Do academics lean left, and if so, why?

This post is a "sidebar", unrelated to the main topic of this blog.  My apologies to readers who are not interested in this controversy.

1.        The perceptual hypothesis

Academics don’t really lean left, they just appear to do so.   In this hypothesis, the presumed or apparent leftward trend is an artifact.  Something about how academics think/speak/act makes others view them as more liberal than they really are.  This hypothesis requires identification of what that “something” is, and proof that when this “something” is partialled out or controlled for, the leftward trend disappears (or, more technically, never existed in the first place):  an example might be the stereotypic “quirkiness” of the prototypical academic.

2.       The self-selection hypothesis

Whatever makes some people (but not others) choose a career in academia is correlated with, or caused by something (an underlying trait or quality) that also is correlated with or causes the pre-existing liberalism that these people had to begin with.  This hypothesis requires identification of what that “something” is (such as the personality trait of open-mindedness or tolerance for ambiguity/complexity).

a.       Variant #1:  The “something” is genetic in origin, such as the D4DR gene that has been linked to differences in levels of risk-taking behavior.

b.       Variant #2:  The “something” is cultural/familial in origin, such as a tendency to find unanswered questions compelling/interesting rather than frightening/threatening (because asking “why” as a child was rewarded rather than ignored or punished).

3.       The other-selection (gatekeeper) hypothesis

Those with liberal values/views are more likely to be accepted into graduate school, and/or into academic positions after graduate school, than those who have conservative values/views.  Though this hypothesis is sometimes presented in pernicious terms (morally questionable cultural bias), in all probability any such “gatekeeping” is not explicitly designed to keep conservatives as such out of academia, but is responsive to other qualities (such as the ability to think critically about certain kinds of issues) that are functional or adaptive within academia, and which are also correlated with liberalism.  This hypothesis requires identification of what those specific qualities are, as well as an explanation of why they might be correlated with political liberalism.  The hypothesis also requires examination of when (in the longitudinal trajectory of becoming an academic) the “gatekeeping” function is likely to be operative.

4.       The attrition hypothesis

Liberals are more likely than conservatives to survive graduate school (or the tenure process once hired);  hence, the pool of (future) academics becomes more liberal over time due to selective drop-out rates that are correlated with political outlook.

a.       Variant #1:  This selective attrition is due to adaptive reasons (like differences in the ability to hold the “habit of twin hypotheses” or to be a “professional undergeneralizer”) that do, in fact, meaningfully and logically predict success in the academic role.

b.       Variant #2:  This selective attrition is due to extraneous reasons (like the perception that one either does or does not “fit in” with the subculture of academia);  those who drop out might be just as effective in the academic role, but become demoralized, disillusioned, or demotivated due to perceptions of a misfit with the underlying values/culture of the academic institution.

5.       The socialization hypothesis

(Future) academics become more liberal over time because something about the academic environment or role has a liberalizing impact.  This includes the notion that academics (like those in any vocational role) are gradually and informally socialized into the “unwritten rules” of the role.

a.       Variant #1: The socialization is due to factors that are intrinsic to the academic role, such as the need to question existing ideas and to continuously challenge one’s own thinking and presuppositions.

b.       Variant #2:  The socialization is due to factors that are extrinsic to the academic role, such as increased exposure to cultural or ideological diversity (as compared to the baseline levels of diversity found in other, non-academic settings).

The Power of a Voice

(This is the text of a keynote address I was asked to give at the grand opening of the UWMC Center for Civic Engagement on February 17, 2011.)

First of all, let me say how honored I am to have been chosen to give this keynote address tonight.

Although some of you know that I’ve been somewhat stressed lately, my stress levels must not be high enough yet, because I was given only one day’s advance notice that I would be giving this talk.  Keep that in mind in deciding how much you want to applaud at the end.

I’d like to talk briefly tonight about the power of community.

This past weekend, my wife and I went to see the movie The King’s Speech.  Without spoiling the movie for those who haven’t seen it yet, there is a very powerful moment in the middle of the film where the speech therapist is explaining to the king how he helped people who were traumatized during the war.  “People need two things,” he said.  “They need to find their voice… and they need to know that someone is listening.”

(And, by the way, after all that students have been doing for me over the past seven days, let me tell you… someone is listening.)

The metaphor of finding your voice is a very powerful one.  Research shows us that a “voice” is not something we are born with.  It’s something we develop gradually over the course of many years.

