In addition to those traits which may relate to the specific 16 individual temperaments there are some general observations that show how certain temperaments relate to each other.

The information in these links describe how each of these temperaments interacts with the others in the context of divorce negotiations.

Strengths

• The practical approach of E will be a nice balance to I's tendency to think in terms of values and ideas.  They will be complementary at some point in the negotiations.
• When the time comes to initiate agreement it is likely that the E will lead and the I will be ready to go along.
• Normally, Es will talk more and Is will listen more, creating a good blend when things are going well.
• Es' values will be more open and will have been examined more so they are likely to be stronger in the way they present them.
• E is good at asking questions, but must wait for an answer and then listen to it.

Weaknesses

• Is will stick to ideas which often develop entirely within themselves and may be less willing to accept input.
• E needs the affirmation that Is don't give.
• I gets overwhelmed by E talking and may wish E would "put brain in motion before engaging mouth."  If I says that, E will feel badly.  I needs to ask instead for quiet time or time out.
• Is think internally and often feel they said what they think or feel when they didn't actually say it aloud.  Is need to know Es are not mind readers.  An E must not finish I's sentences or talk for him/her.
• In critical stages of negotiations the E will say too much and the I will stop listening.  While an E thinks aloud an I should ask,  "Is this the decision or are you still thinking this out?"
• An I must take care not to be too internal.  If they are they'll lose benefit of E's thinking and make E feel left out.

Hints:

• The I-temperament may more likely request time out to "charge batteries" while an E is energized by the negotiations.
• E must learn to check the need to speak and should listen when I finally speaks.
• Is take time to respond and Es can't rush them.
• Long silences aren't negative to Is.  Es needs to learn to wait.

Strengths

• If both are committed to negotiations they will work hard at it - and be well-focused.
• Will work on people parts and things not ideas and concepts.
• Will tend to work by trial and error and will each feel comfortable doing that.
• As both get experience (they thrive on experience) will become increasingly effective and will be able to close deal.
• They will communicate a great deal face to face.
• Won't mind the other person's considering options aloud.
• There will not be hidden agendas - each is open about what they want.
• During their marriage their house was a revolving door of activities, now they need to convert that energy to direct discussions.

Weaknesses

• Since each enjoys being assertive this can degenerate into a power struggle.
• Both may be active and involved, may have a hard time actually sitting down to negotiate.  Make a real effort to carve out time    for this important activity.
• Both may be too busy talking and not taking the time to listen to needs of the other.
• A mediator might get big issues off the table and then E and E can learn to negotiate with smaller, less emotionally-charged issues.
• If the couple has become enmeshed with lots of bickering and fighting they may not be able to negotiate until disengaged via    a therapist or divorce mediator.
• If the subject being negotiated is a parenting plan they may have some difficulty establishing exclusive time for each with the children since neither has a high need for privacy.

Strengths

• They will be well-focused and articulate about respective needs and will get to the point quickly.
• They will be concerned about general concepts and equity - will be searching for abstract principles.
• They will respect each other's privacy and be willing to examine their own feelings after sessions (meditate upon own feelings.)
• Will bring ideas from past negotiating session to the next one.
• Avoids passive aggressive behaviors.
• Don't make instant decisions.
• Both are deliberate, peaceful, timely.
• Both prefer to write to each other about negotiations, in a careful, sensitive way.
• Because of focus on the inner world they may be less attentive to the other's feelings and thoughts.

Weaknesses

• Slow to reach agreements and act upon them.
• Need a friend for reality checking and counter proposals.
• Try to smile at each other to keep the negotiating relationship going.
• May have difficulty explaining feelings to each other because of not asking or not answering when asked.  As a result of divorcing process, will feel they don't understand the other person any more.
• Need to be more artful and overt than were accustomed to being in getting own facts and feelings out.
• Find it difficult to take leadership role in starting negotiations and initiating discussions on specific topics.
• Will get feedback from friends to help check out what is pragmatic and real.
• Will be surprised that courtship perceptions were wrong and need to acknowledge differences.

An example of a woman N and a male S appeared on a talk-show program where Lowell was the guest.  She had prepared a casual, relaxed parenting plan which allowed for each parent to do what felt interesting whenever the spirit moved them. It had a 70's "hippies" feel to the agreement.  Now she was being devastated by  his and his new wife's insistence on specifics: screening every movie the child saw, precise timing for each activity, exact  activities and a constant suggestion that she was inappropriate.  She will now need to go to court to make sure she gets quality  time in a re-fashioned parenting plan where her parenting style is not being controlled.

