Write a 'Manual of Me'

Problem statement

Working with people is hard. Not because they’re difficult, but because they’re different. We all have implicit preferences, communication habits, and stress responses that shape how we show up. Without shared context, these differences turn into friction, misunderstanding, or avoidable conflict. Without introspection, we may not even realize how others experience us.

Intent

Help yourself — and others — by naming the conditions under which you thrive, struggle, and grow. A personal operating manual improves communication, fosters team empathy, and signals emotional maturity.

• Encourage reflection on your working style, values, and triggers.
• Invite candid collaboration by giving colleagues a starting point for interacting with you.
• Reduce friction caused by mismatched expectations or unseen assumptions.
• Enable better teaming, feedback, and growth through open self-description.
• Shift conflict resolution from reactive to proactive.

Solution

Reflect on your working style, communication preferences, and personal quirks that you bring to the table. Write these down in a structured format (be it a document, wiki page, or even a personal website).

Share this “Manual of Me” with your friends, colleagues, team members, or anyone you work closely with. Alternatively, keep it private and use it as a self-reflection tool to better understand yourself, and build awareness of how you interact with others, and what types of situations you thrive in.

Rather than waiting for conflict or discomfort to surface your needs, the manual invites proactive clarity and shared understanding. It builds trust, speeds up team integration, and fosters more humane collaboration. A personal operating manual is both a self-reflection exercise and a communication tool. It invites you to clarify how you work best, and to share that clarity with others.

Approach to writing your manual

Step 1: Aggregate and Reflect

Begin by thinking honestly about your past experiences.

• When were you most productive? What conditions helped?
• When did things go wrong? What caused stress, conflict, or withdrawal?
• What feedback have you received? What have others appreciated — or misunderstood — about you?

If you have past feedback, assessments, or coaching notes, use them as a mirror. But don’t overengineer it: memory and intuition are valid sources, too. There are a plethora of online personality-based tests, which you can use as a starting point for your self-reflection. We suggest looking into the International Personality Item Pool to find peer-reviewed, and science-backed, tooling.

Step 2: Identify Key Signals

Pick the elements that define how you show up at work. This might include:

• What energizes you: autonomy, clarity, praise, momentum, deep work, collaboration, etc.
• What drains or frustrates you: ambiguity, micromanagement, last-minute pivots, excessive meetings, etc.
• Communication preferences: Do you prefer async updates or live discussions? Directness or diplomacy? Space to think or real-time dialogue?
• Work rhythm: Are you most focused in the morning? Do you need recovery after social days? How do you signal “in the zone”?
• Feedback style: How do you prefer to give and receive feedback?
• Stress signs and support: How do you respond under pressure? What helps you recover?

You can also ask yourself:

• What makes me feel respected?
• What helps me do my best work?
• What kinds of tension do I want to avoid, or invite?

Step 3: Clarify Core Values (Optional)

Name the values, principles, or beliefs that guide you. You might draw inspiration from frameworks like

This isn’t a branding exercise. It’s about making it easier for others to understand what matters to you, so they can meet you where you are.

Step 4: Choose a Format

Write down your manual in a format that works for you, and is easy for others to digest. The format can be anything that works for you: a document, a wiki page, a personal website, or even a slide deck. The key is to make it accessible and easy to share. The content should be structured, but not overly formal. It should feel like a conversation starter, not a rigid contract.

Aim to keep it concise, ideally one page or less. Use bullet points, headings, and clear sections to make it skimmable. Avoid jargon or overly complex language. Stick to the essentials. You are not writing a biography, manifesto, or sales pitch. You’re writing to be understood, not to impress.

Step 5: Add Human Touches

Include quirks, rituals, or values beyond your formal role. These signals create connection and help others see the full person. Examples:

• “Please don’t schedule meetings before 9:30am. I’m not my best self in the morning.”
• “I may look calm, but I care deeply — and sometimes over-invest.”
• “When I go quiet, I’m either thinking hard or feeling off. Either way, it’s okay to check in.”
• “I prefer to communicate in writing first, then discuss live. It helps me gather my thoughts.”
• “I prefer very direct communication and animated debate. You can be frank with me, I will do the same.”

