Monday, July 8, 2019

Maker - A Missing CliftonStrength?

I've benefited from using Clifton's StrengthsFinder method for myself and teams, and I recommend it to people who are thinking about their jobs and careers. I think the method contributes to opening up important internal and team conversations.

Nevertheless, every time I've taken the assessment and looked at my personal strengths, I've felt something missing. So I'd like to propose an additional CliftonStrengths theme that I think will resonate with others to, from what I've seen at work and in my hobbies.
Maker 
You have a natural drive to make things. What you want to make may vary -- for example, it could be a physical object, a piece of writing or software, a team, an organization, or a process. You find great satisfaction in making, which can include evaluating ideas for new things, planning how to make something, designing it, collecting inputs for it, the process and craft of making it, finishing it, sharing it with others, and observing how it is used. You probably experience making as a "flow state." After making something you feel a sense of achievement from materializing an idea, but also soon want to go on to make the next thing. The thing that was made is only partly an end in itself; the desire to make is a flywheel that keeps you going from one project to the next.
To others, the opportunity that you see to make something may not appear as valuable as it seems to you, because of how you value the act of making and the intrinsic value of the thing to be made. To your team, making something may seem merely necessary or incidental to achieving an outcome. Others might see something as "good enough" and ready to use or set aside while you still see many opportunities to improve it. 
You may find it helpful to partner with others who are focused on engaging people in the work, or as a source of ideas, or to help apply and realize the value of what was made. Using your Maker strength, you can help others execute on their ideas; they can experience a sense of participation in the result. As a leader, you can share the excitement of making something bigger together. If you work with or manage Makers, help ensure they have something to make and guide their energy toward the most valuable outcome for the team.
In thinking about this theme, I wondered why it is not already included in StrengthsFinder. I suspect it is because Donald Clifton was interested in "soft skills" that were -- and often still are -- under-recognized or undervalued in the workplace. From this perspective, making is associated more with the "hard skills" involved in a specific discipline or craft.

However, I'm pretty confident that some people are more driven Makers than others, and that the drive to make has important implications for how someone looks for opportunities, participates in a team, and gains satisfaction from their work. For example, when I reflect on and journal my own work, along with appreciating how I've helped others, I list specific things I've made as personal milestones.

With our contemporary emphasis on teams, soft skills, value, and so forth, sometimes the joy of making something, and the discovery and unexpected value that can result, can take a back seat. I've even felt guilty about proposing to make something because it seems "tactical" and not "strategic" to do so. Of course I would agree that the team and the outcomes are ultimately more important; making good use of the Makers in your team is one way to support that.

Regarding existing themes in StrengthsFinder, I see some overlap with Activator, but with the emphasis on a specific thing to be made over generally "making things happen." Related strengths could be Achiever (motivated by working on something defined), Focus (following through on the vision for something), and Intellection (thinking about something for its own sake).

Is Maker a theme you identify with too? Does this definition seem like it closes a gap in StrengthsFinder for you? I'd be curious to hear. Thanks for reading!

2 comments:

  1. I think this is true - or may be more fundamental like the Introvert vs. Extrovert facets of people. I think (at least in my experience) there are three types of people that I have worked with:
    Makers who really like building new things - I saw this in the start-up culture in SF - people who liked building the company
    Operators who really like making things run smoothly and efficiently. They aren’t so interested in making new things as they are in removing any efficiencies and speed bumps
    Producers who really like doing the same task over and over and like being good at their repetitive task.

    I tried, unsuccessfully, to move some Producers over Makers but they were not happy. They missed the deterministic rigor of the production line.
    I watched Makers build a company, an engineering group, or a product line give way and move on as their jobs became much more Operators who were supposed to keep that product line moving smoothly.

    Interesting - a different strength or a different type of personality trait?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting to see what you observed in real life, Jim. And sometimes this reflects in organization structure too -- as in, dev teams vs. operations teams. Which get siloed from each other. Which may be exacerbated by not understanding each others' personal motivations (not just difference in missions).

    One of the things I like about Clifton's model is that it's not binary or on one spectrum (introvert/extrovert); it is far-ranging list of strengths of which several stand out for each individual. But they are still quite fundamental; people can change gradually over time, but if you put someone in a role that does not match any of their current core strengths they are not likely to stick to it (as borne out by your experience).

    ReplyDelete