Most disagreements aren't really about the thing on the table. They're about what each person needs to be settled before they can relax, and what they're quietly willing to give up. One person needs the deadline fixed and doesn't much mind the price. The other will pay anything for the outcome they like, but won't commit to a date.
R.K. Kovalenko and N.A. Zvonaryova call the groups that describe this the quasi-quadras. Each type wants certainty in some areas and is relaxed about others, and each will trade one for the other in a characteristic way. The authors recommend them for resolving interpersonal conflicts and for preparing and conducting negotiations.
The four groups
| Group | Formula | Types |
|---|---|---|
| Phiquasi-Delta | Carefree · Yielding · Democratic | ILE ENTp SEI ISFp ESI ISFj LIE ENTj |
| Omegaquasi-Alpha | Carefree · Obstinate · Aristocratic | EIE ENFj LSI ISTj IEE ENFp SLI ISTp |
| Chiquasi-Gamma | Farsighted · Yielding · Aristocratic | IEI INFp SLE ESTp EII INFj LSE ESTj |
| Psiquasi-Beta | Farsighted · Obstinate · Democratic | LII INTj ESE ESFj SEE ESFp ILI INTp |
Each group is defined by three dichotomies: Carefree or Farsighted (whether you plan ahead), Yielding or Obstinate (whether you give ground on what you want or on what you require), and Aristocratic or Democratic.
Why "quasi"
A quadra is two dual pairs who share the same values, held together by Duality, Activation and Mirror. A quasi-quadra has the same shape, two dual pairs, but the pairs come from opposite quadras: Alpha with Gamma, or Beta with Delta. The site's relation data shows what holds them together instead: Duality within each pair, and Quasi-Identity and Conflict between them, in every one of the four groups.
So a quasi-quadra looks like a quadra from a distance and holds people who disagree about what matters. That's exactly what makes the groups useful for conflict and negotiation: the people inside each one trade in the same currency, but they don't value the same things.
The book gives each group a quadra name as well (quasi-Delta, quasi-Alpha, quasi-Gamma and quasi-Beta). Oddly, none of the four contains a single type from the quadra it's named after, and the book doesn't explain the naming, so I'd treat those names as labels rather than a clue.
Phi: ILE, SEI, ESI, LIE
Phi types want certainty and constancy in relationships, feelings, working methods and how well they work, and in material comfort, while keeping their options open. When a situation lets them get what they're after in those areas, they take the chance and put their savings and personal resources into it.
Their attention goes to what they want and like. They'll give ground on their requirements, even pay over the odds, for something they've set their heart on, and in a joint task they'll finish the job themselves to get a result they're happy with. They prefer not to plan ahead, working from the options a situation offers, and adjust any plan on the spot.
In a negotiation: lead with the outcome and the options, not the process. A Phi type will concede on terms for a result they like, and push back on being boxed in.
Omega: EIE, LSI, IEE, SLI
Omega types hold a steady position on rules and laws, on having a choice, on their emotional state, their settled tastes and their own comfort. To protect those, they'll change plans, act on the spur of the moment, or drop their own aims altogether.
They start from established rules and conditions and tend to defend their own and other people's rights, working out what they need from those rules and the resources to hand. They're attentive to the situation in front of them and would rather adjust a plan as they go than make one far ahead.
In a negotiation: frame the offer in terms of fairness and the rules both sides accept, and leave room to adjust the details later. Threaten their comfort or their principles and they'll walk away from a deal they wanted.
Chi: IEI, SLE, EII, LSE
Chi types want certainty about relationships and attachments, work and its methods, territory and status. Fixed plans and deadlines become goals in their own right: they build up resources deliberately, prepare every step in advance and act as planned, without sudden lurches.
Like Phi, their attention goes to what they want, and they'll give ground on some requirements, or pay more, to get it. In a joint task they'll finish it themselves the way they see the end result, whether or not their partner has delivered. They need plans agreed in advance, goals set, and plenty of warning when circumstances change.
In a negotiation: put the timetable in writing early and never spring a change. A Chi type will often pay for certainty.
Psi: LII, ESE, SEE, ILI
Psi types want certainty about principles, rules, authority, personal space, plans and timing, and about emotions and motivation, and may insist on it, so that they can plan ahead along established lines. They'll give up a personal aim if it threatens their plans, the stability of their mood, or the security of their principles and status.
Their own conditions and resources are always in view and form the base of how they see the world. They defend their principles and their mood, rely on a clear forecast, and expect to be warned about any change, so they can prepare for a situation in advance, emotionally and practically.
In a negotiation: respect the principle before you discuss the price, and give them a clear forecast of what happens next. A Psi type will sacrifice an outcome rather than a principle.
Using the quasi-quadras
The useful move is to separate what someone needs settled from what they're relaxed about. The two Farsighted groups, Chi and Psi, need plans fixed and changes flagged; the two Carefree groups, Phi and Omega, want room to adjust. The two Yielding groups, Phi and Chi, will give ground to get what they want; the two Obstinate groups, Omega and Psi, will give up what they want to protect what they require.
Put two of those side by side and most arguments explain themselves. A Chi type asking for a firm date and an Omega type asking to keep things flexible aren't being difficult. They're each protecting the thing their group needs settled.
As with every small group, this is only as good as the typing behind it, and it describes tendencies rather than rules. If you're not sure of your type, start with how to find your Socionics type. For the relations the groups are built from, see Duality, Quasi-Identity and Conflict.