Skip to main content
Mental Models

Red Personality: Blunt Communication and Perception of Aggression

In Erikson’s color model, Reds favor blunt, direct communication that others may experience as aggressive. He uses an exaggerated feedback scenario to explore the difference between the speaker’s intention and the effect on the listener.

THE IDEA

“I Am Not Screaming! I’m Not Angry! Aaarrrghhhh!”

Because the way Reds communicate is so blunt and so direct, many perceive them as aggressive. This is logical, but at the same time this perception varies, depending on who becomes the victim of the Red’s forceful points of view. For instance, in Sweden it’s not acceptable to behave in the kind of confrontational manner that would be fine in Germany or France. I’m not saying that people quarrel more in these countries, but that they have a slightly different approach to conflicts.

Just imagine. In many workplaces people are encouraged to be candid and “have open communication.” What does this really mean? It’s easy to interpret it as meaning we should all be honest with one another and just say whatever we think, right? We want to have open and forthright dialogue. That’s excellent; for any organization to be efficient, it’s necessary to have straightforward communication about things that are important.

So who excels at frank communication? And can receive the same without getting cranky? Answer: No one.

Besides Reds, of course. For them, this is a nonissue. “Why are we even talking about communication? It’s obvious that you say what you think!” Many people find this stressful; to constantly have the truth pushed into your face can be onerous if you have difficulty taking it.

My goal here isn’t to define what’s right or wrong; I only want to establish that all of us are different.

So why do we sometimes perceive Red behavior as threatening and belligerent? Could it be that they don’t give up right away? That they like to argue and debate even small matters if they find them important? That they’ll raise their voices, glare daggers at people, and pound their fists on the table if it suits them? That sometimes they express themselves rather rudely?

Imagine the following scenario:

You have a project, something that you’ve spent a few days on, or maybe even weeks. You begin to doubt yourself—have you succeeded at your work? Is it as good as you wanted it to be? Would you dare show it to the client as it is now, or should you ask for some feedback from someone who you know will give you an honest answer?

Just then a Red comes sauntering by, and you take a chance. You are fully aware that this colleague—spouse, friend, cousin, neighbor—will be honest. You ask for a frank opinion. With a degree of pride in your voice, you show him what you’ve accomplished, and you go through your process step by step. Without you noticing, the Red becomes impatient because he’s already decided what his opinion is and he’s getting tired of you doing all the talking for so long.

With a wave of his hand that effectively silences you, the Red says, “It doesn’t look that good. I don’t really like what you’ve done here. In fact, it looks pretty rough. I’m amazed that you didn’t do better than this. I think you have to redo the whole thing from start to finish.”

Then he leaves without thinking any more about it. You’re left there feeling forlorn and crushed, regardless of what color you are.

Exaggerated? Can this happen in real life? At this stage, if you believe that such nasty people don’t really exist then you’ve never met a genuine Red. Or the Reds you have met have essentially learned how to be dishonest.

Think about it. What’s the purpose of cutting a person down to size so completely? What were the Red’s intentions? It was to do exactly what you asked. You wanted an honest opinion!

“Say exactly what you think,” you said. It’s possible you even added: “I won’t be angry/ sad/disappointed/suicidal.” “Be prepared,” says the Red, “because here it comes.” By asking for an honest opinion, you released a flood of brutal candor. But you’ll survive—perhaps with your self-confidence a little waterlogged and your ego utterly drowned.

As a consultant, I have explained countless times that when a Red goes all out on an issue that’s important to him, an issue on which he does not intend to give up—well, the storm will be brutal. If you’re afraid of conflict, then you shouldn’t put yourself in that situation. A Red has no problem with conflict. Reds don’t consciously create conflict, but a refreshing quarrel every now and then can be a good thing, don’t you think? It’s just another way to communicate.

A little tip: The worst thing you can do once you get into a conflict with a Red is back off. That tactic can cause you serious problems.

When to use it

  • Giving constructive feedback to a subordinate who prefers directness over sugar-coating.

  • Debating ideas in a brainstorming session where rapid, unfiltered opinions can accelerate decision-making.

  • Negotiating with a blunt client while addressing both the substance of the disagreement and how it is communicated.

  • Managing a team with mixed personality types, where you need to mediate between Reds' directness and others' sensitivity.

FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE

In practice

01

Requesting Feedback from a Red

You ask a Red colleague for honest feedback on a project you've spent days on. After you present it, the Red immediately says, "It doesn't look that good. I don't really like what you've done here. In fact, it looks pretty rough. I'm amazed that you didn't do better than this. I think you have to redo the whole thing from start to finish." Then they walk away, leaving you crushed. Despite the brutal delivery, the Red believes they are giving you exactly what you asked for: an honest opinion.

02

Cultural Differences in Perceiving Red Behavior

Erikson contrasts what he sees as greater acceptance of confrontation in Germany and France with stronger avoidance of it in Sweden. He uses the comparison to illustrate how a blunt remark can be received differently across settings.

✳

A MOMENT TO REFLECT

Put it to work.

  1. When asking for candid feedback, how can you specify the questions you want answered and the kind of detail that would help?

  2. How can you distinguish useful directness from personal aggression without assuming that a personality label explains someone’s intent?

  3. In a team setting, how might you balance the need for honest, direct communication with maintaining psychological safety for all members?

CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION

Source texts

  • Surrounded By Idiots (Thomas Erikson)
← More mental models