Imagine with me that we are at a restaurant. We’re in that post-eating haze time, feeling good, feeling satisfied. We are people-watching but not obviously so. 

Now comes the host, trailed by four people. The host seats them at the table right beside ours. We have front row seats to watch what unfolds. The host hands out menus, and a waitress swoops in to fill each of their water glasses. Then host and waitress withdraw. The four hungry folks are left to decide what they want. 

Here’s when things get interesting. 

One person opens up the menu, quickly spots what she wants, and closes it with a snap. Fast and decisive. 

It all happens before the second person even looks at her menu. It lays there on the table, ignored. This second person is too enthusiastically busy telling whoever might be listening that she is in love with Taylor Swift–how her musical sensibility is amazing; how she has artistic integrity, global engagement, intergenerational appeal, and marketing acumen; this second person then starts to sing and dance to a Taylor Swift tune, from her album Midnights:

It’s me, hi, I’m the problem, it’s me

At tea time, everybody agrees

I’ll stare directly at the sun but never in the mirror

It must be exhausting always rooting for the anti-hero

At this, a third person at the table looks around her open menu at the second, laughs warmly, and says kindly, “You sound like a Swiftie to me! That’s cool! I like her too.” And then the two Swifties start chattering away about their favorite pop star. 

The fourth person at the table, meanwhile, appears to be conducting a careful, scientific review of the menu. You can see her forehead, wrinkled in concentration, peaking just above the upper edge of the menu. Left side: eyes at the top, then slowly and carefully, they scan all the way down. Right side: same careful, methodical action. Then back to the left side: repeat. Then the right side: repeat. She is resolved not to miss any details. 

When the waitress comes to take the order, person one is more than ready. But she is also quite irritated, since person two has still not looked at the menu. Person three has been trying to stay engaged in the conversation about Taylor Swift, but she’s also been peeking at the menu so that she isn’t a drag on the ordering process. Person four looks positively bursting with questions.

Now, what the waitress does next will make things even more interesting. Aren’t people interesting? Say that the waitress comes across in a way that suggests, loud and clear, “Just tell me what you want–no hemming and hawing, no dilly-dallying, no dithering, just get to the point!” Person one–the one who was quick to identify what she wanted–grins with the recognition that this waitress gets her. They are in sync. Person one announces her order. Short and sweet. 

Person two, meanwhile, has just noticed her good fortune that a Taylor Swift song has just started playing in the background, and she excitedly points that out to the waitress, who responds with a frown, says, “But what do you want?” Person two gets the message and, for the first time, cracks open the menu. 

Person three sighs a small sigh of relief, smiles, and, when it’s her turn to order, she asks the waitress what her favorites on the menu are. “What do you recommend?” Person three is looking to make a connection with the waitress–this human connection is almost like a spice added to the food, making it even more tasty–but she’s disappointed by how the waitress seems to shrug the question off. “Everything we serve here is good. Whaddya want?” 

Person three awkwardly spits an answer out, and now the waitress faces person four, whose lips are pursed in concentration and whose eyes are still trained on the menu. Person four says, “I see that you are serving gluten free pizza. Can you tell me the exact ingredients of the pizza that make it gluten free?” At this, the waitress rolls her eyeballs. “Come on! I have a bunch of other customers over there who are staring daggers at me, and I need to get over there. Can you just make up your mind? Person four pauses, breathes in deeply like she is girding her loins for disaster, and then says, “Ok. Listen, I’ll just have my usual scrambled eggs and side of bacon. No toast, fruit. Coffee–black. At least with this I’ll be sure to know that the ingredients are keto friendly.” The waitress looks at her like she’s an alien. She writes the order down, then comes back to person two to get her order, and then: she tucks her pen over an ear, sighs like she’s exhausted, and is off to the table across the room. 

Could the waitress have interacted with her four customers differently? Of course. What if she had been more like person two, with all of the talkative enthusiasm and distractibility? Or what if she had been more like person three, with all of the concern for making a personal connection? Or what if she had been more like person four, with all of the cautious and careful attention to detail?

