The term psychology is derived from the Greek words psyche, meaning “spirit, soul, and breath,” and logia, which means “the study of something.” Psychology is the study of us: our mental and behavioral processes; how we interact with and react to the world around us. Ancient Greek philosophers were the founders of psychology, but the German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt set up the first “psych lab” back in 1879. Since then, the science has spurred dozens of studies and theories about what makes us tick.

Full disclosure: Although I have studied various aspects of this science for decades, have consulted with dozens of experts, and also have three decades of management, leadership, and consulting expertise, I do not have a degree in psychology. I'm not a “leadership shrink” (Figure 3.1). Thus, a PhD somewhere might disagree with some of my conclusions, regardless of whether most of his peers concur. The science of our minds is anything but exact, and psychologists have frequently disagreed with each other throughout history. While researching this topic, I discovered that the “raw data” collected by field observations, ever since the time of the Greeks, is quite harmonious. Moreover, when the observational science is examined against the light of neuroscience, the revelations are astounding.

One of the most well‐known psychologists in history is Sigmund Freud. Born in 1865, Freud spent most of his life in Vienna where he wrote three books about dream interpretation, psychopathology, and sexuality. He is remembered most for the latter, but Freud gave us many of our modern concepts about the human Id, Ego, and Superego. Freud observed that we have three brains, but, lacking neuroscientific knowledge, he did not understand why.

The Id refers to that unorganized portion of our personality structure related to our basic animal instincts and bodily needs. Our Id is motivated by pain and pleasure. Naturally, we want to avoid one and seek the other. As babies, we were controlled almost entirely by our Id, which is why we cried every time we got hungry. Some of us still do that: you know who you are.

As we became adults, we learned to control these impulses lest we pee in our pants or attack the waiter at a fancy restaurant with a fork rather than wait patiently to be served. Addictions and severe temper tantrums stem from an inability to properly control our Id impulses. Our Id is the raw animal within each of us, the untamed beast, unconcerned with right, wrong, good, evil, or morality. Within the Id resides our instinctual drive to survive.

Superego is the learned stuff. Rules, guidelines, boundaries, etiquette, proper communication skills, flushing the toilet, saying thank you, and so on, all reside in the Superego domain. Most of us learned these appropriate behaviors from parents, teachers, siblings, friends, and so forth. When we did something bad, probably because that devil Id sat on our shoulder and told us to, we were given pain, such as a belt whipping from Dad. When we did something good, we got a dose of pleasure, like ice cream from Mom. Our Superego learned how to behave appropriately through this process of emotional pain and pleasure learning.

Our Ego deals with the part of our personality structure that controls our perceptive, defensive, cognitive, and executive functions. Reason and common sense stem from the Ego. A primary Ego function is to mediate between our Id and Superego while striking the right balance between our primitive drive and reality. Our Ego lets us logically organize our thoughts and make sense of them. Unlike the Id, in which our raw passions reside, the Ego deals with reason and common sense. When our Ego is healthy, we have better control over our base instincts, such as the need to lash out in anger or run from potential conflict. Our Ego may know that we should respond to bad behavior with patience, reason, and intelligence, but if we're operating on two hours of sleep, our Id may take over and have us smash a fist into our computer monitor.

Freud's conclusions intimate that the Id is predominately involved with our instinctual brain functions. The Superego appears to be more involved with our emotional functions, and the Ego is rational and pragmatic and more logical. Could it be that Freud had the same observations as the ancient Greeks? It seems that Freud and the Greeks, as well, proffered the concept that humans have three distinct brains that tend to be emotional, instinctual, or logical.

DOG BRAIN

Ivan Pavlov, a psychologist born in Russia in 1849, gave us another interesting viewpoint about our behaviors. Although his theories predate Freud's, they help us see why we might be reacting in certain ways with certain people in certain situations. Pavlov's conditioned reflex experiments led to the famous Pavlov's dog term. A conditioned reflex is a response associated with a previously unrelated stimulus. In Pavlov's experiments, he placed food in front of a dog and the dog salivated. He then rang a bell. The dog did nothing. Then he rang a bell and put food in front of the dog. The dog salivated. Thereafter, whenever Pavlov rang the bell, even without the food present, the dog salivated.

