The Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument is a system to measure and describe
thinking preferences in people, developed by William "Ned" Herrmann
while leading management education at General Electric's Crotonville facility.
It is a type of cognitive style measurement and model, and is often
compared to psychological assessments such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,
Learning Orientation Questionnaire, DISC assessment, and others.
Brain Dominance Model In his brain dominance model, Herrmann
identifies four different modes of thinking:
A. Analytical thinking Key words : Auditive,logical, factual,
critical, technical and quantitative. Preferred activities : collecting data,
analysis, understanding how things work, judging ideas based on facts, criteria
and logical reasoning. B. Sequential thinking
Key words : safekeeping, structured, organized, complexity or detailed,
planned. Preferred activities : following
directions, detail oriented work, step-by-step problem solving,
organization and implementation. C. Interpersonal thinking
Key words : Kinesthetic, emotional, spiritual, sensory, feeling.
Preferred activities : listening to and expressing ideas, looking for personal
meaning, sensory input, and group interaction.
D. Imaginative thinking Key words : Visual, holistic, intuitive,
innovative, and conceptual. Preferred activities : Looking at the
big picture, taking initiative, challenging assumptions, visuals,
metaphoric thinking, creative problem solving, long term thinking.
His theory was based on theories of the modularity of cognitive functions,
including well-documented specializations in the brain's cerebral
cortex and limbic systems, and the research into left-right brain
laterilization by Roger Wolcott Sperry, Robert Ornstein, Henry Mintzberg, and
Michael Gazzaniga. These theories were further developed to reflect a metaphor
for how individuals think and learn. Use of that metaphor brought later criticism
by brain researchers such as Terence Hines for being overly simplistic,
however the metaphorical construct has proven effective in a variety of
organizational contexts, especially for business and government.
Herrmann also coined the concept Whole Brain Thinking as a description of
flexibility in using thinking styles that one may cultivate in individuals or
in organizations allowing the situational use of all four styles of
thinking. = The Herrmann Brain Dominance
Instrument = The format of the instrument is a 120
question online test, which claims to determine which of the model's four
styles of thinking is a dominant preference. More than one style may be
dominant at once in this model. For example, in Herrmann's presentation a
person may be dominant in both analytical and sequential styles of
thinking but be weaker in interpersonal or imaginative modes, though he asserts
all people use all styles to varying degrees.
A 1985 dissertation by C. Bunderson, currently CEO of the non-profit
EduMetrics Institute asserts that "four stable, discrete clusters of preference
exist", "scores derived from the instrument are valid indicators of the
four clusters", and "The scores permit valid inferences about a person's
preferences and avoidances for each of these clusters of mental activity".
= Consulting & Training = Based on the instrument and model,
organizations such as Herrmann International and Herrmann Institute
offer consulting and solutions to improve personal or group communication,
creativity, and other benefits. Critiques
= Self Reporting = Measurements that require people to
state preferences between terms have received criticism. Researchers C. W.
Allinson and J. Hayes, in their own 1996 publication of a competing cognitive
style indicator called Cognitive Style Index in the peer reviewed Journal of
Management Studies, noted that "there appears to be little or no published
independent evaluation of several self-report measures developed as
management training tools. [including] Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument."
However, some find usefulness in self reporting measurements. Researchers G.P.
Hodgkinson and E. Sadler-Smith in 2003 found cognitive style indicators
generally useful for studying organizations. However in a critique of
the Cognitive Style Index indicator they opined that progress in the field had
been "hampered by a proliferation of alternative constructs and assessment
instruments" many unreliable with a lack of agreement over nomenclature.
To measure self-report consistency, a differential item functioning review of
HBDI was published in 2007 by Jared Lees. However, his tests were supported
by EduMetrics, a company on contract with Herrmann International to evaluate
the system, and were therefore not completely independent.
= Lateralization = Herrmann International describes an
underlying basis for HBDI in the lateralization of brain function theory
championed by Gazzaniga and others that associates each of the four thinking
styles with a particular locus in the human brain. Analytical and sequential
styles are associated with left brain and interpersonal and imaginative styles
are associated with right brain, for example. Ned Herrmann described
dominance of a particular thinking style with dominance with a portion of a brain
hemisphere. The notion of hemisphere dominance
attracted some criticism from the neuroscience community, notably by
Terence Hines who called it "pop psychology" based on unpublished EEG
data. He asserts that current literature instead found that both hemispheres are
always involved in cognitive tasks and attempting to strengthen a specific
hemisphere does not improve creativity, for example. Hines stated "No evidence
is presented to show that these 'brain dominance measures' measure anything
related to the differences between the two hemispheres. In other words, no
evidence of validity [of hemisphere dominance] is presented.".
