wikipedia article on Behavioral Communication. Their four styles are: Assertive, Passive, Passive-Aggressive, and Aggressive. But only the Assertive style can be considered positive. The other three can best be described via Daffy Duck’s catchphrase: “You’re despicable!”

I got curious, and searched to locate where the four styles in the Pathways project came from. I found an article by Sean Ellis at Life Coach Directory on November 29, 2018 titled Style is everything (for effective communication) which said those communication styles were aligned with four behavioral styles in the DISC model, as shown above. The behavioral styles came from William Moulton Marston (1893 – 1947), who also created the comic book character Wonder Woman. How did the DISC model wind up in Toastmasters? When I looked on the Toastmasters International web site I found DISC mentioned in the Accredited Speaker profile page for Dr. Dilip Abayasekara (who was President in 2005-2006) – he is a certified DiSC (R) trainer. DISC also is mentioned in an article by Mitch Mirkin titled Communication Guru Lisa B. Marshall on pages 12 and 13 in the August 2016 issue of Toastmaster magazine. I found two other articles by Dr. Abayasekara. One at Squarespace is titled The behavioral connection to effective communication. Another is a newsletter titled How does your preferred behavioral style affect your communication style?

Of course, there are many other ways to describe behavior. There is a 21-section article at BusinessBalls on Personality Theories and Types. Another article by Richard C. Emmanuel titled Do certain personality types have a particular communication style? in the International Journal of Social Science and Humanities (Vol. 2, No. 1, April 2013) has a table listing sixteen different sets of four types for a time span ranging from the Bible and the ancient Greeks up to the 21 st century.  

Three recent articles have cautioned about DISC and other models. At Medium on February 2, 2019 there is an article by Ron Soak titled A warning against using DiSC/Myers-Briggs profiling in the workplace. An article in The New York Times on September 17, 2019 by Emma Goldberg is titled Personality Tests Are the Astrology of the Office, and subtitled Psychometric tests like Color Code, Myers-Briggs and DiSC have become a goofy part of corporate life. But what happens when we take them seriously? A post by Steven Novella, MD, at his Neurologica blog on January 17, 2020 is titled Personality Test Pseudoscience – Swedish Edition.

Dr. Novella links to an article by psychologist Dan Katz at the Swedish Skeptics Society titled How Swedes were fooled by one of the biggest scientific bluffs of our time. It is about a popular book by Thomas Erikson titled Surrounded by Idiots: the four types of human behavior and how to effectively communicate with each in business (and in life). As shown above, Erikson had restated DISC into four colors. For 2018 the Swedish Skeptics Society named Erikson as Fraudster of the Year. So, DISC just is pop psychology drivel that should not be taken seriously.

There is nothing that limits us to four types though. Dan Katz’s article mentions the Big Five personality model (shown above), which is described both in a Wikipedia page and in section ten of the previously mentioned BusinessBalls article. The Big Five has a rational basis.     

How about six types? Dr. Taibi Kahler developed a Process Communication Model with six, as shown above. They are described briefly on a Wikipedia page and explained by him in a six-minute YouTube Video. He has described the history in a long article from 2013 titled Forty Five Years and Counting … on You.

If you would prefer a mystical discussion using even more styles (nine), then there is the Enneagram of Personality shown above (using this diagram). Nine items might be rationally explained by using perpendicular axes for two factors at low, medium, and high values (like a Tic Tac Toe game board). But that might imply the middle type somehow was more special, so the diagram is not drawn that way.

Whether you are rational or mystical you can find a classification of styles to like.