Each scenario would have looked differently: with someone feeling like they were in sync with the waitress and others feeling out of sync. 

This is our reality, in restaurants and beyond. This is our reality within these walls, and beyond. Each of us brings a certain personality style to the table. Other people meet us at that table. Sometimes, that other person is going to share our personality style, and it’s going to feel good. Most of the time, though, the other person is going to be bringing a style that’s different from ours, and, potentially, it could lead to lots of problems. 

Neil Simon “Odd Couple” problems. 

Potentially. Unless we become savvy about the different social styles out there, and learn how to speak to people in ways they understand. “I could save myself a lot of wear and tear with people,” said writer Ralph Ellison, “if I just learned to understand them.” 

And that’s the point. Saving ourselves from the wear and tear of miscommunication. 

I’ll tell you one solution that can never work. It’s restricting ourselves just to the people who share our own style. To the people who think like us, handle emotions like us, manage stress like us, communicate like us, deal with conflict like us. As the restaurant scenario suggests, you can’t control who your waitress is going to be and what they will be bringing. People are entering your world all the time and you can’t control what their style is going to be. 

But there’s also this factor. People problems are guaranteed because opposites attract. Forget about trying to stay with only people who are just like you. There is an instinctive drive within us to connect with those who are our opposite. As Carl Jung says, “It is very often the case… that an introvert marries an extrovert for compensation. Or another type marries the counter-type to complement himself.” And then there’s the humorist Nora Ephron, who puts it like this: “You fall in love with someone and part of what you love about him are the differences between you; and then you get married and the differences drive you crazy.” 

Today’s sermon, in other words, isn’t just for dealing with strangers or friends. It isn’t just help for the church committees we might be working on, or for people we face at work. What we will be learning today about social styles can help us even in our most intimate relationships. 

So: social styles. Personality styles. You may already be familiar with any number of systems out there: Myers-Briggs, DISC, the enneagram, the Kiersey system, the COLORS system, astrology, and on and on. The one I want to share with you today is one I had not known about until very recently. It was a first Saturday of the month, a couple months ago. That’s when I meet with our Pastoral Care Team, which Kathy Strawser very ably leads. Every meeting includes a training segment, in which participants hone their care-giving understanding and skills. This particular Saturday, Pam Smith led the training, when she introduced the team to the Social Style model of personality types, created in the 1960s by industrial psychologist David Merrill. I was delighted. I’ve been interested in personality systems for a long time but had never heard of this one before. Within five minutes of Pam introducing us to this system, I was delighted. People I know kept on rising up within my mind’s eye, and each time, I’d say to myself, “No wonder they’re like that!” “No wonder they’re like that!” There was just something very satisfying and compelling about the personality system Pam presented to us. So, I’m excited to share it with you right now. 

Let me say two quick introductory things about the Social Style model, before we look to its four main personality types. First, the basic underlying assumption is that each of the four social styles has strengths and weaknesses. No style is more likely to succeed than the others. The best team strategy, in fact, is to have all four styles present and working. 

The second introductory thing: the Social Styles model focuses exclusively on behavior. People’s inner qualities are not relevant. Furthermore, it argues that two specific kinds of observable behavior are the ones that will give us the most relevant information. The two main observables are: how assertive a person is, and how emotionally responsive they are. 

Assertiveness is when a person is forceful or directive. More assertiveness, and 

• Your nonverbal gestures are stronger
• Your eye contact is more intense
• Your movements are faster
• Your level of energy is higher
• Your rate of speech is faster
• Your way of expressing opinions, making requests, and giving directions is more forceful

Contrast that to less assertiveness where you are softer, slower, lighter, and gentler. 

As for the second main observable: emotional responsiveness: that’s when a person openly shows emotions and demonstrates an awareness of how others are feeling. 

• Your physical gestures and tone of voice freely express emotion
• You appear warm and friendly
• You like to work with others
• You excel at small talk
• You like to tell stories
• You get caught up and lose track of time
• You care about people

Contrast that to less responsiveness, where you are emotionally restrained, you are standoffish, you prefer to work alone, you want facts and logic not stories, you manage time well, you are focused on policy and results. 

