Guest Carol Chisholm, Federal Intelligence Psychologist

In this episode of Authentic Living, Dr. Carol Chisholm, an eclectic psychologist and delightful guest, joins co-hosts John Voris and Kim Eley for an engaging exploration into the intriguing world of personality tests, the Authentic System and what makes it unique, and what you can learn about people by asking just six questions. 

Carol speaks candidly about high school students, mental health, who uses personality tests, and whether she would recommend that counselors, coaches, and trainers take the Authentic Systems assessment. 

If you are looking for insights into how to know yourself better, this episode is a must-listen.

For more information go to johnvoris.com

Are you Love, Justice, Wisdom or Power?
Click Here to Take the questionnaire to Discover Your Life Theme

Work 1-on-1 with John Voris
Learn about the ultimate journey of self discovery with the ALTA Assessment

Purchase John's book on The Four Life Themes
Discover the Power That Drives Your Personality

Transcript

Authentic Living: The Podcast for a Better Life

Episode 3 Transcript

***

Kim (00:05):

Hi. Oh my gosh, John and I are so excited to have you guys back for podcast number three. And, it's been going along really well, hasn't it, John?

John (00:19):

Oh, absolutely. Very good.

Kim (00:21):

We are both so excited because we have a special guest speaker today. Woohoo. So very excited that we have Dr. Carol Chisholm with us. Hello!

Carol (00:36):

Hello.

Kim (00:37):

Welcome. Welcome. We are delighted you are here. And, maybe share for a second how we all got connected.

Carol (00:50):

It's a…for me, this is, I call these my hugs from God, strange things that happen that make me very happy. And, sometime ago, my daughter, who is an amazing coach, she was working with Kim in some setting or other, and, Kim said to her, “I'm working on this book right now and I need a psychologist.” 

And my daughter said, “My mother's a psychologist.” 

So Kim gave me a call and told me she needed somebody to do a foreword for John's book. I hadn't heard [of] John or his work or any such thing. So I said, “Well, I, I could probably do that, but you don't want me because I'm a very eclectic psychologist. I've been every kind of a psychologist in my life.” 

And Kim said, “That's exactly what we want.” 

So that's how we got connected.

Kim (01:35):

Excellent. Thank you. And I'm so glad we are. Awesome. 

So we wanted to ask you a few questions, so I'm going to dive right in. And, so you mentioned, that you're a psychologist. And what is your background in psychology?

Carol (01:53):

Well, it's a very long story, but I will shorten it for this podcast. The, the fact is I was in, I was a teacher and the whole thing was in the Fifties you became a teacher or a nurse if you were a woman. I once told my fourth grade teacher I was going to be an attorney, and he went wild because he said girls couldn't be attorneys. 

So I had my choice, didn't like blood, went into teaching, so I taught, then I stayed home to raise my kids and after my husband died, I was supposed to go back to teaching only. It wasn't the same profession, like, “I don't want any part of this.” 

So I went back to school and what did I…well, I had to figure me out obviously. And in order to do that I had to major in psychology. So I got my master's in psychology and then everybody told me I had to go on for my PhD and I said, “I don't want to.”

Carol (02:42):

And they said, “But you need to.” 

And I was in an elevator one day and I was commiserating with a friend and I said, “I'm going to be old by the time I get my doctorate.” And the kid in the back of the elevator said, “You're going to be old anyway. You might as well have something to show for it.” Which I thought was really good idea <laugh>. 

So I did go on, got…on, got a really wonderful experience. I did a lot of work at the University of Delaware, not just on my own degree, but helping professors and doing all kinds of exciting things that I never thought I'd be able to do. So at the end of it, I had a degree in psychology. Then what do I do? Well, I was going to teach or I was going to do therapy or what was I going to do? Well, I ended up getting my dream job in the intelligence community. I didn't even know that that job existed when I first started into psychology. So I've been a psychologist for…the federal government. Yes.

Kim (03:37):

Oh, fantastic. Thank you for sharing that with us. So I'm curious because of your background in psychology and, and your intelligence work prior to taking the Authentic Systems assessment, which is John's, program, had you taken any personality profile inventories?

