• Built for teams, not just individuals

Most personality frameworks give individuals a label. HIVE gives teams a shared language — and a practical way to use their differences as strengths rather than sources of friction. 

• Strengths-based by design 

Every HIVE type is framed as a contribution, not a limitation. No type is more valuable than another.

• Grounded in validated research 

HIVE draws from eight established bodies of research in personality psychology, team dynamics, and human motivation — all peer-reviewed and widely cited. 

• Warm, human, and context aware 

Designed for corporate teams, small businesses, and NGOs. HIVE uses language that is accessible, culturally resonant, and free of clinical jargon.

HIVE is not a quiz. It is a framework built on decades of empirical research across personality psychology, motivational science, and team dynamics. The following eight research traditions form the scientific architecture of the framework.

• Big Five Personality Traits (OCEAN)

     Costa & McCrae, 1992 

The most empirically validated personality model in psychology, developed through over 50 years of cross-cultural research. HIVE draws on Extraversion (the direction of energy — outward or inward) and Agreeableness (orientation toward people or tasks) to build its 2x2 grid, producing four types with strong scientific backing. 

Source: Costa, P.T., & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.

• DISC Behavioural Theory

     William Moulton Marston, 1928

Marston's DISC model provides HIVE's behavioural layer — the observable, practical dimension of how people act and respond in their environment. HIVE's four types map cleanly to Marston's Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness styles. 

Source: Marston, W.M. (1928). Emotions of normal people. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Company.

• Psychological Types

     Carl Jung, 1921

Jung's typology gives HIVE its psychological depth — the cognitive and emotional drivers beneath observable behaviour. Energy direction (extraversion vs introversion) and processing style (thinking vs feeling) provide the theoretical basis for why HIVE types behave differently under identical conditions. 

Source: Jung, C.G. (1921). Psychologische Typen. Rascher Verlag. (English: Psychological Types, 1923, Harcourt Brace.)

• Self-Determination Theory

     Deci & Ryan, 1985

SDT proposes that motivation and wellbeing depend on three core needs: autonomy (agency), competence (mastery), and relatedness (connection). Each HIVE type has a distinct primary need driver which explains what energizes and depletes them. This makes HIVE empowering rather than merely descriptive.

Source: Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

• Social Identity Theory

     Tajfel & Turner, 1979

People's sense of self is shaped by group membership, and they adapt behaviour based on that identity. In HIVE, this explains why people show up differently across team contexts, and underpins the Team Mapping activity comparing self-perception against team perception.

Source: Tajfel, H., & Turner, J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Brooks/Cole.

• Stages of Team Development

     Bruce Tuckman, 1965

Forming → Storming → Norming → Performing → Adjourning. HIVE types do not behave identically across these stages — a Hunter in Forming looks different from a Hunter in Storming. Understanding the current stage contextualises HIVE type behaviour and makes the framework more precise in practice.

Source: Tuckman, B.W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399. Tuckman, B.W., & Jensen, M.A.C. (1977). Group & Organization Studies, 2(4), 419-427

• VIA Character Strengths

    Peterson & Seligman, 2004

The VIA Classification identifies 24 universally valued character strengths from positive psychology. HIVE uses VIA to anchor each type in what is right with people — not what is wrong. This keeps the framework strengths-based and prevents the "labelling" effect common in deficit-focused personality tools.

Source: Peterson, C., & Seligman, M.E.P. (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. Oxford University Press / American Psychological Association.

• Daring Leadership Research

     Brene Brown, 2010–2021

Brown's research on vulnerability, shame resilience, and daring leadership provides HIVE's human context layer. Four concepts are woven directly in: emotional regulation, psychological safety, burnout, and Newtonian teamwork — the principle that individual groundedness is a collective responsibility.

Source: Brown, B. (2010). The gifts of imperfection. Hazelden. Brown, B. (2018). Dare to lead. Random House. Brown, B. (2021). Atlas of the heart. Random House.

HIVE's primary purpose is team effectiveness. The following section outlines five ways HIVE can be used to strengthen team performance, each grounded in supporting research.

