Do you know your strengths and how to build on them? The next episode of the Na vlne kódu podcast is full of practical how-to’s, inspiration and aha moments. Coach and mentor Janka Turzova brings us expert insight on the topic of strengths and weaknesses and gives you tips on how to turn your natural abilities into an advantage.
Most of us are preoccupied with suppressing our weaknesses instead of developing our strengths. We are always dealing with them and talking about them as if we were trying to turn a mere stone into gold. But why do we do that when we already have the gold inside us? Strengths are not just some psychological concept. They can improve not only our work, but also our life, relationships and mood.
Why do you need to awaken this power that slumbers within you? Otherwise you may end up like someone who wants to break through the wall with a hammer, even though there is an open door next door. Listen to the interview of our HR manager Ivka Hricova and coach Janka Turzova on the topic Strengths and weaknesses: how to take advantage of what we are good at or read his transcript.
…”Na Vlne Kodu” is an IT podcast of msg life Slovakia, which regularly brings you topics from the field of psychology, HR and news from the world of IT? Listen to other episodes of the podcast Na Vlne Kodu.
Janka, please tell us more about your work. What is your superpower? Are you able to find something strong in absolutely everyone?
You said it nicely in the introduction. I’m basing it on talents, because exactly one of mine is maximizerwho sees talents in other people. And it’s natural for me to develop them further. I love to build and build on other people’s talents. It’s important for people to find what they are naturally good at and what they are good at. Like you said about banging a door with a hammer, even if there’s another one right next door and it’s open. We often don’t realize this and it holds us back, especially in work or business. We blindly copy what others are doing just because it’s a trend or it seems interesting. But if it doesn’t work for us, we start to doubt our Capabilities. But the truth is that we can do anything – if we find a way that suits us and is natural to us.
Why are strengths so important? We all have strengths and weaknesses. Why should we pay attention to our strengths?
If we only focus on what we are not good at, we will never be exceptional at it. A great example is school. I always got straight A’s. Does that mean I really excelled at something? No. If we try to be good in many areas, we dissipate our energy and fail to fully develop our natural talents and excel.
The school system teaches us to focus on the flaws and fix what is not working. When a child comes home with three A’s and one F, what is a parent’s normal reaction? We only deal with that five and look for a way to fix it – instead of supporting what the child really excels at. Of course, weaknesses are not to be ignored, but according to the Pareto Principle, we should devote 80% of our energy to what we excel at. Only in this way can we develop our true potential to the full.
If we focus solely on our weaknesses, we will never achieve excellence.
Let’s dive deeper into the strengths. Can I think of them as a superpower?
I work with the methodology Gallup-Clifton Strengthswhich defines talent as something that is completely natural to a person – the way they think, feel and react. We often don’t even realise that we do some things with ease because they come naturally to us. And that’s why we don’t appreciate them. We tend to focus on what we’re not good at instead of developing what we really excel at.
But that is where our strength lies. As we were talking before the podcast, you mentioned that you have a very strong side in communication. And that’s exactly why you’re here today, not somebody else. It’s completely natural and – I believe – comfortable for you to have this conversation.
I also have communication as a strength, so we didn’t have to spend hours preparing or stress for a week before recording. For people who don’t have that talent, it would be much more difficult to sit down here and spontaneously formulate ideas. It might take them longer to put together a coherent sentence, whereas for us it’s perfectly natural to give our words a flow.
So weaknesses are the opposite of strengths?
This is a very interesting topic. According to the Gallup methodology, we all have talents – 34 in total – but we have them in a different order. Talents that are lower in this ranking, however, do not mean that they are our weaknesses. Rather, it’s that we don’t naturally use them as effectively as those ranked higher.
The higher the talent, the easier we can “turn it on”. For example, if someone is strong in communication, it is quite natural for them to sit down and talk without preparation. Automatically, like on autopilot. However, that doesn’t mean that they are using that talent correctly or that they are actually good at it. It can happen that a person who is strong in communication jumps in others’ speech, doesn’t give space to others and needs to be heard all the time. In that case, his talent may be holding him back rather than moving him forward.