Carol (03:59):

What a question. How many would you like me to count? <laugh> How many are the ways? As a matter of fact, I have met most—very many of the people who developed other psychology, uh, other such instruments. I'm certified in Meyers Briggs. I've taken every, every one there is. And there we go. So, yes, I am very familiar with them. We used the MPI in intelligence work and it suited us. As long as you'd use such things as a tool and not as truth, you're in good shape.

Kim (04:35):

Ah, very interesting. So I, I'm, I'm interested in what you're talking about as a tool versus truth. So, uh, I'm curious to know, what, what was your impression of, of taking the Authentic Systems assessment after having had some of those other, uh, inventories or systems?

Carol (04:58):

It was kind of interesting because at first I just wanted to know about his system, about your system. John and I really [were] studying it and reading some books that he'd written and so forth. And decided he had something here and I was impressed with the work he'd done on it and the eclectic nature of it. I like…things coming from all over the place. 

And so, I, in that reading, I started to talk to him about what I intended to put in the foreword to the book. And at that time he said, “Well, how about…you’d know a lot more about it if you took my assessment.” And I, I didn't say to him, “I can't afford it,” but I was thinking that in my mind when he said he would give it to me. So that, that was my experience in taking it.

Carol (05:43):

And I really, really, really enjoyed the process. And I've been a test validator for years. One of the things I do is validate tests. 

And his people have always complained that you can't really validate his test for a number of reasons. Number one is you don't have a hundred thousand heads a week, which is what Fisher's F is based on. Based on crops, not people. 

So to me, the thing was valid because it was valid for me. So that's all I cared at that point. And then as I got deeper and deeper into it, and, and I continued to push him because he lets me push him, that's very good. He'll I'll challenge him and he'll come back and then we'll discuss it. So he has in his own mind the validation of the fact that he's changed an awful lot of people's lives, which is pretty good for me.

Kim (06:34):

Awesome. Oh, excellent, excellent, excellent.

John (06:38):

Well—

Carol (06:38):

You want to add one thing about, one of the assessments, one of the most favorite personality tests is the Myers Briggs, which has no validity at all. And I, I did want to pop that in there because I am certified to give it, and I—what I mean by I can use it as a tool—you asked the question, Kim, I didn't respond to it, But what I mean is, as a tool, I can get this data from somebody on a, on a sheet of paper. I can score it, I can sit down with them and talk about what I'm seeing here, and they can say whether they feel like that fits them or not. And if so, why? 

But it's sort of like—it's more like the horoscope than some kind of valid test in that everybody who reads their horoscope in the morning, which I do not, is going to say that's me. They've got me down to a T because it's so generic that you could just sort of make, force it, to fit you. And that's not the way John's system is at all. It's not that generic for anybody. It's personal. It's very personal.

John (07:41):

Yeah. I want to make a comment on that. Uh, yeah, I appreciate that you separate the difference between a tool and the truth. And I have psychologists tell me that they use it as a conduit. They use it as an instrument in between them and their client to talk about it. But the psychologist is using psychology, getting into the mind of that individual in ways that they otherwise wouldn't. And so it becomes a valuable tool in that sense. Uh, the other is I've been doing this, uh, assessments since about 2004, and I've never had any two assessments the same. I shouldn't because each one is unique. So it's not, it's, it's, it's not a collective at all. And it's all about you. That makes a difference.

Kim (08:34):

That's fantastic.

Carol (08:35):

So—and this was really important to me because I do believe that God made every single human being very different from every other human being, and therefore—how could we possibly fit in any box?

John (08:47):

That's right. That's right. And that also what I do in the process is after the assessment, they take the, they fill out…their answers, and then what they do is they take a sheet maybe at the sheet and have one in their car, one at home, one in their business. Then that question would pop up. Cause I have questions in the booklet itself. They start answering these and I want them to do that and meet a week later so they can validate it and as to their everyday life. That's very important to me.

Carol (09:18):

Yes. And that was a very important step for me also, John. I'm used to taking the test, getting the results, and that's the end of it. And this way we really hung it down. And frankly, the booklet that you sent me wasn't all that understandable. Not because I'm stupid, but because we were speaking a very different language at that point. 

