Three Ways of Understanding Human Behavior
Human Design, Enneagrams, and The Philosophy of Integration
Human beings are unique. Each of us has our own way of being in the world, our own way of interpreting the world, and our own way of interacting with experience.
As unique as we are, systems like Enneagrams and Human Design have attempted to sort who we are and how we show up into patterns of behavior and identity. They can be useful systems when you’re trying to understand yourself or why you do the things you do.
I was curious what would happen if I ran both systems through The Philosophy of Integration framework.
When I did, I noticed something interesting. Each system is actually answering a very specific question.
Human Design asks: How does energy move through me?
The Enneagram ask: What strategy did I adopt to survive and make sense of the world?
Using those questions, I took each system’s types and applied my framework to them. I looked at what happens when a particular pattern is active, and then used the framework again to show how that pattern can be managed once it’s visible.
The Philosophy of Integration removes identity matching and psychological interpretation and distills these systems down to simple cause and effect. When identity and psychology are removed, it becomes easier to see why things unfold the way they do and how behavior shapes outcome.
All of the Human Design and Enneagram booklets are available in my shop at dellawren.com/shop.
Working through this raised another question.
Could my framework be used as a self-analysis tool in the same way?
Yes.
The question my framework answers is: How do I react to experience under pressure?
When I followed that question through, five recurring reaction patterns appeared. Below is a brief overview of each.
The Checker
What’s Happening Internally
Something feels off. Not wrong exactly, just incomplete. There’s a sense that acting now might create a problem that didn’t need to exist.
The dominant thought is:
“I don’t have enough information yet.”
There’s often a secondary thought right behind it:
“It would be irresponsible to move without confirming this.”
How They Respond to The Thought
They pause. They look outward. They ask a question, or wait for a signal, or seek confirmation that they’re reading the situation correctly.
This doesn’t feel like hesitation.
It feels like diligence.
The logic they’re using
Acting without clarity creates mistakes.
Mistakes create fallout.
Preventing fallout is better than cleaning it up later.
So checking first feels like the most rational option.
What They Don’t Notice in the Moment
While they’re waiting for certainty, the situation continues to exist.
Momentum fades. Others move. Or nothing moves at all.
The delay feels invisible because it’s framed as care.
The Sprinter
What’s Happening Internally
There’s a tightening sensation around time. The longer things sit unresolved, the worse they’ll get.
The dominant thought is:
“If I don’t move now, this will bog down.”
Often followed by:
“I can figure it out as I go.”
How They Respond to The Thought
They act. Decide. Push forward. Initiate something concrete so the situation doesn’t stagnate.
Movement itself brings relief.
The logic they’re using:
Stalled situations decay.
Motion creates options.
It’s easier to course-correct than to sit still.
Speed feels like competence. Waiting feels risky.
What They Don’t Notice in the Moment
By staying ahead of consequence, nothing ever fully lands.
They loop back later to deal with what didn’t resolve the first time.
The exhaustion shows up after, not during.
The Curator
What’s Happening Internally
The situation itself isn’t the problem. The way it’s about to land is.
The dominant thought is:
“This doesn’t need to hit like that.”
Often paired with:
“I can help this make more sense.”
How They Respond to The Thought
They adjust tone. Reframe meaning. Anticipate reactions. Translate what’s happening so it’s easier to receive.
They step between cause and effect without consciously naming it.
The logic they’re using:
Raw outcomes create unnecessary damage.
Meaning shapes experience.
If people understand it differently, it will go better.
This feels compassionate. Intelligent. Skilled.
What They Don’t Notice in the Moment
Because outcomes are continually softened, nothing resolves cleanly.
They end up carrying the emotional weight of the situation long after it should have finished.
The Enforcer
What’s Happening Internally
Ambiguity feels unstable. The longer it goes on, the more likely something breaks.
The dominant thought is:
“Someone needs to decide.”
Often followed by:
“If I don’t step in, this will fall apart.”
How They Respond to The Thought
They assert direction. Make the call. Take control of the situation so it has a clear path forward.
This feels grounding, not aggressive.
The logic they’re using:
Uncertainty creates risk.
Direction creates stability.
Responsibility is better than chaos.
Taking charge feels like preventing damage.
What They Don’t Notice in the Moment
By absorbing responsibility, they also absorb consequence.
Others don’t have to fully meet the results of their own choices.
The pattern keeps repeating because it works — in the short term.
The Relocator
What’s Happening Internally
The issue feels contextual, not intrinsic. There’s a sense that the friction isn’t about the people or the decision itself.
The dominant thought is:
“This just isn’t the right setup.”
Often paired with:
“It would work fine somewhere else.”
How They Respond to The Thought
They change the environment. Shift roles. Adjust context. Move the situation rather than confront it directly.
This feels adaptive, not avoidant.
The logic they’re using:
Environment shapes outcomes.
Friction often disappears when context changes.
Forcing resolution in the wrong setting is inefficient.
Adjustment feels cleaner than confrontation.
What They Don’t Notice in the Moment
The core pattern travels with them.
Because the chain never closes, it simply reappears in a new form.
While my framework is not as involved as Human Design or the Enneagram, because it works with cause and effect, not identity or trauma, its intention is simple:
To help people see the patterns their behavior creates and understand why similar experiences keep repeating.
If you’re interested in applying this framework to your daily life, keep an eye out for a new self-analysis tool based on The Philosophy of Integration framework.