In my experience most people are bad at both, it's just that they think they are one or the other. Also I would suggest another approach at becoming better: In

In my experience most people are bad at both, it's just that they think they are one or the other. Also I would suggest another approach at becoming better: Instead of mastering both styles (which is impossible for most people) it might be better to focus on one style and look for ways to drag the problems that are better solved with the other style back to solutions you already can apply. Stupid example I created just now: Instead of trying to go more with the flow when meeting friends a planner could spent more time before meeting friends to plan and prepare different options. The solution is still not as optimal as for a go-flow-guy, but it is possible to get around it without your friends realizing. On the other hand a go-flow-guy that is writing a master thesis might be better to plan for a very small topic and go for more iterations with the professor to get to a decent paper in the end. In both example I probably fail to show that the guy is actually applying his own style to a problem that is not meant for this style, just that he is more creative and willing to put in more energy to get to the same end result then the person with the other talent. If you look closely at medium level chess players and kungfu arts then you see that they are also doing something like this. They learn a small set of skills that all focus on very few basic concepts and try to solve other problems by moving the situation back to their comfort zone or putting in more effort.