Question:
“I enjoyed your career development column in the Feb. 3 issue of BizTimes Milwaukee. Can you expand on things you think individuals should do to maximize their potential?”
Answer:
I am happy to follow-up on my February column. In this column, I will explore the concept of “fulfilling your potential” by starting with a discussion of self-awareness, the attribute that I consider to be the keystone of individual effectiveness. Then, I will discuss self-awareness within the context of a very simple but very powerful interpersonal framework.
So, let us start with self-awareness. In Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” Polonius, the counselor to the king, observes, “To thine own self be true.” This is a very eloquent way of saying, “Don’t play games with yourself. Don’t kid yourself.” People who are true to themselves are accurate self-assessors. They know where they excel and where they struggle. They work hard to make greater use of their strengths while simultaneously trying to make their weaknesses irrelevant.
This is a very powerful success equation. By optimizing strengths, peak performers are able to do more of what they do well. By making weaknesses irrelevant, performers are not held back by the roadblock or obstacle that was in their way.
Let me be very clear on this point: the goal of working on weaknesses is to make them less noticeable or impactful. You cannot turn a weakness into a strength. If you do so, then it was not a weakness, it was an undiscovered strength. A weakness is a true weakness. The idea is to make sure the weak link in your performance chain is at least minimally strong.
Here is a personal example to drive the point home. As a kid, I played a lot of basketball. I happened to be born right-handed. No matter how long or hard I practiced, my left hand was never going to be better than or as good as my right hand. But, if my left arm and hand hung at my side, useless and ineffective, the defender could take advantage of that deficit every time! Once my left hand became minimally effective, I was free to play to my strength, my right hand, and all the things I could do with the ball with that dominant hand.
Over the past few years, it has been interesting to see the number of popular books on this topic ranging from “The Talent Code” by Daniel Coyle to “Talent is Overrated” by Geoff Colvin to “Bounce” by Matthew Syed to “Outliers” and “David and Goliath” by Malcolm Gladwell. All of these books come to one basic conclusion: the formula for peak performance is: aptitude times attitude times effort.
The best performers are feedback fanatics (they want to know how they are doing relative to specific goals) who work extremely hard and persevere with a positive attitude. They are what Vincent T. Lombardi called “PSDs,” they are poor, smart, and driven.
In order to maximize your potential, as the reader apparently aspires to do, accurate assessment is crucial. Peak performers seek exacting feedback about what they are doing well (i.e., what they should keep doing), what they are not doing well (i.e., what they should stop doing), and what they might try differently, moving forward (i.e., what they should start doing).
Many readers work in organizations where multi-level (i.e., 360-degree) feedback is the norm. Such work settings have the potential to be peak performance organizations because they offer individuals feedback about how they are doing from more than one vantage point, increasing the likelihood that the feedback is reliable and valid, especially if care is taken to build and deploy a sound measurement process.
Multi-level feedback is the undergirding for the Johari Window, a popular framework for interpersonal awareness. It contains two perspectives (self and others) and two kinds of information (known and unknown). Four outcomes are possible (open, hidden, blind, and unknown).
I encourage the reader and all others interested in maximizing their potential to ponder the implications of the Johari Window, as follows:
Open (known to self and others): What seems to be true about what I do well and what I don’t do so well? What are the common themes that I hear from others that are consistent with my own self-assessment?
Hidden (known to self, unknown to others): What am I afraid to let others see or know about me and my performance? Why do I “hold back” in these areas? What might be possible if I selectively disclose that I need help or lack confidence?
Blind (unknown to self, known to others): What might be possible if I listened to the feedback others want to share with me but I am unwilling or afraid to hear? What if I took into account their perspective without becoming defensive, frustrated, or angry?
Unknown (unknown to both self and others): Why am I spending time worrying about tomorrow or what might be? Aren’t today’s concerns sufficiently consuming? Maybe I should heed the implications of Mark Twain’s observation, “I’ve had a lot of worries in my life, most of which never happened!”
Daniel A. Schroeder, Ph.D. is president of Brookfield-based Organization Development Consultants Inc. (www.OD-Consultants.com). He can be reached at (262) 827-1901 or Dan.Schroeder@OD-Consultants.com.
