|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
About 2 years ago, I did an online test called 'strength finders'. I was part of this bible study group of young professionals as an older contributor and it was being led by a really sophisticated and even older guy who specialized in corporate culture/development as well as being an ex-theologian.
HATING ON THE LOVERS
We butted heads a lot, not because we disagreed, but I felt he was taking things too easy sometimes on the group, meaning that, as an ex-theologian of sorts as well, I just didn't agree with his 'pastoral side' when the group we had was a group that were privileged enough to make a difference and they should have hear something of a harder message than affirming their little gains of insight and wisdom.
In the end, I think he got how much I respected him, because while I bagged on him for being too 'watered down' I think he knew it was because I agreed with him. Anyways, going back to the strength finders test, well this guy was the protege of the guy who developed the test and concept of 'strength finders'.
TESTS AND TESTS
Having gone through seminary as well as given pastoral care and through the entire corporate executive system, I've been through pretty much every type of testing you can do related to performance or personality. But, I left the executive sector when this 'strength finders' test became all the rage a few years back, and, here I was with a guy who really knew about this test inside and out. So he didn't suggest I take it, rather, it was other guys around him who were doing the workshop with him asking for additional codes, so I said, what the hell, and I asked him about it, and I ended up doing the test.
IT'S NOT ABOUT YOUR WEAKNESSES
*About the strength finders test* Basically this university professor/dean realized that successful students weren't successful because they minimized their weaknesses, but that they greatly maximized their strengths, -as most type of correction at that time was based on finding on what a student lacked in rather that focus on their strengths - part of this was the entire cookie cutter mentality of standards, but most of it was based on the logical assumption that if you correct what is weak, you should excel, but really if you correct what is weak, you're just barely average.
When it comes to 'success' or achievement - it came down to 34 strengths, and when you test, they only show your top 5 (or if you pay more to see the rest) in ranking, and these are split up into different categories, but the theory is that you should focus on your top 5 because they will give you most gains.
*SO,
I take the test and the results come out, and I've taken a lot of these tests, even when I was a kid and I was part the of the 'gifted' program when I was elementary school. i.e. the place in the 80's for kids with high IQs and ADD, which people weren't sure if it was learning disability or a gift. (well at my school district they obviously thought it was gift but that was before we knew that ADD even was a thing, lol). And I was super surprised, because it was so accurate.
MIND BLOWN
It was accurate in not a hocky way like all personality test are, and not hocky like some fortune teller thing, but it was focused on an aspect of your personality related to how you worked or processed information and expressed it.
But beyond accurate, it made me realize that somethings that were so overbearing about myself, which everyone around me had to make a comment on, which 80% of the teachers I've had had tried to beat me down because of, were actually a core part of me and were really my strengths. And when I read my top 5 strengths as well as the description, I felt free, lifted, free from these chains of societal expectations on me as a person, that for the first time, I saw these traits only as strengths and not personality flaws that needed to be suppressed.
When I had finished the test, I emailed the results to the guy, and he wrote back, 'I'm unfortunately not surprised.' and after that we never had a major misunderstanding in that bible study group. What he meant by his response, was a resignation in recognizing that I wasn't trying to be a dick head, but that I was a dickhead and that was my strength - meaning that I wasn't trying to prove something, or put someone down or put myself up, rather, I genuinely was contributing by being cuttingly harsh, but also -paradoxically- extremely accurate in my harshness, I mean, when I made a comment, I was more like severe radiation treatment than a skilled cut of surgeon, but I still hit the right spot.
But he said 'unfortunately he wasn't surprised' because I think he hoped that I was going to be more deeper or complex in my personality or strengths that maybe my approach alluded to something else, but nope, I am what I am.
WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS FLAWED
What I am, after 40+ years now, I have very very few doubts, and in many ways, this test, confirmed what I could never do because of my upbringing where everyone is looking to impose societal or personal standards, and if you are at all contrarian to that, you fight it, but you always doubt whether or not if you are totally justified either.
When you're young, you fight it blind, you fight because you react.
When you're a bit older, you pause because not all outcomes of the fights are good, and you lose the reaction to fight,
but sometimes you completely lose the fight, and you spend years to realize the spark to get the fire going again,
then when you think you're old enough, you pick your fights, but you still hesitate,
and then
when you're too old, maybe you say, fuck it, I'll fight cause I damn well want to, or
maybe you don't fight at all because you give up and it's not worth it.
