Learning about Strengths
I knew he wouldn't read them, so I asked to borrow the two management books on Andy's ottoman. Ironically the books explained why I borrowed them, as well as why Andy didn't want to read them.
The books were "First Break all the Rules", and "Now Discover your Strengths". The first book explains what makes for an effective team, how to measure that, and touches on 'strengths'. The second book delves into details behind the 'strengths' idea. I am not a manger. I don't plan on becoming one. Why would I be interested in these books? It is one of my strengths. Actually it's a couple of them: (links to strengths are too gallup's strengthsfinder website)
Learner, Deliberative, Input, Intellection, and Relator
These five, in this order, are my strengths according to a very cool online quiz. (You must buy the 2nd book to take the quiz. Yes, I think it is annoying too.) What do these mean? You can find out in detail at gallup's website, but I'll go ahead and paraphrase here.
Learner means I like the process of learning. I like learning for it's own sake. The usefulness of what I am learning does not matter. I just enjoy the process.
I am so much a learner it is actually difficult for me to comprehend that anyone wouldn't enjoy learning. That is why not being a manager, and having no plans on becoming one had zero impact on my desire to pick up these books. It also explains why I bought and read more than 11 guide books on art when visiting Florence.
Deliberative means I am very serious and take a great deal of care in all my decisions and activities.
This explains why, before I even broached the subject of borrowing them, I made sure Andy didn't want to read the books. It also explains why writing this takes me forever.
Input means I crave to know more, and likely collect and archive information.
This is why I bought the books after having borrowed them. I was a little disappointed in this strength, because I think learner covers this. However I did carry those 11 guide books from Florence back home to Seattle. You could be a learner and simply use the library. I still have 5 bookshelves stacked 3 deep, after selling the books I didn't 'need' to Twice Sold Tales.
Intellection means I like to think. I am introspective and like intellectual discussions.
Do I get to have any strengths that don't mean the same thing? Maybe this test would give me different results if I took it later? These questions might not be posed by 'Gary' the input learner who didn't have intellection. That could be because the lack of intellection would mean it never crosses Gary's mind. However, it might be because Gary was lucky enough to get a top 5 strength that exposed a usefully distinct aspect of his personality.
This strength explains picking up these books, rather than say "Bass Wisdom". I am introspective, and I don't like fish. These books provide a different perspective for looking at one of my favorite topics … me. In the second book, I like the section on 'Managing people with X strength' more than the section that describes the strength. The 'how to manage' section gives greater insight into the practical effect of a strength.
Relator means I enjoy working with people where I have close and strong relationships.
This strength is about my dominate style of interacting with other people. I work well in a small well knit team.
I also bought the 2nd book for my wife Shai and had her take the test as well. Shai is
Activator, Maximizer, Command, Self-assurance, and Positivity
Activator means making things happen. (Let's stop talking and do it.) (Such as selling my stuff on Ebay.)
Maximizer means enjoying the process of taking something that works and making it much, much better.
Command means having presence. People strong in command take control and make decisions.
Self-assurance means having confidence in your decisions.
Positivity means having enthusiasm that is contagious.
Seeing the set of top 5 after taking the test is very strange. I picked likely strengths for both Shai and I before taking the test. The real results were completely different from my predictions. The test did much better than I did. It's almost spooky.
The general advice is to capitalize on your strengths and attempt to avoid your weaknesses. When you have a weakness you've identified, you should not attempt to 'train it' into a strength. It's a weakness because you don't like doing it, not simply because you are bad it. Instead you should make your weakness irrelevant.
As an example, if by some amazing stroke of bad luck I suddenly became a salesman, I'd find my relative clumsiness around meeting new people to be a major disadvantage. I could 'learn' the skills necessary to meet people (particularly since learning is my top strength). However, after an amazing amount of effort I still would never be as good as someone who had Woo as their top strength. On the other hand, if in my fictional sales job was a position based on handling a small number of longtime clients with complicated and rapidly changing needs, it's likely I'd be much better than the salesman that had Woo as their top strength. In that circumstance, the weakness is irrelevant.
Marcus Buckingham gives advice in the "One thing you need to know" about how to accentuate your strengths and minimize your weaknesses without needing to actually identify them. The book has at least 3 "One things" (4 if you are married). The 4 topics are "How to be a great leader", "How to be a great manager", "How to have sustained individual success", and "How to have a happy marriage." The answer's are really good … so go buy the book.
All three books give practical advice grounded in quite a bit of data. The great thing about the strengths test is how specific it is. An ordered set of 5 out of 34 strengths is more like your personality dna. However, this does require you to piece together the implications of how your strengths inter-relate all on your own. There are to many possible combinations for them to go into any depth about combinations.
It's hard to explain just how effective these strengths are as a tool for introspection. Over the course of writing this I have grabbed a bunch of books from my book shelf. Here are three: "Sin and Syntax", "Where does the weirdness go?", and "The Fiefdom syndrome". All of these books (Input) were related to some rather esoteric point that I wanted to pull in (Intellection), but later decided was straying too much from the topic (Deliberative).
Strengths still need the skills to back them. A skillful and deliberative writer will take the time to be concise. In my case being deliberative has me rearranging sentences into other sentences that are roughly just as bad. I need to reread "Sin and Syntax" and practice getting my thoughts into print quickly. Then I can then take yet more time and be concise.