Similarly with talent of discretion. People with this strength are great at identifying risks and can “put the brakes” on impulsive colleagues. However, if they don’t get this talent right, they may constantly analyze everything, delay decisions and end up doing nothing at all because they see too many risks.
Weaknesses are therefore not only talents that we have low, but often also those that we have high, but we do not know how to work with them properly. If we don’t work on them, they can, paradoxically, hold us back more than they move us forward. For example, I only realized in hindsight that my communication may have been more of a weakness in some situations. I always felt the need to say something, even if it wasn’t entirely relevant. And this is exactly how our strengths can sometimes weaken us too.
Can our talents also help us in building relationships with others, for example in peer relationships?
Definitely. Each of us thinks differently and naturally has a different approach to things. For example, my husband is prudent, I am, on the contrary, activator – I do things quickly, without thinking too long. And so we complement each other perfectly, but at the same time we can get on each other’s nerves. It bothers me that everything takes him so long, and him that I act too fast. And this doesn’t just apply to relationships, but also to the working environment – in teams, among friends and colleagues.
When I realize what talents I have and what talents others have, I can look at them with more understanding. For example, someone may not have a talent for communication, but that doesn’t mean they can’t talk – maybe they just need more time to formulate their thoughts. Or someone may seem to be communicating too slowly, not expressing themselves the way I would expect. But it doesn’t mean he wants to hold me back – he just works differently.
I often encounter this with the productivity talent, which is the most prevalent in the population. People who have it high don’t understand how anyone can “just sit around and do nothing”. I’ve had clients who used to say: “We used to have colleagues here who looked at the internet while they worked! How is that possible?” Because it’s normal for them to work hard when they’re at work. They can’t imagine that someone else needs time to think, find inspiration or take a break. But that doesn’t mean they’re lazy – they just work in a different way. And it’s understanding these differences that can help us function better, not just at work, but in our everyday relationships.
Janka, you mentioned that you work with Gallup tests with your clients. Could you tell us how such a test works and what it can reveal about us?
I call it a questionnaire rather than a test, because testing makes people anxious, even though there are no wrong answers. It contains 177 questions and takes approximately 40 minutes. It is completed online and the results are available immediately. Each person has the same 34 talents, but in a different order.
When consulting, I focus mainly on the first ten talents, which are the most distinctive and easiest to use. At the same time, we talk about the last five talents, not to focus on them as weaknesses, but to understand how we operate.
For example, if I don’t have the talent responsibility high, it does not mean that I am irresponsible, but that I show it in a different way. Someone with strong accountability sees fulfilling a promise as paramount, even at the expense of their own well-being. But I am guided by a different talent – for example Relations. I care about trust and the quality of relationships, so I finish things so I don’t let others down, rather than because I’ve promised myself something. Every talent can be grasped differently and it’s important that we use it in a way that feels natural to us. So I’m not going to work on being responsible, but I have that responsibility simply through some other talent.
Is the Gallup poll available to everyone? How can it help us? Is it free or for a fee? And what’s next – how do I work with the results I get from it?
The Gallup questionnaire has a fee of 67 euros. It can be purchased directly at gallup.com or through a strengths mentor, such as myself. The questionnaire is available in Czech language because it is an American product and Slovak is not yet supported. If someone has a high level of English (I recommend C2), they can also fill it out in English.
Once completed, the first consultation comes where we focus on the top 10 talents that are key to a person and briefly go through the others. We call this step “name it”, i.e. the naming of talents. And then after that there can be collaboration with a coach – there’s more coaching and less mentoring. The important thing is to tell yourself in what area of your life you would like to use your talents further. Someone wants to function more effectively in a job, another is looking for direction, that where to move after maternity leave or at a time of professional breakthrough.
For entrepreneurs, I focus on building their business based on their strengths. I help them break down the blocks, fears and beliefs that are holding them back so they can grow their business to its full potential through their talents. I don’t focus on optimizing the processes in companies, but rather on the mental side and inner alignment of a person that are important for their growth.