And for example, he calls this Authentic Systems. Well, I love authenticity. I love the Authentic System part, but part of his cri—part of his work has to do with your synthetic side, which I call my domesticated side. So it's a…a verbal difference. But when you can sit down and talk about those things, then suddenly they, they make sense.

John (09:58):

Right? Mm-hmm. <affirmative> It's the synthetic side of just the synthesis of all your cultural experiences, your, your life experiences. But, yeah. And it's the same thing as you're talking about. Yes.

Kim (10:11):

Fantastic. So it sounds like, Carol, to kind of reiterate what you're saying, so much of what you learned was not just taking the assessment, but also talking about it afterwards and processing the results that were shared with you.

Carol (10:27):

Yes. Excellent. And as, as a psychologist, the first thing I did is one of the first things that doctors do after you've read an article, you're sure you have every disease that's in that article. And so after I take an assessment, then I'm sure that this is true, and that is true, and I start forcing it onto other people. 

But once you truly understand the system, you're not going to force on other people, but you're going to see where they're coming from in a way you didn't before. And that's going to make for human relationships that are much, much more appropriate.

Kim (11:00):

Mm-hmm. <affirmative>. Oh, that's fantastic.

John (11:00):

Very good. Uh, Carol, did you find any of the questions intrusive or highly personal?

Carol (11:07):

<laugh> Well, of course they had to be somewhat personal, but you didn't urge me to share any more than I wanted to share. Had it be, had…I felt like I had to answer. And there's a question. One of the, one of the best validated, one of the most important personality inventories as it were today, is the Myers Briggs, which is still used heavily everywhere and should be, it's an excellent tool. Mm-hmm. <affirmative>, But the reason I'm bringing it up is one of the most important questions they had to drop because people found it so intrusive. And that question was, “I have black stools…”

John (11:44):

<laugh>

Carol (11:44):

What does that mean? Well, the point is the questions aren't supposed to mean anything. It's the numbers that put these into areas. So if everybody who answers that question happens to have this particular trait, then it's a pretty good indicator that that is the trait they have. But they get very offended that you ask such questions. Another one is, “I don't like tall women.” <laugh> So, you know.

John (12:11):

Interesting. Yeah.

Carol (12:12):

Interesting. None of your questions were that intrusive, John!

John (12:15):

<laugh>. Well, I…Good. That's good. I asked that because some people are afraid to take an assessment thinking they're going to find some deep, dark secret in their, in their life. And so I just want to clear that up so people don't have that fear. 

Carol (12:28):

Because the other part of that is some people are afraid to take assessments because they're going to find think that you are going to find out some, some deep dark secrets.

John (12:37):

Yes.

Carol (12:38):

So you have to earn their trust, which you certainly did early on with me.

John (12:42):

Oh, good. Thank you.

Kim (12:45):

So Carol, when you took the assessment, did you feel like it, it captures who you are?

Carol (12:55):

The…farther away from it I am, the more I totally do. 

At first I was ready to quarrel with it in a lot of places. First of all, I wanted to quarrel with some of the grammar in it, as you remember, John. I'm…I'm not kind of a person…you give me a challenge and I'm going to see what's wrong with it first, and then we'll find out what's right with it. 

But the longer I go on and the more I see how it's working for me, which is even more important than knowing in this particular case, then, then certainly it, it all works very well. And yes, it absolutely captures me. And it's not because there's any magic involved, It's because he, John knew what questions to ask me after 20 years of trying to sell people things they didn't want <laugh>, right. Then you, you get to know people in a way that nobody else has taken the time to know them. And I know that your next, some of your next work is gonna talk about, uh, European versus, American psychology and philosophy. And, and I think we're gonna find some of those differences located in there. Yeah,

John (14:05):

Absolutely. Yes.

Kim (14:07):

thank you for that feedback, Carol. So I'm curious now to ask you, John, have you had other people who've taken the assessment said that they kind of had to, I'm going to say process it or kind of walk around with the results for a while before they adapted it? I'm curious.

John (14:25):

All my wisdom people.

Kim (14:27):

Ah!

John (14:29):

Aha. Yes. Oh, yes. They have to think about it. And the other is some Justice people [who] have a high [amount of] Wisdom, and it's the same thing. They need to, to think about it for a while.