What does Pavlov's dog have to do with leading? How we interact with others, including those we lead, is often directly related to learned responses. For example, what if as a child one of your subordinates had a parental or other authoritative figure bully, mistreat, ridicule, or upset them in some way? Perhaps this figure used a certain vocal tone or facial expression during these episodes. If so, these figures “rang a bell” before they metaphorically slapped your subordinate around. Today, whenever you use a similar tone or look, is it possible that you're ringing your subordinate's bell?

PERSONALITIES AND OBSERVATIONAL SCIENCE

During the early 1900s, humanist psychologist Carl Rogers proffered his self‐theory. He believed that all humans are infused with a single driving motivation: to self‐actualize. He defined this state as achieving the highest level of “human‐beingness.” He obviously never watched a hockey game. Others have simplified this theory to being happy or filled with joy in every aspect of one's life—including our professions.

Modern psychology views personality through the lens of an individual's emotions, behaviors, thoughts, actions, and reactions. These make us unique in relation to others, and are referred to as our mental system. Although we exhibit our personality characteristics in individualized ways, there are definite commonalities. Our traits remain relatively constant throughout our entire lives. The caveat here is whether we are acting in healthy or unhealthy ways. Most people slip in and out of these categories upon occasion.

In addition, individual or not, people tend to behave in similar and sometimes predictable ways when faced with certain situations or decisions. Although the study of personality is decidedly a psychological science, many experts now agree that our personalities are impacted by neurological wiring and processes. Some psychologists, like Sigmund Freud, subscribe to the nature theory, in which they believe that biology (today more commonly referred to as neurobiology) entirely governs our personalities. Others, like Alfred Adler, lean toward the “nurture” theory in which personalities are governed entirely by experiences, environment, and societal factors.

Many other experts have a leg in both camps. They point to identical twins or triplets exposed to similar environments and home situations who exhibit completely different personalities. They claim that nature is to blame for our core personality types, but different nurturing aspects can alter levels of psychological health and account for diverse individuality. Based on direct observation and years of research, many leading psychologists I've interviewed believe this theory is the most accurate. I'll reveal some of the science behind their conclusions in a moment. These insights may, as they did for me, alter your concepts about personalities forever.

In the mid‐1930s, Gordon Allport, a Harvard graduate, became the first psychologist in the United States to teach a class about personalities. He also created a trait theory that used more than 4,500 dictionary words to describe different traits. He divided these traits into three categories he named Cardinal (individual), Central (common), and Secondary (conditional) traits. Years later, Raymond Cattell reduced Allport's long list to 171 traits by combining and reclassifying similarities and removing uncommon ones. Using questionnaires completed by individual subjects, he narrowed the list even further to only 16 types that include perfectionism, dominance, apprehension, warmth, and so on. Allport's observations provided some of the foundational elements used in the 16 Myers‐Briggs personality profiles.

NINE TYPES

When speaking Greek, Ennea means nine and gram means point, so the term Enneagram (pronounced any‐a‐gram) means nine points. I first learned about the Enneagram in writing circles. I've used it frequently to create distinct fictional characters for my novels. At first I thought this stuff was all mumbo jumbo, but upon further research, aided by my son, Brandon Reed, I discovered some rather amazing and enlightening information about the Enneagram.

Brandon's friend in middle school was the son of Helen Palmer, a well‐known author on the Enneagram. By asking questions and scouring books, I learned that this personality theory had gained ground in scientific circles and was used for jury selection, employee hiring, and Internet matchmaking. This theory also aligns well with Myers‐Briggs and the 32‐trait Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ32) initiated by Saville and Holdsworth Ltd. in 1984.

OPQ32 is a personality “test” widely used in professional and employment circles for selection, development, team building, succession planning, and organizational change. The SHL Group, purveyors of the OPQ, completed a study in 2005 in concert with The Enneagram Institute and discovered that the nine personality types promulgated by the ancient Greeks are real and objective and stand on a par with Myers‐Briggs, the Big Five, and other prominent psychological systems.

The OPQ32, backed by hundreds of validation studies across tens of thousands of individuals, is one of the most widely used and highly regarded measures of personality in the workplace. Professors Dave Bartram and Anna Brown conducted an independent study of the Enneagram Institute interpretation made by authors Don Riso and Russ Hudson to see if it related to the OPQ32, and discovered a clear match.