It is hard for Ns and Ss to follow the other's thinking. One  practice could be for the N to explain what they know about  details of baby care, or teen-age study problems or financial "nitty-gritty" of sending their child to college.

Strengths

• Ss perceive facts and Ns are idea-oriented.
• Ss go step-by-step and Ns jump around.
• Ns see infinite possibilities and Ss pay attention to facts and details and balance Ns' focus on the many possibilities in negotiation pie.
• Ss' essential pragmatism will come to fore while Ns try to divide pie.
• Ns can't go on a "walkabout" or drift away from real responsibilities - in this society Dad goes to jail if he doesn't pay child support.
• Ns can lean on Ss to stay grounded in reality instead of fantasizing.
• If Ss focus entirely on practicality they both lose the Ns' version of what future might hold and the opportunity to plan for possibilities.
• Ss may insist on future plans being grounded in facts.
• Ns find the "nitty-gritty" not poetic, too confining, "too much anchor and not enough sail."

Weaknesses

• Ns may want to leave the bargaining table - they must listen and ask Ss to bring the matter to solution.
• Ss may see Ns as flaky.
• If they have children together, Ss will need security and Ns may want to change jobs or in some way that Ss feel their security is  threatened:  try having N set up a fund for S to depend on while N changes jobs, etc.  N wants to be able to float and dream - yet needs to have a way to meet real needs of kids or house payment,    etc. S might use term insurance or a savings account to meet obligations when N wants to change jobs or be less available for awhile.

Strengths

• Both are practical , down-to-earth.
• Can appreciate the other's practical approach.
• Can understand the spouse's lifestyle.
• Both are realists.
• Good attention to detail.
• Will process the negotiations in the same way.
• Weaknesses
• You may get stuck in negotiations when feelings interfere.
• You may be unwilling to try something new, like brainstorming.  It doesn't come easily to you.
• May form deadlock.  Then should consider a third party or mediator    to help unstick.  A therapist can help here.  This is a good idea- a small expense now can save a big legal bill later.
• Difficult to look beyond experience.
• Self-esteem is tied around body image and if overweight, Ss feel unhappy.
• Two Ss tend to be overly pessimistic when unable to get past deadlock.
• Ss don't often visualize the future.

• Ss tend to have problems seeing the overall situation.  An S might try consulting a friend who is an N to do negotiating scenarios with him or her in private and help in drawing a "big picture."

Strengths

• Two Ns can communicate with each other at a high level which includes verbally.  They can almost intuit how the other feels and thinks.
• They enjoy complex bargaining.
• They might work spontaneously together - perhaps right at the  deadline.
• Both like to live in the future and so can focus on issues "down the road" - college or whatever lies in the future.
• Especially good with creative solutions to divorcing couples' problems - might be good at sharing kids in some non-conventional way.  -One N-N couple each had an apartment and kept the house  for the kids.  They took turns moving into the house when it was their turn to be with the kids.

Weaknesses

• May, with imagination, impute bad objectives to others which are  not really there.
• One N husband hid in the bushes and spied on his wife in an attempt to catch her in a wrong doing.
• When N works with N they have difficulty coming to conclusion.
• They don't get to the decision making process.
• May be unrealistic about how well they can work together post divorce.
• May ignore clear evidence that future conflict may make agreements unworkable.
• Tendency to be impractical in solutions - neither is detail oriented so final agreement may fall apart in the future.  Good    idea to have the agreement checked over by a CPA or an attorney, etc..
• Too big-picture oriented.  Needs to avoid conflict by anticipating and working out details.  (i.e. Where will the kids be every day  next year?  If nothing else, the kids need to know.)

Strengths

• A Feeler can ask a Thinker to organize things logically.
• Thinkers can spot flaws in situations.
• Feelers can show appreciation and keep events positive.
• Feelers can be more conciliatory and be examples of conciliation.
• When Ts and Fs negotiate F can help T get in touch with feelings.
• F can be enthusiastic and persuasive and appreciative.
• T's strength organizing and analyze.

