There seems to be some confusion as to what I'm all about, so I am publishing the results of a personality test that I took a while ago. Hopefully that might shed some light on where I am coming from.
I took the StrengthsFinder personality test a couple of years ago, with the following results:
SELF-ASSURANCE
People strong in the Self-assurance theme feel confident in their ability to manage their own lives. They possess an inner compass that gives them confidence that their decisions are right.
IDEATION
People strong in the Ideation theme are fascinated by ideas. They are able to find connections between seemingly disparate phenomena.
WOO
People strong in the Woo theme love the challenge of meeting new people and winning them over. They derive satisfaction from breaking the ice and making a connection with another person.
MAXIMISER
People strong in the Maximizer theme focus on strengths as a way to stimulate personal and group excellence. They seek to transform something strong into something superb.
STRATEGIC
People strong in the Strategic theme create alternative ways to proceed. Faced with any given scenario, they can quickly spot the relevant patterns and issues.
Copyright 2000 The Gallup Organization. All rights reserved. StrengthsFinder is a registered trademark of The Gallup Organization.
Silly names apart, I consider StrengthsFinder to be the best of all the many tests that to which I have been subjected (I am an MBA, so that means loads!). What's more, I have been in contact with Gallup and they have explained that while people's personalities do change a little over time, the main traits are quite constant from the age of about fifteen. The main ones (ie in my case the five 'strengths' listed above) are set for life.
What I like most about the test is that it is based on thinking that says we should concentrate on what we are good at, rather than trying to become a 'jack-of-all-trades.' In other words, the most efficient unit is not an individual, but a team of people whose skills complement one another. This runs counter to how senior managers run many of the American and British-based multinationals companies with which I have had dealing; they insist that people become skilled across a broad range of areas before they can be promoted. In the worst cases, this means that the performance of talented individuals is greatly compromised.
Surely it is better for people to concentrate on what they are naturally good at? Sure, there can be improvement in areas of particular weakness if they impede performance, but this should not be at the detriment of the job to be done, or indeed an employee’s progress in a company. I recall one department I worked in where most members of staff were extremely dissatisfied with both the responsibilities they had and the salaries they earned. To this day I am convinced that the firm in question used its ‘development program’ to limit promotion opportunities and to cap salaries. This was certainly the attitude of the Director who ran the department; his penny-pinching attitude showed in almost every decision that he took – I should point out that he was generous with his chosen ‘stars’ who seemed to be elected to this elite status according to how high they jumped when he barked at them. I didn’t stay long.
If you want to take the StrengthsFinder test, you need to buy the book, which is not particularly expensive (about £5 at Amazon.co.uk… it seems to be more expensive in the US for some reason). If you read it properly, there is an interesting section on how to work with people’s strengths, which is a lovely way of acknowledging that one’s greatest characteristics are also one’s greatest weaknesses!
/Dom
Posted by dompannell at November 23, 2004 7:45 PMInteresting CV. Are you job hunting again? Incidentally it doesnt explain your preference for women over WASPs.
Posted by: Ahmed at November 26, 2004 12:48 PMMorning Ahmed.
I'm always on the look out for new projects as the old ones finish.
I didn't say that I prefer women over WASPs. Indeed, I have worked for female WASPs and found that to be only slightly less irritating than working for their male counterparts. I do think that women (WASP or not) should play a greater role in running companies and politics.
One company type in particular that benefits from a less aggressive management style is community websites. By their nature, these require management to speak and listen to their members/customers.
This is a fundamental flaw that community sites such as Ecademy make; the current CEO told me "I don't run this business via committee so your opinions aren't helpful at all..." In other words, Ecad is not prepared to listen to its members, which is one of the reasons I choose not to be a customer any more. There are other reasons as well, but it's Christmas and I don't want to spoil it for anybody.
Posted by: Dom Pannell at December 20, 2004 12:00 PMI was just talking about this to a group yesterday. That too many people go into careers or business not suited to who they are, and this shows in the way they relate to their business or others.
I am not a mantra person but, Do What You Are, is something I find becomes more and more prevalent the more people I meet.
Dave
Posted by: Dave at February 23, 2005 2:39 PMDave,
I wholeheartedly agree with you. If you try to stick it out in a career that you are unhappy with, you're always going to have problems.
Mind you, it can take a long time for people to realise what really makes them tick, which can be a frustrating experience for all concerned - self, employer, colleagues and most of all loved ones.
/Dom
Posted by: Dom Pannell at February 23, 2005 4:00 PM