Strengths, Weaknesses, and Genuine Growth

I decided to take a break for the past week, enjoy my family during the Thanksgiving holiday, and return renewed.

Doing What Comes Naturally was about paying more attention to what comes easily to us. Too often we ignore our talents because it doesn't "feel" like we are working very hard.

The reason I emphasized this is because of a tendency--beginning with elementary school education--to point out the deficiencies in one's performance based upon another's perceived sense of what is important, worthwhile, and desirable. We tend to hear more about our downsides than our inherent gifts. Later on in life, organizations tend to do the same thing with gap analyses based upon competencies. That's not bad at all if the competencies are related to your desired professional development. It works better if the gap analysis is tied into agreed-upon goals. That way, you are looking at performance vs. results instead of performance vs. behaviors which may not, in fact, have anything to do with your success. My experience with a number of competencies is that they fit into a textbook, social-engineering "this is how you should be" framework that can be inaccurate and merely reflect the fad-du-jour in management.

Strengths vs. Weaknesses: It's Not An Either/Or

If you are going to be really good and really satisfied with your life's work, you need to pinpoint--and accept--your talents and strengths. I say "accept" because they may not be what you want or what you had hoped for (or what your parents, teachers, and friends believe you ought to have).

Yet in order to reach star status, you'll need to bump up your game in other areas. I like this addition from Dr. Peter Vajda:

Focusing on one's strengths alone supports one to move from good, to better to best where they "are." Focusing on one's weaknesses, potential, ares for development, etc., supports one to move the action of their life forward, beyond where "I am"....towards a deepening self-actualization, and holistic sense of growth.

It's also well to remember that one's virtues often become one's vices...as when one becomes an "expert" at some ability, skill, or talent and often becomes overbearing in the way they feel they need to manifest that talent, etc. "When all you have is a hammer..."

Here are three related examples I've seen in the past month:

1. A PowerPoint pro unwilling to teach colleagues a few tips and tricks that would help them save time and improve the quality of their visuals. The issue is not blatant selfishness--it is unwillingness to stretch a bit in order to stand in front of a small group and "teach." However, the unwillingness is perceived in some circles as "not helping the team."

2. Global manufacturing manager not initiating conversations with boss in order to keep him up-to-date. When asked "Why not?", the response was, "It's just not me."

Fact: This guy is unbelievably knowledgeable and experienced.

Fact: He is perceived that way by the boss.

Fact: The boss needs information and will not allow this to continue, even if it means getting a replacement who is not quite as experienced but is more forthcoming with information.

3. Engineer using "I am an engineer, not a people person" as an excuse not to cooperate with others whose points of view are different. His posture: "This is what I was trained to do, this is why you hired me, this is my opinion, I don't need to 'defend' it to non-engineers."

Unfortunately, this example is one that has become more common. Technical prowess has been increasingly allowed to hold hostage the most basic elements of effective organizational behavior. In this case, the individual will retain a technical role but will end up losing managerial status. He's not willing to acknowledge weaknesses which, if addressed, could put him at the level he believes he "deserves" to be.

None of these people is using their talent to move their lives forward and contribute in bigger ways to their organizations. Each is talented, yet each is choosing not to broaden the impact of their talents. They don't have to be "as good" in the areas desired by others. They need to reach what may be considered, like vitamins, a "minimum daily requirement."

A good question to ask yourself is: "What else do I need to develop in support of my strengths?"

It may only be a minimum daily requirement.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks to everyone who has been adding to this discussion:

Jackie Cameron at Jackie Cameron-Coaching and Communication

Entrepreneur Karin H. at The Kiss Business

Tom Magness, LeaderBusiness

Dr. Peter Vajda, partner at SpiritHeart

Michelle Malay Carter, consultant at Mission Minded Management

The talented Meg Bear at Talented Apps

Brain-based Dr. Ellen Weber at her new site Brain Leaders and Learners

Comments

[David Zinger]

Perhaps the strength movement was to counterbalance how much attention we have paid to weaknesses or deficiencies.

I think I side with Peter Drucker's from 1999 when he advocated such a strong focus on strength. If I am generous with my strengths I have tremendous room to grow and contribute.

I can get whole, etc. from my strengths and be more than I already am and more helpful than I already am. I disagree with Peter. I can get to towards a deepening self-actualization, and holistic sense of growth by working on my strengths.

To me, it is about limited time and energy. It would be nice to do it all, and I will leave it to others to work on their weaknesses but I have all that I need and will need with a strength focus.

