Max, upon rereading my post, I realized it came across harsher than I intended. I was just terse and in a hurry.
Bingley, I did not take any offense on that.
I don't know how any of this would apply to a survival situation. I mean, if you're in a survival situation, especially in a long-term one as envisioned by the video in the OP, you're in crisis.
Everybody is in crisis. So, what, trust no one?
The book "Please understand me" (Iīll second Montaneroīs recommendation) may give you hints on this topic. Different personalities perceive a crisis in different ways. Some personalities may need to be monitored more closely, some may actually thrive. Assign tasks accordingly for best results.
At the end, I continue to feel that character can be known only in the long term.
I think that basic traits can be observed fairly quickly. A more accurate assessment takes time.
You can design whatever process you want for admitting people into your "survival group," but I am guessing that 50% (or more!) of that process will reflect you and the social dynamics in the existing group.
That is not neccessarily a bad thing. An applicant needs to fit into the group if things are supposed to run smoothly.
It should not be forgotten that the interview process is mutual. The applicant may decide that he or she does not want to join the group after the admission process.
I'd prefer a survival group with people you have known for a long time, and prepare for their flaws.
Thatīs a wise choice. Teams need to form and a group develops the social dynamics over time. Itīs best when most of the friction is resolved ahead of a crisis.
Previous Topic
Index