Bartram and Brown reviewed information from hundreds of volunteer participants from different countries. The results indicated a strong relationship between the nine Enneagram personality types and OPQ32 traits. In fact, based on a person's OPQ32 profile, someone could predict the Enneagram type 75 percent of the time. One could do this only 11 percent of the time by guessing. The conclusion is that modern researchers have all but validated the observational science recorded by ancient researchers from as long ago as 2000 BC.

The Enneagram symbol is an interconnected circle made of nine points used to depict nine distinct personality types. Many believe the ancient Greeks invented the diagram and science, but evidence of its origination can be found in 4,000‐year‐old Pythagorean geometry (Figure 3.2). The Pythagoreans were an inquisitive bunch and were captivated by the deeper meaning and significance of numbers. Plato apparently studied the Enneagram theories and passed them on to his disciple Plotinus and other followers.

George Gurdjieff, a Russian teacher and follower of Freud, learned about the Enneagram in the 1920s while visiting a Sufi monastery in Afghanistan. Oscar Ichazo learned about it from Gurdjieff, and Claudio Naranjo heard about it from Ichazo. Robert Ochs and Helen Palmer researched the Enneagram by studying Naranjo's concepts, but the most famous authors on the Enneagram are Riso and Hudson of The Enneagram Institute.

Is the Enneagram accurate? The ancient Greeks invented the water mill, odometer, alarm clock, cartography, geometry, medicine, philosophy, and democracy. They excelled in the fields of astronomy, biology, and physics. Aristotle postulated that our world was round, and the Pythagoreans proposed that the earth revolved around the sun. Archimedes discovered that submerging a solid object displaces a like measure of weight. The Greeks weren't infallible, but they were obviously highly observant and accurate. It is possible that the research conducted by the ancients on human personalities is bunk, but it's highly unlikely.

If we assume that the Enneagram is reasonably precise, and there are indeed nine distinct personality types, how then might modern neuroscience validate this theory?

PERSONALITIES AND NEUROSCIENCE

Most experts seem to agree that neurotransmitters and chemicals modulate brain activity in predictable patterns and influence how we humans act and react to the world around us. Three primary neurotransmitters that appear to be more involved with our personalities than others are dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.

Dopamine is a basic modulator of attention, motivation, pain, and pleasure and regulates how we behave. Serotonin modulates obsession, compulsions, and psychological well‐being and regulates how we feel. Norepinephrine is involved with focused thinking, mental activity, alertness, and energy and regulates how we think. For all of us, each neurotransmitter's production, or level, is either high, medium, or low. Apparent levels can also be determined by the length of a neurotransmitter's pathway in our brain. Neuron Profiles are divided into three groups: logical, emotional, and instinctual (Figure 3.3).

How does this relate to Aristotle's Persuasion Model or the emotional, logical, or instinctual brain functions we previously discussed? Here's where it gets tricky and controversial. Some experts flatly disagree with the above premise. They do not believe that the three neurotransmitters noted are the ones primarily involved with personalities, or that humans are genetically predisposed to have high, medium, or low levels. In fact, they disagree that we can have “levels” at all. Conversely, many other experts state that genetic predispositions are factors that can cause low, medium, or high levels, and they specifically use the word “levels.”

For example, a May 9, 2015, article in Psychology Today states that around 20 percent of the population is likely more sensitive in nature. The article cites findings from the University of British Columbia and Cornell University neuroscientists, who discovered that human genes may influence how sensitive certain people are to emotional information.

In other words, some of us may be genetically wired to be more emotional.

Furthermore, the researchers determined that some people have a genetic variation called ADRA2b, which influences the norepinephrine neurotransmitter. ADRA2b is linked to heightened activity in certain brain areas that can trigger intense emotional sensitivity and responses.

To summarize, neuroscientists from two respected universities validated that a percentage of the human population is genetically wired to be more emotional, which may be directly related to their levels of norepinephrine. Furthermore, their research shows how the norepinephrine pathways connect directly to the hippocampus and amygdala, which are located in the limbic system.