Contextual forces

Enablers

The following factors support effective application of the practice:

• Psychological safety: Your environment welcomes self-expression, reflection, and open sharing of personal quirks or boundaries.
• Self-reflective culture: Your team values introspection, values alignment, or feedback rituals. Personal operating manuals fit well alongside retrospectives or team charters.
• Cross-functional collaboration: You work with people from diverse roles, backgrounds, or disciplines who may not share the same implicit norms or communication styles.
• Coaching and team development: You lead or support others and want to model clarity, self-awareness, or sustainable ways of working. By sharing your manual, you set an example for others to follow.
• Mentorship or pairing culture: Your team uses mentorship, pairing, or rotating roles, where deeper individual understanding leads to smoother collaboration.
• Remote or hybrid teams: Physical separation reduces ambient understanding. A Manual of Me helps fill in the context that would otherwise be learned through hallway conversations or observation.
• New team formation / Onboarding support: Your team is newly formed, cross-company, or going through a restructuring, and people are learning to collaborate for the first time. You want to ease the ramp-up for new team members, helping them understand colleagues without needing to decode each personality from scratch.

Deterrents

The following factors prevent effective application of the practice:

• Low-trust environments: In toxic or overly political cultures, being candid about preferences or needs may be seen as weakness or self-indulgence.
• Lack of introspection: If you haven’t reflected deeply on how you operate, the manual risks becoming vague, aspirational, or performative. In cultures where communication is already performative or over-curated, the Manual of Me may be co-opted into a form of personal branding rather than honest introspection.
• One-size-fits-all assumptions: Teams may treat the exercise as a formality rather than an individual reflection, leading to formulaic manuals that lack depth or authenticity.
• Time pressure or low perceived ROI: Teams may deprioritize personal reflection practices, seeing them as “nice to have” rather than mission-critical.
• Over-professionalism: Some people view emotional self-disclosure or contextual framing as unprofessional, preferring to “just get on with the work”.
• Overuse of personality typologies: Your organisation heavily relies on formal assessments (MBTI, DISC, etc.), which can lead to rigid interpretations of behaviour and discourage more nuanced or evolving self-description. There’s a risk of treating personality traits or value statements as deterministic categories. If readers treat the manual as a label rather than a lens, it can reduce empathy rather than deepen it.
• Hierarchical mistrust: In highly hierarchical settings, manuals may be misread as entitlement or boundary-setting, especially when created by junior contributors. In rigid organisations with strong cultural defaults, declaring personal preferences may feel unsafe or be actively discouraged.

Rationale

The Manual of Me practice makes tacit preferences explicit, helping others engage with you more intentionally and compassionately.

Most interpersonal friction stems not from bad intent, but from mismatched assumptions: about what drives us, how we like to work, or what we need to feel safe and effective. By surfacing this context early, the manual offers a proactive alternative to conflict mediation, coaching escalation, or months of silent friction. It acts as a lightweight, human-readable spec for effective collaboration.

For individuals, it fosters self-awareness and psychological congruence, acting in alignment with your needs and values. For teams, it builds empathy, psychological safety, and cultural flexibility, making it easier for different working styles to coexist without friction.

Unlike many personality frameworks, a personal manual is not a diagnostic tool. It’s not a fixed label, but a living reflection. One that invites curiosity rather than categorisation. It gives the author agency in what they share and how, avoiding the flattening effect that models and traits can sometimes create.

The goal is not to reduce people to patterns. It’s to offer others a map, knowing full well that humans are more than any map can describe.

