How to Recognize Temperaments in a Team (Without Tests)

Approximate reading time: 3m 25s

Why tests do not solve the problem

In almost every organization there comes a moment when someone suggests:
„Let’s do a personality type test.”

The result is usually predictable:

• people fill out the test mechanically;

• some recognize themselves, others do not;

• after a week, the results are no longer used;

• the behavior in the team does not change.

The problem is not the tests themselves.
The problem is the expectation that a test will answer questions that are solved through observation, context, and managerial maturity.

What „recognizing a temperament“ really means

In a business environment, this does NOT mean:

• to „label“ people;

• to put them into boxes;

• to excuse behavior.

It means something much more practical:

To understand how a person reacts under pressure, in learning, during change, and when making decisions.

This is a managerial skill, not a psychological analysis.

Why observation is more reliable than tests

Research in organizational psychology (including publications by Harvard Business Review) shows that:

• self-report tests often reflect:

  • how a person wants to be seen;

  • how they think they should answer;

• observation in real work shows:

  • how a person acts under pressure;

  • how they react to deadlines, mistakes, and feedback.

For a manager, the second is far more valuable.

Where to look: 4 situations that reveal temperament

1. Reaction to deadlines and pressure

This is the first and most reliable indicator.

• One employee speeds up, makes decisions, and „pushes forward“ → choleric pattern

• Another tenses up, slows down, and seeks security → phlegmatic pattern

• A third starts analyzing and asking questions → melancholic pattern

• A fourth gets distracted and looks for support → sanguine pattern

There is no good or bad here.
There is predictability.

2. Behavior during training

Online and in-person training are an „x-ray“ of temperament.

Observe:

• who wants to finish quickly;

• who asks clarifying questions;

• who gets emotionally involved;

• who prefers independent work.

These reactions are extremely stable over time.

3. Attitude toward change

According to analyses by McKinsey & Company, the failure of transformations is rarely „resistance“, but rather a misunderstanding of human dynamics.

• The choleric person wants quick action;

• The melancholic person wants clarity and logic;

• The sanguine person wants meaning and people;

• The phlegmatic person wants stability.

The same change is experienced in four different ways.

4. Reaction to mistakes

Mistakes bring temperament to the surface.

• Choleric → defense through action („How do we fix it?“)

• Melancholic → defense through analysis („Where did we go wrong?“)

• Sanguine → defense through emotion („It’s fine, we’ll manage“)

• Phlegmatic → defense through withdrawal („Let’s not make things worse“)

This is extremely important for:

• feedback;

• training;

• performance evaluation.

A real management case 

A real example of strongly expressed different working styles is Pixar Animation Studios. In the book Creativity, Inc., Pixar president Ed Catmull describes how, at first, managers tried to make everyone faster, more decisive, and more uniform. This led to tension, writers shutting down, and a decline in quality. When the company realized that the differences – between the people who „push“, those who analyze, those who connect, and those who stabilize – were the key to success, Pixar created a structure (Braintrust) that did not smooth out temperaments, but used them. As Catmull himself notes: „We were trying to smooth out differences instead of understanding that they were the reason we were successful.“*
(Ed Catmull, Creativity, Inc., Harvard Business Review adapted)

And one more real example:

Within Project Aristotle, Google analyzed more than 180 teams, trying to understand why some worked and others did not. The initial attempt to build teams out of equally active and dominant personalities had the opposite effect – analytical members began to stay silent, the social ones burned out, and the stabilizers withdrew. Only when the company realized that different roles – the people who push, those who analyze, those who connect, and those who maintain stability – must be protected, not homogenized, did team effectiveness improve. Google framed this as „psychological safety,“ but at its core it is about managing different behavioral and temperamental models.“
(Project Aristotle, Google; Harvard Business Review; NY Times)

The most common mistakes when „recognizing temperament“

- Slapping on a label („He is like that“)
- Excusing problematic behavior
- Using temperament as an excuse
- Ignoring the context

Temperament does not отменя responsibility.
It helps us manage it more intelligently.

How this is used in training

In a well-designed training:

• choleric participants get case studies and solutions;

• melancholic participants – structure and logic;

• sanguine participants – interaction;

• phlegmatic participants – clear pace and framework.

This is instructional design, not psychology.

This is where the real value appears for:

• manager training – how to work with different types of people;

• onboarding programs – adapted to different profiles;

• creating trainings and redesigning trainings – when „we have courses, but they don’t work“.

NIT – New Internet Technologies Ltd. works precisely in this area: between psychology, business, and training.

FAQ

Can temperament be recognized without tests?
Yes. Observation in real situations is more reliable than a test.

Is it dangerous to use such models?
Only if they are used superficially. In a management context, they are a tool, not a diagnosis.

Is it suitable for all teams?
Yes, especially in hybrid and remote work.

And finally:

Good managers do not need a test to understand their people.
They need a framework for observation and interpretation.

Temperaments provide exactly that –
not labels, but a working language for real behavior.