A liberal arts education has a very important role to play in helping people to find their voice.  One theory suggests a five-step process in finding and learning to trust your voice.  I’ve watched with delight over the years as many of my students have moved from stage one (or two) to stage four (or five) over the course of their time here at UWMC.  Think of this campus as one giant voice development center. 

The addition of the Center for Civic Engagement adds a whole new dimension to this as well!  The boundaries of the university are the boundaries of the state.  Think how far that means your voice can carry, especially with the great acoustics in the new theater!

Sometimes, it’s hard to trust your voice because it’s different from other voices.  That’s why a place where many different voices are honored is so important.  Some students have told me that it wasn’t until they came to UWMC that they discovered that there were other people in the world like them, other people who had similar voices.

A voice isn’t something you develop on your own.  It comes through community.  An infant who is never spoken to, who never hears others speaking, never develops a voice.  Or, they develop a voice, but don’t learn how to pay attention to other voices.  Swiss psychiatrist Paul Tournier calls this “dialogues of the deaf”. 

You develop your voice through interaction and dialogue, whether it be a face-to-face discussion or, as I’m starting to learn this week, a Facebook conversation.  (By the way, I’m up to 85 Facebook friends now.  Don’t ever tell me that a person is too old to  learn something new!)

The collective voice of a community is always louder and stronger than the individual voices of which it is made. 

This is even true in the nonhuman realm.  Many of my students have viewed my classic Hornet Man picture, which depicts my battle a few summers ago with some persistent and angry insects that decided to make the eaves of our roof their home.  I learned to my dismay that a large enough group of insects is smarter than a college professor, even though I have a three-digit IQ.  Biologists call this “swarm intelligence”.  An individual hornet may not know very much, but when it shares what it does know with other hornets, they are a force to be reckoned with.  Collectively, the swarm is nearly indestructible because it doesn’t rely exclusively on any individual hornet, and yet each member of the swarm has its indispensible place.

A voice, then, isn’t something you develop by yourself, and it’s not something you use just for yourself.

Eighty years ago, at the height of the Great Depression, an out-of-work man named “Doc” Cole decided to join a unique foot race.  The race was to begin in Los Angeles and end in New York City, three thousand miles away.  The winner was to receive ten thousand dollars, which would be about $130,000 today.

Doc started out as a fierce competitor, but as the miles rolled by, he got to know his fellow racers and to listen to their stories and their voices.  Soon he began to realize that the race wasn’t just about him.  It was about a story of suffering and survival that had gripped the entire country, and he decided to do something about it.

On the last day of the race, Doc found himself far ahead of the pack of other runners and would have easily bagged the ten thousand dollar prize.  But, ten feet short of the finish line, he stopped, held out his arms, and waited for the next runner.  They linked hands and waited for the third, then the fourth, then the fifth.  When there were finally 20 runners in a row, they all raised their arms in unison, stepped across the finish line, and Doc shouted, “We won!”

That’s community.

My wish for you today is that you will all take the next step in finding your community and your voice, and that when you find it, yours will be a voice for good in the world.

Thank you for inviting me to speak tonight.

Career Roadblocks and Psychological Type

Now that you're a fledgling expert on psychological type (from having read my two previous posts), the fun can begin!  Let's see how type theory can help you when you feel that life has painted you into a corner (at least as far as your career transition or job search are concerned).

Of course, type is not responsible for all career roadblocks.  It's unlikely that type is the cause of the current economic downturn, unless one is to blame the personality types of those in charge of Wall Street (which might be the case).  However, much of the time, people find themselves stalled out in their career transition ventures because they have been shooting themselves in the foot.  Type theory helps to define common ways that different types do that, and suggests strategies for managing the problem.  Today's post will outline the problems, and my next post will provide some potential strategies/solutions.

Challenges for Introverts

1. Introverts tend to undercommunicate during networking ventures, job interviews, and more.  Make sure that you don't say too little.  Very strong Introverts sometimes think they have said something when they've only thought it!  Introverts can treat open-ended questions as if they were simple yes/no questions, to their detriment.
2. Introverts may have limited networks, or may be very intimidated by the networking process.  Some may lack self-confidence in social situations, or may struggle with habitual shyness.  Or they may simply not know how to manage small talk well.
3. For technical reasons having to do with the relationship between the dominant and auxiliary functions (see the previous post), Introverts often fail to put their best foot forward, especially in casual or superficial (or highly formal) social encounters.  Unfortunately, many job interviews fall into this category.  Similarly, Introverts can fail to maintain eye contact during interviews.