How is this emotional disposition linked to our personality type? Adam Anderson, professor of human development at Cornell University and senior author of the study, intimated that it is. He stated that emotions aren't just about how someone feels about the world, but also how a person's brain influences perception. Human genes can influence how we visualize negative and positive aspects in our environment.

The American Psychological Association defines personality as the differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving. So it appears safe to assume that, to some degree, norepinephrine influences our personality, and our levels of this neurotransmitter are genetically predisposed.

What about serotonin and dopamine? Can they also influence our personalities?

The research study referenced above states that there is reciprocal activity between norepinephrine and serotonergic and dopaminergic systems, which refer to serotonin and dopamine production, respectively.

Several additional resources validate that neurotransmitter levels are directly related to personality types. In his book, The Edge Effect, Dr. Eric Braverman shows how four main neurotransmitter or chemical levels in the brain can determine our personality profile. To validate this, he used a quantitative electroencephalogram (EEG) called BEAM (Brain Electrical Activity Mapping). Some skeptics question Braverman's research and even his credibility, but his studies do appear to be thorough and match research conducted by two PhDs that I personally know are quite reputable.

What are the four neurotransmitters or chemicals Braverman researched?

Dopamine is an assertive “power” neurotransmitter that dominates our frontal lobe. Braverman found that those with high dopamine levels enjoy power, theories, language precision, and strategy.

GABA (Figure 3.4) is found in our temporal lobe. Those with high “calming” GABA levels are more traditional and conventional, dependable and punctual, organized and confident. GABA is an “inhibitory” neurotransmitter that can lower “excitatory” ones, most especially norepinephrine.

Norepinephrine makes us more alert and ready for active body movement, which increases our energy use. Its effect can be offset by GABA and acetylcholine, which act on most of the same organs to make us more conducive to calmness, rest, recovery, and food digestion.

Acetylcholine is related to motor and memory functions and is produced in the parietal lobes. Braverman says that individuals with high levels are more creative, empathetic, authentic, and benevolent. As noted above, it can affect our norepinephrine level. Other studies show a direct connection with this chemical and introversion and extroversion. Introverts apparently have long acetylcholine pathways. For extroverts, it's shorter. Visualize a hose pumping water into your brain. You won't necessarily have a higher “level” of water with a longer hose, but it will take longer to fill up your brain. That's why introverts can handle large crowds temporarily but eventually grow weary of them. Their brains are slowly filling up with acetylcholine.

Serotonin (Figure 3.5) is in the occipital lobe and is associated with delta waves. Those with high serotonin are playful, adventurous, optimistic, achievement‐oriented, and have a positive mental attitude.

If Braverman's research is accurate, it could prove to be groundbreaking, but does it align with the ancient Enneagram?

NEUROSCIENCE AND THE ENNEAGRAM

Renowned experts Dr. Eric S. Schulze and Dr. Tina Thomas conducted research studies similar to Braverman's. Dr. Thomas documented these findings in her book Who Do You Think You Are?: Understanding Your Personality from the Inside Out. These two PhDs discovered that the Enneagram's observational science can be explained by genetically determined high, medium, or low levels of dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.

We know that the Enneagram's nine types are divided into three distinct groups of three personality types each (Figure 3.6). The three groups, or triads, can be defined as “head types” (more logical), “heart types” (more emotional), and “gut types” (more instinctual). Schulze and Thomas discovered that thinking group types appear to have high levels of norepinephrine activity and are generally mentally active. The instinctual types have relatively low norepinephrine activity, and the heart types have medium levels. There is also an assertive group, which has high levels of dopamine activity and a lot of energy and drive. The passive group has low levels, while the compliant group has medium levels.

How does their research compare to Braverman's work? A close examination reveals that they are quite compatible (Figure 3.7). Here's how:

Norepinephrine: Schulze and Thomas found that this neurotransmitter regulates how quickly and how often a person thinks and solves problems. Thomas reports that “people who have a high set point of norep [norepinephrine] are people whose brain ‘engines’ are set at a high idle. They are almost always revved up and ready to think.” They also tend to speak quickly and may be perceived as “high‐strung” individuals. They may have difficulty “turning their brain off,” so sleeping soundly could be a challenge. People in this category are logical “head types.”