Application

Consequences

While the approach brings numerous benefits, it can also lead to several unexpected or undesired outcomes:

• Perceived self-centredness: Others may interpret your manual as overly self-focused, especially in cultures that value group identity or humility over individual preferences. Particularly if you are the one introducing the practice, it can be interpreted as narcissistic, manipulative, or self-serving. This is especially true if the manual is not framed as an invitation to dialogue, but rather as a set of demands or expectations.
• Over-reliance on the manual: People may treat the manual as a definitive guide, rather than a starting point for conversation. This can lead to assumptions rather than curiosity, reducing the opportunity for deeper understanding. This can also lead to rigidity in collaboration, where colleagues expect you to always operate exactly as described, even as your context or growth evolves.
• Self-limiting beliefs: Individuals may begin to internalize or perform their own manuals too rigidly. Using them to justify avoidant behaviours or downplay their ability to adapt. (see:
  barnum effect

  Barnum Effect

  A cognitive bias in which individuals believe vague, general statements about personality are highly accurate for them personally. Often exploited by horoscopes, personality tests, and pseudoscientific diagnostics, the Barnum Effect explains why people perceive such feedback as insightful even when it applies to most others.

  See: barnum effect
  )
• Confirmation bias in interpretation: Once a colleague has read your manual, they may unconsciously filter future interactions through that lens. People are prone to start noticing behaviours that match your description while overlooking evidence to the contrary. This can reinforce outdated or simplistic views of how you work.
• Misuse of vulnerability: In low-trust or competitive environments, sharing boundaries or quirks can be misinterpreted as fragility or ammunition. Instead of empathy, it may elicit judgment or exclusion.
• Overemphasis on individualism: The practice may inadvertently shift focus from team dynamics to individual quirks, leading to a culture of self-absorption rather than collective growth. It can create an expectation that everyone should have a manual, which may not be comfortable or appropriate for all team members.
• Labeling and flattening: Especially in organisations already steeped in frameworks (e.g.,
  MBTI

  Myers–Briggs Type Indicator

  A psychological framework based on Carl Jung’s theories of personality types, categorising individuals along four dimensions: Extraversion–Introversion, Sensing–Intuition, Thinking–Feeling, and Judging–Perceiving. The resulting 16 personality types aim to describe cognitive preferences and behavioural tendencies. Often used in team building, coaching, and self-awareness contexts — though its scientific validity is unconfirmed.

  Use with caution! While the theory is widely popular, it can be dangerous to use it as a definitive measure of personality. Personality indicators are best used as a tool for self-reflection and understanding, rather than as a rigid classification system.

  See: MBTI
  , DISC), manuals may be read through the lens of cognitive shortcuts. This risks reducing individuals to a handful of traits or types.
• Loss of nuance through scale: As the practice spreads, organizations may create templates, frameworks, or checklists that erode its original intent. The result is mechanical manuals that are less honest and more sanitized. Teams might over-rely on manuals and written cues rather than practicing live dialogue or co-adaptation, reducing actual collaborative resilience.

Mitigation strategies

To reduce the risk of negative consequences, consider these mitigations:

• Reinforce that this is a snapshot, not a contract: Clearly signal that the manual is a living document, an evolving reflection, not a fixed identity. Encourage updates, edits, or “reintroductions” as people grow or change.
• Prompt others to verify, not assume: Normalize curiosity over categorization. Encourage teammates to say things like “Is this still how you prefer to communicate?”, rather than assuming the manual always applies.
• Contextualize with humility: Frame your manual as “This is what I’ve noticed about myself . . . so far”. Acknowledge that others may experience you differently. This opens space for reciprocal clarity rather than defensive alignment.
• Name the bias, not just the pattern: Briefly call out confirmation bias as a known risk: “I know people tend to see what they expect — feel free to challenge this if I show up differently.” This helps reset expectations over time.
• Allow for privacy and choice: Make it clear that no one is obligated to create or share a manual. Offer it as an invitation, not a requirement. Respect different boundaries around openness.
• Model constructive use: As a team or leader, avoid using manuals in evaluation, hiring, or performance framing. Anchor them in empathy and collaboration, not accountability. Ensure the manuals are used to open dialogue, and not to box people in. Ideally, they should never be used in performance reviews or hiring decisions.
• Layer reflection over performance: If manuals are encouraged as a team ritual, provide optional prompts or feedback mechanisms that keep the practice grounded in reflection rather than positioning.