But for me.
I fight. I keep fighting, and have been fighting all my life, non stop, even when I was so beat down that I was scared to fight - not because of the consequences,- there has always been a part of me that says that my urge to fight is somehow wrong, that I fight because of ego and only because of ego - some false belief that what I'm doing is someone how right and I that I know it's a false belief, right?
THAT THIS FLAW CAN'T BE A POSITIVE
That I'm not humble enough, I'm not modest enough, I'm too arrogant, I'm not listening, my pride blind me, and if everyone tells you every day this from every angle, and yet, you still fall back into it, and if that pride, arrogance and blindness is also responsible for your greatest achievements, how am I to give that part of myself up without giving up on myself?
We I didn't, I didn't give up on my pride, my fight, my arrogance, I am embraced it along with a bit of self-hate, self-disgust and self-judgement, that I wasn't good enough to achieve without it and self proclaiming first that I was going to speak and I was going to be an asshole about it, but that wasn't going to stop me from saying what I needed to say. Driven by pride, blinded by pride, embarrassed by it as well.
BUT HOW CAN BEING ME BE GENUINELY BAD?
The thing about the strength finders, is that they take these strong traits of personality, and they translate into the best possible angle, meaning that, they accept you as you, these are the top 5 things that you exhibit when you approach work or a problem, and none of it is bad, but it's different, it's you.
So I thought about it, was this bullshit -, that these primary traits weren't a mix of flaws and pluses, but rather all primary traits are a particular strength and in combination make a unique approach which inherently is dictating our achievements?
And I thought about my life in an instance, every beat down from every teacher, or authoritative figure, from the crowds that rejected me, and the achievements that I had made, in spite of them and in spite of myself and my primary flaws. And, no. this wasn't bullshit, it was me and it was me without negatively for once in my life.
PRIMARY TRAITS ARE ALWAYS A STRENGTH
And just to realize that these primary traits in the lens of 'what they do good' rather than 'what mistakes they can cause', was actually was a mind blowing moment that I had been holding back my entire life and beating myself over doing what was natural and worked because it was a strength and not a flaw I needed to over come.
Of course by now, I had intuitively known my major traits to be positive, but to actually have this test pick them out and articulate in a pure strength perspective, rather than a flawed trait with some good things that needed to put in check, was truly a freeing moment.
WE ARE NOT SOCIETY'S STANDARDS- WE ARE WHO WE ARE
I think, for many of us, we are so caught up in believing that the main traits that drive us are both good and bad, strengths and weakness, but the worst is when society leads us to interpret our trait completely as a weakness and we never embrace the benefit of it, but rather spend an entire lifetime fighting to accept it or going nuts because we still do what we do and we think we should know better.
I'm lucky, I'm a simple guy, my traits or strengths, make me a guy who is always straight forward and so because of that, even though I felt embarrassment or disgust with my actions at time, because I thought I should know better, well, I'm not one to look back, regret and cry, I'm always just pushing forward, so while there were years where I was down I was far from out. But I never got fully beat down, but it's because I'm simple, not because I was more reflective. But for those who are more complex in character, I think it would be hard to power through the understanding that your primary traits are strengths, especially if they are counter societal norms/expectations.
I REALLY TRY NOT TO BULLSHIT WHEN I WRITE- THAT'S TOUGH TO DO LOL
This community is composed of special guys in many stages of their lives. Over the years I've shared, and lately, over the last couple of months since my last point, I have tried to think of things to write, but I feel as though what I write is too complex to be understood or else, I think what the fuck am I writing - like that it's a bit of bullshit because it's forced. So, I wanted to share this, not because I needed to write, but I wanted to write something to share.
gallupstrengthscenter.com
this is the link,
It's 15 bucks for the test, the top 5 is all you need,
don't do the entrepreneurial test, its total bullshit. I guess they needed to add in that content for extra profits lol.
ABOUT ME
But if you're interested in my strengths,
well, I won't share em,
lol,
but if you can take the test or convince your parents to let you,
I think it's the best 15 bucks I ever spent on a test,
and another great thing was - that when I actually discussed the results with another person who has taken it, that, I got really another level out of it. So its good value at least for discussing shit. lol.
