5.1 Differences in People and Personality Preferences
Key Takeaways
- CM3 describes differences through four preference pairs: Extravert-Introvert, Sensing-iNtuiting, Thinking-Feeling, and Judging-Perceiving
- Judging types prefer situations to be cut and dried, working to a timetable in a systematic and methodical way
- Sensing types focus on definite detailed facts, while iNtuiting types are big-picture people who enjoy concepts and theory
- An Introvert with a Sensing preference tends to support careful incremental change, while an Extravert with iNtuiting preferences favours dramatic immediate change
- The aim is to look for the strengths each person contributes rather than to label or exclude
The People and change syllabus area opens with individual differences, because how someone responds to change depends heavily on personality preferences. CM3 lists several ways of describing differences — personality profiles, types, talents, preferences about receiving information, and learning styles — and examines the four-pair type model in detail.
The four preference pairs
Extravert (E) — Introvert (I)
| Extravert: energised by the external world | Introvert: energised by their own inner world |
|---|---|
| Likes talking to people, being sociable | Enjoys their own thoughts and feelings |
| Likes to learn by activity and talk | Prefers writing to express ideas |
| Lots of interests | Fewer, more serious interests |
| Speaks first, thinks about it later | Thinks before they speak |
| Likes starting new things | A reflective learner |
Sensing (S) — iNtuiting (N)
The N abbreviation avoids confusion with Introvert.
| Sensing: focuses on sensory data | iNtuiting: focuses on interpretations and intuitions |
|---|---|
| Focuses on what their senses tell them | A big-picture person |
| Pays attention to definite, detailed facts | Enjoys concepts and theory |
| Notices things in an orderly way | Looks behind facts for meaning |
| Likes getting information in clear stages |
Thinking (T) — Feeling (F)
| Thinking: decides with logic | Feeling: decides with values |
|---|---|
| Treats problems with logic | Decides with empathy and consideration for others |
| Cause-and-effect reasoning | With compassion |
| Tough minded | Based on values and beliefs |
| Looks for the objectively right answer | Seeks a widely accepted outcome |
| Appreciates just solutions | Open to and accepting of others |
Judging (J) — Perceiving (P)
| Judging: prefers things cut and dried and clear | Perceiving: prefers open-ended, ambiguous situations |
|---|---|
| Working to a timetable | Spontaneous |
| Systematic and methodical | Happy with ambiguity |
| Likes to plan | Likes to be flexible and adaptable |
| Appreciates closure on decisions | Dislikes restrictive systems and detailed plans |
| Dislikes the pressure of leaving things late | Positively enjoys urgent work |
The descriptor systematic and methodical belongs to Judging and is a favourite exam item, because candidates instinctively associate methodical working with Sensing. Sensing is about what information you attend to; Judging is about how you like to organise and close things down.
Preferences at work in learning
Preferences shape how people want to be taught:
- People with a strong Sensing preference are likely to appreciate more detailed instruction; those with the opposite iNtuiting preference prefer more open-ended approaches
- Those with a strong Thinking preference typically seek more rigorous logic in their learning and less personal support than those with the opposite Feeling preference
The practical implication for a change manager designing training: a single format will serve part of the audience well and part badly. Offering the detailed step-by-step guide and the one-page conceptual overview is not duplication — it is coverage.
Preferences at work in change situations
Type preferences also affect attitude to change, and CM3 gives four specific combinations:
| Combination | Likely attitude to change |
|---|---|
| Strong Introvert + Sensing | A thoughtful, down-to-earth approach that supports only careful, incremental change |
| Strong Extravert + iNtuitive | Likely to favour engaging with others in dramatic and immediate change |
| Introverted iNtuitive | Favours ideas and vision |
| Extraverted Sensing | Wants to organise immediate action |
This is genuinely useful when reading a stakeholder. A senior manager who keeps asking for more detail and pushing back on timescales may not be resisting the change at all — they may be an Introverted Sensing type doing exactly what such a person does with an ambitious proposal. Responding with more enthusiasm is precisely the wrong move; responding with detail and a phased plan is right.
Conflicts and complementarity
The purpose of the model is not to sort people into boxes. CM3 is explicit: the ideal is to look for the strengths that each person can contribute to a given situation.
The worked example given is a meeting to discuss the impact of change on a work group. The Thinking person brings objectivity, rationality and care for fairness, all of which matter to a good outcome. The Feeling colleague brings a natural sense of humanity and sensitive understanding of the people involved, which also matters. Ideally we value both while respecting the different preferences from which they come — and if the two individuals can begin to understand and respect each other's contribution, they could begin to make a great team.
That framing matters for the exam and for practice. Questions that offer an option about excluding a personality type, or matching people to changes they will find comfortable, are testing whether you have understood that the model is about harvesting difference, not managing it away. It connects directly to the later material on team diversity, where diverse teams with high psychological safety outperform teams of similars.
A colleague works to a timetable, plans ahead, dislikes leaving things late and wants decisions closed off rather than left open. Which preference does this describe?
A stakeholder consistently asks for more detail, resists ambitious timescales and argues for a slower roll-out. Which preference combination does CM3 associate with supporting only careful, incremental change?
What does CM3 identify as the ideal use of personality preference models in change?