Those with low levels are referred to as the three instinctual “gut” personality types. They are more solid and steady, traditional and conventional, dependable and punctual, organized and confident, and “calm.” They rarely have a problem falling asleep. Recall that GABA is calming and throttles norepinephrine, and Braverman said that those with high levels have similar attributes. High GABA and low norepinephrine are essentially peas in the same pod, so it appears that the two viewpoints are similar.

Schulze and Thomas determined that people with medium levels of norepinephrine fall into the emotional and feeling “heart” triad. They are “intermittent thinkers” and may cycle in and out of daydreaming. These types are also more creative, caring, and empathetic. Braverman said that those with high levels of acetylcholine are creative, empathetic, authentic, and benevolent. The effects of norepinephrine are offset by acetylcholine, so it's quite possible that high levels of the latter will create medium levels of the former. Again, a potential fit.

Dopamine: Braverman said that those with high levels are assertive and enjoy power, precision, and strategy. Schulze and Thomas concur. They show high dopamine types as falling into the assertive triad and they like power, control, precise diction, and strategic goal setting. Again, a close alignment.

Schulze and Thomas also note that dopamine levels can dictate whether or not someone is more extroverted or introverted. This aligns with research completed by Dr. Marti Olsen in her book, The Introvert Advantage: How to Thrive in an Extrovert World, wherein Olsen concludes that extroverts have a low sensitivity to dopamine and need more of it, while introverts are highly sensitive and prefer lower amounts.

Serotonin: Schulze and Thomas show high serotonin types as being in the “positive outlook” triad. Braverman said these individuals are playful, adventurous, and have positive orientations. Close enough.

Based on the above research (backed by studies and neurobiological facts) it appears that we might be able to conclude the following:

1. Our personality types are, for the most part (not exclusively), influenced by a handful of primary neurotransmitters and brain chemicals.
2. The levels (production) of norepinephrine and serotonin neurotransmitters are either high, medium, or low, which equals nine types. Our levels of dopamine and acetylcholine create what is referred to as “wings,” meaning we may tend to have a few of the attributes of an adjacent personality type that has a higher or lower level.
3. The nine types described by the ancient Greek Enneagram align closely with the neurotransmitter studies done by leading researchers.
4. The Enneagram aligns with top personality profiling systems like Myers‐Briggs and the OPQ32.
5. It appears that the ancients observed what recent neuroscientific research has possibly validated.
6. If true, it only took us a few thousand years to relearn what we already knew.

Why should you care? Because leading requires persuasion, which necessitates effective communication. Remember the book Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus? Therein, John Gray, PhD, discussed how men and women use different “languages” to convey thoughts and feelings. Perhaps the truth goes much deeper than this.

To lead effectively, we must understand someone else's viewpoints, motivations, and communication styles so we can listen to what they are saying, respond in kind, and better persuade them to embrace our vision or complete a task. For example, if someone is more logical, they may respond better to numbers, facts, figures, logic, etc. If emotional, to the “touchy‐feely,” warm and fuzzy, heart strings, emotions, etc. If instinctual, to messages about survival, security, fight or flight, avoidance of harm or loss, and so on.

Below is a chart outlining how several research studies align with the ancient Greek Enneagram. You can visit www.neuronleaders.com to use a free app to determine your Neuron Personality Profile and download a comprehensive description that includes diet and lifestyle recommendations to improve your leadership ability. You can also determine the Profile of anyone you interact with and receive a detailed guide on how to better persuade, communicate with, and motivate them to perform at their best.

MIRROR NEURONS

The key difference between this book and most others on the topic of leadership may well come down to this one neuroscientific term: mirror neurons. I've talked with dozens of well‐meaning executives who have read excellent leadership books. They resonated with many of the concepts, scheduled meetings with their department heads, and asked them to implement the author's recommendations.

Now. ASAP. Then report back.

The department heads ran off, ran in circles, and ran out of steam while trying to deploy the concept or best practice in the midst of juggling 2 million emails and 5,000 meetings. They did their best to make changes, encouraged participation from the troops, and got some results, but the new behaviors never stuck. Eventually, enthusiasm waned and the project failed. The initiating executive blamed either the department heads or the author of the book—which he quickly tossed into the trash.

What went wrong?