So anyway, good luck guys. I hope, this if you have the chance, helps you as it helped me. ^^
ps. If you read through my blogs, I'm sure if you read through the 32 traits you could pick most of them out, that is how simple I am, but I'll share if we make a discussion out of this. ^^
|
I think you can get to maybe 75% potential only increasing your strengths, but if you don't minimize your weaknesses you will never reach 100%.
The easiest analogy is probably sport. Say you are an MMA fight and you are naturally gifted striker. So you learn boxing, kickboxing, maybe tkd or karate... what do you do when you are taken down by a grappler or wrestler? No chance at all.
If you play chess and you play in the romantic style, you will always struggle against defensive players.
There are a million examples like that.
It's probably like this:
strengths: 75%
fixing weakness: 25%
perfecting strengths: 10%
sum: 110% you are officially a god in whatever you're doing.
|
Just curious but what do you do? I really liked reading your last few blogs and was wondering what kind of job experience you had to write all these blogs.
|
Enjoyed this blog, as always. I'll definitely be thinking about these things throughout my life going forward.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 06 2016 04:32 Thaniri wrote:
I think you can get to maybe 75% potential only increasing your strengths, but if you don't minimize your weaknesses you will never reach 100%.
The easiest analogy is probably sport. Say you are an MMA fight and you are naturally gifted striker. So you learn boxing, kickboxing, maybe tkd or karate... what do you do when you are taken down by a grappler or wrestler? No chance at all.
If you play chess and you play in the romantic style, you will always struggle against defensive players.
There are a million examples like that.
It's probably like this:
strengths: 75%
fixing weakness: 25%
perfecting strengths: 10%
sum: 110% you are officially a god in whatever you're doing.
I think 3 points to consider here.
1. The level of analysis of the trait (strength or weakness)
2. Time vs results
3. What is 100% and your potential vs What is achievement
1. The level of analysis of the trait (strength or weakness)
What this test or what I'm talking about is not related to amassing the right knowledge or learning the right skills, it is about one's approach in dealing with problems, gaining achievement, or processing information. We all do it in different ways, we all express ourselves in different ways, but rather then do it the way that we consider the 'standard way' or behave the 'standard way' we should understand what our primary traits are first and maximize those.
You're analogy about MMA is a level of analysis below this - in that - you're talking about a type of skill or technique to learn or knowledge to utilize i.e. the right knowledge and a comprehensive skill set and adaptability to compete.
Of course you need to cover all your bases, because you're in a specific competition, but this is a level of analysis that is irrelevant to the discussion and point I'm making. Let me even go one step further, in the extreme to your point.
A person is a very skilled knife fighter, but the competition is a gun fight, well, their talents are here useless if they don't have a gun or the skill with a gun, especially if it was a 30 paces gun duel. There is no argument here, because the skill set is dictated by the nature and rules and confines of the competition.
This is not up for debate, if you don't have the right skill set, then you can't win. This is not a weakness, this is a requirement to compete.
But lets take the level of analysis one level up, to the primary trait of how you learn or approach a problem. Then this discussion is not tied to winning a specific game, or gaining a specific achievement, rather a self discovery of how you yourself can best approach and address a problem to have the maximum contribution to achieve or contribute.
This then leads one to see each game or competition as just another game or competition in relation to you rather, you fitting into that.
To go back to the MMA analogy,
Say you are gifted at striking.
Why are you gifted at striking, what are the primary traits that made you more gifted at striking, and not the striking itself - as that is 'just' knowledge and skill opposed to the traits that made you pick it up so well. -
Is it because of your sense of distance,
is it because of your fast hand speed,
is it because of your sense of anticipation?
Perhaps if you recognized the core traits, and maximized that, maybe MMA isn't the place you should be, maybe it should be tennis or to stay a kickboxer or boxer. But those traits may or may not translate well into the other skill sets of MMA. But at least you have awareness of this.
But my point is,
you play any competition, you need the minimum skill set for success,
but if your primary attributes will not fulfill those minimum skill sets,
then maybe you're in the wrong game, and there is some other game
which is equally as hard and rewarding that does suit you.
On an even more macro example,
university isn't for everyone,
or rote learning,
or classroom learning,
do we stick with it and try to adapt to it,
or is it better to learn in a different environment that actually suits our primary traits.
I think an example in the book was a mother took her daughter to the doctor because she simply could not sit still and go through school without getting into trouble. And the doctor saw the daughter in the waiting area and he said to the mother, you're daughter is not ill, but she is talented in another way, let her take dancing classes, - and that girl ended up being one of the premier American ballerinas and choreographers.
