For my CUNY leadership and innovation program we all took the Gallup Clifton Strengths Finder, over 100 questions you have to answer in a few seconds each. The test highlights five out of 34 possible strengths – divided into four quadrants that represent your “talent DNA, (…) the ways you most naturally think, feel and behave.”
I’ll spare you the suspense; here’s my talent DNA:
Intellection. Says the test: “You are introspective and appreciate intellectual discussions.”
Strategic. “Faced with any given scenario, you can quickly spot the relevant patterns and issues.”
Connectedness. “You build bridges between people and groups. You help others find meaning by looking at the bigger picture of the world around them.”
Learner. “The process of learning, rather than the outcome, excites you.”
Input. “You seek and store information.” (Basically I’m curious.)
The first and last two are all in the strategic thinking bucket. Connectedness is under relationship building. According to the test, none of my top 5 strengths are in executing or influencing.
We talked about our results and the instructor’s first question was whether this surprised me. It didn’t – I recognize myself in these. What did surprise is how quickly the other thought snuck in: so if this is what I do best, that means I suck at the rest.
*
Let’s start there: it may be the way we’re socialized (in Eastern Europe, but not only), that the moment someone recognizes a strength, we immediately think that all the others that were not mentioned must be weaknesses. Doing intellection and strategic stuff probably means my head is in the clouds, and I’m always dreaming shit up (which is true), but with no executing chops, it doesn’t get done. Thus, not good enough.
I’m still working on deprogramming this instinct because it’s a form of self-sabotage bordering on victimhood. And it takes away from the reality that all of us do some things really well, and that we should cherish them – they are our strategic advantage (per last week’s post).
But also: are these tests really saying something about who we are, or are they just – at best – a reflection of our projections and desires with the scientific value of a horoscope? (I’m a Gemini. No, I don’t think that means anything).
I guess it depends how much we want them to be true and why. Many amazing thinkers and writers have debunked personality tests and their worth, especially as they have become more and more prevalent. Chances are you took one to get a job, or you took one as part of a job evaluation, or as a training offering.
Take the most famous test (or instrument, as the company calls it), Myers-Briggs. It’s named for the two women who dreamt it up many years ago, a mother and daughter without a psychology background, just a desire to make Jungian archetypes more popular (and do some good in the process). Merve Emre is a writer and scholar I love, who actually took on the cultural phenomeon of the test and wrote that whether it’s scientifically accurate (not really) doesn’t matter. It still dominates our imagination. We want to know who we are, and a lot of us want to be an ENTJ (an extrovert who relies on intuition, thinking and judging – supposedly these are the CEOs and leaders of the world).
*
According to the Myers-Briggs, I’m an INTJ – which means an introvert who relies on intuition, thinking and judging. It’s also flatteringly called “The Architect” in some descriptions. “These thoughtful tacticians love perfecting the details of life, applying creativity and rationality to everything they do. Their inner world is often a private, complex one.” Well, thank you!
I’ve taken a bunch of other tests over the years.
On the PCM (Process Communication Model), which NASA has used to hire, I’m a Persister at heart – meaning I “experience the world through the perception of opinions, preferring to take in and process information through their belief system.” I’m also conscientious and dedicated, and will pester you to get things done. (The Persister is one of six patterns of communication.)
When I took the PCM I was also in my Harmonizer “phase”, which means that I am “compassionate, sensitive and warm, and prefer a benevolent communication style”.
I’ve taken tests that said I’m an “ideator”, and that I’m “inclusive”, or the Life Styles Inventory, which generates a circle of three colors out of which, trust me, you want as much blue as possible (blue is that great colleague, who is supportive and constructive). I have a fair amount of blue, but also more green than I wished for (those are defensive traits). The other color is red, representing all the aggressive peeps who like winning at all costs. (OK, I might have scored a tad high on “perfectionist”, which is the red part).
*
I’ve always enjoyed these tests, although many loathe them – I have friends and former colleagues that are put off simply by the idea that a test can capture who they are. Why I like them is because I never bought into the idea that they can capture a “true” you, or a you that won’t change.
I take them as a vibe check. Do I feel like the person that’s described? Does this result tell me anything about who I am, and what I’m interested in? Can it be useful?