• Building a Common Language

Research consistently shows that teams with shared mental models perform better under pressure. HIVE gives teams a shared vocabulary for how each person works — reducing misattribution of intent, improving conflict navigation, and accelerating trust formation. When a Hunter says "I'm pushing because I care about results," and the team knows what that means, the dynamic shifts from friction to understanding.

Sources: Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E., & Converse, S. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In N.J. Castellan Jr. (Ed.), Individual and group decision making (pp. 221-246). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

• Optimizing Team Composition

Belbin's team role research showed that team composition matters as much as individual ability. HIVE gives leaders a practical lens for assessing composition: Are we missing an Ember (quality control)? Do we have too many Hunters (high action, low reflection)? Is there a Vessel to hold the team's emotional safety? HIVE doesn't prescribe the right composition — but it makes the gaps visible.

Sources: Belbin, R.M. (1981). Management teams: Why they succeed or fail. Heinemann.

• Navigating Conflict

Thomas and Kilmann's conflict research identifies five conflict styles, all of which map to HIVE types. Hunters tend toward competing. Inspirers toward collaborating or accommodating. Vessels toward avoiding or accommodating. Embers toward avoiding or competing (privately). Understanding these tendencies gives teams a framework for productive disagreement.

Sources: Thomas, K.W., & Kilmann, R.H. (1974). Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode instrument. Xicom.

• Supporting Psychological Safety

Edmondson's research identifies four things teams need for psychological safety: respect, freedom to speak up, tolerance for failure, and interpersonal trust. HIVE supports all four by helping team members understand why certain behaviour feels threatening and how to adjust — not by changing who you are, but by understanding the impact of how you show up.

Sources: Edmondson, A.C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.

• The Team Mapping Activity

A key application of HIVE in the workshop of Honey Kate's flagship program Team Dynamics Lab is the Team Map — a structured activity where participants identify their own type and compare how they see themselves against how teammates perceive them. This process is grounded in Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) and the Johari Window model (Luft & Ingham, 1955). The gap between self-perception and team perception is often where the most powerful development conversations begin.

Sources: Luft, J., & Ingham, H. (1955). The Johari Window: A graphic model for interpersonal relations. University of California Western Training Lab

H — The Hunter 🔴

Outward energy · Task-first

The Hunter is the person who sees the target and moves toward it — fast. They don't wait for perfect conditions or full consensus; they assess quickly, decide confidently, and act. In a team, they create momentum where there was hesitation and results where there were only ideas. Their directness can feel intense to others, but it comes from a deep belief that things can always be better, faster, and bolder. At their best, the Hunter doesn't just reach the goal — they make the whole team believe it was possible.

I — The Inspirer 🟡

Outward energy · People-first

The Inspirer is the person who makes the room feel alive. They bring warmth, energy, and a genuine belief in the people around them — and that belief is contagious. They read the emotional temperature of a team before they read the agenda, and they instinctively tend to both. Where others see colleagues, the Inspirer sees people with stories, potential, and something worth celebrating. At their best, the Inspirer doesn't just lift the mood — they make people believe in themselves

V — The Vessel 🟢

Inward energy · People-first

The Vessel is the person the team relies on without always realising it. They don't move loudly or demand attention, but they notice everything: who is struggling, what is unspoken, where the team is fraying at the edges. They carry the team's emotional memory — they remember what was promised, who was hurt, and what matters to each person. At their best, the Vessel doesn't just hold the team together — they give it somewhere safe to land.

E — The Ember 🔵

Inward energy · Task-first

The Ember doesn't burn bright and loud — they burn long and deep. They are the quiet intelligence of the team: the one who has already thought three steps ahead, noticed the flaw in the plan, and is sitting with a question that will change everything — if only someone thinks to ask them. Their thinking is precise, their standards are high, and their contribution is often invisible until it is suddenly the most important thing in the room. At their best, the Ember doesn't just find the right answer — they raise the quality of everything around them.

The Blend Types

Blends are not a consolation prize — they represent a richer, more layered contribution to the team. Research in personality psychology supports the existence of intermediate types along all Big Five dimensions and blend types reflect this natural complexity. There are six possible HIVE blends.