PeopleSmart in Business eBook - The Platinum Rule
PeopleSmart in Business eBook - The Platinum Rule PeopleSmart in Business eBook - The Platinum Rule
118 Five: On the Job In business, Cautious Th inkers are practical and realistic. Th ey seek neither utopias nor quick fi xes. Because of their low risk-taking tendencies, they may overplan when change becomes inevitable. Th ey like working in those existing circumstances which promote quality in products or services. When possible, they prepare ahead of time for their projects and then work diligently to perfect them to the nth degree. Th eir thorough preparation is designed to minimize the probability of errors. Th ey prefer fi nishing tasks before or on schedule without mistakes caused by last minute rushing and inadequate checking or review. Cautious Th inkers rank second only to Steady Relaters in their pursuit of logic. Th ey rely on reasoning to avoid mistakes, so they tend to check, recheck, and check again. But they may become mired down with data collection. Amassing facts and specifi cs, they are uncomfortable with giving opinions or partial information until they’ve exhausted all their resources. Th is can frustrate people who want to know what’s going on now, the types with faster paces. Additionally, all that checking can result in a disruption of the workfl ow. Th ey can benefi t from checking only the critical things rather than everything. Th is procedure allows them to sort out and control the important details, and still get things done well. Th ey can hold onto their high standards without becoming bogged down in relatively trivial business details. Cautious Th inkers need to learn to accept that perfection is an impossible quest, worth the eff ort in some instances, but not in others. Cautious Thinkers prefer the “right” way When airline pilots prepare to fl y a commercial plane, they have a checklist of safety points before take-off . Cautious Th inker pilots have been found to focus far more on the most critical factors, using the remaining time to review the less crucial ones. In their typical Cautious
Th inker style, they complete the checklist the right way, by checking known factors against unknown variables. By contrast, Dominant Director pilots have been known to delegate this duty to someone else. With this, they then see to it that the task gets done their way. Interacting Socializer pilots have been observed getting off task by talking to co-workers they see during this process. Th en they may wait till the last minute, due to their diffi culty in assessing the amount of time needed to complete such detailed tasks. Steady Relaters go through each point, in the listed order, completing it in a step-by-step way, but without the same rigorous attention paid to those most critical items that the Cautious Th inker pilot scrutinizes. Although all four types fi nish the checklist, they have completed this task quite diff erently—according to their diff erent work styles—and with the possibility of diff erent outcomes as a result of their diff erent approaches to the same task. Old questions, new answers Whether or not this type opts for a scientifi c or artistic career, they often follow a scientifi c method or intuitive, logical progression to achieve their objectives. Because of their natural inclination to validate and improve upon accepted processes, Cautious Th inkers tend to generate the most native creativity of the four types. Consequently, they oft en fi nd new ways of viewing old questions, concerns, and opportunities. Many artists and inventors fall into the Cautious Th inker category, many leaning toward experimentation and the possibility of coming up with new answers. Just as Michelangelo’s creative mind envisioned completed sculptures entrapped in a solid piece of marble, Leonardo da Vinci perfected the Mona Lisa’s expression in such a manner that its meaning still evades contemporary experts. Similarly, Galileo’s creativity formulated precisely detailed plans of “impossible” futuristic inventions. 119
- Page 85 and 86: tive and logical alternative for so
- Page 87 and 88: If the shoe fi ts Th e dimensions t
- Page 89: DAILY EXAMPLES OF THE FOUR STYLES S
- Page 92 and 93: 74 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 94 and 95: 76 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 96 and 97: 78 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 98 and 99: 80 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 100 and 101: 82 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 102 and 103: 84 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 104 and 105: 86 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 106 and 107: 88 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 108: 90 Four: Creating Personal Power Th
