Now, Discover Your Strengths

Rating:
Summary: Frankly, Not Worth Your Time
Review: The strengths survey was interesting but didn't really tell me anything about myself that I didn't already know. Most of us know ourselves well enough to figure out what our strengths are. I suggest sitting down with a good glass of wine and give this some thought rather than wasting a little money and a bit more time sitting through this book.

Bottom line, I wouldn't bother wasting your time with this book. The basic premise is sound, focus on your strengths. The book basically spends page after page rehashing this theme but not much more.

So, think about your strengths. Are you compassionate, a competitor, a thinker, empathetic, etc.? Look for work that will utilize these strengths. Live a happier and more productive life.

There you have it.

Rating:
Summary: Pretty Good Psych -- Some Insights on People Management
Review: This book presents an interesting description of personality that describes 34 different types of strengths that a person may have. Based on measurement of these strengths (discussed below), it is possible to identify dominant strengths that help to determine personality. The focus of the book is on describing these strengths and then arguing that it is best for individuals and managers can best develop and build upon individuals' strengths. The book makes the interesting point that it is most effective trying to build on these strengths rather trying to identify and improve upon weaknesses.

A key to this book is an internet-based test that allows an individual to obtain a measurement of their top five strengths. To take this test, you log onto a specific website and type in the unique password that is printed in thte inside cover of the book. (This means you only take the test once -- your friends will need to buy the book to take the test!). The test is based on work that the Gallup Organization has done and has (according to the book) been been administered to 2 million people in a large number of different type of organizations.

Once on the site, you answer 180 questions in which you are asked to make a two-way choice as to what word better describes you, which action you would rather take, and so forth. It takes about 20-30 minutes in total to get through these, but once you do, a report is generated on screen (along with an with the same information) that lists your top five strengths and provides a description of what they are. Many of the strengths involve how you deal with people, how you process information, and how you see yourself in the world.

The book gives short descriptions of each strength and gives short (one-paragraph)write-ups from people who have the particular strength describing themselves. The book is meant to be a management tool, in that it talks about how to manage people with each of the strength in the book and make best use of these strengths.

I feel that the book is a better popular psychology book rather than a management book. Although the descriptions of strength seemed fairly clear, the discussion could have been better when it described how to manage people. It tended to be a list of "do this" without much discussion of why a manager might want to encourage an employee to do certain things or take on certain types of assignments. What the book really lacked was a description of the downside that certain strengths might bring (e.g., a person who is deliberative may seem to take a long time to do something). A better discussion of what the strengths really mean would have been helpful.

The book is well-written and taking the test is fun. Learning about one own attributes as measured by the test is helpful, both in personal and business life. It will make you think about yourself in a constructive and stimulating way. This in itself makes the book worth buying.

The book provides some good insight into how to manage individual types of people and help them develop on the job. I found it a bit weak on management from the standpoint of what an organization should do, in that it just seemed too general beyond saying figure out what everybody can do well and encourage them to do it. It may be, however, that some of this material is discussed in the book's (earlier) companion book ("First, Break All the Rules").

Rating:
Summary: Let Well-Established, Good Habits Take You Forward!
Review: This book represents three very ambitious efforts. One, it argues for a new management paradigm that builds from the psychological make-up of each person in the workplace to create the most effective combination of people and tasks. Two, the book presents a new psychological mapping scheme to capture those areas where a person will display "consistent near perfect performance in an activity." Three, the book connects you to a self-diagnosis tool that you can use on-line to see yourself in the perspective of the new mapping scheme. Most books would settle for pursing just one these goals. My hat is off to the authors for their ambition!

The concept of building companies around "desirable" pyschological profiles has been in application for some time. The Walt Disney organization uses this approach to locate people who will enjoy working in their company, and to match the person to the task they will be most focused on. More and more companies are experimenting with this approach. The evidence is that it works.