Of course, this implies a broad definition of strengths that is more than a simple inventory of 5 strengths.

David

[Meg Bear]

Your #3 has been all to frequent an experience in my career, I think it highlights the idea that we need to work on those personality traits that hold us back so that they don't overshadow our strengths.

Attempting to make ourselves social when we are not or organized when we are not, is probably not the best use of effort. Smarter to attempt to gather those people who have those strengths to our team where possible.

Smoothing out our serious character flaws though, is necessary for our ultimate success (both personally and professionally).

- Meg

PS how fun that I get to claim "talented" as my own. Sw-eet. I'm sure *that* wont go to my head at all

[Mile High Pixie]

WOW! This really struck a chord with me for some reason. Teaching and being funny and quick-witted (often at the same time) come very naturally for me, and I forget how that's actually a "talent". I recently got to use those talents in an interview my office did for a potential client, and I'll be using those today during an office meeting. I have to be able to accept that sometimes, my job is to use that skill to present ideas to people, not to necessarily generate those ideas.

I'm with Meg to a certain extent. My dad used to say that being intelligent didn't mean you knew everything but that you knew where to get the info. I fyou have a weakness, like poor public speaking or "social" skills, then you find someone who "gets" you and team up with them to help you get your message out.

[Steve Roesler]

David,

Well, that's exactly my point in focusing people's attention on their strengths--to counterbalance the common approach of pointing out one's weaknesses.

There's another reason, too. I began to "get it" about 15 years ago while coaching and counseling an engineering department in transition. People were being moved around and had the chance to really stand up and say "This is what I'm good at and I love doing it." The problem? Many of the folks hadn't looked at their strengths very deeply and were caught off guard by the opportunity. So we sat down and went through a structured process of pinpointing genuine strengths as well as related skills that were already there or needed to be developed a bit more.

Smart, articulate people can perform at a satisfactory level in jobs for which they are not gifted. But they don't excel and don't get energized. After a while, organizations spit them out without pausing and asking, "Where can this person be a star?" Sometimes the answer is nowhere. But the honest question needs to be asked and pursued; it's costly to release someone and go through the process of hiring an orienting a new employee.

As for the number 5: that's where I became concerned. Our proprietary instrument identifies 73 distinct talents that fall under Communication, Relationships, and Functions as well as best-match type of organization. It's not a 15-minute process; but it's darned effective and produces results that companies and individuals are thrilled with.

[Steve Roesler]

Meg,

Bask in it:-)

The character issues are the ones that are showstoppers. Over a 30-year consulting career I've only seen one or two people let go because they actually couldn't "do the job." The rest were considered the best and the brightest--but couldn't remain due to issues of character or inability/unwillingness to play well with others.

[Steve Roesler]

MHP,

You point out an advantage of being inside of an organization: complimentary talents. If there are certain things that just aren't in your bag of tricks--and probably won't be--it's possible to pair up or team up to get 'er done.

The one area in which this doesn't work well over the span of a lifetime is the ability to present one's self effectively. I once was in an audience and someone near me said of the speaker "Who he is speaks so loudly, I can't listen to what he has to say."

This was a combination of Meg's comment on character as well as a slap at how the guy "did" himself in the conference.

[Karin H.]

Hi Steve

You gave us some wonderful examples of how 'using' (utilising?) your strengths blocks your 'growth'.
Personally I found that after truly discovering your strengths you cannot help but sharing the knowledge that comes from/with it with others. Win-win?

Karin H. (Keep It Simple Sweetheart, specially in business)

[Steve Roesler]

Well, Karin, I wasn't implying that using one's strengths blocks growth. To the contrary, they are areas on which to build and build.

The key issue here is avoiding an either/or approach. In addition to Peter's quote, I would add that I have seen students of the "Strengths Only" school of thought use it as an excuse not to develop in other areas. That doesn't negate the importance of strengths, but it does show how the human condition is more than willing to take a snippet of truth and attempt to use it incorrectly to their "advantage."

As for sharing what one has learned from strengths--keep it going!

Recent blog post: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Genuine Growth

[Chris Young]

Great post Steve! I see a lot of self-limiting beliefs in the three examples you provided towards the end of your post - especially the third example. Overcoming these self-defeating attitudes is critical to professional growth and improvement.

I've featured this post as one of my Rainmaker 'Fab Five' blog picks of the week which can be found here: http://www.maximizepossibility.com/employee_retention/2008/12/the-rainmaker-1.html

Be well Steve!