Challenges for Extraverts

1.  Extraverts can overcommunicate, running on too long or not recognizing signs of fatigue in their listeners.  They can overelaborate their answers to the point of hopeless redundancy, which can be particularly wearing or draining to an Introverted listener.
2. Extraverts can rely so heavily on networking and relationship-building that they fail to present concrete evidence of their skills in job interviews.  Or, they let networking become an end in itself rather than utilizing it as a means to an end (getting to an interview).
3. Extraverts can strike others as superficial (all sizzle, no steak) if they don't have a good balance between their dominant and their auxiliary functions. 

Challenges for iNtuitives

1. iNtuitives can get so caught up in their visions of the future that they fail to take care of the mundane, practical action steps that are necessary to put feet to their dreams.
2. iNtuitives can be so nonlinear, metaphorical, or even idiosyncratic/eccentric in their communication style that they completely lose or alienate Sensing audiences.
3. iNtuitives can start many more projects than they ever finish, leading in the extreme to a reputation of being a person who can't be counted on to be reliable.

Challenges for Sensors

1. Sensors can have a hard time thinking outside the box, so if traditional/conventional search strategies fail to work for them, they may not be able to generate a more innovative fallback plan (or may not trust such a plan).
2. Sensors can give so many details and specifics in job interviews and other discussions that they bore or alienate others (especially iNtuitive listeners), or run the risk that the main point of what they have to say gets lost.
3. Sensors, because they are skilled at spotting practical flaws and problems, can overdo this style and get a reputation of being pessimistic, change-averse, or a nay-sayer.

Challenges for Feelers

1. Feeling types can be so busy taking care of others that they fail to take care of themselves.  Sometimes they can be fierce advocates for others, while failing to take basic steps to safeguard their own needs.
2. Feeling types can be hypersensitive to criticism, seeing even benign constructive criticism as a frontal attack on their worth and value as persons.
3. Feeling types can seem illogical, or lacking "leadership qualities", to a Thinking decision-maker.  It doesn't help that cultural stereotypes in American business culture strongly favor Thinking.

Challenges for Thinkers

1. Thinkers can be so brief and businesslike that they fail to build rapport in interviews.  Or, they can mistakenly think that a logical exposition of their skills and capabilities is sufficient, forgetting that it's also necessary to build rapport and a personal/emotional connection with others.
2. Thinkers can come across as too blunt and direct (especially if E-T- or --TJ), or as aloof and uninvolved (especially if I-T- or --TP).  These can lead to poor impression management in interviews.
3. Thinkers can  be so focused on what's logical that they fail to factor in the needs and feelings of important others (like family members) in their lives, thus making lopsided life/work decisions.

Challengers for Perceivers

1. Perceivers are procrastinators par excellence.  While any type can put off unpleasant tasks, Perceivers are especially prone to do so.  They can often find something more fun to do than face the unpleasant aspects of a job search. 
2. Perceivers can struggle deeply with issues of time and space management, which can be fatal in a work culture that favors the opposite, Judging traits of organization and timeliness.  Sometimes these traits even take on ADD-like properties, even if that disorder is not really applicable.
3. Perceivers can get a reputation of lacking a sufficient work ethic or of pushing deadlines to the limit.  Or, in sales contexts (like interviews), they can make a good impression but then fail to close the deal.

Challengers for Judgers

1. Judgers can be so quick to make decisions (and then not look back) that they fail to see other, better opportunities that are in their peripheral vision.  They often believe that quick decisions are best, which means that sometimes they decide prematurely.
2. Judgers can push others too hard for premature closure, failing to respect the different decisional rhythms of others who decide more deliberately or more slowly.
3. Judgers can be so oriented toward outward markers of achievement or success that they put themselves under unnecessary stress, becoming workaholics or perfectionists.

Type balance (maturity) can resolve many of these issues, but often, a more focused strategy is needed.  In my next post, I'll discuss some possible strategies.  Stay tuned!

Copyright (c) 2011
Marlowe C. Embree, Ph.D.
President/Founder
Kaleidoscope Consulting Services LLC
marlowe_embree@yahoo.com
Twitter:  marlowe_embree

The Power of Personality Type (Part Two)

In the previous post, I outlined the basic elements of the first layer, or so-called static model, of type theory.  As a reader, you learned what the mysterious eight letters E, I, S, N, T, F, J, and P mean, and how to identify which preferences best fit you.  We briefly explored career-choice implications as well.   You should now be able to understand why ENFJ is the most common type for a clergy member, for instance, or why the prototypical electrician is an ISTP.