So the first argument simply takes that experience one step further by formalizing it a bit. The book has many persuasive examples of how people usually do not have jobs that use their best talents. This provides another perspective on the Peter Principle. So far so good.

Next, 34 patterns of mental habits are described based on millions of interviews over 25 years. These include achiever, activator, adaptability, analytical, arranger, belief, command, communication, competition, connectedness, context, deliberative, developer, discipline, empathy, fairness, focus, futuristic, harmony, ideation, inclusiveness, individualization, input, intellection, learner, maximizer, positivity, relator, responsibility, restorative, self-assurance, significance, strategic, and woo. You need to see the descriptions to understand what these patterns reflect.

The argument is that these labels capture patterns of thinking habits that condition behavior in any situation. I find it difficult to relate to all of the patterns because there are so many. Also, without knowing what patterns work well in a particular job, I wasn't sure how relevant they are. Connection of patterns to success needs to be shown as cause and effect in a given company before this will be totally useful.

Small companies may not be able to use this tool very well because they will never have enough people doing the same task to figure out which profile is best. Everyone working in that role may have a very inappropriate profile. You will just be picking the best of a poorly-fitting lot if you select around one of them.

Then, I took the personality test on-line. There were no surprises there for me in my top 5 patterns. I also suspect that there would be no surprises for you in putting me into these categories. You would probably have pegged me as an achiever, learner, relator, focus, input person from the fact that I read so many nonfiction books, write so many book reviews, and keep books and notes everywhere (just in case I might need them again). On the relator front, if you had noticed who I like to work with and how I work with them, you would have spotted me in a few days.

However, my actual job competence is a lot different from this. Most clients tell me that they find me most helpful to them when exposing them to new perspectives on their work that allow them to make faster progress. So, I was left wondering if the tool is strong enough to do the task of making people most effective in their work without more help. Someone might develop or be born with a great talent that has little to do with the psychological profile of how she or he likes to spend their time.

To state the opposite proposition to the ones in the book, complexity science would suggest that it is a mistake to overly organize the workplace in any way. You should have as much diversity as possible. When we leave lots of room for open space and time, people will self-organize outstanding solutions. Having people focused on tasks they love might make them less aware of what else needs to be done. Behavioral scientists would argue that learning continues throughout life, and that major new habits can be formed at any time. Old dogs can learn new tricks. Why cannot new psychological mindsets be learned as well. I suspect that they can. These kinds of counter-observations were not addressed in the book, and it would have been helpful to me if they had been.

So while I was impressed by the concept that the "great organization must not only accommodate the fact each is different; it must capitalize on these differences," I wasn't sure that the authors have the best method to get there yet.

I do recommend that you read the book and consider its messages. I suspect that its application will work best in focusing people on tasks that require great persistence and consistency in order to be effective. I am less clear on how well it will work to help people accomplish more in creative tasks. Time will tell.

I suggest that you take the test and discuss your results with someone else who has also taken the test. Ask each other what insights you got from your own results and from hearing the other person's results. That discussion should start to help you imagine ways to use these insights more effectively.

May you always "derive intrinsic satisfaction" from the activities you do!

Rating:
Summary: Looking In The Right Places
Review: I enjoyed the authors book "First Break All The Rules", and this sequal is great also. I always assumed companies built their teams on peoples strengths, but after being in the workforce I now know that most managers spend time trying to make workers something they are not. Find out what someone does well, place them in the proper position and let them do the job. Not rocket science, but I would love to work for a company that used these principles. Check out Rat Race Relaxer: Your Potential & The Maze of Life by JoAnna Carey for more workplace survival tips.

Rating:
Summary: beware of used copies
Review: An integral part of this book is the online profile. Each copy of this book comes with a unique PIN number inside the book jacket. If you buy a used copy, the PIN number may be already used, and thus will not allow you to use the online profile. However, the book is still interesting if you enjoy reading through the signature themes and guessing what your profile would have uncovered. It is also fun to read each theme and think of people you know who come to mind, and consider ways in which you can support their strengths.