Kim (14:40):

Oh, fascinating. Do they also have the similar, and Carol, you had shared that you almost wanted to quarrel or, or maybe pick apart the, the assessment. Is that common wit Wisdom people as well, John?

John (14:53):

Yes…yes. Because what they're doing is they want to know. And so the, the way they do this is through questioning and constant curiosity. And of course, that's their gift. That's their talent. And so they have to ask these questions. It's, it's almost compelling and that…helps them and myself as well. Yes.

Kim (15:13):

Fascinating. Very, very cool. Oh my goodness. Well, well, thank you, Carol, for, for sharing that. And you touched on this a little bit, but do you, do you ever use what you've learned about Authentic Systems in your interactions with others? Like family members, or—

Carol (15:33):

I'll give you—what a wonderful, delightful example. Yes. At first, as I say, just like reading a medical article, I don't want to apply this here. So I…I didn't believe I had the right to apply it to other people. 

But there, I have a sister, I have only one sibling left; there were four of us. So she's very important to me and she's very annoying. <laugh>. She's been annoying all my life. We didn't even like each other till we were grown up. I mean, that's the way it was. 

But now that I know that she is very much a Justice person, then I was able to ask her the questions to be able to find out whether I was right. And most of what she does comes from the motivation of wanting things to be right, wanting things to be best for everybody. I used to think she was just picking on me just to pick on me, you know? But she wants it all. She wants the world to be, to be right. And so I have had the best relationship with her since I, since I got to that point. So that's thanks to John.

Kim (16:41):

Oh fantastic!

John (16:42):

Oh, thank you. Yes. Glad to hear it. And, Kim, you have an experience with a power person?

Kim (16:51):

Yes. So I have….so I'm a, a Love life theme and Power life theme people—we tend to annoy one another. I, I had a wonderful, client who was a Power person. And when I initially started working with her, well, I was, I was like, “Goodness gracious!” 

You know, she, she's a lovely person, but she would do things like name drop important people, and…things that just sort of rubbed me the wrong way. I was like, “Goodness gracious, why do you, why do you care about this so much?” 

And, once I understood her better, we get along better. I actually speak her language now. Like I know the question similar to what you were saying, Carol, about you and your sister. I know now how to ask my questions in such a way that my client responds to them positively.

Kim (17:57):

And gosh, it's made a world of difference. You know, it's…I no longer go into it like, “Oh, you know, what is wrong with you?” 

Instead, I go into it with the thought of, “Oh, okay, this is where she's coming from. I have to get into that mindset and, and understand, even if I don't agree with her, I can ask questions in such a way that she responds better to them.” 

And really deep down, Power people want love. So they want us love people. They, they want, they want our friendship. Of, of all the clients I've ever had, she's the one who, who craves being friends with me more than any of the others, which I found at first baffling. And now I understand it. <laugh>

John (18:45):

You know, I want to say, Kim, your description of how you've changed with your Power people by changing…the way you speak to them, and now you're communicating, People should know that every theme has their own lexicon, their own language in itself. And so when you are a Love person speaking in Love language, there's, there's that barrier. But when you start changing, then they, you actually communicate with those people. 

Now, what you just described was a good description of what I did for 20 years. When I did door-to-door sales, everyone I met, I…picked up on their theme, and then I started speaking that language too. And there was a whole different communication.

Kim (19:35):

Amazing.

Carol (19:36):

I—it's interesting that when you just pick that up from her, John, you talked about language, and I was going to make a point about language, because I learned, when I started coaching, I really learned that language is generative. 

Language is what makes things happen. And I always just thought of it as something you report with, but it makes things happen. And that's very important. 

So, Kim, when you talked about she rubbed you the wrong way, just think about that phrase. I mean, I don't think I've ever said about someone, “they rubbed me the wrong way.” That's a Love thing. I mean, it really is.

John (20:12):

Exactly.

Carol (20:13):

So you begin to see how this, how this plays out for you.

John (20:17):

Oh, yes.

Kim (20:18):

Absolutely. Absolutely. So, this has been fantastic. We are going to take a short break and we will come right back with more. So, Carol, stay tuned.