Examples

Manual of Me – Stijn Dejongh

A systems thinker in a noisy world. Architect, coach, strategist. Quietly building clarity.

How I think and Operate

• I believe most problems are misaligned systems, not broken people.
• I ask “why” more often than most. Not to challenge but to understand.
• My default mode is reflection before action — but I move fast once clear.
• I don’t seek control; I design context.
• I believe every recommendation should be felt by those it affects. If it’s not grounded, it’s not ready.

How I communicate

• I like layered communication: context first, conclusion second. ( unless I sense the reverse is needed to get my point across ).
• I calibrate to the audience: I can go executive-brief or engineer-deep, but not both at once.
• I ask clarifying questions to reveal assumptions or surface friction. Expect a “Just to check…” or “Help me understand…” as invitations, not doubts.
• I’m transparent with what I know and don’t. I value mutual clarity over being right.

What I value in others

• Curiosity that’s grounded in action, not ego.
• Integrity in decision-making — even when inconvenient.
• Comfort with ambiguity, and the discipline to tame it.
• Respect for both craft and context.
• The willingness to grow by doing, failing, and reflecting.

When I’m at my best

• Working on hard, meaningful problems with principled people.
• Shaping complex systems with space to think and room to improve.
• Helping someone reframe a situation, untangle a challenge, or step into their own clarity.
• Designing architecture, strategy, or process in service of real impact — not just theoretical elegance.

How to help me thrive

• Invite me early, when things are still messy.
• Give me access to delivery, not just PowerPoints.
• Challenge my ideas. I enjoy a debate. Not to win, but to deepen understanding.
• Let me coach, write, or shape. I’ll contribute more than my job title.
• Be candid, not political. I can work with disagreement, but not with misalignment hidden behind smiles.

Quirks you should know about

• I can over-explain when I sense confusion. It’s my attempt to rebuild shared ground.
• I’ll sweep the floor as a principal architect, because equality and shared burdens matter.
• I care deeply, even if I sound calm. If I push, it’s because I believe it matters.
• I have a somewhat dry, subversive sense of humor. It might surface as a quiet one-liner, ironic eyebrow raise, or well-timed metaphor involving goats or bureaucracy. It’s usually intentional.
• I bring my full self into the room — even high-power ones. That includes my principles, a calm presence, and the occasional dad joke. I believe professionalism and personhood are not mutually exclusive.

Mantras I live by

• “First, seek to understand.”
• “If it works, it’s their win. If it fails, it’s my miss.”
• “Clarity before complexity. Integrity before elegance.”

Criticism & Clarifications

This can be weaponized

That’s a totally fair concern. Manuals like this aren’t a

It helps you notice what energizes or drains you, which patterns tend to repeat, and where you might quietly shift how you show up. You don’t have to share it. Sometimes just knowing what you need, and where you’re stretching too far, is enough to make the next decision with more clarity. No sharing needed. No system change required.

This is just a self-indulgent exercise

There’s definitely a version of this that is performative or self-indulgent. If the Manual of Me becomes a personality branding exercise, or a way to avoid real engagement, then yes: it’s just another polished artifact adding to the noise. But that’s not what this is aiming for.

The real intent here isn’t to show off quirks. The technique aims to surface friction early, before it festers into something costly. It’s not about making ourselves feel special. It’s about helping others work with us without having to guess or stumble for months.

For some people, that’s just “being professional”. But what professionalism looks like can vary wildly across cultures, personalities, or neurotypes. Writing it down is a small act of clarity that can prevent a lot of unnecessary tension later on.

And it’s not for everyone. If a team has high trust, great communication, and plenty of informal ways to learn each other’s styles — then fine, skip the manual. But for cross-functional, remote, or fast-forming teams, it can save time, build empathy, and create space for actual work — not replace it.