Strength for Weakness
Dealing a strength for a weakness makes you weaker, not stronger.
Sports fans love a trade because it allows them to determine the strength of the team they love and then fix the weaknesses. Major League Baseball fans in particular love the trading deadline. It's the professional sports version of "Fixer Upper." They constantly read about prospects in the minor leagues, then make calculated determinations that ultimately allow them to start asset managing. Most teams, as well as fans, apply a simple strategy: Trade a strength for a weakness. For example, say a team has two pitchers who have won 20 games, but its hitting is weak. Naturally, the obvious move is to trade a quality pitcher for a quality hitter — strength for weakness. However, this is a misguided move. Essentially dealing a strength for a weakness makes you weaker, not stronger.
The exchange of strength for weakness trade occurs in leadership thinking as well. When someone becomes the leader, instead of focusing on their strengths, which is the reason for the hire, they focus on being a more balanced multi-dimensional leader. Advice flows from others, reminding them not to become one dimensional, even though that one dimension was a massive part of our success and the reason for the new gig. New leaders also have "overstepping their bounds" concerns. They want to build a sense of collaboration, empowerment among new followers. Therefore, they become docile in already strong areas. There is a belief to not meddle with those working under us, allowing them to have the ability to lead without interference. The thought process is: "New leaders need to become more of an overseer, not hands-on." That thinking is the equivalent of trading a 20-win pitcher for a hitter. Now you're weaker in two areas as the strength for weakness trade never works.
We are not implying to give in to weakness and avoid improvement. We know that all great leaders work on their weaknesses, but they never sacrifice their strengths. Steve Jobs's strength was in design and development. He worked endless hours on those core areas of strength. It's common knowledge he lacked empathy, great people skills, and an ability to get along with his superiors. When he left Apple the first time, many of his weaknesses in leadership were his downfall. When he returned, he worked hard to improve in those areas, yet dedicated more time to his strengths. Jobs was relentless in his pursuit of his areas of strength. He never was trading a strength to improve a weakness.
Some might view this as lopsided leadership, which means overplaying your strength; you risk diminished results on the areas of your weakness. Not true.
You can never overdo a strength — just look at Steve Jobs.
P.S. If you are in search of a book recommendation, our team at The Daily Coach highly recommends The Meaning Revolution: The Power of Transcendent Leadership by Fred Kofman. This book claims that the biggest driver of motivation is the chance to serve a larger purpose beyond our careers and ourselves, rather than salary, benefits, bonuses, or other material incentives; companies that are able to successfully focus their people, their teams, and their culture around meaning outperform their competition.
Please forward and share this email with your friends and family.