Carol (20:30):

Thank you.

**(Break)**

Kim (20:35):

Hi. So thanks for sticking with us during the break, and John and I are delighted to be talking with Dr. Carol Chisholm today. Yay!

Picking up on our conversation…so we talked a little bit about this, Carol, you had mentioned the personality profile inventory, Myers Briggs. So what would be the difference between using a personality profile test and using what you've learned about yourself and others through the Authentic Systems assessment?

Carol (21:11):

Well, as I say, to me, [Myers Briggs] is very much like reading the horoscopes. They can be fun, but they're not going to do anything. There's nothing actionable within them. They can say, “So you should play the lottery” or whatever. 

But in fact, what John is offering is, is actionable. And that's very important to me. So if I take the Myers Briggs, for example, I've got some…well, someone else takes it, and I, I give it to them. I've got some idea of how they operate in these areas. I have to, because of the Myers Briggs, the test is going to put them in a box, and I'm going to treat everybody in that box as if they were alike. And that is exactly the wrong thing to be doing. 

Now, if I'm a really good psychologist, and I am, or if I'm a really good, lie detector manager, and I have been, then I'm going to know that this is just leading me in a direction to, so that I know what questions now to ask. But if I don't ask those questions, I don't get anywhere near what the person really is all about or, or how I can help him or her make a difference in the world.

Kim (22:17):

Oh, that's very—I think that speaks volumes about the, the, how am I trying to say? The…way that you designed, the way that, and, and Carol, you had said you had spoken with others who had actually created some of the personality profile tests. Is that correct? 

John, you and I have talked before about how those tests are designed, and Carol, you're touching on that, that by their nature, they are leading you to conclusions. John, what's the difference between the way you have the assessment set up? And, and you said that not in all the years that you've given it, no two people have had the same answers. That's a very different result than leading people to say four specific answers.

John (23:15):

Most of these assessments are about observation and doing. That's how they gather statistics, and it has to be measurable. What I focus on is, “what does it mean to be…” So the—so I might ask a question and they'd give an answer of what their motivation was, but then I would ask, “Well, what motivated your motivation?” <laugh> 

Now we're into an area that no one discusses. And so now the question that I ask in a roundabout way is, “Now, since we have an idea of what motivates your motivation, why do you want to be motivated?”

Kim (23:55):

Hmm.

John (23:56):

People ask that question, “And what type of motivation is that this distinct that makes you unique?” Because in the world, when you think about doing, we share a great deal of doing. And that's the point, that's what Carol brought up or alluded to, is that when we have these tests, they're really statistical and you deal with averages, et cetera. And so we share a lot in the doing. 

But when it comes to being, as I said, every assessment is unique unto that individual, because I'm looking at being, I'm not interested in what they do.

Kim (24:32):

Mm, Gotcha.

Carol (24:33):

Another interesting thing from, in knowing John for some time now, he has, because he is a knowledge [Wisdom] person, he has taken everything he's learned and, and integrated it with what else he learned. Well, that's not normally the way you do things. 

It certainly has worked for him and for us under that circumstance. I think one thing that…is very interesting to me is that he has, he has learned about the six questions without knowing he knows about the six questions. So that, that's just one of the discoveries he's made in his own. 

And the example is, you know, I mean, I, I taught leadership at the university level for some time, and one of the things we always taught was that if you really want to get to the bottom of something, you need to ask six questions. At the—usually at the sixth question, the person can't come up with any more information. You've got it all. 

Well, that's one thing John does, is he just keeps going down one level. Now, one level down from that. The last answer will give him the level he needs to go to underneath that. No wonder it's unique because nobody answers questions the same way over and over again.

John (25:44):

Right. And the other problem, well, it's a natural issue, or challenge that the, the testing, natural testing have is, “How can they scale it up to applying the test to thousands of people and go deep at the same time?”

Carol (26:04):

Right.

John (26:05):

So it is kind of a problem that they naturally have. I understand.

Carol (26:10):

Yeah. So, and, and let me just get a little bit into the nitty gritty of you. You…keep saying statistical and, and I keep talking about validation stuff. Let, let's just give a very simple example. 