- Page 112 and 113: 94 Five: On the Job Dominant Direct
- Page 114 and 115: 96 Five: On the Job never buys gree
- Page 116 and 117: 98 Five: On the Job From bus excurs
- Page 118 and 119: 100 Five: On the Job pecially, brin
- Page 120 and 121: 102 Five: On the Job • Implement
- Page 122 and 123: 104 Five: On the Job Non-Interactin
- Page 124 and 125: 106 Five: On the Job What do Intera
- Page 126 and 127: 108 Five: On the Job task and take
- Page 128 and 129: 110 Five: On the Job • Librarian
- Page 130 and 131: 112 Five: On the Job others, follow
- Page 132 and 133: 114 Five: On the Job Steady Relater
- Page 134 and 135: 116 Five: On the Job • Dislike ta
- Page 138 and 139: 120 Five: On the Job C leaders Caut
- Page 140 and 141: 122 Five: On the Job may make it a
- Page 142: 124 Five: On the Job • Work with
- Page 146 and 147: 128 Six: Leadership Styles Th e dif
- Page 148 and 149: 130 Six: Leadership Styles staff me
- Page 150 and 151: 132 Six: Leadership Styles the same
- Page 152 and 153: 134 Six: Leadership Styles person w
- Page 154 and 155: 136 Six: Leadership Styles boring s
- Page 156 and 157: 138 Six: Leadership Styles clinch t
- Page 158 and 159: 140 Six: Leadership Styles Making d
- Page 160 and 161: 142 Six: Leadership Styles between
- Page 162 and 163: 144 Six: Leadership Styles do that,
- Page 164 and 165: 146 Six: Leadership Styles how to i
- Page 166 and 167: 148 Six: Leadership Styles Action P
- Page 168 and 169: 150 Six: Leadership Styles sanitary
- Page 170 and 171: 152 Six: Leadership Styles what the
- Page 172 and 173: 154 Six: Leadership Styles Action P
- Page 175 and 176: Chapter 7 Selling and Servicing wit
- Page 177 and 178: salesperson and prospect have worke
- Page 179 and 180: #2—studying D’s needs To head o
- Page 181 and 182: ecome so preoccupied with other bus
- Page 183 and 184: How to Sell Your Product or Service
- Page 185 and 186: about the favorable impact or conse
118<br />
Five: On the Job<br />
In bus<strong>in</strong>ess, Cautious Th <strong>in</strong>kers are practical and realistic. Th ey seek<br />
neither utopias nor quick fi xes. Because of their low risk-tak<strong>in</strong>g tendencies,<br />
they may overplan when change becomes <strong>in</strong>evitable. Th ey<br />
like work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> those exist<strong>in</strong>g circumstances which promote quality<br />
<strong>in</strong> products or services. When possible, they prepare ahead of time<br />
for their projects and then work diligently to perfect them to the<br />
nth degree. Th eir thorough preparation is designed to m<strong>in</strong>imize the<br />
probability of errors. Th ey prefer fi nish<strong>in</strong>g tasks before or on schedule<br />
without mistakes caused by last m<strong>in</strong>ute rush<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>in</strong>adequate<br />
check<strong>in</strong>g or review.<br />
Cautious Th <strong>in</strong>kers rank second only to Steady Relaters <strong>in</strong> their pursuit<br />
of logic. Th ey rely on reason<strong>in</strong>g to avoid mistakes, so they tend to<br />
check, recheck, and check aga<strong>in</strong>. But they may become mired down<br />
with data collection. Amass<strong>in</strong>g facts and specifi cs, they are uncomfortable<br />
with giv<strong>in</strong>g op<strong>in</strong>ions or partial <strong>in</strong>formation until they’ve<br />
exhausted all their resources. Th is can frustrate people who want to<br />
know what’s go<strong>in</strong>g on now, the types with faster paces. Additionally,<br />
all that check<strong>in</strong>g can result <strong>in</strong> a disruption of the workfl ow.<br />
Th ey can benefi t from check<strong>in</strong>g only the critical th<strong>in</strong>gs rather than<br />
everyth<strong>in</strong>g. Th is procedure allows them to sort out and control the<br />
important details, and still get th<strong>in</strong>gs done well. Th ey can hold onto<br />
their high standards without becom<strong>in</strong>g bogged down <strong>in</strong> relatively<br />
trivial bus<strong>in</strong>ess details. Cautious Th <strong>in</strong>kers need to learn to accept that<br />
perfection is an impossible quest, worth the eff ort <strong>in</strong> some <strong>in</strong>stances,<br />
but not <strong>in</strong> others.<br />
Cautious Th<strong>in</strong>kers prefer the “right” way<br />
When airl<strong>in</strong>e pilots prepare to fl y a commercial plane, they have a<br />
checklist of safety po<strong>in</strong>ts before take-off . Cautious Th <strong>in</strong>ker pilots have<br />
been found to focus far more on the most critical factors, us<strong>in</strong>g the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />
time to review the less crucial ones. In their typical Cautious