Notice, Guess, Test, Revise: Which Need Is Missing From This Decision?
Where you are: Module 5 · Lesson 20 of 30 · about 24 minutes (reading 12, video 4, practice 8). This lesson gives you four steps to look again at one decision, and it says plainly that the steps are this course's own design, not a tested method.
What you'll be able to do
- Run the four steps (notice, guess, test, revise) on one decision from your record.
- Write one tentative guess about what a decision did not take into account, with one fact that does not fit it and one other explanation.
- Tell a real constraint, such as a staffing gap or a limit on your authority, apart from something you did not look at.
- Say clearly that "balance" in this course is our adaptation, and that no source cited here tests it.
What the sources say about balance, and what they do not
This module asks a practical question: when you look back at one decision, did it leave something out? Three sources say something close to this idea. None of them gives steps for the workplace.
- Fauvre, on her own website, describes one instinctual stacking pattern in which two instincts are close in dominance and the third instinct is "eclipsed". The same page presents keeping the instinctual drives in balance as part of her own teaching, linked to what the page calls transformation. Both are Fauvre's claims inside her own framework, not independent findings, and neither names a workplace action. As Lesson 19 said about a repressed instinct, a pull missing from your entries does not show that an instinct is "eclipsed" either.
- The Enneagram Institute describes a dominant instinct, a second one, and a third that it calls "the least developed". It describes no workplace action that we use here.
- Chestnut and Paes give one episode of their podcast to what a repressed social instinct looks like. We have not checked its wording against the audio, so we do not quote it, and we rely on it for nothing more than its topic. It is not a workplace procedure.
Our reading. Fauvre's teaching does speak of balance, but as her own claim about personal growth, not as a tested method. None of these sources gives a workplace procedure, and none reports a test showing that any action brought an instinct into balance. So the four steps below are this course's own adaptation. They are untested. We do not say that they balance anything, and you should not say it either.
The four steps (our design)
| Step | The question | What you write |
|---|---|---|
| Notice | Where did my attention go in the first minute of this decision? | One of the four pull tags from Lesson 19, or "none". |
| Guess | What did this decision not take into account? | One tentative sentence, and one fact that does not fit it. |
| Test | What one small step could I try next? | An experiment card with a stop condition (Lesson 21). |
| Revise | What happened at the next two comparable events? | Keep, narrow or drop the guess. "No change" and "worse" are results. |
The four tags, as a reminder: basics and resources, belonging and standing, carried away, and none (or "the lens is not useful here").
A missing look
In this lesson, a need "missing from a decision" means something you could have observed that the decision did not take into account. It might be about your own time or energy, how others would take the decision, or promises you had already made. You write "I may not have looked at…". You do not write "I have an underdeveloped instinct".
The tag and the missing look are separate: an entry tagged "none" can still have a missing look.
Check for a system fact first
Before you write a guess, ask: could I have changed this? A staffing gap, a budget your manager decides, a deadline someone else sets, and a request you cannot change without your manager's agreement are system facts (Lesson 17 sorted these as "the system"). They explain a decision; they are not a neglected need. If a real constraint explains most of an entry, a complete answer is: "none, and there is a real constraint".
Hold it lightly
A good guess:
- says "may";
- names one decision;
- comes with one fact that does not fit it, and one other explanation.
"This lens does not fit this event" is also a complete answer. One decision does not show a pattern. You never write a guess about a colleague, and you do not act on a guess until Lesson 21.
Worked example
Bandar leads a warehouse team of five on the day shift, which starts at 8.00 a.m. On Tuesday at 4.30 p.m. a client moved its visit to Wednesday at 9.00 a.m. That clashed with the team's usual 9.00 a.m. Wednesday meeting. At 5.00 p.m. Bandar messaged the team: "Wednesday's meeting is now at 7.30 a.m." Two of the five come by a company bus that arrives at 7.50 a.m. At 7.30 a.m. only three people were in the room, and he ran a short second meeting at 8.00 a.m.
| Step | Bandar's entry |
|---|---|
| Notice | "In the first minute my attention went to the stock count and getting the floor tidy before the visit." Tag: none. His attention was on the task. |
| System facts | The client chose the visit time, and Bandar could not change it. The notice was short. These facts explain why something had to move. They do not show whether he could have asked one person first. |
| Guess | "I may not have looked at how an earlier start would land with the team, or asked anyone first. I hold this loosely." |
| A fact that does not fit | "Last Sunday I changed the lunch rota only after I asked the team." |
| Another explanation | Time pressure: the message went out half an hour after the visit moved. Or he did not know about the bus. Neither is an instinct. |
What Bandar cannot say: that he has an underdeveloped instinct; that he usually ignores the team; that a different action would have made the meeting go better.
He narrows the guess, to test in Lesson 21: "When a change is at short notice, I may not check how it lands."
Watch: Notice, guess, test, revise
The video follows Layan, who leads a claims desk, through all four steps after one weekly meeting. As you watch, notice:
- how she checks the system facts (the director's agenda and the fixed meeting length) before she writes her guess;
- that her tag is "none", and that this is treated as a complete answer;
- how two meetings lead her to narrow the guess, not to prove it.
The lesson teaches the same points in text, so it is complete without the video.
Your turn
Work in your private coaching record (Lesson 6). Nothing here is sent anywhere.
