Alignment Is The New Strength

We have often embraced and accepted strengths and weaknesses as part of who we are. We recognise areas where we are more proficient, where there is room for development and areas that claim as part of our identity. A determination of strength provides us with assurance and validation, and potentially shapes our decision making and the interactions that we share.

So what determines a strength and how accurately can we identify this? There are various methods and testing that can help to provide insight into a range of areas, from aptitude through to more specific character traits that help us to determine what is considered a strength. There are also elements that we know about ourselves, perceptions of creativity, critical thinking and perseverance can become prominent. So the first step is to evaluate the difference between a strength and a skill. Confidence in public speaking can be identified as both however this is a broad context. And the perception of confidence can be different to the reality. What we are instead seeing is bravery in public speaking. But then we might not be properly acknowledging the time and effort that has been placed in developing the skill. Our view of strengths is that they are similar to talents - you either have it or you don't. But there are also times where you both have it, and don't have it. And this is where context needs to be considered, in particular the alignment of the skills and knowledge to the context.

Critical thinking and problem solving are often described in the context of strengths. However we can see that these can be limited in their application depending on experience. These skills are grown in particular contexts and the ability to transfer these to new contexts is often untested. A broad overview of these aspects might cause us to overstate the extent of how we can apply these, or we do not have enough awareness and knowledge to understand how these can be used in different contexts. Essentially, a strength can be a weakness when we lack awareness. We have seen this in the case of athletes who enjoy success in one discipline often struggle to establish themselves in the same way in another. We may find this ourselves when we take on a new role or position. Some of these are subtle, and some of these provide a greater contrast. What we can know is that the application is very different and there is no guarantee that this will transfer across.

Instead, let's consider alignment of skills and knowledge to context.

The challenge of creating a critical thinker is that this is often tied to context. For instance, I can be deemed critical in the analysis of a piece of music yet not when it comes to gameplay in football. The importance of being creative is also undermined as it needs to link to a context. A joiner demonstrates a high level of creativity through the interpretation of plans to a finished product yet may not be considered creative when considering an appropriate route for a new cycle way. These might seem obvious where it is clear the disciplines are different, however we can be tempted to consider that the results of our alignment in one area mean we are more proficient in other areas. Strengths might not be as transferable as we might assume.

Imagine you are being interviewed. There is a common question that can be asked in an interview situation, something along the lines of "describe your strengths and skills for this position". If we rephrase this as "describe the alignment of your current skills and knowledge to this position". This changes the context and will make it apparent if you can clearly identify the transfer required. Essentially, we might find a different approach that is more revealing.

Simply put, when we have a strength, it is based on past experience and achievement. When we have skills and knowledge we can better seek the future capability of this and the alignment it brings. The alignment then is focused on the application of these skills. It is more objective in describing where there might be the need for additional learning and support to better meet this alignment.

And now we can deal with the other side of this. What happens when we are asked to describe a weakness? First of all, there is a large list that we working from and identifying a specific one that is relevant is better met through the question "what skill or knowledge do you need to develop further to better align to this role?". What is revealing in this instance is the candidates understanding of the role, their alignment of skills, and what will be an advantage to develop. Context plays a large part in this and broader generalisations about strengths and weaknesses might create a false picture of what skills and knowledge are applicable. This would be the case where something that has previously been identified as a strength is not transferable in a way that is meaningful or relevant, resulting in the perception of a weakness. This can be reframed as well through the idea of developed and undeveloped. An application of skills in a specific context demonstrates a developed ability through this alignment. When we lack these skills, the default starting place of undeveloped can very easily be changed into developing. The strength doesn't then lie in what we see is a developed skill, it lies in the fact that we have the ability to learn and adapt to find the alignment that is necessary.

Alignment is the new strength. The ability and skill to recognise the role that context plays will serve each of us well. And help us to be honest about the appropriate alignment of skills and knowledge in a meaningful way.

Michael.