Modern neuroscience tells us that forcing everyone else to do something the leader doesn't do habitually is a recipe for failure. Leadership is an inside job. We must first make the needed changes between our own ears before we can inspire others to follow our lead.

Studies show that the qualities exhibited by a leader account for up to 70 percent of the engagement of their followers.¹ McKinsey & Company,² one of the world's most respected management consulting firms, determined that around 50 percent of cultural change management efforts fail when leaders do not set good examples by adopting the recommended changes or new behaviors.

Workers do what their leaders do, not what they say.

As children, we emulated our parents. Doing so helped us learn how to walk and talk. As adults, we often look to others we want to emulate and mimic what they do. Modern neuroscience now explains how and why this works. Mirror neurons were discovered in the 1980s by neuroscientist Dr. Giacomo Rizzolati and his team from the University of Parma in Italy. They were conducting experiments on monkeys related to motor neurons, which carry signals from the spinal cord to the muscles to allow for movement. One of Rizzolati's lab assistants came waltzing in one day while chomping on an ice cream cone. One of the monkeys, who was still wired up to the monitors, observed the assistant. On the monitor, the monkey's readings lit up with electrical brain activity as if the animal was also eating the ice cream. The primate mimicked the assistant and even moved its arms and mouth as if also enjoying the cone.

Rizzolati's team conducted further research using peanuts and found that the same motor neurons fired in the same way whether the monkeys were handling the peanuts or observing others doing so. Subsequent research on humans led to the theory that mirror neurons trigger our brain to simulate the action of those we observe. We can also mimic the emotions we witness when expressed by others. This is why we cry during a sad scene in a movie. We actually feel the same emotions we observe on the big screen.

Experts believe that mirror neurons play an important role in our learning process, which is why storytelling is so powerful. We'll dive deeper into that topic in a later chapter. For leaders, an understanding of mirror neurons now places on our shoulders the grave responsibility of setting the right examples. It's easy to say “do what I say and not what I do,” but the human brain will do just the opposite. It is therefore vitally important to maintain proper and good daily habits. Your team will observe your discipline, dedication, and actions. They will then do what you do and not what you tell them to do.

Vanguard Group is a Fortune 500 company and was once ranked number 18 on Fortune's list of the 100 Best Companies to Work For.³ Jack Brennan, the company's CEO during that time, once said that workers will emulate what a leader does, good or bad.

Plutarch was an ancient Greek educator and historian. He felt that most people, whether introverted or extroverted, preferred not to live in a vacuum. Instead, he believed we are naturally curious and social creatures that imitate others through close observation. If someone is cursed with a bad role model, they may unfortunately adopt bad behaviors. Therefore, all leaders have a responsibility to lead by example. Plutarch taught us how to do this through his famous Parallel Lives biographical sketches, which pictorially told positive stories about Greek and Roman heroes including Alexander the Great, Caesar, Cicero, Pericles, and others. His goal was to offer children examples of heroism that they could emulate.

When leading, are you a positive role model that your team will emulate? Are you constantly striving to become a better person, a better listener, and a better leader? Do you take full responsibility for your actions when things go wrong, or do you focus outwardly and blame others for setbacks and failures?

As mentioned in the Introduction, rather than focus outwardly on trying to change everyone else, great leaders seek to change themselves first. Once they do this, miracles can happen … within themselves and everyone they lead.

THE LAND OF OZ

An easy way to remember the concepts we've discussed in this chapter is by recalling The Wonderful Wizard of Oz book, written by L. Frank Baum and published in 1900 (Figure 3.8). As Baum tells us, the only thing the Tin Woodsman wanted was a heart. He appeared to lack the ability to tap into and use his emotional brain, and so could not feel or impart emotions to the extent he desired. By the end of the book, his tears were rusting his metal. If those we lead appear to be heartless, perhaps we need to do a better of job of getting past their hardened metal exteriors to see the beating hearts inside.

The Lion thought he lacked courage. In the end, he discovered that fear and courage are the opposite sides of the same coin. He had been ruled by his instinctual brain, which governs fight or flight responses. When controlled by fear, as was the case with the Lion, our gut tells us to run. When courage takes over, we can fearlessly stand our ground. If someone on your team appears to be ruled by fear and caution, and tends to delay action until the path is clearly safe, perhaps becoming frustrated and angry with them is not the answer. Maybe they just need you to lead them by example and take that first courageous step.