In this post, I'll be moving on to the second layer, or so-called dynamic model, of type.  It's called "dynamic" because it has to do with how we change and grow over time, as well as how our preferences lead us to interact with our environment in ways that are unique to our type.

By the way, if you're getting impatient with all this theory, can you see that your personality type is probably responsible?  Some people (usually iNtuitive types) love theory and can't get enough of it, while other people (usually Sensing types) can struggle with seeing the point of too much theory.  If you're in the second group, relax:  we're almost done building our necessary foundation, and will soon move on to the very practical task of helping you to use these ideas to better manage your life and your career.  Not much longer now!

Remember from the last post that you have four mental functions (S, N, T, F) at your disposal.  But you prefer, and are usually much more skilled at using, two of these:  the two that are represented by the middle letters of your four-letter type.  For instance, as an INFP, I'm much more effective in using my iNtuition and Feeling than I am at using my Sensing and Thinking, though I can make some good use of all four.

In the dynamic model of type, one of your two better developed functions (for me, N and F) is your strongest and best function, or your so-called dominant.  Not only is this your strong suit, but it tends to shape your entire life -- your choices, your priorities, your lifestyle.  Many type theorists describe your dominant function as the "captain of the ship".  There are other people on board ship besides the captain, but the captain has the final say.  Similarly, you have four functions at your disposal, but your dominant function exercises veto power over the other three. 

Your second best function is your so-called auxiliary.  Think of this as the "first mate" or "first officer" of the ship.  This function assists the dominant, but the dominant outranks and outvotes the auxiliary.

These two functions develop early in life (in childhood) and are usually very apparent by the time you are an adolescent.  Because the other two functions develop later -- slowly, more gradually, over decades during the adult years -- younger people can easily seem rather imbalanced or lopsided or overly exaggerated in their styles of living.  With age, most of us achieve maturity and balance in our personality, which comes by way of the later-life development of the remaining two functions (the two that are not found in your four-letter type).  However, even for the most balanced and mature among us, these latter two functions remain somewhat childlike (or at least less well developed, less comfortable, less effective, and less trustworthy) than our two better functions.

Your third-best or tertiary function, which is the opposite of your auxiliary (example:  my auxiliary is iNtuition, so my tertiary is its opposite, Sensing), usually develops in your thirties.  For instance, when I turned 30, I began to become more observant, more financially savvy, and more accurate in my use of facts and details.  However, as an iNtuitive type, I'll never be as strong in those areas as a Sensing type would be.  In terms of the ship's crew analogy, the tertiary is like the "second mate" or "petty officer".

Your fourth-best or inferior function, which is the opposite of your dominant (example:  my dominant is Feeling, so my inferior is its opposite, Thinking), usually doesn't begin developing until after your fiftieth birthday.  I'm 56, so my inferior Thinking is finally beginning to make its way onto the stage of my life.   Among the ship's crew, the inferior is like a "cabin boy" (or girl, if you don't want to be unnecessarily sexist).  It's a valued member of the crew, but you don't want the cabin boy running the ship;  you want him doing simple tasks, like bringing a mug of coffee to the captain from time to time.

Under stress, however, your inferior can "go wild" and start taking over the ship (think of a normally meek, mild cabin boy or girl turning into the Incredible Hulk or Xena, Warrior Princess).  This is usually bad news!  Sometimes, your "inner toddler" can throw a temper tantrum.  These are times when you "aren't yourself" and begin acting in ways that you will later regret, so learn to recognize when your inferior function is taking charge.  The problem can be (somewhat) avoided by giving the inferior a place at the table, a set of tasks to do that are within its current range of skill (remember, if you are 50, your inferior function is acting at the level of a five-year-old).  To change the analogy, parents listen to their children, but don't let the children make the important decisions.  Similarly, listen to your weaker functions, but good decisions are made in the long run by your stronger functions (with the necessary input of the weaker).  Don't shut out your weaker functions altogether, which would be like locking your children in the basement (if you do, they may call their Mafia contacts for help and break out to destroy you).

Determining which function is which for your type (the so-called "hierarchy of functions") seems complicated to many people, but here is a simple way to do it.   Look first at the first and last letters of your type.

• If you are an I--J or an E--P type, the second letter of your type is your dominant, and the third letter of your type is your auxiliary.
• If you are an I--P or an E--J type, the third letter of your type is your dominant, and the second letter of your type is your auxiliary.

