|
Index of More Articles about Leadership
|
Articles about Leadership
Just Wait Teens™ program
by Carl LaFresnaye
The Just Wait Teens™ program has been 8 years in development. The theory behind the program is based on the research of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse. Joseph Califano, the former...
Emotional Intelligence: Why it can Matter More Than IQ by Daniel Goleman
by Prasoon Kumar
Feelings play a large role in our lives, and we recognized the fact long ago but gave little importance to understanding it since we simply could not find out more on the subject. Even those research studies...
The Intelligence of Emotions: Will the Real Definition of Emotional Intelligence Please Stand Up
by Joshua Freedman
The most recent NexusEQ Conference included delegates from over 100 disciplines and 37 nations gathered in Holland to see how emotional intelligence improves leadership. On EQ.org, more and more practitioners...
468
by
4, 6, and 8 the Reactive Temperaments
Types........................................These types react emotionally to conflicts and problems. When conflict or problems arise they look for an emotional...
|
|
The Stanford Marshmallow Experiment
In above video you will see kids participating in the Stanford Marshmallow Experiment. The Stanford Marshmallow Experiment must be the most astounding psychological study ever performed, or at any rate ranking right up there with some of the experiments done by Stanley Milgram.
Who would ever guess that a brief observation of a four-year old alone with a marshmallow would be an excellent predictor of college entrance exam scores — twice as good a predictor as IQ test scores? In one of the most amazing developmental studies ever conducted, Walter Michel of Stanford created a simple test of the ability of four year old children to control impulses and delay gratification.
Children were taken one at a time into a room with a one-way mirror. They were shown a marshmallow. The experimenter told them he had to leave and that they could have the marshmallow right then, but if they waited for the experimenter to return from an errand, they could have two marshmallows. One marshmallow was left on a table in front of them. Some children grabbed the available marshmallow within seconds of the experimenter leaving. Others waited up to twenty minutes for the experimenter to return.
In a follow-up study (Shoda, Mischel, & Peake, 1990), children were tested at 18 years of age and comparisons were made between the third of the children who grabbed the marshmallow (the "impulsive") and the third who delayed gratification in order to receive the enhanced reward ("impulse controlled").
The third of the children who were most impulsive at four years of age scored an average of 524 verbal and 528 math. The impulse controlled students who scored 610 verbal and 652 math! This astounding 210 point total score difference on the SAT was predicted on the basis of a single observation at four years of age! The 210 point difference is as large as the average differences between that of economically advantaged versus disadvantaged children and is larger than the difference between children from families with graduate degrees versus children whose parents did not finish high school!
At four years of age gobbling a marshmallow now v. waiting for two later is twice as good a predictor of later SAT scores than is IQ. Poor impulse control is also a better predictor of later delinquency than is IQ.
Obviously there's a strong correlation between IQ and impulse control. People who do well in life have lots of both, and vice versa for those who don't do well.
Sociologists have regaled us for years with their theories as to the causes of poverty: lack of education, structural causes, racism. But it seems that, at least where opportunity exists, the reason for differences in income and wealth is that the poor have high impulsivity.
|
The Just Wait Teen Program
The teenagers of the Just Wait Teen™ program are exposed to the information and research concerning their Happiness, their Temperaments, their Talents, their Attributes, their Gifts and how to maintain long term relationships. The Just Wait Teen™ program is life enhancing program, not a substance rehabilitation program. Although its' objective is to give the teens tools and understandings to reach 21 years - substance free.
This Program was developed by the Just Wait Foundation a 501 (c)(3) nonprofit corporation to prevent drug, alcohol, and tobacco problems among teenagers. The Foundation provides one-year scholarships (two semesters) at a Community College or $1000 award to teens that completes the 4 year Just Wait Teen™ Positive Youth Development Program, obtains a GED, or graduates from high school - alcohol, tobacco, and drug free. The Just Wait Foundation has arranged to use of 80 acres to raise fruit and vegetables to finance the scholarships
We offer free training for any person or group that wants to start this program in their community.
Contact Us
Copyright 2009 - 2010 & Developed by
Just Wait Teens
|
|
Strengths as Weaknesses
Sherry L. Read
Marcus Buckingham, author of such books as First, Break All The Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently and The One Thing You Need to Know...About Great Managing, Great Leading and Sustained Individual Success, argues that the best managers share one talent - the ability to find, and then utilize their employees' unique strengths. He has been quoted as saying, "The guiding principle is, 'How can I take this person's talent and turn it into performance?' That's the only way success is possible." With his book, Now, Discover Your Strengths, co-authored with Donald O. Clifton, he kicked off the latest management trend - strength-based management. By focusing on strengths in every management practice, from hiring, assignment, development, motivation and promotion, managers apply the greatest leverage to business success.