If I wanted to create a personality test, I would first study all of the other people who have been into personality theory. There are great many of them, and they're pretty smart people. And so I know that they've, that they've come up usually with four boxes, sometimes five, but usually four. And they vary in the names of them. They're not the same four that John has in general. Some of them are the same. But—so I have already a preformed idea in my mind when I start to go for my test, now I'm going to start throwing out questions that my mind thinks up.

Carol (26:56):

Just me personally [I] think up lots and lots of questions. I may get a hundred thousand questions and I may give different forms of this to lots of people. Now comes the statistics. Now the statistics are going to say, “Okay, this question relates to people who do this. This question relates to people who do that.” And suddenly, I think I've got it. Well, I've got the overview, but that's all I've got. And that's what it is. So yes, it's always the numbers that are going to be crunched to make it true. And that's why John's system has not gone into universities and so forth, because they can't accept the idea that he can't possibly do this on the basis of a hundred thousand heads of wheat. <laugh>

John (27:42):

Yeah. But that's the out, that's the issue. One issue. The other issue is they really don't believe anything is new or different.

Carol (27:49):

Yeah.

John (27:50):

In fact, I tried to introduce this into the sales industry. I went to a manager and said, “Give me a car [in] a car lot. And I said, “Give me the two sales people that produced the least for free for two weeks,” and they wouldn't even do it.

Carol (28:05):

Yeah.

John (28:06):

And there's many opportunities I've given Allstate, MetLife, many other companies, and they just—they would, they don't, they just don't think there's anything new. 

And I understand that. I used to go to those sales seminars and workshops and people would get there and sit down and they'd look at each other. “If I get one kernel of new information, it'll be worth it.” And they, sometimes they don't even get that.

Carol (28:31):

Well, and people like the way that they've always been doing things. 

I can give you a similar example, but it's actually in reverse. When I got to the University of Delaware, I was very excited about all the things that I could get to do in my PhD program. So my first dissertation was going to be about a social—I was going to prove something about a prejudice thing. And they said I couldn't do it because it was too touchy. Then I was going to do something about depression, and they said I had to test all these kids that were going to be in my…experiment for depression. And when I found out that 92% of them were depressed already, then I was supposed to spend the semester making them “un-depressed” instead of doing my research.

Carol (29:21):

So it's difficult. These questions are difficult to answer, but I did, one of the things I did, because I was getting pretty good at test validation at that point. So I offered any campus, professor to bring me their tests, their exams, whatever they wanted to bring me. And I would validate them and I would show them which questions didn't work. You know, from taking tests, there'll be a question that actually the best students can't answer and the…stupid students can't because the best students overthink it. So you don't want that question. So I was going to give them that. I had one professor on all of [the] campus that took me up on it. The rest were afraid to find out about their tests. I do believe. <laugh>

John (30:05):

I believe. Yes, yes, that's right.

Kim (30:09):

Well, Carol, I'm curious because as we're talking about this, because, as a psychologist and John, I think you've, you've shared before that you've had some psychologists who kind of pushed back on the assessment because it wasn't like other tests. 

Carol, did you have any hesitation about accepting the results? Or did you—is [it] because you do have a, as you described it, an eclectic background—what, what was it that made you able to, kind of put your arms around the…results as they were?

Carol (30:46):

Oh, I did put my arms around 'em that fast. <laugh>.

Kim (30:50):

Ah, okay.

Carol (30:50):

Okay. The knowledge [Wisdom] people, we tend to be skeptical. That's one thing. 

Although I'm a real Pollyanna! I used to think that was a compliment then I heard it was a majority. But anyway, <laugh>, I do tend to think things, you know—I have a friend who believes fairies exist and, maybe they do, but—I just mean that as a—I don't mean that fairies exist. I'm you, you know what I mean? So there are some things that people will say that is not true. And then I'll find out. Maybe it is true because I've got an open mind. 

So yes, I was willing to, to keep my mind open. I really liked what I saw he had done. I loved that somebody was going to synthesize psychology and philosophy and do the things he'd already done. So I wanted it to be true, but that didn't mean I was automatically going to believe it was true. <laugh>.

John (31:45):

Excellent. Very good for you. Good for you.