My point on it is, I don't want to get into a discussion on skill sets, I think it's obvious what the answers are, maximize every skill set that is required for the task at hand. i.e. MMA, learn all the disciplines in unison, High School, be good at memorizing and test taking, etc.
The question is, is it worth it to do so, when there are other games/competitions/contexts that are more suited to the strength of your primary traits.
2. Time vs results
Lets use an appropriate analogy here- at the level of analysis that I'm taking about-, instead of MMA or Chess, lets say, your life and how you process information.
Say you suck at memorizing, Say you're much more a logical thinker.
Should spend your time improving your memory,
or Should you use your logical ability to be able to reconstruct the flow of facts?
One of my mentors, who is considered one of the top, if not the top, stock market contrarian analyst in Korea, in the field of tech, has an absolutely shitty memory. If you were to ask him, what did he eat yesterday, he wouldn't have a clue. If you were to ask him what he did 3 weeks ago, he wouldn't have a clue- as most of us wouldn't.
But if you gave him 5 mins, he could tell you what he did 3 weeks ago because he would be able to reconstruct a chain of events from a point where he knows something happened and logically back track to that day.
His ability to logically connect points, for the most part give the same results as someone who has an amazing memory.
We tend to look at a 'set of primary traits' and say, these are the traits I need to be successful, and I'm going to try develop them, when in fact, should you do so, instead of maximizing your own primary traits, the time spent to just become 'average' would have given you far more results express through developing your primary traits.
Again, I'm not talking about skill sets, but how your use your primary traits to express those skill sets, is where the time should be spent for the maximum results. In the real world, and whatever I talk about is about the real world, you need to perform and you need to be efficient, it's all well and good to say, you need to cover your weakness, - and I agree, you need to cover your weak skill sets so they aren't a deficit, the maximum they will give you is to just be average, the knock out comes from the maximized strength. i.e. achievement.
Example:
I do work in China now, a lot. But I don't speak a lick of Mandarin. But the keys to doing business in China and the skill set I need is to speak and read write mandarin. So lets say I take the most obvious route. I don't know mandarin, so at the age of 40+ I'll start learning it. Which at my age, at best I'll be an average speaker and still need translators.
Or based on my strengths of why I got the contracts in China, I:
1. make sure all the contracts are dealing with international businesses in China, so there is the onus for the other party to also engage in English,
2. I've set it up that I have 3 translators for specific areas, 1 translator for high level talks, 1 translator for documents and paper work, 1 translator for minor day to day details.
3. While I can't speak Mandarin, I'm very familiar with Chinese business culture but even so, I know how not to make a faux pas, not being able to speak directly is major obstacle to discussions, so I tend to make every meeting as informal as possible so we can keep the pace low and keep all operational meetings at a lower level. Meaning just a few key decisions need to be made when I'm there.
And what primary strength is this working from? To compensate for the lack of Mandarin, I have created a framework that does the purpose of me being able to speak Mandarin, while also other benefits of dictating the flow of meetings and topics. That is part of my strategic primary trait, which I've used to create a framework right away to address the issue of me doing more long term business in China, opposed to getting a single translator and learning mandarin. I recognized that this is a major issue and I tackled as such by putting a significant amount of resources behind it so that my lack of Mandarin wasn't a hindrance but in some ways a plus. Business won't wait for me to learn Mandarin, but of course I am learning it on the side, but I'm engaging that necessary skill set from a weakness but my strength.
3. What is 100% and your potential vs What is achievement
Again, context, 100% to be the best in a game? or be constantly developing in life to develop the traits that make you, and focusing on that to be the best combination of your strengths and then playing from those strengths to adapt to the context but to also make some macro life choices.
I think, it is necessary to make goals to be the best in what you do, to be the winner and 'the boss', I think it is necessary to have the right skill sets to play the game, but if we're really talking about fulfilling one's potential, that doesn't rest in any comparison to anyone else and it's not a game where someone crowns you the winner.
It's a matter that you are at peace in your own skin, that you feel you're acting from a position of power and you're truly happy in the choices you make and understand and can realize where you need to improve or lack and to compensate by getting the right skill set, but also maximizing your own primary traits and that also come with a macro sense of picking your battles to win the war.