Weaknesses

• T feels logical and criticizes F for emotions who takes it personally and their sense of harmony is hurt and the negotiations can fall apart.  Return to the negotiations table another time.
• If T closes down because their space is invaded F needs to back off.
• Fs feel it is "their fault" if negotiations fail and the T agrees.  (In reality this may well not be the case.
• F's world is not compatible with Ts world.
• If T continues to ignore Fs feelings negotiations are at risk and settlement is threatened.  T must validate F's feelings in order to keep negotiations successful. T needs to incorporate F's        feelings in negotiations in order to have successful negotiations and not wind up in court.  T might try to restate F's feelings in    objective, detached way to validate and re-include F's feelings    in the negotiations.
• F just wants the bad feelings over.

Hints:

• Make F feel appreciated by T so they can move toward a logical result.
• F can validate T's logic by re-stating what T said and making sure it is correct.  Then remembering it.
• F needs to see that personalizing impedes conclusions.  They need to take less blame for set-backs.
• F can try to re-state needs, rights, desires or objectives.

FLAG:  If F gets teary and emotional T begins to feel it is getting illogical and out of control.  T feels loss of control.  Stop and come back to the table later.
 

Strengths

• The negotiations will be very logical with logic as the base for decisions.
• High probability of successful negotiations since both will be good problem solvers.
• They can negotiate  in an honest and candid way without hurting the other's feelings.
• Well-motivated and will concentrate hard on a negotiated outcome.
• Weaknesses
• Neither T is good at dealing with their own true feelings which makes them vulnerable when making joint, logical decisions eg a joint Parenting Plan.  A logical, carefully drafted plan may blow    up when a kid rebels and doesn't follow the plan.  The result may be chaos for two thinkers.             Negotiations might deteriorate when each becomes critical and not supportive so need to express respect and appreciation for each other's position.  Risk when two thinkers negotiate because they don't spend time on feeling part of their nature - when emotions do come out they can lose control This might be a good time to interpose a therapist.  Ts feelings are not often expressed and when they surface they might be raw and frightening - the T is unused to dealing with  them and is rusty in expressing feelings and  knowing how to act.
• Ts use logic to control the environment and their strong emotions. They fear that they may come apart.  Can feel disoriented when strong feelings surface in either spouse.
• The Ts can be problem solvers but if conflict generates intense feeling might bring primitive emotional responses  or long suppressed anger.  The negotiations may disintegrate into litigation.  There is danger of two Ts using logic style as a weapon against the other.  Two Ts arguing may destroy the financial resources both need when  deep anger surfaces.

Hint:
Look at the economics of the situation - bring in a third party if necessary to work towards the negotiated settlement to save money.
 
 

Remember:  the love relationship is over, so when you read spouse's emotions and see anger and hurt you can help most by validating the feelings and then moving on.  F's can be effective because  both are anxious to keep harmony for kids.  A therapist can help with this.  Future parenting relation is a strong pull to getting through negotiations effectively.

Strengths

• Both want to avoid full blown conflict - want harmony.
• High empathic skills enable them to read each other's needs and wants and share common values.

Weaknesses

• Because of conflict prior to negotiations each has hurt the other deeply and personally.  How to play past this:  war is over - now    need to negotiate the peace.  All complaints and hurts need to     come off the table.
• May have trouble because of need for harmony - hopefully anger has been expressed before negotiations.  If still quite angry may benefit from face-to-face confrontation or anger may explode as    a result.
• Need to get to agreement by getting through anger.  Get unstuck from anger - bursts of temper not intrinsically bad if they clear the air and are validated.  Then work along.  Each assumes guilt    for the situation and can make guilt stick to the other.  Don't use guilt to manipulate each other.  If value systems are not      congruent then have real breakdown in negotiations.  For example:    her loved babies in his new wife's arms is an impossible picture for her.  See it as a bigger pie for kid - more love available.    This is not intrinsically bad.
• Fs are not good at critiqueing outcome for balance.  Judgements  made on feelings alone can be risky.  Need to show results to third party mediator, lawyer or CPA.
• Trust a third person with a logical side to be involved for logical balance.  There is a danger that two Fs might be drafting conclusions outside the main stream.  They may use wrong words,    misconstrue pension division, etc.
• May have negative self-image due to black/white thinking.
• Money matter with two Fs may not add up.  Need to be able to balance assets/liabilities - involve third person who is logical.
• May tend to blame selves for being "in this mess."  Might color ability to approach negotiations objectively with win-win  outcome.

