Extreme Work Styles – [Talent Profile]
When you get your Talent Profile, you need to read all the way through it once and then go back and focus on one section at a time. To illustrate this, I am going to go over my own report with you, even the less than complimentary parts.
In a previous article, I showed my summary graphic. On this graphic, you can see that I have some extreme scores and those extremes are what I’m going to focus on today. In this case, an extreme score is a score that deviates from the ‘mean’ score of 5. If you want to know more about norm scoring, OTM has a video to help explain it in detail.
In this article, let’s see what the Talent Profile has to say about those high scores on Analyst and Strategist and the low scores on Team Player and Helper.
Richard places a heavy emphasis on facts, data, and information in all decision making. He is a
critical thinker and skeptical of arguments based on emotional statements. He dives deep into
the information, trying to learn as much as possible before moving. Richard will base his
statements and recommendations in reality and those decisions will be well supported with
rational arguments. Such a strong emphasis on making well-supported decisions will slow him
down, he will wholesale mlb jerseys work best in situations where being correct is more important than being fast.
That’s cheap mlb jerseys a very accurate description of how I think about things and I recognize this in my day-to-day behavior. I do feel it is more important to be correct than to be fast. Back in my early 20’s, I worked in a call center doing user support. I would spend time making sure the customer thoroughly understood the answers to their questions before cheap nfl jerseys getting off the line with them. This was not valued behavior. The call center was evaluated and paid according to the turn around time of the cheap nba jerseys call, faster turnarounds raised their rewards and profitability. It didn’t matter if the customer called back again and again. I was focused on being correct and doing, what I perceived to be, a good job. I was continually dinged for speed in my performance evaluations, though my customer satisfaction numbers were through the roof.
I still think that was an incorrect way to evaluate performance. It still upsets me just to think about it. I had to learn the hard way that I did not want to work in a company that valued speed over correct. Which is probably why I jumped to my next job at a bank, even though it required a Change move to another city. Hmm, I never thought about it that way before, I know I valued the stability and rationality of the banking environment (this was the mid 90’s, not the late 00’s).
All right, I’m on board with this report so far, the other high score is on the Strategist role, what does the Talent Profile say about that ‘8’ score?
Richard thinks about the long term, goals, and laying out strategic plans. He is much more
concerned with fundamental questions and issues than with practical considerations. Richard
is very quick to ask the question “Why?” and enjoys digging in to find the answers. He is good
at setting goals and finding creative ways to reach those goals, he is very much aware of the
big picture and at seeing trends. He is like a man walking around with binoculars in his eyes,
great at seeing the far horizon and less effective at seeing the next step.
This, combined with the strong Analyst score, is probably why I’m a good consultant and systems designer. The tag line on my Oakbox profile for years was “Not just answers, the correct greenhouses questions”. I can totally see this score as valid and, ironically, why I only lasted a few years at the bank. I was working in Credit Operations during the mid and late 1990’s. This was right in the middle of the Internet boom and I was seeing ways to leverage electronic communications EVERYWHERE. The bank was still centered on paper, filing it, finding it, storing it, moving it around, but all about paper. I was saying things like, “Let’s stop using fax machines and move over to electronic communications in department ‘X’”. Stagnation It took months to get anyone else to see the value in what I was proposing and the change process was going to take another 18 months. This was just one small department! Why wasn’t everyone else on board? Couldn’t they see my ideas were correct?
No. Not really. Because, while I did turn out to be correct, I was not paying attention to the due diligence and regulatory hurdles that had to be overcome whenever a change was made. [As an aside, the elimination of many of those regulatory hurdles led to the crash in 2008, so slow and Practical steady really is what you want in your banker.]
I really enjoyed asking big questions, but that’s only valuable if it is part of your job description. I can see now why I felt like the walls were starting to close in, despite the (perceived) job stability and good salary. When I had the chance to move to a smaller organization where I would have a bigger say in the direction of the company, I took it. Neat!
Richard can operate independently and actually prefers more “alone time” than most other
people. He does not spend a lot of time worrying about how people on the team are feeling, he
is focused more on his own business and personal interests. To use a sports analogy, Richard
is more comfortable competing in an individual sport rather than a team sport. This score does
not necessarily mean “socially unskilled”, it just means that he prefers to not get too involved in
the feelings and internal lives of the people he works with.
Okay, that’s not bad, at least from my perspective. Since I have a low Team Player score, that’s probably why I don’t see it as bad :) I think a person with a high score here, who enjoys being surrounded by people all day long and eating birthday cake, would probably not see it as a good way to behave. But I really do think this way, when I moved to the small company, I had my own office and could really zero in on my work without being interrupted all the time. That was a relief, especially after the cubicle farm at the bank. I didn’t have to hear all of my co-workers all the time.
I am on board with this. I used to think I was a warm and friendly person in the wholesale nfl jerseys office, but that delusion was blown away while I was still in college and managing the student radio station. I thought I was approachable and nice. My staff thought I ruled with an iron fist! I even found out that they had a nickname for me, “Ronald about Koresh”, because I was a cross between a McDonald’s manager (Ronald McDonald) and a cult leader (David Koresh), get it? That was a good lesson to learn early, that there could be a disconnect between how you perceive yourself and how others see you.
Interesting that the test was able to pick out how I really am and not how I like to think about how I am.
Richard is very direct and blunt when dealing with others. Richard does not pull his punches
when it comes to giving criticism or his opinion. Richard does not take the time to focus Influencer on the
feelings of others, to empathize. He very much prefers being direct and honest with people, to
express himself clearly to coworkers without obscuring information with tact or diplomatic
double-speak. His ability to empathize is weak, but this does make it easier for him when it
comes to making business decisions that might negatively affect others.
Again, I think this is an accurate description of me. Though, because I lack tact, I would be comfortable with it just saying, “Richard isn’t a big fat liar”. Of course, this behavior doesn’t win me any popularity contests. It’s something that I have to work on, to soften my words when it is appropriate for the situation. This will actually come up later in the report, in later articles, we’ll talk about the given advice and how easy, or hard, that advice will be to apply to my day to day work life.
The Talent Profile is available on the Octogramtest.com website.