Maha is a first-time supervisor. She may decline or re-date a request from Operations or Finance. A request from her manager needs her manager's agreement to change. On Wednesday she missed her own weekly summary, and her record does not say why. Two weeks earlier, when Finance asked for a report on a Sunday, she checked her week first, asked for Thursday, and Finance agreed. Here are her private notes from one Sunday (fictional):
- 9.00 a.m. Operations asked for last month's data. "My first thought was whether Operations would think my team slows them down. I said yes within a minute."
- 11.30 a.m. Finance asked for a cost report. "I read it and said yes. I noticed no pull."
- 3.00 p.m. Her manager asked for slides. "It was my manager. I did not think about saying no. I could not change this request without my manager's agreement."
- Tag. Give each entry one of the four tags (or "none") and one reason. Say where a real constraint is part of an entry.
- Guess. Write one tentative sentence about what one of the Sunday decisions may not have taken into account. Nothing in the notes says why she said yes, so do not write a reason.
- Test the guess. Write one fact from the notes that does not fit your sentence, and one other explanation for Wednesday's missed summary that is not an instinct.
- Your own decision (private). Choose one recent decision from your record. Write its tag (or "none"), one tentative sentence, and one fact that does not fit. If you have no decision yet, write what you would need: one decision and one line on where your attention went.
Check your work
One good answer:
- Entry 1: belonging and standing. Her first thought was how Operations would see her team.
- Entry 2: none. She noticed no pull.
- Entry 3: none, with a real constraint. She could not change her manager's request alone. That is a system fact, not a neglected need.
- Guess: "In entry 2, the Finance report, I may not have looked at what I had already promised for the week before I said yes. I hold this loosely."
- A fact that does not fit: two weeks earlier she checked her week first and asked Finance for Thursday.
- Another explanation: three requests arrived on one day, one of which she could not change alone. The notes do not say how long each task took, so the missed summary may simply reflect the load.
Other valid answers: a guess about entry 1 (her hours, or whether the Operations date could move); tagging entry 2 "not sure"; or "this lens does not fit these entries", with one next thing to record.
Your answer meets the criteria if: it says "may" and names one decision; entry 3 keeps its constraint; a fact that does not fit and another explanation are named; and nothing is said about Maha's type, instincts or order. "Her self-preservation instinct is underdeveloped" fails, and so does "she cannot bear to disappoint people": the notes do not say why she said yes.
For your own entry, apply the same checks.
Extra practice (optional)
Joud supervises a help desk of five. Her manager decides staffing. The client contract sets a 4-hour reply time, which she cannot change. On Tuesday the head of the client's team criticised the desk in a meeting. That morning Joud had checked the ticket log, and every ticket had been answered within 4 hours. Within the hour she sent the client a full written apology, without asking her team what had happened. Her note: "My attention went to how the client's head saw my team."
Write a tag, one tentative sentence, one fact that does not fit, and one other explanation.
Key: tag, belonging and standing. Guess: "I may not have looked at my team's account before I decided to apologise. I hold this loosely." A fact that does not fit: she had checked the ticket log that morning, so she did look at one fact. Another explanation: the criticism came in a meeting, and she gave herself only an hour. No reason for the apology is invented, and nothing is said about Joud's instincts.
Knowledge check
Which statement about what the cited sources give for balancing the instincts is accurate?
Which sentence is a guess in this lesson's sense?
A supervisor's manager sets the overtime budget. The supervisor worked 12 hours to cover a gap the budget would not fill. What fits this lesson?
Answers explained
- C. Fauvre describes the third instinct as "eclipsed" in one stacking pattern, the Institute calls it "the least developed", and Chestnut and Paes give a podcast episode to a repressed instinct. None gives workplace steps. A and D invent a test and a result. B invents an agreement and an order.
- A. It names one decision, says "may", and points to something you could observe. B claims an instinct caused a decision. C reads an instinct into a colleague. D labels the writer and states a habit.
- D. A budget limit is a system fact, not a neglected need. A, B and C each turn a constraint into an instinct reading.
Key takeaways
- None of the sources cited here gives a workplace procedure for balance or reports that any action works. The four steps (notice, guess, test, revise) are this course's own adaptation, and they are untested.
- A guess is about what one decision did not take into account. It says "may", and comes with a fact that does not fit and another explanation.
- Staffing gaps, budgets, deadlines set by others and requests you cannot change alone are system facts, not neglected needs.
- "This lens does not fit this event" is a complete answer. Never write a guess about a colleague.
Sources
- Katherine Chernick Fauvre, "A Study of the Enneagram Instinctual Subtypes", katherinefauvre.com/subtypes (read on 2 November 2026). Used for the stacking pattern with two instincts close in dominance and the third "eclipsed", and for her teaching that the instinctual drives need to be in balance. It is the author's own account of her framework, not independent evidence.
- The Enneagram Institute, How the Enneagram System Works, section "The Three Instincts" (read in a copy saved in October 2026). "The least developed" is quoted from this page. A keyword search of that section for "balance" found nothing. It is the Institute's description of its own framework, not independent evidence.
- Chestnut and Paes, podcast "Enneagram 2.0", season 2 episode 14, "What does a Social Repressed Instinct Look Like?". Cited for its topic only. Its wording has not been checked against the audio, so nothing from it is quoted.
- This course's own design: the four steps, the idea of a missing look, the system-fact check, the guess format, and the cases of Bandar, Maha, Joud and Layan (fictional). No source cited for this lesson gives a workplace procedure for balance or reports a tested result. That statement is about the sources cited, not about every source.