What is the difference between coaching and mentoring? Can you explain these concepts to us? Many people often confuse them.
As a mentor, I bring my knowledge to the process – in the case of strengths, this is essential. I need to explain to the person what their talent means and how it can manifest itself. But that doesn’t mean I come to you and say you’ve got communication, so you should become a presenter. It doesn’t work that way, at least not for me. That’s why I combine mentoring with a coaching approach.
In coaching, I’m more of a thought guide – I ask questions, but I don’t put my opinions into the process. In mentoring, I sometimes point out certain contexts, for example, that this is probably happening to you because this talent has such and such a predisposition. But I always work in hypotheticals. I’m not looking for a way to “fit” a person to a test result. Rather, on the contrary, we explore together where and how his or her talents manifest in real life. And frankly, it hasn’t occurred to me yet that anyone would say: “This doesn’t fit me at all.”
I’m wondering, if someone fills out a Gallup test and isn’t sure of the result, can it be adjusted somehow? Or how exactly does the process work?
You have 20 seconds per answer, so it’s a spontaneous decision. I always remind clients to answer the way they actually have things, not the way they would like to have them.
The test asks for each talent multiple times (4 – 6 different ways), so there are up to 177 questions. Gallup claims to be able to determine the results with high accuracy after only 70 questions. So there is no reason to worry about the test “not coming out right”.
It is important not to stylize yourself into a role. For example, in the question on communication – do you like to meet people or do you prefer to spend time with yourself? There are people who have both. Gallup, unlike other methodologies, doesn’t work with either-or polarities. You can be both social and relational at the same time. I myself, for example, have relationships as my strongest talent, and I also have the talent Social in sixth place. I have a close circle of close friends that I value, but at the same time I have no problem meeting new people.
That is why there are so many questions. People also find out in the test that why they don’t understand themselves sometimes. For example, if I have a strong talent activator, but also prudence, it can happen that I want to start things right away, but at the same time I need to check them thoroughly.
Moreover, talents may manifest themselves differently at work and in private. They are not always 100% on, but when we know them, we can consciously develop them and use them purposefully. And that’s the beauty of it – when I realize what my strengths are, I can consciously work with them and gradually make better use of them in my daily life. You can also unlearn yourself over time.
So the test actually helps us understand ourselves better and shows us how we naturally function, right?
Yes, exactly. It helps us to understand our inner self and realize that some things are naturally within us. Often we don’t even realize that what we take for granted may just be our strongest point.
Gallup research itself has shown that people who develop their strengths are more satisfied at work and less “burned out.” However, if someone doesn’t want to invest in the Gallup test, they can try other methodologies such as the Hogan tests, Jungian typology, DISC profile, emotional tests or the 16 personality factors? Which of these is, or possibly is not, effective?
Any methodology can be effective. However, it is important to go over the results with an expert to help understand their meaning. The Gallup test does provide a detailed report to read, but I don’t know a person who can follow up with that without mentoring. Similarly with 16 personalities, which I sometimes use with clients with limited budgets, such as teams.
The difference is that this test is more categorical – it puts you into one of 16 types, whereas DISC only works with 4 categories, which may not always accurately represent the individual. If someone tells you that you’re one of the four, then maybe 70% of the time it will fit you. But there will still be about 30% that don’t fit you. DISC can be especially practical for junior positions, especially if the employee has no ambition to grow. In this case, a quick understanding of basic character traits is important, similar to the choleric, sanguine, melancholic and phlegmatic classifications.
And for those people, that’s understandable.70% of the information from a test is often enough to make people realise that we’re all different and that different personality traits have their own strengths. For example, a sanguine is not just a person who lives in the clouds and is happy all the time. His real strength lies in his ability to motivate and enthuse people, act quickly and keep positive energy in the team. In the same way, a choleric is not just someone who blows up or shouts all the time – his or her uniqueness is in actionability, the ability to make decisions and lead others when action is needed. And he will be the one to say that now we need to get busy.
Let’s imagine that we already know what we are strong in. What next? How can we use these skills in our daily lives and work? Does this mean, for example, changing jobs? If I find out I’m great at baking, should I quit my job and open my own pastry shop?
