Strength Finder 2.0
Our company is currently doing an evaluation of our consultants and support staff using Strength Finder 2.0. I was skeptical at the beginning of this process, but I've been impressed by the results so far. We have a lot of different types of consultants within Seilevel, but we're seeing a couple different themes:
Strategic: These seem to be the people who are best at kicking off projects. These are the consultants who work best in problems of ambiguity.
Achiever: These people are driven to accomplish things every day.
Responsibility: These are the people who are generally detail oriented who feel obligation to finish tasks.
Not all of our consultants are strong on each of these, but we do find that in order for projects to be successful, we need to have all three elements present within the project team.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Strengths-Finder-20/Tom-Rath/e/9781595620156/?itm=1
Strategic: These seem to be the people who are best at kicking off projects. These are the consultants who work best in problems of ambiguity.
Achiever: These people are driven to accomplish things every day.
Responsibility: These are the people who are generally detail oriented who feel obligation to finish tasks.
Not all of our consultants are strong on each of these, but we do find that in order for projects to be successful, we need to have all three elements present within the project team.
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Strengths-Finder-20/Tom-Rath/e/9781595620156/?itm=1
Labels: Strength Finder 2.0
posted by Marc Talbot at 2/16/2009 08:30:00 AM
1 Comments:
I think this is the same one my company uses. We all get a card with our top 5 strengths and display them on our desks - we use the cards most often when we need help with a task, and are looking for someone who is good at something we're not as good at. Ex: If I think we could sell services to a particular person, a co-worker with "Woo" can be very helpful to me, if I myself have no Woo. So, making sure that a project team has some set of strengths covered by the group makes sense to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home