A bit of history. What pushed me to study this approach. By nature I am a very kind person who, for a long time, could not say "no". On a physical level it felt like real pain and guilt over the other person, even when that person felt nothing of the kind. The result, in my own life, was an abusive marriage that lasted 27 years, and I lost a job I loved... Why? I asked myself that question many times. And since I am someone who always loves to learn, I went looking for the answer. The work of Carl Gustav Jung, Mark Luchin and Igor Leychenok, Konstantin Shadrin, Naomi Tickle. Years of studying and applying it in practice — in negotiations, in building teams, in helping people choose a profession or a partner. It all began in 2007 and took its current shape through research and application from 2011 to today.
In that time, more than two and a half thousand people have passed through my practice. Not clients asking "analyse my partner" — real couples, real teams, real stories, where one person didn't understand the other until it had already become costly.
A pattern that repeats almost every time: words can be chosen. Behaviour under pressure cannot.
A person can say exactly what you want to hear for months. But how they act when something goes off-plan — that's visible. If you know where to look.
Why words and actions are not the same thing
Research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology shows that 40% of relationship conflicts arise not from real disagreements between partners, but from a failure to understand their natural differences.
In other words — the conflict isn't about one of you being wrong. It's that you're built differently, and no one ever explained how to read that in advance.
Most people judge a partner by what they say and do in calm conditions. But that's exactly what's easiest to control and present in the best light. The real pattern of behaviour shows up under pressure — in an argument, under stress, when something isn't working.
What's actually worth noticing
This isn't a list of "signs of a bad person." These are behavioural observations — without diagnoses or judgement.
- How they react to disagreement. Do they listen and respond to the point — or immediately go on the defensive, shift blame, dismiss your point of view?
- How their tone shifts under stress. The same person can be gentle when comfortable and sharp at the first sign of difficulty. The gap between those two versions is what's worth noticing.
- How decisions get made together. Is a decision discussed — or announced afterward as a fact that isn't up for discussion?
- What happens after a conflict. Does normal communication return — or does tension linger for days as a kind of punishment for daring to disagree?
None of these on its own means you're dealing with a "toxic person." These are signals worth noticing together — and ideally before a year of living together, not after.
Why it shows on a face before it shows in conversation
Twelve years of practice happened not in a psychologist's office but in corporations — where a misjudgement of a person isn't a philosophical question, it's a line item in a budget.
In one of the teams I worked with — 2,500 people, financial sector. Staff turnover in that industry runs at 53% a year as a baseline. After one year of working with the FaceCode method, it dropped to 2-3%.
The difference wasn't new scripts or higher pay. The difference was that a person's nature became visible earlier — before they could hide it or perform the version of themselves meant for an interview. And once you understand what motivates a specific person, the work itself becomes easier, because neither your energy nor theirs gets drained. That's always good for a business.
How this works for a couple
FaceCode Method analyses two people from photographs and shows each person's behavioural profile: how they react under pressure, what triggers them, how they make decisions, and at what point they shut down a conversation.
For a couple, this isn't a verdict on whether you're "compatible." It's a concrete map: where the natural pull is, and where the friction point is — the one that keeps repeating because both of you keep misreading it.
The free reading takes about 30 seconds and gives you a first orientation. The full analysis — built around the "toxic behaviour" scenario — gives concrete behavioural patterns for each person and a tactic for your specific situation.
If you've read this far
You probably already have a specific person in mind. Not abstract curiosity — a real situation that won't let you go.
Upload two photos — yours and theirs. In thirty seconds you'll have a first answer to a question you may not have let yourself ask directly.