Remember that the tertiary is the opposite of the auxiliary, and the inferior is the opposite of the dominant, for all types.

Actually, there is one more complicating element.  Each of your functions (S, N, T, F) can be used either outwardly (where others can see) or inwardly (where others can't see).  A function used outwardly is an Extraverted function, while a function used inwardly is an Introverted function.  So, note that the words "Extraverted" and "Introverted" are really used in two different ways in type theory:  they can refer to kinds of people (as an INFP, I am an Introverted person), but also can be used to refer to how the functions are being used (if I am using my creativity to explore possibilities in the outer world, I am Extraverting my iNtuitive function).

If you are an Introverted type, your dominant and your tertiary functions are mostly used inwardly (they are Introverted), while your auxiliary and your inferior are mostly used outwardly (they are Extraverted).

But if you are an Extraverted type, your dominant and your tertiary functions are mostly used outwardly (they are Extraverted), while your auxiliary and your inferior are mostly used inwardly (they are Introverted).

Thus, for me an INFP, what people see about me outwardly (especially in superficial encounters) is my auxiliary Extraverted iNtuition (creative exploration of new ideas in the outer world of discussion and action).  Or, if I'm having a really bad day (in the grip of what Jung called the "shadow", or having a so-called "inferior function eruption"), they see an angry (or self-critical), rigid, explosive person (my inferior Extraverted Thinking having a temper tantrum).  What they don't usually see about me (unless I know them very well) is my dominant Introverted Feeling (my core values and principles, which are actually the captain of the ship);  they also don't usually see my tertiary Introverted Sensing (increasing ability to pay attention to important facts and details, like keeping track of financial matters and being cautious and conservative about them).

Confused?  All this information takes time to digest.  The good news is that once you've done so, you'll have a very important intellectual tool kit at your disposal, which we'll be making use of as we proceed to explore practical aspects of life/work planning and career transition management in future posts.  Hoist the sails, captain, and let the voyage begin!

Copyright (c) 2011
Marlowe C. Embree, Ph.D.
President/Founder
Kaleidoscope Consulting Services LLC
marlowe_embree@yahoo.com
Twitter:  marlowe_embree

The Power of Personality Type (Part One)

In my consulting work over the past 18 years, I have worked extensively with Carl Jung's model of personality type. In the next few entries, I'd like to outline the basics of that model for those who may not be familiar with it, then explore its practical implications for career transition and life/work management.

It would be impossible to do full justice to the multifaceted nature of Jung's model in a few short blog posts.  There are many excellent book-length works on this topic, and interested readers are encouraged to dig deeper by pursuing those works.

According to Jung's model, whenever you are using your mind, you are always doing one of two things.  You are either gathering information, exploring experience or possibilities (in the Jungian model, this is known as Perceiving), or else you are evaluating and assessing that information in order to prioritize it or to make decisions (which is known as Judging).  Note that it's easy to misunderstand the implications of these terms:  a Judging person is not necessarily "judgmental", for instance.   Some of us run our outer lives primarily in a flexible, adaptable, spontaneous manner;  these are Perceiving types.  Others emphasize organization, structure, and planfulness in our outer lives;  these are Judging types.  Can you recognize which of these two descriptions best fits you?  (Don't forget that we are all shaped by the expectations of our social environment, so that -- for example -- many Perceiving types have to act more organized than they would naturally be, or learn to be more decisive than they would normally be, when on the job.  Don't confuse these learned, secondary behaviors with your basic personality type.)  Most retail managers (who have to make a steady stream of quick decisions and not look back) are Judging types, for instance, while most farmers (who have to adjust each day to changing conditions and be able to switch plans to suit) are Perceiving types.

In Jung's model, there are two different ways of Perceiving, and all of us tend to prefer one over the other.  Similarly, there are two different ways of Judging, and each of us has a preference for one of them.  Thus, there are four basic ways of using your mind, which Jung called the four mental functions.

When you are Perceiving, you can either pay attention (often in a linear and rather literal way) to the facts, details, specifics, and tangible concrete realities of the world as it is now, as presented to you through your five senses:  this is Sensing.  Or, you can focus (often in a nonlinear and quite metaphorical way) on the ideas, emerging creative options, innovative big-picture concepts, and intangible abstract possibilities of the world as it could be in the future, using your ability to read between the lines or go beyond what your senses tell you (in a sort of "sixth sense" leap into the future):  this is iNtuition.  (We'll see in a minute why the word iNtuition is written in this rather odd way, with its second letter capitalized).  All of us are capable of both, but each of us prefers either Sensing or iNtuition.  Most accountants (who focus on details and facts) are Sensing types, for instance, while most college professors (who live in a world of abstract theoretical possibilities) are iNtuitive types.  Can you spot your preference?