Yet, with historical practices focused on strengths and weaknesses, challenges are sure to arise. Consider the standard (and dreaded) interview question, "name your top three strengths and weaknesses". What about the typical performance review where "areas for improvement" are required? Doesn't development planning normally focus on three areas "needing improvement"? What about the contention that our greatest strength can be our greatest weaknesses?
Article to continue below-------------------------------------
Canada's Nex Top Dog (Barrie Examiner)
I t's a dog-eat-dog world for a puppy hoping for glory. The day starts early. Exercise is key to excellent body toning. Baths can last up to four hours, followed by up to two hours of nails, hair and posture...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
As the key proponent of the StrengthsFinder system from Buckingham and Clifton's book, the Gallup Management Journal touched on this topic in Probing the Dark Side of Employees' Strengths: Can their talents actually alienate colleagues and hurt your organization? They give as an example, Matt who has a top talent theme of Command. The question is whether this can result in being bossy (bad) versus decisive (good). Gallup falls back on their definition of strength "the ability to consistently produce a nearly perfect positive outcome in a specific task". If Matt is being bossy, he needs to learn to refine his talent so that it is used in a more productive fashion. In this way, a strength can't be a weakness. If not used productively, it is not a strength; though can perhaps be developed as one.
Turknett and Anderson in their article, Aggressive Leadership: When Does Strength Become Weakness? argue that aggressiveness, often considered a strength in a leader, can be a weakness when it affects interpersonal relationships. A bit confusing, since if we apply the Gallup definition, the aggressiveness wouldn't be strength since it's not consistent produces a positive outcome. Turknett and Anderson argue for learning new behaviors that channel the aggression toward positive outcomes.
Article to continue below------------------------------------
NJ Gov Off To A Strong Start; Some Say Too Strong (AP Via Yahoo! News)
There's not a lot that's small about New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. He is a big man with a big personality and a big problem — namely, closing a nearly $11 billion deficit in a state whose residents...
Personality Test: Artist Kathleen Zimbicki (Pittsburgh Tribune-Review)
Kathleen Zimbicki of Collier Township is president of the Associated Artists of Pittsburgh, which is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year with more than 70 exhibits in museums, galleries and other...
------------------------------------------------------------------
In a blog posting titled Are Your Strengths Under Control the theory suggested is that no one has weaknesses - they are merely strengths carried to an excess. In these examples, aggression carried to an extreme leads to bullying. Posited as an approach to having performance reviews with marginal employees, this could be the "softer, gentler" approach to the needed development discussion. When a manager says to you, "you're so good at this, it's a problem" I wonder whether the message is received better?
Chris Rodgers of informal coalitions agrees that strengths can be carried to an excess, with the resulting behavior being a problem. He disagrees with the assertion that there are no weaknesses, believing that this leads to a denial of weaknesses and a tendency toward mediocrity. He argues that we need to own our strengths and our weaknesses. With our weaknesses acknowledged, we should work to ensure that our "unavoidable weaknesses" are expressed in the most positive way possible and in support of our strengths.
Gallup recommends that we help people understand their nature patterns so they can be applied in a positive and productive way; therefore, strengths cannot be weaknesses. Turknett and Anderson argue for coaching to build the new behaviors that channel attributes into positive interactions with others. PainFreeLearning requests that we consider whether we have a tendency to overplay any of strengths. Chris Rodgers asks that we manage our "warts and all".
It is intriguing to me that none of these articles speaks to the interaction of the behavior or attribute with the environment. A strength is neither good nor bad. A weakness is neither good nor bad. The only legitimate question is perhaps alluded to in the definition Gallup gives for a strength, "do the behaviors result in a positive outcome in the context in which they are used?" The commanding presence of Matt may be bullying in a small collaborative high tech company; it may be appropriately decisive in a privately held Chinese company. Without context, without measurable outcomes, the behaviors are neither strengths, nor weaknesses. Perhaps the focus should not be on whether there are strengths and weaknesses, but rather which behaviors are most appropriate when hiring, promoting, developing and motivating staff to support the desired business outcomes in the particular environment.
Are your strengths weaknesses? What could you alter about the behavior or context that would change your answer?
Sherry Read, principal of Read Solutions Group, works with individuals seeking greater success in their work and lives. As a coach based in Shanghai, Sherry listens, counsels and helps find solutions to challenges in the workplace, boss relationship, living up to job expectations and work life balance. More about her services can be found at www.ReadSolutionsGroup.com
Index of Articles about Temperaments & Strengths
|