With Js and Ps timing is the issue, not emotions.

Strengths

• P makes work into play.  The J wants the job done.  Negotiations can be fun, creative, exciting and come to a conclusion if all goes well.

Weaknesses of each

• A strong P can create negative options.
• J can cut off options too soon.  Are there too many ideas?  Then suggest a time to make the decision.
• Js don't communicate well when angry.  As deal nears completion, J thinks its a "done deal" and P hears options are still open even when they are not open.
• The J may want to control a decision and then the P might become passive-aggressive and sabotage the result.
• Deal can flip if P feels conclusion is reached too soon  and  options were cut-off. If the stress is too bad, the agreement won't hold.
• As decision-making approaches the Js may try to take over and the P feels left out.
• Ps drive for flexibility and Js want the environment set, organized and closure on the horizon.  P hesitates from early commitment while the J wants to plan ahead.
• Ps are stressed if the decision comes too soon and Js are stressed if the decision is put off.
• If a deal is re-thought a J might react by saying "a deal is a deal" and then holding on to settlement, becoming angered if the deal is re-opened.  Then there is a high probability the deal      will fall apart.
• The P can keep open and keep getting data and miss the deadlines.

Hints:

• In working toward settlement the P should suggest options and the J move towards the agreeable decision.
• Each might re-state the other's position.
• They might try writing individual deals (incremental agreeing) and taking some issues off the table.
• To get J to the table to start negotiations, a P might agree to complete negotiations within a certain time frame.
• P wants some now and some later.  The danger with P is they might come to the table too soon.
• The P can remind the J not to get too rigid/inflexible.
• P can keep things open and make more choice available.
• The J can keep the negations from being too "loosey-goosey."
• The P could try submitting options in advance to J so P knows they have been considered.  J submits a time schedule to P so P can deal with deadlines.
• As the negotiations start to conclude, the P should restate the conclusions, the J should state what options are still open to "expand the pie" for the greater good of both.

Strengths

• Both will be very flexible, spontaneous,creative.
• Neither will be judgmental when coming to the bargaining table.
• Good at exchanging information about respective positions and keeping each other informed about their thinking.
• Adaptable to change, will want/appreciate flexibility in schedule.  Don't keep to rigid schedules.
• Both prefer flexibility.
• Won't show up on time, or won't have child ready for visitation, or back on time.

Weaknesses

• All this flexibility is fine until a J enters the lives of one of them with schedules and timetables.
• Won't want to plan long term divorce solutions such as financial planning for college expenses.
• Wants to leave too much open-ended in agreements.
• If P isn't happy at work (too rigid environment), he/she will have troubles in negotiation and can actually become dysfunctional.
• Property agreements which generally have to be ordered and structured may not get attention needed to carry them out.
• Two Ps have trouble with negotiation agendas and they could fall apart when they can't meet court time requirements (such as discovery timetables and trial dates).
• May be tension over decision avoidance - both prefer not to decide.
• Little decisions can take major effort and big decisions may never get done.

Hint:
Can use attorney mediator as problem solver to get to closure.
 

Strengths

• Highly organized, will get a lot done.
• Like to plan and organize.
• Both like organizing agendas.
• They will do fact gathering needed to make decisions.
• Will want to get closure on divorce.
• Both will want to  simplify decisions and make dollar decisions quickly.
• Two Js are work-oriented.
• They enjoy decision making.
• Can communicate easily, will hear what the other is saying and will both schedule the closing of the case.

Weaknesses

• There is risk of a severe power struggle.
• They will work off own plans without full sharing.
• There is stress when their own plans fall through.
• If they can't agree on joint negotiation they can get severely disappointed, even depressed.
• In parenting negotiations both can be over-controlling of children and of themselves.  May not be making good parenting decisions.
• May want psychologist or therapist to help them address their children's needs as opposed to their own.
• As a result of easy decision making they may not want to listen to co-operative ideas that would improve their "win-win" situation.
• Because good at plan-making they may get locked in to plan and miss opportunities  to be creative.
• They may over simplify their options.
• Need to listen carefully to be sure that both have really reached a joint agreement on all points.
• Look at check lists of what needs to be done so they don't miss issues.
• Might make decisions before they have all the facts.