The Psychology of Transformational Success: A Psychometric Model of Orderliness, Assertiveness, and Internal Resistance
What separates individuals who conceptualize success from those who execute it? Traditional psychology has long emphasized conscientiousness as a key predictor of achievement. However, deeper analysis reveals a critical distinction within conscientiousness: while industriousness drives persistence, orderliness — characterized by rule adherence, structure, and rigidity — can sometimes inhibit transformational change, especially when not balanced by assertiveness.
Assertiveness is often viewed as an external trait, one associated with leadership, negotiation, and social influence. Yet, this model argues that internal assertiveness — the ability to override one's own resistance and cognitive inertia — is equally, if not more, essential in driving bold, high-impact decisions.
This article introduces a structured psychometric framework that explores the interplay between orderliness, assertiveness, openness, and intelligence in decision-making. We will examine how singular Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) shape the category of decision-making, while assertiveness dictates the ability to act on conceptualized choices.
The Formula for Decision-Making: From Empty to Loaded Actions
To formalize this concept, we introduce a decision-making model that demonstrates how orderliness and assertivenessfunction as filters of viable actions:
Transformation Model: A --X--> B
A: Represents the current state (status quo).
B: Represents the transformed, improved state resulting from a decision and action.
X: Represents the range of possible actions available to move from A to B.
However, not all potential actions are truly available to the decision-maker. The nature of X is determined by key personality traits:
Openness to Ideas & Intelligence (GMA): Expands the initial set of hypothetical actions (X₀ → X∞). High openness broadens the range of conceivable solutions, or at least the range of potential actions with sufficient quality to even theoretically result in favourable end solution.
Orderliness: Filters the generated options by assessing feasibility within existing rules, norms, and frameworks. High orderliness significantly reduces the set X, leaving mostly structured, rule-abiding possibilities (X_empty—conceptual but unexecuted actions).
Assertiveness: Determines which of the filtered actions are actually chosen and executed. High assertiveness increases the likelihood of implementation, shifting choices from X_empty to X_loaded.
Mathematically, we distinguish two profiles:
High Orderliness + Low Assertiveness: X = [X₀, Xa] (highly constrained choices, limited by feasibility concerns).
Low Orderliness + High Assertiveness: X = [X₀, Xa₂] (broader, more disruptive choices leading to innovation).
Thus, transformational success is not merely a function of intelligence or openness; it depends on whether orderliness constricts action and whether assertiveness is strong enough to push choices into execution.
Assertiveness: Overcoming Internal Resistance
A critical insight in this model is that assertiveness is necessary to "go against oneself." This means that during internal deliberations, an individual must possess enough internal assertiveness to override classic resistance mechanisms such as rationalization, avoidance, and cognitive inertia.
However, internal assertiveness does not imply an absence of struggle. In fact, individuals with high assertivenessmay also experience greater internal resistance, as their decision-making involves challenging ingrained behavioral patterns and confronting self-doubt. The key difference is that assertive individuals do not surrender immediately to these forces, as those with high neuroticism or extreme agreeableness often do. Instead, they engage in a form of internal struggle that ultimately enables them to push through resistance and take bolder, more consequential actions.
This introduces an interesting psychological concept: Internal Assertiveness — the cognitive and emotional capacity to engage in self-confrontation and override passive tendencies. Unlike external assertiveness, which focuses on interpersonal dynamics, internal assertiveness determines one’s ability to act decisively despite internal fears and objections.
The Role of SIVHs in Decision-Making
While orderliness and assertiveness influence how decisions are made, Structured Internal Value Hierarchies (SIVHs) define the category in which decisions occur.
A person whose SIVH is topped with "Family" will prioritize non-negotiable commitments for family activities before applying the orderliness-assertiveness framework.
A person whose SIVH prioritizes "Freedom" will first allocate time for flexible, high-variability experiences, then apply assertiveness and orderliness within that domain.
Two individuals with identical levels of openness, orderliness, and assertiveness may apply their decision-making abilities in completely different ways depending on their SIVH priorities.
Thus, SIVHs shape decision-making focus, while assertiveness and orderliness determine execution potential.
Implications for Personal and Corporate Success
1. Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk exhibit high assertiveness and relatively low orderliness, enabling them to execute unconventional strategies rather than remaining stuck in conceptual ideation.
Transformational business leaders rely on internal assertiveness to push through self-doubt, resistance, and structural rigidity.
2. Corporate Leadership & Strategy
Organizations that value high conscientiousness but lack assertiveness often become efficient but stagnant.
Companies seeking innovation must balance structured processes (orderliness) with a culture that rewards assertive, risk-taking decision-making.
3. Individual Career Success
High intelligence and openness without assertiveness lead to intellectual stagnation.
Developing internal assertiveness allows individuals to transition from theoretical problem-solving to bold, high-impact execution.
Conclusion & Future Research
This model presents a paradigm shift in how we understand decision-making, assertiveness, and conscientiousness. Traditional frameworks have often equated high orderliness with superior outcomes, yet this analysis suggests that without sufficient assertiveness, orderliness can lead to rigid, risk-averse behaviors.
Future research should explore:
The correlation between orderliness, assertiveness, and decision-making effectiveness in high-stakes environments.
The impact of assertiveness training on individuals with high orderliness.
Longitudinal studies on success trajectories based on different orderliness-assertiveness profiles.
The role of SIVHs in structuring decision priorities, examining how value hierarchies amplify or mitigate orderliness’ restrictive effects.
Ultimately, this model suggests that while intelligence and openness create opportunities, assertiveness determines whether those opportunities lead to meaningful transformation. The key to success is not just thinking boldly — it is acting boldly despite internal resistance.