Assertiveness and responsiveness: the two main observables that Social Styles theory focuses on. Put them together, and the result is four social styles. People will tend to emphasize just one of the four styles most of the time. I have included a short test in your order of service which you can take at home, to help you identify your style. I would suggest that you make a copy; use one for yourself, and ask someone who knows you very well to use the other. Then compare results! 

The four social styles:

Start with the Driver style. Remember the story about the restaurant, from earlier? The person who opened up the menu, quickly spotted what they wanted, and closed it with a snap was a Driver. So was the waitress who came to take everyone’s order. Typically, Drivers are progress-oriented and decisive in pursuit of goals. They value getting the job done with excellent results. They like a fast pace. They like it when people get to the point. When they are low-functioning, however, Drivers can jump to solutions that are unwise, all things considered; they can struggle with collaboration;  they can be pushy and controlling. 

Then there is the Expressive style. The Expressive in our restaurant story was the person who got all enthusiastically caught up with Taylor Swift. Expressives are typically emotional folks who couldn’t hide what they’re feeling if their life depended on it. They are full of feelings, they are full of ideas, and they will talk your ear off. They want work to be fun. They will get easily bored with routine. They are optimistic, intuitive, creative, and focused on the big picture. Low-functioning expressives, however, can be overly dramatic, impatient, easily distracted, and impractical. They can struggle with listening to others because they just have so much to say! 

The third style is the Amiable style. The Amiable in our restaurant scenario was the person who was easy-going with the Expressive’s enthusiasm for Taylor Swift. Amiables are fundamentally people-oriented, good listeners, friendly and sensitive. When our Amiable in the restaurant story asked the waitress what her menu favorites were, that’s classic Amiable at work. Food will literally taste better to an Amiable if it is wrapped up in some positive human connection. Amiables, furthermore, like consensus, avoid confrontation, and tend to be timid about voicing contrary opinions. They are likely to be slow with big decisions and need a lot of input. They thrive on making sure everyone is involved and everyone is participating. They like a slow, steady pace. A low-functioning Amiable, however, can be unsure of himself and dependent on others. They never want to disappoint anyone, which means that they can struggle to let you know that things aren’t working–until things have ground to a halt, and the chance to have prevented this is long past. 

The fourth and final style is the Analytical style. The Analytical in our restaurant story was the one who carefully studied the menu and who had lots of questions for the waitress about the gluten free pizza. The Analytical person plans thoroughly before deciding to act, is persistent, highly organized, cautious and logical. They even plan spontaneity! The Analytical prefers to work alone and has a tendency to be introverted. The Analytical person is focused on process, focused on the task at hand, focused on doing things the right way.  They prefer a rational approach, logical thinking, solid documentation and careful planning. A low-functioning Analytic, however, can be nitpicky, perfectionistic and stubborn, as well as indecisive. They can get stuck in “analysis paralysis” and a bureaucratic mindset. 

That’s the four social styles, and now, let’s see how it lines up with a classic TV show of the 1980s and 1990s which was entertaining in big part because it illustrated the clash of differing personalities. I’m talking about The Golden Girls. Remember The Golden Girls? The cast starred Bea Arthur, Betty White, Rue McClanahan, and Estelle Getty. The show is about four older women with very different social styles who share a home in Miami–and the hilarity that ensues. 

​​

Take the Betty White character, named Rose Nylund.

Rose is a natural nurturer, always providing support and encouragement to her friends. Rose leads by example, demonstrating kindness, compassion, and an unwavering belief in the goodness of people. 

“Oh, don’t give up!” she says to her fellow housemate Dorothy. “If the ancient Egyptians could move 20-ton stone blocks to build the pyramids, we can move a toilet.” 

Which of the four social styles does this remind you of? Driver, Expressive, Amiable, or Analytical? 

If you have a lot of Rose in you, you’re an Amiable. 

