Desire-type individuals tend to overstate theories while lacking the decisiveness of practice. Their fundamental motivation lies in the pursuit of comprehensive honor, yet they tend to avoid responsibility and the acceptance of failure. They often exhibit strategic indecision, frequently changing direction, and find it difficult to maintain lasting enthusiasm for a particular idea.
In terms of personnel management, they often play the role of a nice person, always good at affirming everyone's viewpoints and proving them correct through theoretical deduction. However, when it comes time to execute, they divide and conquer, believing that everyone is good, which leads to an inability to gather strength for use, ultimately resulting in failure.
Goal-oriented individuals demonstrate a high level of execution, characterized by a clear sense of direction and strong self-discipline. They can endure temporary setbacks, dedicating themselves to finding solutions to achieve established goals. Driven by a sense of accomplishment, they continuously write chapters of success and emphasize mutually beneficial cooperative relationships.
This type of individual prioritizes the pursuit of a sense of achievement; once they lose that sense, they may not be interested even in easily achievable goals. Therefore, to enable goal-oriented talents to exert their abilities, one must understand where their sense of achievement lies, rather than naively assuming that making money is of interest to everyone; in reality, making money may be a byproduct.
Execution-type individuals possess a strong desire for challenges, and their determination to exceed goals makes them efficient problem solvers. They are good at divergent thinking, seeking innovative solutions, and strictly adhering to objective laws to ensure the effectiveness of their actions.
When we need to implement a plan, execution-type individuals are required to put it into practice; otherwise, if we use desire-type talents, they may find various excuses, ultimately leading to the plan being stillborn. Execution-type individuals enjoy the joy of doing things and dislike inefficient meetings and disputes.
Big-picture individuals, also known as self-sacrificing types, tend to prioritize collective interests over personal gains, contributing to the maximization of platform benefits. They are good at empathizing with others, possess a broad-mindedness that does not count personal gains and losses, and can accurately identify and utilize people, making them trustworthy leaders. Their altruistic thinking model enables them to always find the best solutions that seek common ground while reserving differences when solving problems.
Although big-picture individuals are suitable for leadership, in practice, we often perceive them as lacking opinions and are reluctant to let them take on leadership roles. At the same time, when it comes to personal interests, they appear non-competitive, which can lead to misunderstandings about their lack of desire to make money.
Mixed-type individuals integrate characteristics from various types, exhibiting shadows of both demand and desire types, while also possessing traits of goal-oriented, execution-oriented, and big-picture types. They may appear selfish or selfless, but in any case, they are unique individuals worth understanding deeply.
The six types of individuals mentioned above each have their own characteristics. Which type do you lean towards? Of course, I can continue to write some in-depth analyses and possible application scenarios for these six types of individuals.
So, how should these six different talents act to better reflect their self-worth?
Desire-type individuals can also become driving forces for change and innovation in certain situations. Their enthusiasm and desire for success can motivate the team to move forward, but the key lies in how to guide them to translate this enthusiasm into actual actions and results. For leaders, it is necessary to teach desire-type individuals how to set and achieve specific goals, rather than merely staying at the theoretical stage.
Goal-oriented individuals usually play key roles in enterprises; their execution ability and achievement orientation make them excellent project managers or team leaders. However, they may also overlook the emotional needs of the team or individuals due to their excessive focus on goals. Therefore, they need to learn to balance goals and emotions to establish and maintain good interpersonal relationships.
Execution-type individuals are invaluable resources in enterprises; their quick actions and problem-solving abilities can help businesses respond swiftly to various challenges. However, they may also neglect long-term planning and risk management due to their excessive focus on short-term results. Therefore, leaders need to guide them to consider long-term impacts and ensure that their actions align with the strategic goals of the enterprise.
Big-picture individuals typically hold senior leadership positions in enterprises; their vision and altruistic thinking enable them to formulate strategies that benefit the entire organization. However, they may also overlook certain specific details or the needs of individual employees due to their excessive focus on overall interests. Therefore, they need to learn to pay attention to details and individual needs while focusing on the big picture to ensure organizational harmony and stability.
Mixed-type individuals possess characteristics from multiple types, allowing them to adapt to different environments and challenges. However, they may feel confused or uneasy due to a lack of clear self-positioning. Therefore, they need to learn to recognize their strengths and weaknesses and find a development path that suits them. For leaders, it is essential to provide sufficient support and guidance to mixed-type individuals to help them achieve self-growth and development.
In summary, these six types of individuals each have their own characteristics, and each type has its unique advantages and disadvantages. Understanding the characteristics and applicable scenarios of these types of individuals can help us better collaborate and communicate with them, thereby improving work efficiency and team cohesion.
Although many people can basically understand through reading this article, they may still be unable to change in practice. This is because everyone has cognitive biases; cognitive bias refers to the belief that someone, including oneself, does not belong to a bad type. For example, if you employ someone to execute tasks, even if that person is a desire-type and not an execution-type, you may still believe that they are making excuses, attempting to change them through ideological education to become someone with excellent execution. The reason you do this is that you do not believe the other party belongs to the desire type, but rather assume they belong to the execution type, only with a slight attitude problem. This cognitive bias occurs for various reasons, but the main reason is the unwillingness to enhance self-awareness and the belief that one does not make mistakes.
Therefore, applying theoretical capabilities to practical processes remains a long and arduous task. This is because, in this process, one may need to engage in self-denial, which is difficult to achieve, especially for those who place great importance on face. If someone points this out without regard for face, it may lead to anger and further reinforce their desire to maintain their face.
Thus, all methodologies have long existed; perhaps you have read them before and found them very reasonable. However, serious problems arise when applying methodologies to practice.
Since this is a relatively common phenomenon, we have reason to believe that straightforward value is still very significant. Although many say that educating people requires subtlety, humility, and restraint, in the workplace, passively waiting to be discovered by a talent scout is a wrong decision. In fact, there is no such thing as a talent scout; opportunities and conditions are always required. At this time, those who bravely express themselves gain the advantage, while those who do not express themselves may be overlooked, even though the individuals chosen in this way may not be true talents; nonetheless, this remains a common method for selecting talents.