I would give this book 5 stars if an unlimited number of people could use the online profile with each book purchase.

Rating:
Summary: Management, Not Psychology
Review: As a manager, perhaps one of our greatest challenges is juggling the uniqueness of our employees. It's not our job to fix them, rather it's our job to facilitate their success.

I agree with what "First, Break All the Rules" said, in that, we should seek to build the strengths of our employees rather than fix their weaknesses. But, I walked away from that book saying "ok, that was great, but how do you determine a strength or talent?"

"Now, Discover your Strengths" gives practical insights on the strengths and inate talents of people. I was impressed by this and also by the real life examples of people displaying the stregth being discussed. The disheartening thing about the test is that it only gives your top 5 strengths when it's likely that 8-10 strenths are outwardly shown (in my opinion).

Unlike other readers, I DID NOT see this and the online test as meant to be a "personality" test. Quite the contrary. I believe it accurately measures what it says it does: STRENGTHS.

I'm looking forward to applying this information to the organizations I work with.

Since my question after reading the first book (how do you determine someone's strenghts?) was answered with "Now Discover your Strenthgs", I'm guessing that if there is a third book, it will discuss what to do with your strengths now that they're discovered.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting Approach
Review: "Discover Your Strengths" is an easy to read review of the work the Gallup Organization has done in studying and defining talent, the natural tendency to perform with excellence in certain situations. The book does a great job of explaining the approach and methodology used to discover individual talents and how they become strengths (with knowledge and skill) and it does a good job of defining the 34 strengths they isolated after interviewing over 2 million people whose performance was identified as excellent.

The authors want to offer companies the language and means to implement a management system that focuses on employee strengths instead of systems that focus, as most now do, on overcoming employee weaknesses. They also want individuals to spend more time developing their talents into strengths and to look at weaknesses as something to manage but not obsess over (great chapter on just how to do that).

You're given a registration code so you can take the strengths index online yourself (only one person per code). Once you're told what your strengths are, don't expect to find out which careers you may best be suited for. The authors admit that it is not their intent to offer career guidance to individuals, but you'll still gain some interesting insights about yourself.

Rating:
Summary: A must read for professionals in any field
Review: In summary, I am in full agreement with all of the positive reviews posted here, however, I also agree with the various criticisms I have read - hopefully they will be noted by the authors and incorporated into a revised and improved next edition.

I found myself enlightened, inspired but unsatisfied after reading this book and wanted more real-life story examples and advice for how to apply the knowledge in my career and personal life. I particularly liked reading examples of how some people overcame their weaknesses with their strengths and would have liked more of this inspirational material.

I would suggest hunting around and reading the various other strengths-related books from Gallup in order to fill-in the gaps and provide other perspectives. Also, "Unique Ability" by Catherine Nomura and Julia Waller is rather complementary.


Rating:
Summary: Solid book, only suffers by comparison to its predecessor
Review: After Marcus Buckingham wrote "First, Break All the Rules," my favorite management book of all time, he was beseiged by people asking him one question. "You told us to focus on our reports strengths and our own strengths, but how do we figure out what they are?"

This book is his answer to that question. The book includes the password to a website that allows you to take a clever little test that tells you your five primary strengths (out of 25 or so) or those of your subordinates if they take the test.

In reading the book, you learn about the different attributes, what work best fits the various skill sets and how best to manage people with the various characteristics. This really is a very useful book, but Buckingham's first book was so strong that this one suffered a little bit by comparison.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting but insufficient information
Review: The main concept of the book, based on lots of research, is that it it a waste of time to work on your weaknesses; instead, focus on your strnegths--if you know them. The test you take on the computer gives you your five strength; however the terminology left me cold and wondering what to do with them and how such strenghs work together in my profession. Most of the web site and the book is aimed at management and HR people and not individuals seeking personal answers. As it goes the book is a decent start but for folks to capitalize on it, they will need another book that is more specific and with more examples than the petty few in this work.