The DISC assessment model has evolved over decades, with different interpretations on how best to display individual results. At Assessments 24×7, we offer the flexibility of one-, two-, or three-graph models, acknowledging that no single approach is definitively superior. There are benefits to various perspectives. The three-graph model—originating from Dr. Walter Clarke’s mid-20th-century research and later developed by J.P. Cleaver, Dr. John Geier, and others—includes representations of Natural Style, Adapted Style, and a Combination graph. While widely used, some question the theoretical distinction between the graphs.
Practitioners have different preferences:
- Three-graph users (Natural, Adapted, & Combination) value deeper, comprehensive insights and behavioral nuances.
- Two-graph users (Natural & Adapted) prioritize clarity, direct interpretation, and comparison of perspectives.
- One-graph (Combination only) users seek simplicity and efficiency in client discussions or self-application.
All of these remain viable theoretical models. Assessments 24×7 is the first company to empower DISC professionals with the choice of one, two, or three graphs, ensuring they can utilize the model that best suits their methodology.
DISC Assessments – One, two, or three graphs? Which one is best?
Science works via ‘negativity.’ That doesn’t mean that science is negative. It means that ANY scientific idea or theory holds as potentially true, until it’s disproven. For example, no one has ever presented a topic at a psychologists’ convention that conclusively proves that the Id, Ego, and Superego items of Freud’s theory are false and do not exist. Therefore, the theoretical ideas hold as one potential model to explain human behavior. There are obviously many other models.
Looking at the theories of the DISC model, there are a variety of positions regarding the number of graphs used to display an individual’s results. No position is wrong, until its proven wrong. Therefore, DISC professionals will choose the model the works best for them, and there are no wrong choices, only different ones.
- The one-graph model displays the theory of the ‘Combination Style’ graph only.
- The two-graph model displays the theory of the ‘Natural Style” and ‘Adapted Style’ graphs.
- The three-graph model displays the theory of ‘Natural Style,’ ‘Adapted Style,’ and ‘Combination’ graphs.
The Brief History of The Graphs
The original model of the Natural and Adapted Styles can be sourced directly to the work of Dr. Walter Clarke, an industrial psychologist, between 1945 and 1956. Clarke developed an adjective checklist using Dr. Wm. M. Marston’s descriptors, and published in 1956 as the ‘Activity Vector Analysis.’ Clarke presented two identical checklists of 86 items, and asked the person to respond twice. In the first response-set, the person is asked to check all adjectives that they felt they were expected to act by others. In the second (identical) response-set, the person is asked to check those adjectives that they feel really describe them, personally. The Activity Vector Analysis was widely used after it was published in 1956.
Clarke had an employee, James P. Cleaver, from 1951 to 1956. Cleaver left Clarke’s company, and formed his own company in 1956, as the Activity Vector Analysis (AVA) was published. Cleaver used substantial portions of the AVA to create his own forced-choice response instrument. He called it the Self DISCription, and it consisted of 24 boxes of four adjectives with the instruction to select one word that is MOST descriptive of you, and one word that is Least descriptive of you. This resulted in two graphs, commonly labeled as Adapted Style and Basic (or Natural) Style, plus a third graph labeled Combination.
Dr. John Geier from the Behavioral Science department of the University of Minnesota used Cleaver’s instrument, and enriched the results by conducting hundreds of clinical (recorded) interviews with people of various response patterns. He developed the ‘Library of Classical Patterns’ resource, which defined and enriched Cleaver’s original fifteen specific patterns.
Since Geier used Cleaver’s instrument, and provided additional narrative to the model, the two people each copyrighted the same instrument under their own unique companies. Cleaver’s copyright was under the label of JP Cleaver Co., Boston, MA. Geier copyrighted the same instrument under the name of Performax Systems, Inc. A third contributor, Dr. Thomas Hendrickson, worked with Cleaver in 1956-58, and his contributions to the research yielded a copyright of his own, again on the same instrument, with the label of Thomas Management Systems. Therefore, to be clear, there are three copyrights on the same DISC instrument question-set. Each of these parties developed their own results narrative for end users; this included slightly different descriptors of the fifteen patterns or profiles. And, each used three graphs with slightly different labeling for the Most, Least, and Combination score results.
