Career Connection: Building your professional future |
“Strengths-based” leadership seminars have become very popular. These professional training events are mostly based on the popular 2007 business bestseller “StrengthsFinder,” by Tom Rath (Gallup Press). Readers of the book are provided with an access code that allows them to take an online assessment that reveals and classifies their strengths across 34 broad themes.
Is it important that we know our strengths? Most of us would wholeheartedly agree. Your strengths largely determine the activities you find enjoyable and where you feel you can make the greatest impact or contribution. For example, if you feel at home in a highly structured environment and gravitate toward repetitive and cyclical positions such as bookkeeping, tax or financial statement preparation, you might want to be an accountant. If you’re highly curious and inquisitive and enjoy interacting with others, an auditing career might be a good fit. If you’re more creative and prefer less predictability you might prefer managerial, law enforcement or investigative positions. By combining your strengths you may position yourself as a successful Certified Fraud Examiner who could become an educator or consultant. The combinations and opportunities for integrating our strengths are varied and exciting. However, an implication of the strengths-based research is that we spend too much time lamenting over our limitations rather than celebrating our strengths. Notwithstanding the significant benefits of discovering our strengths, is that the real key to performance improvement? Are managers, mentors and peers doing us a disservice when they point out our shortfalls? Are we off track when we focus on our shortcomings? Is “deficit-oriented” thinking misguided and really the problem?
OVERLOOKING WEAKNESSES ISN'T THE PATH TO HIGHER PERFORMANCE
Another body of research suggests that overlooking one’s weaknesses or limitations to primarily focus on strengths may be good for our self-esteem, but it isn’t the path to higher performance. (See “The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance,” by K. Anders Ericsson, Ralf T. Krampe and Clemens Tesch-Römer in the July 1993 issue of Psychological Review.)
We can only speculate on why this latter research hasn’t received the same level of attention as strengths-based research. One possibility is that it just isn’t as pleasant to think about the investment required to achieve a higher level of performance. Regrettably, our culture has, in many respects, become superficial. We prefer to put a positive spin on everything we do versus critically examining where we need to improve and take action.
To some, leadership has become more about marketing than execution. And yet, research (and common sense) tells us we can only address future performance improvements by examining our limitations and shortcomings rather than patting ourselves on the back for what we may have the ability to do but haven’t yet done. Our performance is ultimately dependent on our actions rather than merely taking inventory of our potential strengths. To be clear, this important point isn’t lost in the follow-up “StrengthsFinder 2.0,” in which Rath defines a true strength as talent multiplied by investment. (See page 20 in the book.) But the investment part of the equation is often glossed over in training seminars.
TALENT IS OVERRATED
So, what is “deliberate practice” and why is it so vital to improving performance? In an equally compelling but considerably less-acclaimed 2010 book, “Talent is overrated: What really separates world-class performers from everybody else,” by Geoff Colvin (Portfolio Trade), deliberate practice necessitates that we isolate areas of our lives that need improvement and incessantly devote ourselves to developing greater levels of mastery. Much of the insightful ideas from this interesting read are derived from the previously mentioned work of Ericsson et al. The research findings suggest that those seeking exceptional performance in fraud examination, accounting and business can benefit from the deliberative practice mindset that outstanding musicians, chess players, athletes and entertainers use. How can we use the deliberative practice mindset to improve performance?
Self-regulate
Exceptional performers don’t assume everything is going well until someone tells them otherwise. They are self-disciplined, self-directed and have boundless levels of personal initiative. They are self-critical and don’t allow themselves to become complacent. Like a dedicated athlete, an extraordinary performer in fraud examination doesn’t reach higher levels of excellence by basking in his or her previous glory. High performers acknowledge their limitations. They know that there’s always room for improvement. They’re motivated not discouraged by their shortcomings.
Attention to detail
Exceptional performers acquire the ability to detect and concentrate their efforts on even slight differences in performance. They know that their minor adjustments can contribute to better outcomes and take them to the next levels. If the adjustments produce better results, they proceed to master them through deliberate practice.
Consistency
Mastery comes primarily from repetition and not from being in a state of constant change. As the philosopher Aristotle said, we are what we repeatedly do. To some, this may contradict conventional wisdom that business is always in a state of change. Yet, high performers rarely need radical change since they’re already performing at a high level. They should change incrementally and deliberately in specific areas they’ve carefully identified. Exceptional performers recognize that excessive or constant change can be their enemy. Extraordinary performers are, in effect, students of the late professor, statistician and management consultant Edwards Deming, and realize that minimizing variation is the key to being exceptional. (His work is worthy of another column.)
Embrace hard work
Unlike those who advocate that we should only do what we enjoy, many don’t find deliberate practice enjoyable. Just as an exceptional musician or athlete dedicates countless, agonizing hours to improve performance, a fraud examiner who’s seeking to improve his or her “game” must be willing to pay the price of excellence. Becoming exceptional at something is challenging and often demands enormous concentration and dedication to hard work despite our culture of instant gratification. Extraordinary results typically aren’t achieved with ordinary efforts.
Facing reality with no spin
Let’s stop the spin and face reality. For fraud examiners who seek higher levels of performance, we must appreciate that “discovering our strengths” is just a preliminary step. Reaching exceptional performance is largely dependent on systematically identifying and deliberately practicing in areas for improvement. Anyone who has passed a challenging certification exam, such as for the CFE credential, knows that we achieve success through dedicated deliberate practice not innate talent or taking inventory of our strengths. As evidence-based research has also confirmed, the deliberative practice approach truly produces lasting, outstanding results and excellence.
Nick Lebredo, Ph.D., CFE, CPA, CMA, is an associate professor of accounting at Saint Leo University near Tampa, Fla. Before entering academia, Lebredo held financial management positions in the private sector as well as federal and state government. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, he also served in the Navy as an officer.