*
Going through the CUNY test with my colleagues we realized one important thing: many of us spend the first part of our careers plugging holes, trying to raise our game in the areas where we lagged hard or soft skills. We aced some, we barely moved the needle on others. (Just watch me do spontaneity with a stranger – there’s fewer cringe dishes on the menu).
But now, when most of us are in our late thirties, or somewhere in our forties, isn’t it best to focus on the strengths, double down on them? Shouldn’t we spend less time trying to better the things that we don’t do as well?
Many of you might have learned this lesson faster; I feel I’m just starting to.
*
On Saturday I had the privilege of a few deep conversations. On self-driving cars with an AI-researcher who is working on machine learning algorithms to make detection sensors better. On how architecture can be more democratic, more fluid and playful, more of the place it’s going to occupy. On high performing athletes and the difference between passion and obsession and how to tell them apart.
These are all different and they made me tremendously happy. They also confirmed – again – the things these tests keep pointing out. I love learning new things, I’m terribly curious, I am better in private conversations than in group settings. I also like to connect ideas, build bridges, and make new things, and yes, I like to make those new things with others.
While these tests are not me, I am what they say more than I’m not.
No test has ever described me as a rebel extrovert master negotiator who woos people, for example. I envy them, but there is a limit to who I can turn myself into. Yes, we grow and change, but, in some ways, we grow and change from the same roots.
*
Whatever a test says, it’s not that strict of a box. I can be in a crowd, speak in public, walk up to strangers and chat with them. I can also execute on the things I dreamt up, focus on one thing for hours, and even sell projects. It’s just that I expend more energy doing so. Finding connections between things or coming up with new ideas from whatever I’ve read or watched or saw consumes barely any energy; on the contrary, it fires me up.
Maybe I’m late to this party, maybe you’ve already figured this out: trust in what gives you the most energy and focus on that – especially once you’ve mastered the basics. Don’t avoid what doesn’t come as easy – especially if the benefits (of any kind, from joy to a salary) are worth it –, but be mindful of the energy cost.
Also know that there are shadows to the strengths. Being a “strategic thinker” might meant you can seem cold or that you’ll always bring a frustrating amount of new ideas to the table. (Guilty). Wanting to involve others might mean you push them farther than they’re willing to go. (Guilty again). And enjoying making connections means you might write really long ass newsletters. (This is what some of you have already complained about, so yes, guilty).
Friends, enjoy your four letter types, your five strengths, your preferred colored-quadrant or whatever any other test says. It’s not destiny, don’t worry, bit it might at least be a good opportunity for reflection.
SIDE DISHES
All of the above make me a good editor. And the editor in me is proud to have worked on the stories in Ioana Burtea first collection of essays, a witty, poignant, and heartbreaking tale of growing up as a millennial Romanian. I’ll plug this book some more soon (it’s on tour this coming week, starting in Iași on Monday!), but for now just know that you can order it and be among the first to enjoy it.
Speaking of Merve Emre and test – here’s a great convo between her and Adam Grant on “intelligence as corporate control”, basically about how Myers-Briggs and company can be used to exploit.
I saw two important movies on my flight to and from New York. On the way I re-watched Before Sunrise, which remains one of my all-time favorites. It’s basically this: boy and girl meet on a train, spend a night in Vienna, will they see each other again? (Spoiler: it has now become a trilogy of movies, one of the best ever.)
Also watched She Said, the fantastic adaption of the work of two New York Times journalists to bring down abuser Harvey Weinstein and kickstart the global #metoo movement. (It’ll soon be six years since that story). In Romania you can stream the movie on Sky Showtime.
If you’re in Romania, you can still catch Arsenie. Viața de apoi. in theaters. It’s a documentary (of sorts) about the impact of monk Arsenie Boca on the local collective imagination. Let’s just say there’s a lot of it.
Good news. The National is putting out a surprise new record TONIGHT (just a few months removed from their April masterpiece). It’s called Laugh Track. Who’s coming to the Berlin show on September 30?
A long read your newsletter, but it worth it ☺️
I can complain that the newsletters are not long enough :) I have enjoyed reading your stuff since the Esquire era and found it a bit sad that you slowed down during DOR. So these newsletters are always a breath of fresh air for me. And I would definitely pay to read your stuff, either for this product or any other future project that you might come up with.