What to Know About the Three Graphs
Graph I – Adapted Style
Graph I is commonly called the Adapted Style, Motivated Style, Work Style, Response Style, and other labels. This graph is an additive graph that builds the score up from the bottom to top of the graph. That is the more that someone chooses a ‘Most’ descriptor in a specific DISC category, the higher the score bar becomes as it builds up from the bottom. The graph labels above are used because the intent of the graph is to provide results on what the person chooses as their own self-perception. It is often easier for respondents to choose ‘Most’ descriptors that describe them in reference to a specific environment, situation, or relationship, so this typically reflects a particular focus area.
Graph II – Natural Style
Graph II is commonly called Natural Style, Basic Style, Latent Style, and other labels. This graph is a subtractive graph that builds the score down from the top of the graph to the bottom. The more that someone chooses a ‘Least’ descriptor in a specific DISC category, the lower the score bar becomes as it builds down from the top to the bottom of the graph. For example, if someone frequently chooses a “D” descriptor as a ‘Least’ choice, the “D” bar on the graph begins to lower, from top to bottom. The same is true for each of the other DISC categories. The intent of this graph is to illuminate one’s ‘natural’ style, perhaps outside of the focused or work environment. It is often easier for respondents to choose ‘Least’ descriptors to describe them in more general circumstances, so it captures a broader self-perception of behavioral tendencies.
We need to note here that this is the ‘theory’ of the model. In ‘practice,’ there are some who say that there may not be a statistically significant difference between the two graphs. And in some (limited) experimental studies, when the two graph labels are reversed (Basic vs. Adapted) that the respondents don’t report a clear difference in the reversed narratives of the labeling. That is to say that some questions may emerge as to whether, in fact, Graph II is a representation of one’s ‘natural,’ or ‘unconscious,’ style. Since this is a ‘theory,’ any theory presents as a potential explanation… until it doesn’t. There have been no definitive statistical and experimental studies which disprove this theory; therefore, it remains (for nearly seventy years) as a potential explanation of one’s ‘natural’ style.
Graph III – Combination Style
Graph III is commonly called Combination Style or Total Style. This graph is the mathematical average of Graphs I and II. Some claim that Graph III is the most accurate graph since it combines the additive (Graph I) subtractive (Graph II) data in one graph. This, some argue, is the most accurate because the additive and subtractive features of the first two graphs create a ‘check-and-balance’ of sorts regarding one’s response pattern. With the data averaged to create a single bar graph, this graph is used to provide a preferred baseline of behavioral tendencies for the respondent – the most likely and commonly observed behavior for the individual.
Assessments 24×7 Offers All Three Options
Assessments 24×7 is the first company to empower DISC professionals with the choice of one, two, or three graphs, ensuring they can utilize the model that best suits their methodology and approach. We provide professionals with exactly what they need to work with their clients, no matter the desired perspective and data.
- Three-graph users (Natural, Adapted, & Combination) value deeper, comprehensive insights and behavioral nuances.
- Two-graph users (Natural & Adapted) prioritize clarity, direct interpretation, and comparison of perspectives.
- One-graph (Combination only) users seek simplicity and efficiency in client discussions or self-application.
Three-graph users
There are consultants and coaches who prefer the three-graph approach to debriefing and working with their clients and customers. Their reasoning includes that this method provides the maximum amount of information to their clients, and helps them describe all of the potential nuances of one’s behavior. Three-graph users aren’t wrong, and are good at what they do.