One thing that always gets me is that,
no matter how great all of our achievements are, we'll all be lucky if we're even a footnote the history books 100 years from now, or even a footnote of a footnote 200 years from now. The mark we make really isn't the point at all, achievement for what? But achievement for the now, in how we live the life to the fullest by understanding ourselves and utilizing our limited time in the best way, well I don't think there is more to ask or want, when it comes to achieving something on our own terms that fulfills us.
|
Understood. The takeaway would be learning your problem solving style strengths, more so than your personality strengths. Sort of like how people do polls to see their learning style.
|
"THAT THIS FLAW CAN'T BE A POSITIVE
That I'm not humble enough, I'm not modest enough, I'm too arrogant, I'm not listening, my pride blind me, and if everyone tells you every day this from every angle, and yet, you still fall back into it, and if that pride, arrogance and blindness is also responsible for your greatest achievements, how am I to give that part of myself up without giving up on myself?
We I didn't, I didn't give up on my pride, my fight, my arrogance, I am embraced it along with a bit of self-hate, self-disgust and self-judgement, that I wasn't good enough to achieve without it and self proclaiming first that I was going to speak and I was going to be an asshole about it, but that wasn't going to stop me from saying what I needed to say. Driven by pride, blinded by pride, embarrassed by it as well. "
You're not humble/modest enough? But you say right after this that you kept your self-hating and self-judging characteristic side with you!
This blog (the sheer amount you write in these blogs!), and the countless others I've read.
The test you just did, the talking you do with others.
You may be a huge arrogant business-dominating juggernaut; but I can clearly see that you've developed your modesty, self introspection and humility to astonishing heights also.
There is only two actions we can take in life; to command, and to obey. It seems to me that both traits have grown in you to enormous proportions and your soul has grown very deep. God and the Devil have fought and reconciled constantly in you and it has resulted in an amazing individual. You are a true inspiration and I hope one day you get to teach people and give life equal to the amount you've taken and slayed through your awesome brutality 
Nice blog! 32/5! (or was it 34, you said two different numbers )
EDIT: and just btw that newb who said 'unfortunately I'm not surprised' sounds like a condescending and insecure asshole. He is just jealous that you can teach better than him lol don't take no shit from him
|
i like the Peter Drucker approach to dealing with strengths and weaknesses.
|
EDIT: I am curious about finding out my stronger traits and improving them!
I haven't taken the test (yet?) but focusing on strengths of who I am is something I've been trying to do recently. I just changed my CV and cover letters to spotlight a lot more of my work & volunteer experience (promotion to lower management and training) instead of education (year 5 of a 4 year engineering degree!). I also aimed a little higher with my internship applications and now have an interview on Friday for a "summer lead". Wish me luck 
|
Great blog again!
I haven't taken the test yet, but am very tempted. I have taken so little test in my life so I don't really know what kind of test is this.
Is it written / quiz like test? What if I kind of "mess" up during the test? Do I get 5 strengths that are totally different to what I'm supposed to have? What is the accuracy of the test?
I've been trying to figure out more traits of myself lately, by doing this I guess I can really see my strengths / weaknesses and apply this to wherever field I can be in.
Actually now that you mention it and looking back, you hit right in the spot. There are countless instances while growing up where I'd get shut countless of times if I go too contrarian to society standards, and it feels almost as if growing up blind, confused, flawed and doubting myself if I try to be more like me.
By knowing more about myself and my true strengths, I can potentially grow more as a person? That's what I'm starting to believe...
|
United States22883 Posts
On April 06 2016 04:32 Thaniri wrote:
I think you can get to maybe 75% potential only increasing your strengths, but if you don't minimize your weaknesses you will never reach 100%.
The easiest analogy is probably sport. Say you are an MMA fight and you are naturally gifted striker. So you learn boxing, kickboxing, maybe tkd or karate... what do you do when you are taken down by a grappler or wrestler? No chance at all.
If you play chess and you play in the romantic style, you will always struggle against defensive players.
There are a million examples like that.
It's probably like this:
strengths: 75%
fixing weakness: 25%
perfecting strengths: 10%
sum: 110% you are officially a god in whatever you're doing.
The point is that you don't have to do everything or attempt to be a well rounded "god."
Most of the posts in this blog make me want to throw up, however, Strength Finders is a solid test with a very strong track record. At the very least, most young professionals should take it because it's excellent for networking and likely anyone you meet in a Fortune 100/500 company has taken it. That also means that a lot of companies will pay for you to take it.