When you are Judging, you can either make decisions on the basis of objective, impersonal, analytical logic, by focusing on the costs and benefits, risks and gains, assets and liabilities:  this is Thinking.  (Note that, for Jung, the word Thinking does not mean just any mental activity, but this specific kind of mental activity.  Note also that Thinking does not mean the same as "intellect" or "intelligence".)  Conversely, you can make decisions on a subjective, personal, human basis, by focusing on cherished personal values and the feelings, needs, and concerns of yourself and others:  this is Feeling.  (Again, rather oddly, Feeling does not mean the same as emotion:  Feeling decisions are not "emotional" in the sense of being illogical, but are driven by the personal values of the heart.)  Again, we can all do both, but we all have a prefeerence for one or the other.  Not surprisingly, most attorneys (who make a living by making logical arguments) are Thinking types, while most counselors (who make a living by being caring, empathic listeners) are Feeling types.  Do you know which is your preferred function?

Finally, we all live in two different "worlds" (modes or domains of being) at the same time:  the outer or public world of actions, relationships, sociability, and breadth (this is the Extraverted world), and the inner or private world of solitude, reflection, introspection, and depth (this is the Introverted world).  Again, while we all have some capacity to navigate both, we all have a preference.  Those who prefer being "out and about" in the external, public world are Extraverts, while those who prefer being "in and within" their own internal, private world are introverts.   Most computer programmers, for instance (who spend much of their work day by themselves, digging deep into technical problems) are Introverts, while most salespeople (who spend much of their work day interacting with others in more brief conversations) are Extraverts.  Which is your preference?  (Since Introversion begins with the letter I, we had to use the second letter of the word iNtuition -- which also starts with I -- to refer to that function.)

Since these four preferences are (more or less) independent of one another:  you prefer either E or I, either S or N, either T or F, and either J or P, to yield one of sixteen possible psychological types.  For instance, I am an INFP.  You can easily find descriptions (some of which are more reputable than others - beware of purveyors of pop psychology!) of these types by doing an Internet search.

In my next post, I'll explore further implications of type theory for your life and your career transition.  Stay tuned.

Copyright (c) 2011
Marlowe C. Embree, Ph.D.

President/Founder
Kaleidoscope Consulting Services LLC

marlowe_embree@yahoo.com

Twitter:  marlowe_embree

Welcome!

This blog is dedicated to career transitioners, especially (but by no means exclusively) those in midlife, who are seeking to make a radical or dramatic career change.  This might include a shift from conventional employment to self-employment (or vice versa).  It might also include those who seek to move in the direction of a so-called portfolio career, one that encompasses a combination of various time-limited or part-time components, most often of a project-driven nature.  Traditional job seekers, who simply want to find a new job along the same lines of the one they had previously, are also welcome, of course.

A bit about my background.  I have a Ph.D. in social psychology and have spent roughly half of my 32-year career thus far in the world of career consulting/coaching and organizational development training, with the other half having been spent in academia.  Thus, my unique blend of theoretical knowledge and hands-on, real-world experience in assisting hundreds of individuals with their job search and career change voyage, bring a balanced perspective to the task I hope to accomplish in this blog.

Think of this blog as a kaleidoscope (not inappropriate given the name of my consulting firm) or smorgasbord of career transition strategies.  While I offer fee-based services to both individuals and groups, this blog will offer plenty of free information that might well whet your appetite for more!

Given  my long-standing interest in Jungian psychological type theory, I will begin with an overview of that theory for those who aren't familiar with it, then will explore implications and applications of that theory for life in the career-change trenches.  If type theory isn't your cup of tea, relax -- many other topics will also be covered in the weeks ahead, including the role of generational differences in career change, the power of "unique selling propositions", handling the emotional roller coaster, and much more.  However, type theory provides one very powerful tool for addressing life change issues, so consider taking a close look at this material.  Even if you are familiar with this model, you may learn some new things from my ruminations.

I look forward to hearing from those of you who are following this blog.

Copyright (c) 2011
Marlowe C. Embree, Ph.D.
President/Founder
Kaleidoscope Consulting Services LLC
marlowe_embree@yahoo.com
Twitter:  marlowe_embree