Benefits –
- Balanced perspective, revealing deeper insights into self-awareness and personal development possibilities
- Identifies strengths and gaps that could highlight areas to focus on building new skills, improving communication, or adjusting behavior for better alignment to specific environments, situations, or relationships
- May provide a more nuanced foundation of an individual’s combined DISC Style, showing a behavior across both personal and professional contexts
Limitations –
- Can be complex, requiring additional interpretation and proper context to understand how to easily apply what’s learned
- May not be as clear to determine which specific contexts may influence behavior and emotions
Two-graph users
There are consultants and coaches who prefer the two-graph approach to debriefing and working with their clients and customers. Their reasoning is that this two-graph method provides the direct and true responses of their clients without any mathematical averaging or calculations of their clients’ scores. They discuss the relationship between the two graphs and how their clients respond in both work and natural environments. Some claim that the third graph may introduce potential confusion for their clients, and they avoid the confusion by presenting only two graphs. Two-graph users aren’t wrong, and they’re good at what they do.
Benefits –
- Highlights behavioral flexibility
- Identifies distinctions in style by environment, situation, or relationship (energy use, expression, emotions)
- Builds recognition of untapped natural style tendencies that may be effective if leveraged
Limitations –
- Requires additional insight into environment, situation, or relationship that may influence behavior and emotions, and that shifts are not bad or good
- May not be a fully accurate reflection of most common behavior for the individual, but a reflection of a moment in time
One-graph users
There are consultants and coaches who prefer the one-graph-approach to debriefing and working with their clients and customers. Their reasoning is that the one-graph model may be the most appropriate results-set to use because it brings the check-and-balance equation to the screen and presents the preferred message to their clients in a more clear and concise way. This allows them to get to work without a lot of explanation of graph nuances. The one-graph users aren’t wrong, and they’re good at what they do.
Benefits –
- Simple, singular insight into common behavioral traits
- Reveals overall perception of self, not specific to environment, situation, or relationship
- Provides opportunity to build self-awareness and take immediate action to ensure greater effectiveness
Limitations –
- May not account for how respondent will likely behave in specific contexts
- Does not reflect shifting or adapting of style based on changing contexts
Which is Correct?
A) No one is wrong. ALL are theoretical models and approaches, and until there is compelling evidence that one or more of the graph alternatives is incorrect, ALL stand as solid potential explanations of one’s DISC style. Use what works best for your purposes, client needs, and specific preferences.
B) DISC was not meant to be conclusive determination. People are all combinations of many behavioral tendencies, and the report and graphs are meant to be a starting point for conversation, discovery, observation, and action – not a definitive, locked-in viewpoint, or conclusive determination of style. While behavior is predictable, it’s not set. Further, the tendencies of a style group may not be representative, as a whole, of the individual respondent. Humans are more complex than any graph or report, whether one, two, or three. However, these approaches can provide more insight and the ability to begin to communicate and understand one another better. More knowledge & information is not a detriment; it provides greater opportunity for exploration, discernment, and mutual understanding.
C) The DISC model has high Face Validity, that is, the assessment measures what it claims to measure. DISC, and all three of the graphs, provide practical insight into the four behavioral tendencies in a way that makes sense to most people. Most respondents relate to and see themselves in the styles as measured and described in their reports, so the graphs provide a starting point for greater self-awareness, stronger communication, and mutually-beneficial interactions.
D)There is some evidence that the ‘Natural and Adapted style’ constructs may not have been appropriate carryovers from Walter Clarke’s Activity Vector Analysis, as done by J.P. Cleaver in 1956. However, evidence doesn’t equate as proof, and until there is a stronger evidence-set (there hasn’t been for seventy years), the Natural and Adapted style theory remains.
Assessments 24×7 is the FIRST company to provide all three choices for its clients. Assessments 24×7 has developed a system allowing ANY DISC user to CHOOSE whether to use one, two, or three graphs for their report output.
Author of 31 books translated into over 50 languages, including best-sellers "The NEW Art of Managing People" and "The Platinum Rule," Dr. Alessandra helps organizations build stronger relationships with prospects, customers, and co-workers.
When not developing new assessment tools, Tony explores cutting-edge business communication trends. Connect with Dr. Alessandra on LinkedIn to learn how his innovative approaches can boost your team's performance.
- DISC for Hiring Without Legal Risk - August 3, 2026
- Understanding Behavioral Drivers - May 7, 2026
- The DISC Behavioral Model - April 30, 2026
+1 (206) 400-6647
sales@assessments24x7.com