It's particularly helpful to know when forming teams, because you want a mix of traits and thinking styles. Again, the goal isn't simply to audit yourself so you know what to work on - it's to help you understand how you think and how it differs from others. There's like 30+ traits from the test, so there's no way to emphasize everything. You want to understand what you're best at, so that you can better pick projects/goals that align with your way of thinking. Basically, it helps you frame your own career and decisions.
And yes, your strengths will change over time.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 06 2016 08:09 iSometric wrote:
Just curious but what do you do? I really liked reading your last few blogs and was wondering what kind of job experience you had to write all these blogs.
gov't technology negotiator
senior management consultant
regional director of multinational
and have been running own consulting firm & business for 6 years now
I say I suck at the running the own company part though lol.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 06 2016 13:04 Thaniri wrote:
Understood. The takeaway would be learning your problem solving style strengths, more so than your personality strengths. Sort of like how people do polls to see their learning style.
^^
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 06 2016 14:12 firehand101 wrote:Show nested quote +"THAT THIS FLAW CAN'T BE A POSITIVE
That I'm not humble enough, I'm not modest enough, I'm too arrogant, I'm not listening, my pride blind me, and if everyone tells you every day this from every angle, and yet, you still fall back into it, and if that pride, arrogance and blindness is also responsible for your greatest achievements, how am I to give that part of myself up without giving up on myself?
We I didn't, I didn't give up on my pride, my fight, my arrogance, I am embraced it along with a bit of self-hate, self-disgust and self-judgement, that I wasn't good enough to achieve without it and self proclaiming first that I was going to speak and I was going to be an asshole about it, but that wasn't going to stop me from saying what I needed to say. Driven by pride, blinded by pride, embarrassed by it as well. " You're not humble/modest enough? But you say right after this that you kept your self-hating and self-judging characteristic side with you! This blog (the sheer amount you write in these blogs!), and the countless others I've read. The test you just did, the talking you do with others. You may be a huge arrogant business-dominating juggernaut; but I can clearly see that you've developed your modesty, self introspection and humility to astonishing heights also. There is only two actions we can take in life; to command, and to obey. It seems to me that both traits have grown in you to enormous proportions and your soul has grown very deep. God and the Devil have fought and reconciled constantly in you and it has resulted in an amazing individual. You are a true inspiration and I hope one day you get to teach people and give life equal to the amount you've taken and slayed through your awesome brutality Nice blog! 32/5! (or was it 34, you said two different numbers ) EDIT: and just btw that newb who said 'unfortunately I'm not surprised' sounds like a condescending and insecure asshole. He is just jealous that you can teach better than him lol don't take no shit from him
Thanks! It's a bit embarrassing to read this kind of reply, but ...I'll take it any day over Jibba saying he throws up most times after reading my blog content! LOL. Hey, I got a job to do, and that is to crush!
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 06 2016 15:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
i like the Peter Drucker approach to dealing with strengths and weaknesses.
I cried on the day that Peter Drucker died. I would have loved to have met him in person more than any other person I know of that has lived in the same period of me.
As to his approach to dealing with strengths and weaknesses, I don't think that was a specific focus in the way I'm putting it forward, if you're referring to it in the context of the 'knowledge workers' or competition, but your post is a bit vague to pin point what you're actually referencing and I've been reading Drucker for nearly a couple of decades.
Can you expand?
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 06 2016 21:43 y0su wrote:EDIT: I am curious about finding out my stronger traits and improving them! I haven't taken the test (yet?) but focusing on strengths of who I am is something I've been trying to do recently. I just changed my CV and cover letters to spotlight a lot more of my work & volunteer experience (promotion to lower management and training) instead of education (year 5 of a 4 year engineering degree!). I also aimed a little higher with my internship applications and now have an interview on Friday for a "summer lead". Wish me luck
Sounds solid & good luck!
I urge you, if you have the time to take it. It will be worth it I'm sure. ^^
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 07 2016 01:44 Nerios wrote:
Great blog again!
I haven't taken the test yet, but am very tempted. I have taken so little test in my life so I don't really know what kind of test is this.
Is it written / quiz like test? What if I kind of "mess" up during the test? Do I get 5 strengths that are totally different to what I'm supposed to have? What is the accuracy of the test?