Business is not just about baking. It’s about realizing how much I’m willing and able to do everything myself. Who will take care of invoices, marketing or customer acquisition? Many people think of entrepreneurship as a great thing, but in reality it means managing a lot of different tasks. I know this from personal experience – I’m in my third year of operating this way on my own, and it’s not about having a team of people to take care of everything for me. In a job we focus on one activity, but in business we have to manage more than one, and that might not be a good fit for us. That’s why it’s good to think about whether entrepreneurship is really the right way to go. It’s not just about whether I can bake a cake, it’s also about what I can do with it next. Anyone can learn to bake, but for someone it will be more natural and easier.
And here we come to talents – for example, if I am a baker maximizerI mean, a person who needs to have everything perfect, it takes me maybe 10 hours to bake one cake. But that doesn’t mean it will be better than one that someone else can do in 2 hours and make five times more money on it. It’s about using your time efficiently and understanding your own talents. If I want to change jobs, it’s important to know which talents can help me do that. In baking, it’s maximizer advantage, but I also have to set boundaries – if I can’t stop my perfectionism, it may mean I won’t make a financial living in business.
So the key is not only to know your talents, but also to be able to apply them correctly to practice. I need to realise whether I have the potential to stay motivated and whether I will enjoy the activity in the long term. It’s not enough just to know that I’m good at something – it’s also important whether I can see the point in it and can imagine committing to it for the long term without getting exhausted or discouraged.
What about strengths that are more “soft”? I mean, for example, empathy, patience or a sense of humour. Can they be as valuable as hard skills? And what is the difference between soft and hard skills? How should we perceive it?
I come across this a lot because people often underestimate relational or communication talents. The Gallup test divides talents into four domains: executive, influencer, strategic thinking, and relational. When someone’s relationships come out, they may feel like it’s not useful and a common response tends to be, “I can talk to people, now what am I going to do about it?” Conversely, those who have a dominant executive think along the lines of, “I can only do, so how am I supposed to get along with people?” But Gallup doesn’t just lump you into one box. You’re not just one of those domains. All of us have all four. We just have a different percentage of them.
We need all types of people at work and in everyday life. There is no better or worse, we just all have it differently. If everyone was just a “maker”, who would be inventing new strategies? Conversely, if we only had visionaries, who would put their ideas into practice? In the same way, isn’t it more important to have only hard skills or soft skills. You can be a great professional, but if you can’t communicate, you’ll struggle to get your ideas across. Conversely, a great communicator without expertise won’t translate much into practice.
It is important to understand that every talent is valuable if we grasp it correctly. For example, empathy in a team can be a huge advantage – if the leader is focused on results and execution and only cares about getting things done. If a person with empathy comes to him and says I feel something is not right in this team, that leader will say I don’t see any problem in the spreadsheet. And this is the moment when an empathetic person can help prevent problems in the team. If we look at our strengths as opportunities to complement each other, we can use them effectively not only at work but also in everyday life.
It is said that the best employee is not the one who does everything, but the one who knows what not to do. I think that’s a great idea. Can you give us some practical tips on how we can practice our strengths every day?
The first step is to realize that I have some strengths and start consciously noticing them. It works like a learning process – at first we are not aware that we are doing something in a certain way (unconscious incompetence). When we notice it, we move into a phase where we realize we can’t control it (conscious incompetence). Then we consciously try to do things differently until it becomes automatic (conscious competence), until finally we act differently without conscious effort (unconscious competence).
For example, if I realize that I have strong communication but I often jump into speech, at that conscious stage I tell myself that I’m not going to jump into speech. I start to notice it and consciously hold myself back. And I consciously learn to actively listen because it’s just as important to me as talking. And I can already communicate with people in a completely different way because I’m listening and responding to what they’re saying. And I’m not just trying to put myself out there.
Another example is talent productive. These are the macaques who always want to do something. They need to be busy all the time. I’m starting to realize that I’m only doing this to do something. Not because I need to do it or it needs to be done. I just need to have my time filled.