Kim (31:47):

Excellent.

John (31:48):

That's—and that's why I liked working with Carol, because I knew her, her criterion was going to be a very high standard. And so I really appreciate her comments.

Kim (31:57):

Excellent. Thank you.

So Carol, would you recommend that someone take the Authentic Systems assessment?

Carol (32:29):

I…I don't know why more people aren't jumping on it. I mean, it, it's been—you've been working to get the word out. John's been working to get the word out. It seems very obvious to me. 

There's somebody for the price. He's asking if somebody is going to really put in personal effort and do what I'm needing—why would I not? I have people who are going to coaching seminars for four weeks and they're spending $10,000. I just don't understand why this isn't taking off. I just think somehow…I don't know. I just don't know. Maybe it's tainted with all the other instruments they've taken and they don't want to do one more. It has—we have to see it as very different.

John (33:13):

Well, one issue, one issue I do have is that a lot of these people have a fan base. I mean, there are professors in the college, they work for an institution, they already have people around them to support them and also financial backing, and so [they]get the word out. 

So I'm just one individual been doing this for about 20 years, and it takes time. And so I'm willing to, I'm obviously willing to take the time. 

But I have a question for you. So now since you've been through it, how would you recommend this for high school students before they select ther major?

Carol (33:52):

That's a very complex question, because I don't think that high school students are anywhere near ready to…I think you need to go through college before you select a major. So in that sense, but I don't know, I don't know how you operate with teenagers. 

So in other words, you've worked so well with adults because you've worked for 20 years with grownups. And if you can work as well with teenagers as you work [with adults], then I would recommend it. 

John (34:27):

I have a different set of questions for them. I've done families—

Carol (34:32):

In fact, but what's your rapport with them? That's my question.

John (34:35):

Well, [when interviewing] a teenager, I always have a parent there. And, I go through the questionnaire—[it] is very simple, but I…but they're so open that I get to my answer much faster than [with] an adult.

Carol (34:48):

Sure, sure.

John (34:49):

Yes. And so—

Carol (34:52):

Yeah.

Carol (34:54):

But…I would, you know, on basis of your question, I would certainly recommend it as part of a college four years [program]. In other words, maybe in your junior year when you are starting to think, where do you wanna be in—

John (35:09):

Life? Yes. The junior year. Yes. That's when they, many of 'em, are starting to apply to colleges. 

There was one young lady that I assessed, her father wanted her to be an attorney, and I assessed her in front of him. And turns out to be, she wanted to be a child psychologist. And in that moment, what, there was many epiphanies in that moment, because of course they had had a huge history. And the father started to cry right at the table because he said, “You showed me a daughter I didn't even know I had.” 

And now he can devote his money to the proper college. She will be truly motivated because she didn't want to be an attorney. And she will finish and she can live a happy life. Whereas a lot of parents, good natured, pushed their children in the wrong direction. And so that's where I found it. It helped.

Carol (36:02):

But see, that's, that's where I would prefer to see it given to the parents. In other words, the PTA—

John (36:10):

You're right. Yeah.

Carol (36:10):

Frankly, I knew my daughter well enough to know exactly what she, where she was headed in life, and it wasn't anything standard or anything that was going to earn her a lot of money. So I was thrilled with that. I mean, you know, I let my kids live their lives, but I knew their personalities. Every parent needs to be that close to their children, and it's not happening. That's right.

John (36:34):

You—

Carol (36:34):

—can't fix all that. But you could at least make the parents aware of there are four possible structures from which she's working, and these are stable. Unlike the Myers Briggs, these remain stable over your life. I've always [been] a knowledge [Wisdom] person. I've always been a knowledgeable person. It's very obvious to me. So, yeah.

John (36:56):

One…aspect that I learned quickly is with—I think he was about 17 years old. And, he was getting very bad grades in, what was it, English, but he was doing very well in the sciences, and they thought, “Well, you have an intelligence… you should be able to get…if you get an A over here, you should get an A across the board or a B.” And so when I discovered that he was a Justice person, and that there's a certain way that he likes to learn, they got that that was not happening. That he was going to go in one very specific direction. And…it wasn't what the model the parents had for the child, and they all learned it together. You see, that was it. And so the pressure was off.

