50 pages • 1 hour read
Thomas EriksonSurrounded By Idiots
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2014A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Chapters 19-21Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapter 19 Summary
Erikson interviews colleagues and acquaintances of different personality types to demonstrate how they have understood and applied the lessons from his book. He relays an interview with a CEO, Helena, who feels she has a “Red” personality. In their conversation she admits that, as Erikson predicts in his work, she finds Blues too slow, Yellows too talkative, and Greens to be overly conflict-avoidant. Being a Red personality, Helena confesses that she is prone to making spontaneous decisions which do not always turn out well.
Helena shares that the book helped her and her staff be more understanding of each other; she hopes that they know that she does not mean to seem angry or intimidating. Helena shares that her husband has an opposite personality which sometimes creates conflict between them, as she is fast and takes initiative while her husband is slower.
In his next interview Erikson talks to Hakan, a Yellow personality who works in television. Hakan shares that he believes he is a Yellow because he is very creative, socially outgoing, and loves public speaking. Hakan defends Yellows’ penchant for making decisions based on their intuition, rather than logical facts, and claims that his talkative nature is generally appreciated by those around him. Hakan admits that he has a very difficult time working with Blue personalities, whom he finds very “boring” and overly concerned about “red tape” (Location 3557). Hakan feels that some Yellows could work on their listening skills, but is adamant that he does not have any weaknesses that need to be addressed.
Next, Erikson interviews a Green type named Elisabeth who works in health care. Elisabeth labels herself a Green because she prioritizes cooperation and cares deeply about her relationships. She finds Red personalities “insensitive” but admires their efficiency and ambition (Location 3647). She admits that she has taken a sick leave from work to avoid the stressful environment and conflict, which she wants to learn to cope with better. Elisabeth shares that Greens value the chance to form relationships and are stressed by changing environments and strict expectations.
Lastly, Erikson interviews Stefan, a Blue personality who works for a large corporation. Stefan comments on the structure of the book and how it fits into the ongoing discourse around personality. He admires Reds for their focus on the future and their drive to meet goals. Stefan is comfortable working with Reds but observes that they seem to struggle to work with him because he is a perfectionist and always works according to a set structure. Like many Blues, Stefan strongly dislikes Yellows as he finds them to have poor boundaries at work and to talk about themselves too much. He criticizes this type for what he considers their poor grasp of the facts and tendency to exaggerate. Stefan feels that his weakness is getting bogged down in details and having a hard time making decisions.
Chapter 20 Summary
Chapter 20 consists of a quiz which tests the reader’s knowledge on the main traits of each personality type and the compatibility of different profiles. At the end of the quiz, Erikson asks the reader to reflect on the kinds of people with which they choose to spend their free time. He notes that no one can choose their professional colleagues and must make the best of the relationships they form at work.
Chapter 21 Summary
Erikson shares an experiment he tried while working with a group of managers from a major company. After getting to know the managers, Erikson divided them into homogenous groups based on their types. Erikson gave them one hour to finish a particular task that was relevant to their profession. Each group struggled with the assignment for different reasons. The Red group had high energy, a lot of ideas, and finished very quickly. Although this group presented their findings very confidently, they did not execute the task properly and failed to solve the problem.
Meanwhile, the Yellow team was enjoying their lively interactions, though most of their exchanges were not centered around the work. The Yellow team’s presentation was fun to listen to, but they, too, had failed to make real progress on their task. The Green group had a calm discussion but struggled to focus on the task at hand, instead they shared personal stories. Their presentation lacked confidence and energy. Finally, the Blue group very carefully read the task instructions but could not agree on a perfect plan of action. This group pointed out several small mistakes in the task instructions and admitted that they would need more time to complete the task properly.
Erikson shares that the point of this exercise was to show how poorly people work when they are deprived of other types’ talent and input. He insists that “Diversity is the only possible route” and warns the reader against hiring people simply because they seem to share a personality type (Location 3955). Erikson concludes his work by encouraging the reader to remember that everyone is different and to translate their new knowledge into actions in their own life.
Chapters 19-21 Analysis
In Erikson’s final chapters, he reiterates how each personality type views the world and how it affects Personality and Compatibility. Each of his interviewees clearly exhibits their type’s personality traits as they discuss their reactions to the book and their impressions of other people.
For instance, the Red type delivers very frank answers to each question. She admits to being controlling and prone to conflict, and works in a management position as many Reds do. The Yellow interviewee demonstrates typical Yellow behavior, as he goes off-topic and weaves different personal anecdotes into his answers. He is quoted as saying, “I’ve always found it easy to charm people; it is kind of a natural talent actually. I know lots of people; I always have. And I’m great at public speaking” (Location 3516). He is also resistant to identifying any weaknesses in his own personality. Meanwhile, the Green interviewee shows this type’s penchant for focusing on relationships, as she mentions her son and husband many times. She also admits to struggling with conflict, which causes her a lot of stress, and shares that she wants to address this weakness in herself.
While Erikson’s interviews provide examples of the personality types, he does not address the inherent bias in how he conducted his interviews. By informing his acquaintances that he is the author of the book and interviewing them directly, Erikson subjects the interviewees to significant social pressure to say that they enjoyed his work and agree with the DISC system. Interestingly, while all of the interviewees claimed to find the book helpful, they were all derogatory about other personality types in their interviews. This suggests that while they identified with one of the DISC personalities, the book failed to increase their empathy toward other types or their ability to collaborate with them.
For instance, Helena, the Red boss, strongly dislikes working with Greens due to their fear of conflict and passive personalities. She complains that Greens are “immature” and “dishonest,” saying, “It would be easier if they came straight to me with their questions. I mean, how hard can it be to step into the manager’s office and just ask?” (Location 3423). Hakan, the Yellow type, judges Reds negatively for their assertive demeanors. He complains that they are “[c]antankerous. That’s what I think about Reds. Lots of them are actually quite nasty” (Location 3596).
Similarly, the Blue interviewee is very negative about Yellow types, sharing his irritation at their talkative and expressive nature. He says, “I can’t listen to them yammering on and on about everything and nothing. And you never know if what they’re saying is actually true. That irritates me” (Locations 3763-3773). The different interviewees’ intense dislike for other personalities clearly demonstrates their own traits and preferences, but also suggests that there are limitations for how much a theoretical understanding of personality can actually increase empathy and communication.
In his concluding chapters, Erikson emphasizes how cooperation amongst diverse personalities is mutually beneficial to different individuals and has a positive effect on workplaces as a whole. His personal social experiment demonstrates The Importance of Adaptability by showing that, while similar personalities may feel more comfortable working together, it is not necessarily productive to form these homogenous groups. He insists, “The best way to put a group of people together is by mixing different types of people. This is the only way to achieve decent dynamics in any group” (Location 3955, emphasis added). This argument invites the reader to reflect on how they could embrace the challenge of collaborating with other types of people for the benefit of all.
