Fatal Flaws Follow Up

A few weeks ago, I wrote up my thoughts about fatal flaws. I sought some thoughts from people who are wiser than me and I want to pass on their thoughts.

What I would add is that in my experience the ability of an individual to figure this out about themselves at an early age is one of the key determinants of success and happiness.  Not just at work but in life....Here is how I sum it up for folks in college:

 1.  Work hard to find what you are good at and what you like as you move from high school to roughly your early 30's.   

2.  At the same time you are doing this try to also isolate those things you are not good at and/or truly don't enjoy. This may take a little longer as you often don't know until you see it. I think this is actually harder than the first because people naturally don't like to admit they aren't good at things and they also try to talk themselves into "liking" things they think they are supposed to like.

 

3.  Spend your mid-career understanding and refining your strengths. And to add to previous comments, if you have fatal flaws (which I believe are usually not fixable) work hard to avoid or at least minimize.

 

One caveat to all of this.  I have come to believe that there are some people (maybe many) whose biggest flaw is that of complete lack of intrapersonal aptitude.  When one doesn't critically think their own capability none of the above is useful and those people I think are the most unhappy and typically your worst case scenarios.

  

Here are some more thoughts from another person who's wiser than I am:

I struggle with framing the answer in terms of strengths, weaknesses, and fatal flaws.  If someone were to ask me, I would respond:

1.  It is always about value creation - i.e. how to maximize it - or more personally, how you can maximize your long-term contribution to the organization.

2. So the question of "do I work on a strength or a weakness" might more productively be framed as "of all the strengths you might build on or weaknesses you might attempt to improve, which one or two have the highest probability of significantly advancing your ability to contribute to the organization?"  It's a risk-adjusted return concept - some things might have high value, but may be highly unlikely I can achieve the improvement...  So I have to pick those things that, after considering probability of success, effort / cost to improve vs. value to the org, have the greatest return.

3. A moments reflection will validate the GENERAL rule that it's a lot more valuable to build on your strengths than to shore up your weaknesses (e.g. it's why we spend so much time proving out capabilities analysis as part of our vision development processes!!).

4. From time to time we all discover character or performance traits that are so sub-par relative to our environments as to present a great risk to our ability to adapt enough to survive.  Arrogance, fear of change, taking on a role we are not ready for, being in a role where the needs or comparative advantages have significantly shifted....  in such things, if we can't get to "par" -- good enough, or adequate -- in that dimension, then we will not have the opportunity to "flex" our strengths and really contribute.  Sometimes it is as easy as changing your RREs - or moving to a different role.  Sometimes it's more difficult - addressing a character flaw that up until now has been bearable, but not longer, by your team, customers, whatever.  

 

Thanks to my contributors! I appreciate your thoughts and have personally benefited from them.

To the readers, what would you say to an inexperienced employee who asked you for your thoughts on fatal flaws, comparative advantage or general early career advice? How can we help people around us find their comparative advantages?

Comments

[Andy Gillette]

I think an unstated theme from the above comments is Humility, too. Having the ability to admit "I'm not good at X" and having the interpersonal ability to be intellectually honest in identifying and addressing flaws is important.

[Ann Zerkle]

Great point, Andy. Also, I think there are elements of trust and seeking feedback. It's really hard to know strengths and weaknesses without honestly seeking. It's hard to seek, but gets easier when you trust the people around you.

[Andy Gillette]

[This is actually from Ben S, who was having tech trouble.]

Interesting. So fatal flaws are what will keep you from getting to the major leagues, per se, not so much short stop in the major leagues from first baseman.

So how does one learn their "fatal flaws"? consistent failure? hope for honest feedback from others?

I would also like a "WeaknessFinder 2.0". As much as I want to work towards my strengths I want to avoid weaknesses and knowing what they are would help with that.

Myself and a '11 Associate are in a group of guinea pigs in a new test being put together by Marcus Buckingham, still in the lab stages. Called Strength Accelerator. So far I like it.

I now see you have a new fatal flaws post which I will likely get to next week.

[staffaction]

that was actually for the other fatal flaws post but that's ok :-)

for this -

I like the first set of comments the best. Makes the most practical sense I suppose.

1. I think a good principle to keep in mind here is the importance of cross-training, as expressed in Corps Business. One shouldn't pick up and leave a job or cop an attitude simply because they aren't using a strength or their comparative advantage. Hang in there, learn from the experience.

2. Are you sure fatal flaws can't be fixed? So if someone is a poor writer can't they work on that and with much practice and determination at least reach "average"? While people may have fatal flaws I don't think they are inescapable.