= Creativity = Herrmann offered creativity workshops
based on strengthening particular thinking styles and strengthening the
right hemisphere, which received critiques that creativity is not
localized to a particular thinking style nor to a particular hemisphere.
A study published in the peer reviewed Creativity Research Journal in 2005 by
J. Meneely and M. Portillo agreed that creativity is not localized into a
particular thinking style, such as a right-brain dominance resulting in more
creativity. They did however find correlation between creativity in design
students based on how flexible they were using all four thinking styles equally
as measured by the HBDI. When students were less entrenched in a specific style
of thinking they measured higher creativity using Domino’s Creativity
Scale. References
Allinson, C.W., & Hayes, J. 'Cognitive Style Index: A measure of
intuition-analysis for organizational research', Journal of Management
Studies, 33:1 January 1996 Bentley, Joanne and Hall, Pamela
Learning Orientation Questionnaire correlation with the Herrmann Brain
Dominance Instrument: A validity study Dissertation Abstracts International
Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol 61(10-A), Apr 2001. pp.
3961. Deardorff, Dale S. An exploratory case
study of leadership influences on innovative culture: A descriptive study
Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering,
Vol 66(4-B), 2005. pp. 2338. DeWald, R. E.. Relationships of MBTI
types and HBDI preferences in a population of student program managers.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 50(06), 2657B.
Herrmann, Ned The Theory Behind the HBDI and Whole Brain Technology pdf
Hines, Terence 'The myth of right hemisphere creativity.' Journal of
Creative Behavior, Vol 25(3), 1991. pp. 223–227.
Hines, Terence 'Left Brain/Right Brain Mythology and Implications for
Management and Training', The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 4,
October 1987 Hines, Terence 'Left brain, right brain:
Who's on first?' Training & Development Journal, Vol 39(11), Nov 1985. pp.
32–34. [Journal Article] Hodgkinson, Gerard P., and Sadler-Smith,
Eugene Complex or unitary? A critique and empirical re-assessment of the
Allinson-Hayes Cognitive Style Index., Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 09631798, 20030601, Vol. 76, Issue 2
Holland, Paul W. and Wainer, Howard Differential Item Functioning ISBN
0-80580-972-4 Krause, M. G.. A comparison of the MBTI
and the Herrmann Participant Survey. Handout from presentation at APT-VII,
the Seventh Biennial International Conference of the Association for
Psychological Type, Gainesville, FL. Lees, Jared A. Differential Item
Functioning Analysis of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument Masters
Thesis, Brigham Young University - pdf McKean, K. 'Of two minds: Selling the
right brain.', Discover, 6(4), pp. 30–41.
Meneely, Jason; and Portillo, Margaret; The Adaptable Mind in Design: Relating
Personality, Cognitive Style, and Creative Performance. Creativity
Research Journal, Vol 17(2-3), 2005. pp. 155–166. [Journal Article]
Wilson, Dennis H. A comparison of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument(TM)
and the extended DISCMRTM behavior profiling tool: An attempt to create a
more discerning management perspective. Dissertation Abstracts International
Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol 68(3-A). pp. 1079.
Further reading Ned Herrmann The Creative Brain, Brain
Books, Lake Lure, North Carolina. ISBN 0-944850-02-2. ISBN 978-0-944850-02-2.
Ned Herrmann The Whole Brain Business Book, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. ISBN
0-07-028462-8. ISBN 978-0-07-028462-3. Giannini, John L. Compass of the Soul:
Archetypal Guides to a Fuller Life. ISBN 0-935652-70-1. ISBN 978-0-935652-70-3.
Edward Lumsdaine, M. Lumsdaine Creative Problem Solving, McGraw-Hill ISBN
0-07-039091-6. ISBN 978-0-07-039091-1. Peter Ferdinand Drucker, David Garvin,
Dorothy Leonard, Susan Straus, and John Seely Brown.. Harvard Business Review on
Knowledge Management. Harvard Business School Press ISBN 0-87584-881-8. ISBN
978-0-87584-881-5. Sala, Sergio Della, Editor. Mind Myths:
Exploring Popular Assumptions About the Mind and Brain, J. Wiley & Sons, New
York. ISBN 0-471-98303-9. ISBN 978-0-471-98303-3.