And then I get to the stage where I realize in retrospect that it’s too much. And that’s the advantage – realizing before I get to the stage of not keeping up. Suddenly, I find that I don’t need 5 cups a day, I only need 4. And I consciously put that one less task in there, and I know that if I accomplish them, I’ll be happier than if I leave that one task in there. I’m already consciously managing my time. And I’m consciously giving myself a break. And I’ll make it through lunch and coffee during an 8-hour workday, and I know that will have a much greater effect on me energetically than sitting down and brushing it off at the pace I’ve been used to.
How to focus on your strengths and not waste energy on your weaknesses? We often tend to try to be good at everything. Should we focus on what we really excel at?
In my opinion, you can’t be excellent at everything. There are people who excel in many areas. But if we distract our attention on too many things, we won’t be truly excellent in any of them. That’s why it makes sense to spend time on what we are naturally good at and what we enjoy.
For example, you’re sitting here as a moderator because you’re probably comfortable with communication. If you dedicate yourself to it, you can get much better at it and maybe one day you’ll become a podcast star. But that doesn’t mean that any time invested is worth it. If someone has a poor relationship with numbers and should forcefully learn Excel, how will that turn out? I’ll send a colleague to training five times because her spreadsheets aren’t working. It’s cost me time, money, and she still doesn’t get it right. Who is this effective for? But if, for example, she has the talent empathy, it will help the team a lot more if I send her to do one-on-one with employees, it will bring me a lot more money and happy employees.
I, for example, have very low talent consistent. And I’m trying to do things somehow, because that’s what somebody says, that you should have everything in that calendar exactly planned out and scheduled. Two weeks. And after those two weeks, I’ll be so disgusted with it that I’d rather not do it at all for three months afterwards. And the same thing is true in every single area. If somebody doesn’t have a natural talent for communication and I put them in front of hundreds of people at a conference, who is that good for? Not for him, not for me. Because he’s not going to perform there like another person who really does have that natural talent. On the contrary, if we use strengths in the right way, we will get better results with less effort and more efficiency.
At work, we often try to develop what the company or team expects of us. It’s logical. But what would you recommend for those who feel stuck and feel they are not using their strengths?
A lot of people don’t even know them. They can’t tell me what their strengths are. But when I ask them what they’re not good at, what their weaknesses are, they spill out of their sleeve immediately. We’re not used to bragging and looking at ourselves, at what works for us. We live in a society that is really tough and demanding. If you ask about an American’s strengths, they’re very likely to tell you what’s working and what’s working for them.
Finding out your strengths is the first step. Whether it’s through Gallup or another methodology, figuring out why I should start looking at things differently is important. Then we can develop our potential and move somewhere further.
Is it better to surround ourselves with people with different strengths to complement each other, or is it preferable to surround ourselves with similar types of people? Which is more worthwhile?
It depends a lot on what the team’s goal is. Sometimes it makes sense to surround yourself with people with similar talents, for example in creative professions. But in general, it’s important to have a diverse team. If we only “crossbreed” certain types of people all the time, it could lead to an imbalance – for example, everyone will come up with great ideas, but no one will see them through to the end.
Relationships are also key – people should be able to communicate with each other, trust each other and ideally spend time together outside of work. When I know the strengths of the team, I know who I’m missing. For example, I have a weak executive team, so I look for someone who has a strong executive team to help me get things done. If two of us were the same, we’d just start 450 projects and not finish anything.
We call it contrasts. That is, they are not opposites. It’s not the opposite, it’s just a different angle of looking at the same thing. And yes, it’s good to have people on the team from different parts of that spectrum, strengths or even knowledge.
Can you give us some examples from your practice? Have you had clients who realized with you that their strengths were not mere talent, but some real foundation on which they could successfully build a career or life?
