Heavy research

Some folks like academic "hard data" research and would like to see the Enneagram "scientifically" validated. Here's how one guy did it.



Using the Enneagram to help organizations attract, motivate, & retain their employees
by Hebenstreit, R. Karl, Ph.D., Alliant International University, San Francisco Bay, 2007 , 128 pages; AAT 3294292

ABSTRACT (abstract summary is below)

This study used an on-line survey to evaluate various hypotheses around differences in decisions to join, stay with, or leave organizations being explained by differences in Enneatype. 87 completed surveys were collected July-August 2007 and data was analyzed using Cronbach's alpha (reliability), ANOVA and Tukey tests (chance), and Fisher exact tests (links to MBTI). The results supported several of the hypotheses, revealing that some statistically significant (p < 0.05) inter-Enneatype differences exist in decisions to join, stay with, and/or leave organizations:

Enneatype 1s differed from 4s and 8s in valuing supervisory integrity more when having joined organizations. They also differed from 3s and 4s in that dimension having chosen to stay with their current companies. Enneatype 6s differed from 4s in their higher valuation of trust in leadership having decided to join organizations (as did 1s, 5s, 7s, and 9s). A collaborative work environment was more important for 9s than 4s remaining with past employers. Sufficient time off was valued more by Enneatype 5s (and 6s) than 3s having chosen to stay with past employers. Enneatype 6s (along with 1s and 2s) valued trust in leadership more than 4s having chosen to stay with past organizations. Additionally, Enneatype 1s differed from 3s in valuing the aggregate literature review-based factors more having chosen to stay with their current employers. Further analysis by subtype revealed statistically significant differences between social and sexual counterparts in the former's higher valuation of innovative work when joining and remaining with past organizations. Social subtypes differed from self-preservation peers having chosen to stay with past employers based on collaborative work environments. Sexual subtypes differed from social subtypes in their valuation of supervisory support having decided to stay with past employers, and from both other subtypes when factoring in interesting work. Other statistically significant results (0.05 < p < 0.08) were also revealed that require further research with larger populations. The results of this study validated many of the findings and predictions of the literature and Enneagram theory. These findings should provoke corporate action to integrate the basic motivations of the Enneatypes into the workplace to attract, retain, and motivate their diverse workforce.

So there!