I've been trying to figure out more traits of myself lately, by doing this I guess I can really see my strengths / weaknesses and apply this to wherever field I can be in.
Actually now that you mention it and looking back, you hit right in the spot. There are countless instances while growing up where I'd get shut countless of times if I go too contrarian to society standards, and it feels almost as if growing up blind, confused, flawed and doubting myself if I try to be more like me.
By knowing more about myself and my true strengths, I can potentially grow more as a person? That's what I'm starting to believe...
Multiple choice
In my case very very accurate,
I could have predicted some of the 'strengths, but mind blow from the angle of the description of how the strength is understood as a strength rather than a balance between bad/good qualities.
for sure, anyways, a little bit more insight never hurts,
of course I took this when I was like 39, so I guess it was more confirmation for me than really life changing,
but for someone younger, I think it is a strong tool.
Take it, best 15 bucks you could invest in yourself with.
If you don't have a credit card, ask your parents to front you.
If they don't, then PM, and buy you a code. lol.
First and last offer thought lol.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
On April 07 2016 10:56 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2016 04:32 Thaniri wrote:
I think you can get to maybe 75% potential only increasing your strengths, but if you don't minimize your weaknesses you will never reach 100%.
The easiest analogy is probably sport. Say you are an MMA fight and you are naturally gifted striker. So you learn boxing, kickboxing, maybe tkd or karate... what do you do when you are taken down by a grappler or wrestler? No chance at all.
If you play chess and you play in the romantic style, you will always struggle against defensive players.
There are a million examples like that.
It's probably like this:
strengths: 75%
fixing weakness: 25%
perfecting strengths: 10%
sum: 110% you are officially a god in whatever you're doing. The point is that you don't have to do everything or attempt to be a well rounded "god." Most of the posts in this blog make me want to throw up, however, Strength Finders is a solid test with a very strong track record. At the very least, most young professionals should take it because it's excellent for networking and likely anyone you meet in a Fortune 100/500 company has taken it. That also means that a lot of companies will pay for you to take it. It's particularly helpful to know when forming teams, because you want a mix of traits and thinking styles. Again, the goal isn't simply to audit yourself so you know what to work on - it's to help you understand how you think and how it differs from others. There's like 30+ traits from the test, so there's no way to emphasize everything. You want to understand what you're best at, so that you can better pick projects/goals that align with your way of thinking. Basically, it helps you frame your own career and decisions. And yes, your strengths will change over time.
Thanks for the contribution Jibba, I'm glad I didn't make you throw up this time ^^.
Surprisingly, or not, the two other people that I've spoken/shared this with, - one a US country manager Exec and the other ex-Bain director, both had 3 and 2 traits of our top 5 we all shared and our backgrounds in business are similar enough. I didn't realize the extent that this testing has become as I've been out of the current management circles.
But in terms of the team formation thing - I can buy that diversity thing, but the idea of picking projects/goals that align with your way of thinking - I think the point is that we approach it all differently, not better or worse, but differently. We all have similar goals or have to do what is in front of us, but the instead of doing it the 'one way', but rather in a way that maximizes/complements how our strengths operate, I think that's the real take away.
Why I say that is that application was the same line of reasoning when MyerBriggs was all the rage, but again, I think there are limitations when it comes to it, beyond basic team set up.
|
Was this the Tom Rath Strengths Finder?
|
On April 07 2016 19:16 MightyAtom wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2016 15:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
i like the Peter Drucker approach to dealing with strengths and weaknesses. I cried on the day that Peter Drucker died. I would have loved to have met him in person more than any other person I know of that has lived in the same period of me. As to his approach to dealing with strengths and weaknesses, I don't think that was a specific focus in the way I'm putting it forward, if you're referring to it in the context of the 'knowledge workers' or competition, but your post is a bit vague to pin point what you're actually referencing and I've been reading Drucker for nearly a couple of decades. Can you expand?
imo, Drucker was great man. like you.i wish i met him in person.
basically, Drucker's approach to employee recruitment and development is to leverage their personal strengths for everything you can and ignore their weaknesses. This rule goes out the window for an employee displaying a lack of ethics and personal integrity. If the guy's weakness involves lying and fraud he has to go no matter how good his strengths are in other areas.
On April 07 2016 19:16 MightyAtom wrote:
your post is a bit vague to pin point what you're actually referencing and I've been reading Drucker for nearly a couple of decades.
you probably know more about Drucker's work than i do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