I certainly do, and it happens to me very often. People commonly come to underestimate themselves. That they don’t realise just what is natural for them and that they are trying to work on the same thing over and over again, which they have failed to do. It is, for example, that Productivity. That it’s what’s strong for me, so I have to learn to keep that at bay. This is not about discovering America. Those people usually know that they do this naturally, they just don’t see it as a strength, it’s just the opposite. They see it as a weakness and start to put the brakes on their strengths. And that’s where they figure out that this talent is bringing them a problem and this self needs to be addressed acutely. Because up until now it was so natural for them that they didn’t realize that it was a problem at all.
What advice would you give to those who are already aware of their strengths? Should they develop them and work with them every day?
A great start is to be kind to yourself. To be able to give yourself feedback too. Appreciate myself for something I do. To be able to appreciate maybe those around me and not keep pushing myself to go get better. The self-development isn’t about me wanting to be I don’t know how awesome I am right now either. I need to get to know myself. And it’s beautiful to just look at some of my reactions, for example. Why does this make me angry now? Why am I now reacting this way and that way?
Such healthy self-reflection.
Exactly. And sometimes I just stop and think, oh, I do this all the time. And when this happens, I react like this. And I always do that. And actually it’s not pleasant for me and it’s not pleasant for the other side either. When I’m in a hurry, I often don’t inform the person who depends on my decisions that I’m going to do something new. And then how does that person feel? It could be a partner or a colleague. For example, if I decide to start a new sport and don’t discuss it with my husband – what about the kids? Who will take them? I sign up and forget to tell him. It’s only later that I realise that this happens to me repeatedly – at work, among friends, in different situations. And here comes the self-reflection, “Why am I doing this?” In my case, I know that it’s talent activator. I need to get started quickly, and sometimes that speed overtakes me before I think everything through. Because it’s important for me to start. Then it’s already done for me.
Can you also recommend an exercise or technique that can be started right away?
I really like to use the classic coaching wheel. When you think of a circle on a piece of paper that’s split like a pizza. You write down each aspect (category) of your personal or professional life. On a scale of 1 to 10, you go through each aspect of your life. For example, it could be work. How satisfied am I? For example, I’ll give you a number 5. Then I have partner life, friends, leisure, health, sport. And like that I’ll think of at least 8, but there can be any number of them.
Then I ask myself, what does it mean for me to get to 10? What would it have to be for me to be most satisfied? Where would I like to get to? And this is a nice self-reflection as I figure out where I’m happy and where I’m not in different parts of my life. And that’s the very first step where I can then seek out a coach or someone who can help me get higher with that than I currently am. Often we don’t realize that we’re just feeling dissatisfied.
I often joke that people know only five emotions, but most often they distinguish only two – I feel good and I feel bad. Nothing in between. The important thing, though, is to start exploring how I actually feel. Is it frustration? What’s behind it? And how can I work with it?
It’s not just that “I’m not happy at work”. Something concrete is going on there. Why am I not happy? Is there something I can change, or am I at the point where the only option is to leave? By exploring in this way, one can get to know oneself more deeply and understand one’s needs better.
However, if I leave one job and find exactly the same one, it won’t solve the problem. I need to admit what’s really bothering me. If I was a manager here and I go to be a manager somewhere else, but I do the same thing, just in a different company, I’m just going to transfer the same problem to a new place. We need to get to know ourselves and ask questions to know what we really want in life. Where we are right now and where we want to go.
Janka, thank you for your inspiring advice. And finally – what would you say to those who are still hesitating? Does it make sense to discover your strengths? If you had to give one or two key pieces of advice on how to make the most of them, what would they be?
In particular, find out what those strengths are. Don’t pretend you just know. But really start focusing on what it is. Really. Put your energy into it. It’s very important to be aware of how you feel in particular moments or situations. That self-reflection can make huge changes in your life. Often we only perceive the consequences, but if we stop in the moment and reflect on why we feel the way we do, we can discover important connections.
The second piece of advice is to not repress the emotion and allow yourself to experience it – whether it’s anger, frustration or whatever – and answer the questions, “What’s really going on right now? Why am I reacting this way?” Therein lies a huge shift.
Dear listeners, I believe that today we have brought you a lot of new ideas and food for thought. I bid farewell to today’s dear guest, Janka Turzová, and we’ll see you on the next episode podcast On the Wave of Code.