Kim (37:47):

Yep. And I think too, and, and, and y'all know better than me, but I feel we all do the best we can with the knowledge we have. 

I remember at one point people saying to me, “Well, Kim, you're good at speaking. I think you'd be a great lawyer.” And no, you know, that wasn't my—that didn't appeal to me at all. But I think people put together, “Oh, this is what you do well, so this is what you want to, you should be.” 

And it's like, “ell, yes, I think I'm a good speaker, but I definitely don't want to get up in front of a courtroom. I want to get in front of a group and teach people, you know, that kind of thing.” So I think sometimes that's very confusing to people giving advice.

Carol (38:38):

Well, if you, if you were going to be an environmental lawyer as a Love person, I think that would be good. But if you want to be a trial lawyer, do not be a Love person. <laugh> 

John (38:47):

Absolutely. Yes. There—in fact, there's many—I probably have assessed about 30, 40 attorneys, and you hit it on the head. They go in with the idea of, “This is going to be justice and I'm going to take care of all these people, and I'm going to see that their rights are acknowledged.” And they get in there. It's not about any of that. It's about settlement, it's about money, and they're so discouraged. 

But what I do isI direct them toward a nonprofit, and that's where they have a different feel about what they're up to. But they don't know to do that until they're assessed. A lot of them will drop out a law together.

Carol (39:29):

Yep. Well, that's a good [thing]! But no, I didn't say that. <laugh>

Kim (39:36):

Funny. So, Carol, let me ask you this, kind of similar, idea. Would you recommend that people like counselors and coaches and trainers take the authentic systems assessment?

Carol (39:52):

Yeah. I—and particularly coaching is becoming more and more important in the world, and people are really getting a lot of value out of coaching. And I think every coach that really understands John's system and understands how they fit into that system, because there are coaches in all four quadrants too. 

So absolutely, I would recommend it for all coaches and for counselors, considering the amount of money they make, it may be difficult for 'em, but it would be good <laugh> and social workers that would be good for social workers.

Kim (40:28):

Absolutely. Absolutely.

John (40:31):

Well, I’VE work with a career coach for the last 12 years. And she has a 97% placement rate, but also a 95% retention rate over five years. Those people are not only getting the jobs, but they're staying. And that's what's very important because they can't argue with the results. 

That's what the major complaint I get from counselors is, “I tell my client what to do and they won't, they don't listen to me. Why?” Because they took another test that only shows a superficial approach to who they are and not the deeper motivation. And so they don't feel compelled to follow through with the advice that the counselor's giving. But with this—

Carol (41:13):

Yeah, I think you're identifying one weakness with almost any system we've got. And that is people aren't going deep enough with much of anything. I'm about to start a four week course in which I get to speak with 20 other very intelligent people about real issues. Really not, not how do we fix the abortion issue, but how do we help people learn to be the people they need to be? How do we help people come to realize that they have value? I mean, those are the questions we should be asking. Not these silly things we're asking.

Kim (41:49):

Absolutely. So fantastic. 

Oh my gosh, this has been such an amazing discussion. Carol. You are fabulous. Thank you so much for being our guest today.

Carol (42:00):

Thank you for having me.

Kim (42:02):

<laugh>.

John (42:03):

Oh, yes. Thank you.

Kim (42:05):

Absolutely. So as we wrap up this episode, please tell us what you think. 

We would love to hear what you as our listeners think about, what we're talking about. And hey, if you have any questions for me or for John, please feel free to contact us. John, what's the best way for people to get ahold of you?

John (42:28):

One is an email, john@authentic-systems.com.

Kim (42:36):

Excellent. Excellent mm-hmm. <affirmative>. Excellent. And, also if people want to take an assessment, how could they do that?

John (42:45):

Well, they go to my, my site, www.authenti-systems.com, and just work through the prompts and we'll be able to get together and make an appointment.

Kim (42:57):

Outstanding. And if anybody would like to get in touch, my website is www.kwepub.com. And, I am grateful to be John's editor and also a co-creator of this amazing podcast. 

So thank you all so much for joining us and, we'll see you next time.

John (43:17):

Thank you.