I have a teacher’s heart and taught in the public school system for 8 years. I bring that personalized learning approach to this course. I intentionally deliver content that will reach you no matter where you are in your stage of life. I’m also a practicing Christian. I am passionate about my faith and bring it with me into the content I provide, doing so with a servant’s heart.

The short answer is that you can't.  I know that the material is transformational.  I know that my marriage was saved as a result of incorporating the concepts in my life.  What I CAN'T answer is how committed you and your partner will be to trusting the process and  completing the course, applying the concepts you learn.  Success will be a two way street.  I can promise, my part is fantastic.  Now it's up to you! 

Your “A-ha” moments begin before you’ve completed three modules!! If you put into practice what I teach, you should see results in the first week.

My course is built on three core principles:

• Understanding yourself
• Understanding your partner
• Learning to adapt your behavior to meet your partner where he/she is

If your partner doesn’t want to participate, there are parts of the course that you can share (like your assessment results) which I am certain will promote a “This is interesting” or “That does describe you pretty well” type of conversation.

Many university’s behavioral sciences and psychology departments have conducted research into the validity of the four type Model of Human Behavior. In 1921, Carl Jung published Psychological Types in Germany, identifying and describing four “types.” William Moulton Marston earned his doctorate from Harvard in 1921, and was professor at both Harvard and Columbia Universities. In 1928, he published The Emotions of Normal People, advancing his DISC theory. In the 1950’s, Walter Clark developed an assessment tool based on Marston’s work, the “Activity Vector Analysis.” Today, more than 50 companies use the Marston DISC Theory as the basis for examining patterns of behavior. Experts in psychometrics evaluate the validity of the assessment tool, comparing it (among others) to: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Myers Briggs Type Indicator, Cattell 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), Strong Interest Inventory, and the Performax Personal Profile. Marston styled assessment tools have been administered to over 30,000,000 people worldwide and they enjoy respect in the business and education communities. More than 81% of the participant’s colleagues see it as a very accurate picture of his or her habitual behavior patterns. Among those who are primarily “D” in their style, accuracy is rated at 91%; for “I” types, it is 94%. Primarily “S” type individuals perceive an 85% accuracy, while for “C” types, it is 82%. This gives us an 88.49% perceived accuracy, with a standard deviation of 6.43%. In other words, the report generated by this process is perceived as highly accurate, in most situations, by most participants.

Certainly, because finances involve attention to detail. Here is how the four styles look at a budget: “D” will go over it briefly but tends not to be detail-oriented. A budget is thought of as a rough estimate that must yield to goals and plans. “I” has difficulty making sense of it because it seems too theoretical, rather than being something can be experienced by the senses or valued emotionally. “S” will stay under the budget for safety’s sake and will have great stress in weighing people issues against financial constraints when those difficult decisions must be made. “C” will stay within the budget, but a savings in one area will be applied to upgrading another area in terms of quality. Goals and plans must yield to the precision of budgeting.

Marston’s original work on DISC was called the Emotions of Normal People. He theorized the 95% of a general population was “normal” – which meant they were not in prison or some other kind of mental institution. That meant the 5% of any given population group were not normal.
His original work was done over 100 years ago – so during that time the word “normal” has changed a lot to say the least. And to complicate matters even more there is a wide range of statistical data within any given behavior disorder (from mild to severe). ADD, ADHD, Asperger’s, Autism, PTSD, Behavior defiance disorder, etc., etc. The list is still growing!
The answer depends upon the severity of the condition. My first cousin, Wesley, has Downs Syndrome. He is highly literate and functionable. I have often observed him display all four of the different D-I-S-C qualities at different times. My response to him has always been the same – to show him love and respect, but realize there are additional circumstances and challenges that may need to be taken into consideration when dealing with him.
I have not found it necessary or have the need to perfectly or correctly evaluate the personality style of individuals with special needs. It is too unpredictable. Just showing them love, respect and attention may be the best approach in any given situation.
I suppose a doctoral level dissertation project could be applied to this phenomenon. However, I believe the conclusions would be these same observations that I have shared.

The topic of “values” is very broad as you can imagine. While we do not directly measure a person’s values in our DISC assessment, we do see some correlation between one’s DISC scores and one’s values.

Dictionary.com defines values as  “a person’s principles or standards of behavior; one’s judgment of what is important in life.” While there are many lists of values available from many sources, it is clear that there are trends in terms of what people value based on their personality styles. From a sample list of values found at yourdictionary.com we can propose these general correlations as examples:

D’s tend to value task-oriented and productive concepts such as

Dependability, Reliability, Loyalty, Commitment, Efficiency, Innovation, Spirit of adventure, Motivation, Passion, Respect, Courage, Perseverance

I’s tend to value people-oriented and involved concepts such as

Loyalty, Open-mindedness, Honesty, Creativity, Good humor, Compassion, Spirit of adventure, Motivation, Positivity, Optimism, Passion

Respect, Service to others

S’s tend to value people-oriented, stable concepts such as

Dependability, Reliability, Loyalty, Consistency, Honesty, Good humor, Compassion, Respect, Service to others

C’s tend to value task-oriented, specific concepts such as

Dependability, Reliability, Loyalty, Commitment, Consistency, Honesty, Efficiency, Innovation, Respect, Education

These are just example values and are not intended to be the same values that others might measure or list. The point is simply that personality traits and values have a correlation to an extent that there are trends. Obviously, any person can have any set of values. It is widely accepted that one’s values are less pre-determined in a person’s life vs. one’s basic personality style. Therefore, it would not be fair to assume a person’s values based on his or her personality traits. Even so, we find the example tendencies above to be the case.

Lastly, it may be helpful to think in terms of priorities when considering values. A person may highly value two different concepts but simply prioritize one value over another. In that case, it is not a matter of whether the person highly value one area and not another, but that he or she has a higher priority for one value over another. For that reason, we do not make any ethical assumptions or value assumptions based on personality styles in our assessment process.