But then consider the Estelle Getty character, named Sophia Petrillo. 

Sophia is sharp-witted and perfectionistic. She pays attention to details. While she cares about her housemates, she nitpicks them to death, often commenting on Dorothy’s lack of love life, Blanche’s promiscuity, and Rose’s stupidity. Don’t push her to go faster than she is comfortable with. She’ll sock it to you. 

“Let me tell you a story,” she is often heard to say. “Picture it, Sicily…” and then she goes on and on, in exhaustive and exhausting detail……

Driver? Expressive, Amiable, or Analytical? 

Sophia is closest to the Analytical style. Who are my Analyticals? 

Then there’s the Bea Arthur character, Dorothy Zbornak. 

Dorothy is a quick thinker, a problem solver, a go-getter. Look to her to maintain a calm demeanor in stressful situations. She’ll make sure the job gets done. She’s got opinions and she lets you know what they are in no uncertain terms. She can be quite blunt. 

“Go hug a landmine!” is one of the things she is known to say. 

Driver? Expressive, Amiable, or Analytical?

Dorothy is a Driver. Who are the Drivers in the house? 

Finally, there’s the Rue McClanahan character called Blanche DuBois. 

Blanche is all about enthusiasm, charisma, and adventures. With her outgoing personality and natural magnetism, she can rally her friends and encourage them to take risks and embrace new experiences.

She’s also very dramatic: “Nobody ever believes me,” she says, “when I’m telling the truth. I guess it’s the curse of being a devastatingly beautiful woman.” 

You can tell from a mile away–she’s an Expressive. 

Who are the Expressives among us? 

In The Golden Girls sitcom–in TV life and in real life–there exists a diversity of personality styles, and all are needed. Think about some team you may be on, maybe here at church, maybe somewhere else. What does the mix of social styles look like? Are any styles missing? What’s for sure is that a well-balanced team, with all four styles present functioning at a high level, is going to max out on different dimensions of productivity. Drivers are great problem solvers and ensure that the process doesn’t get bogged down. Expressives are wonderful at communicating the big picture and can engage people with their excitement and enthusiasm. Amiables listen carefully; they know just what to say to make someone feel welcome; they make sure that everyone is involved and no one is left out. Finally the Analyticals: they are terrific at making sure that everything is organized, no details are neglected, and that big plans are feasible because they are supported by facts and logic. 

But there’s more to teamwork than each person doing their own thing. There’s the active collaboration with folks who are different from you. Here is where the real value of spotting social styles comes into play. 

If you’re working with a Driver, don’t chit chat. Get to the point. Talk about goals and progress towards goals. 

If you’re working with an Expressive, embrace their enthusiasm. Don’t nitpick, but find the positive in their ideas. Join them in their playfulness. Laugh with them. 

If you’re working with an Amiable, respect their desire for situations to feel harmonious. Soften your language and assume that they will take things personally. Be courteous. Be patient in drawing out their opinions. 

If you’re working with an Analytical, communicate facts clearly and concisely. Understand that they are perfectionistic and detail-oriented so give them time for that–don’t pressure them for answers. Give them space.

My way or the highway in relationships doesn’t take a person very far. Neil Simon “Odd Couple” blow-ups are entertaining only for the audience and never for the people who are embroiled in conflict first-hand. When some of us are Golden Girls like Rose, others like Blanche, still others like Dorothy, and others yet again like Sophia, it’s good work to be able to empathize with where the other is coming from, so there can be communication, there can be collaboration, there can be human beings finding common ground and making the relationship work.

Next time you find yourself in a people-watching place, keep the four Social Styles model in mind. Say you are at a party. Who dominates the conversation and puts a premium on convincing others to go along with their solutions? How about the serious person who rather cautiously talks in precise detail? And how about the person bursting with enthusiasm who simply cannot wait to tell you all about her great idea? And then what about the person who, upon entering the room, goes from one person to another, introducing himself to them, spending time with each person to establish a connection?

Now you know why.

No wonder they’re like that. 

No wonder they’re like that.