The Scarecrow imagined himself as an uneducated simpleton. With a head full of straw, he had convinced himself that knowledge was unattainable. He was certain that he lacked a well‐developed rational brain. The Wizard eventually handed him a diploma and helped him realize that we are all wise in our own way. If those we lead tend to act more like the Scarecrow, instead of assuming they are “dumber than bricks,” perhaps we need to come out from behind our curtain and find out what they do know. The wisdom they display in areas we hadn't considered may surprise us. Also, rather than assume they should instantly know everything we know, perhaps we should invoke some patience and become mentors and teachers rather than “straw bosses” on the pyramid.

In summary, from a simplistic perspective, three primary areas of our brains influence our emotional, instinctual, and logical responses. We also have three dominant personality neurotransmitters that affect how we act, react, and deal with everything and everyone in our world. The levels of these three neurotransmitters are either high, medium, or low.

Our three neurotransmitters influence our emotional “Tin Woodsman” brain functions, instinctual “Lion” brain, and logical “Scarecrow” brain. Based on the levels of our neurotransmitters, we tend to act more emotional, instinctual, or logical.

If we believe the ancient Greeks and several modern neuroscientists, human beings exhibit one of nine distinct personality behavioral patterns. If we can better align our communication and leadership styles with the profiles and perceptions of individuals on our team, we can dramatically improve our ability to persuade and to lead.

PREFACE TO THE 7 NEURON SECRETS

We think of ourselves as modern and contemporary. We can Tweet, Skype, text, Google, post, download, and SnapChat. At our local Starbucks, we can choose between Grande or Venti, whip or no whip, macchiato or mocha, blended or Americano. We can use emojis to express ourselves and make light of feelings that are often misunderstood or rarely felt.

When we do speak of love, we use a single, vague term to describe a universe of concepts that encompass playfulness, friendship, romance, marriage, relatives, professions, tastes, sounds, smells, and all sorts of feelings. As teenagers, we “love” that song or that chocolate bar, fall madly in “love” with that cheerleader or football star, or casually tell our parents that we “love” them on our way out the door.

In our thirties, we “love” our spouse and our children, we “love” our professions, we “love” our leisure time with friends, or we “love” that favorite restaurant or football team. In our sunset years, we have grown to “love” our mate, our close friends, and the fact that we can still chew our food.

We use the same word to describe all these variations that have vastly different meanings. In contrast, the ancient Greeks might have admired our technological advances, but would have been quick to criticize the unsophisticated ways in which we express the most important emotion we share with each other. The typical Athenian might have shaken a sad head toward the typical New Yorker, perhaps while trying to enlighten our generation about the meaning of seven different types of love.

In the chapters to follow, we'll explore all seven of these. We'll also discover an astonishing truth: all seven align surprisingly well with modern neuropsychology. By blending this ancient wisdom with the latest scientific revelations, combined with advanced team leadership concepts imparted by top military leaders, we form the Seven Secrets of Neuron Leadership. Leaders who understand and practice these principles can transform hearts and minds, starting with their own, and become revered as the most successful and “loved” team leaders in the world.

The previous chapters you've read were designed to lay the proper foundation to help you learn about the seven secrets we'll now discuss so you can ingrain them into your everyday life. Whether you have been in various leadership roles for decades, have only recently become a leader, or are aspiring to be one, you can always benefit from improving your foundational leadership knowledge and skills. Hopefully, the information provided in this book so far has helped you take some useful steps toward your leadership goals, and now it's time to explore the seven secrets.

These principles are offered in a specific order, based on the neuroscience we've explored. We begin with Dorothy from the book The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. She was in her ordinary world before she embarked on her journey. The first secret is discussed in this chapter, followed by the remaining six in subsequent chapters. Secret One speaks to all three of our brains, while Secrets Two and Three are more emotional.

Secrets Four and Five are more instinctually oriented, and Secrets Six and Seven are more logical. We conclude with a summary of the secrets and suggestions of how to use them in our daily lives.

Interviews, stories, and examples in every chapter will show why an understanding of all seven forms of Greek love, combined with knowledge about modern neuroscience and military team leadership, can transform the way we lead.