The Genetics of Power

I just returned from a week of relaxation and sunshine in Playa del Carmen, in the beautiful Maya Riviera of Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula.  As customary, before leaving for Cancun, I loaded up at the airport with reading materials for the week.  Among my purchases ... the Economist, Time, and Newsweek.

An article about the genetics of power in the Newsweek psychology section by Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist at Rutgers University and the chief scientific advisor to Chemistry.com, caught my eye.  I must admit that the subject is totally new to me, but I found the article interesting.

Fisher tells us that recently Peter Hatemi of Pennsylvania State University and Rose McDertmott of Brown University reevaluated much of the evidence about the genetics of politics concluding that "genetic influences account for a substantial portion of individual differences in political traits"  .. perhaps as much as 40 to 60%.   She goes on to suggest that we must know who we are biologically and genetically speaking.

Her own research suggests that there are four broad primary styles of thinking and behaving within one of four universal brain systems: the testosterone, estrogen, serotonin, and dopamine systems.

Each one of us is a unique mix of the four, but we express the traits of some more than others.  For example, those of us who are particularly expressive of traits linked with testosterone, she calls Directors.  Those primarily expressive of estrogen she calls Negotiators.  Those primarily expressive of serotonin she calls Builders.  And those expressive of dopamine she calls Explorers.

Her information comes from multiple sources, including brain scanning, genetics, neurotransmitter and hormone systems, and a scientific questionnaire she constructed which resides on the dating site Chemistry.com, a subsidiary of Match.com, and which has been taken by more than 12 million people.

Here is a summary of the four brain systems that contribute to personality according to Fisher:

TESTOSTERONE

Qualities: analytical, tough-minded, direct (often blunt), skeptical, and determined to win.

Examples: Margaret Tatcher, Nicolas Sarkozy, George Patton

Not strictly a male hormone, data also link testosterone with the tendencies to be less socially aware, with poor emotional recognition, less eye contact, and less verbal fluency.

ESTROGEN

Qualities: sees the big picture, has people skills, verbal skills; imaginative, intuitive, compassionate.

Examples: Mahatma Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Bill Clinton

Not strictly a female hormone, the effects of estrogen begin in the womb, contributing to a more contextual, holistic, big-picture, long term view, as well as superb linguistic skills.

SEROTONIN

Qualities:  cautious, conventional, concrete, meticulous, respectful of rules and authority, religious.

Examples:  Dwight D. Eisenhower, Colin Powell, George W. Bush

Caution, observing social norms, following the rules, respecting authority, orderliness, adherence to plans and methods, frugality, figural and number creativity and religiosity are traits associated with the serotonin system.

DOPAMINE

Qualities:  curious, creative, spontaneous, energetic, mentally flexible, daring.

Examples: Winston Churchill, John F. Kennedy, Teddy Roosevelt

Genes in the dopamine system are extensively associated, in biological literature, with novelty seeking and risk taking, spontaneity and energy.

Concluding Notes

No one is a pure this or that, in my view.  Human behavior is too complicated to pigeon hole anyone in one box or another.  Scientists have a knack about using 2x2 matrices to illustrate their insights or research findings.  They do so in order to more easily communicate with lay persons.

My own experience teaches me that we are more like a mosaic composed of many traits and qualities. some smaller, other larger, together capturing our individual characteristics

.

For example, applying the author's descriptions to myself, I can identify with most, but not all,  of the Negotiator/Explorer qualities.  Conversely, fewer qualities in the categories of Director/Builder seem to apply to me.

The article suggests that no man is an island, particularly a leader.  So the author offers a modest piece of biological advice: surround ourselves with people who do not think the way we do.

Recent data from Stanford University seems to suggest that "in the long run teams do better when they are composed of people with the widest possible range of personalities".

I am a strong believer and supporter of this advice.  There is much to be gained by diversity in approach, thinking and learning style.  The price we pay for the benefits that accrue includes being more patient, more tolerant, and perhaps less efficient.

How about your thoughts?  What is your dominant style? Would others agree with your assessment?