Dr. Linda Berens has reportedly updated the names of two axes on her interaction-styles model in v2.0 or her booklet on Interaction Styles. The Interaction Styles was the classic temperament matrix (distinct from the Keirseyan groupings), using I and E (pairing together "In Charge" or Choleric with "Get Things Going" or Sanguine; and "Chart the Course" or Melancholic with "Behind the Scenes" or Phlegmatic) along with Directing and Informing (the "people/task" scale pairing BtS with GTG and IC with CtC). Yet there were also "cross factors" so to speak, known as "control vs Movement" pairing the diametric opposites in that matrix. (BtS/IC; CtC/GTG).
So "Movement", now becomes "Process" (as a main focus or interest for Chart-the-Course and Get-Things-Going). "Control", becomes "Outcome" (as a main focus or interest for Behind-the-Scenes and In-Charge people).
I think this is great!
The word "Control" was so misleading. You would figure the aggressive "In Charge" style would be "controlling", so it seemed out of character for the opposite, peaceful Behind the Scenes. (Plus, when I first mentioned the FIRO area of "control", everyone who knew about the Interaction Styles thought it related to this facet). "Outcome" is much more accurate, and helps to understand that cross-factor. ("Movement" was easier to understand, though "Process' is good too).
What it means is that in a development of change, CTC and GTG are focused on the process itself, while IC and BTS are focused on outcomes. Previously, it was "control over the outcome", but the emphasis is on "outcome", not "control", hence the new name. Process was previously pharsed as "moving things along". Like CTC's name implies "charting the course", and GTG, "getting things going".
And it also further makes it clear that I am BtS; (not GTG, as some thought).
I never liked the idea; and before I was married, (and still living with my parents and not paying living expenses), I just saved up money and got whatever I wanted. I wanted to "owe no man anything" as the Bible tells us.
When I got married, and no longer able to save all that money, my wife (GtG) was more willing to enter payment plans, so she could get whatever she/we wanted right away. Plus she had student loans and stuff, and I could never rest until we got these pesky bills with interest and stuff out of the way. The same thing with mortgage (and car payments). I would rather pay rent, along with the other utilities, because they are month-by-month, and you don't expect them to ever "end". Once you make the payment, you are set for the month. If I won money or something, then I would buy a house and just pay all or most upfront. And when money was tight years ago, she would try to split the payments on all the bills, ($20 on this one, $10 on that one; bargain with them if it is a turn-off notice; etc), and I couldn't stand it. My thing was pay them all at once, even if we have to really cut back on food for one pay period. I would live on salad or something if need be. But she won't do that.
She would get annoyed because I basically wanted to do the bills my way, or not be bothered with them at all, so it's like "whatever".
We also have had pest problems, and she keeps pushing me to "stay on top of it" in a routine way, but when they kept coming back, I was like "what's the use; it's endless. I might as well do it less", and she always wondered why I was like that. You have to keep fighting. Yet I just wanted to rest from that, to be done, fast.
She likes the process of building houses on the Sims, and also sees it as togetherness when we both do it. I already arrived at my desired outcome when I built my dream house, a few years ago (twice; first on Sims 1, and then an improved version on Sims 2), and then moved on to other interests.
This is interesting, because I think it may have been the KTS II, where I first saw a question about "desiring closure", and I marked it favorably. But as I later learned; "closure" in 16 types systems generally ties into the J facet. I always wondered about this, because in one sense; I do like the idea of "closure" in some areas, but I clearly have a P preference. (Perhaps that helped make me come out as a J on that test, though it was actually tied with P).
This kind of sorts it out, that closure can come from either a J preference, or an "Outcome" preference. Perhaps it's different kinds of closure? Since J is called "Scheduling", I guess it's closure in terms of the order of time, rather than necessarily the outcome. So my wife and I are diametrically opposite in that respect. As she would sit down and meticulously draw out a budget, she's getting the closure in the process itself, but not in the outcome. I would try to eliminate the process, in order to have the closure in outcome.
It's also why I don't like the idea of school, and couldn't wait until she finished her Bachelor's, and then Master's.
So this is another "dimension" of sorts, that we can notice and use to determine type. Does it make sense to anyone else?