Understanding Dynamics of Talent Themes - "Contrasting Themes"

by Dries Lombaard

"Contrasting" means "to differ strikingly".

When we apply it to the understanding within the Talent Theme descriptions, the term "Contrasting themes" is used when we compare two themes that are completely "opposing" in nature when it comes to all three elements of thinking, feeling and behaving. A theme is only contrasting in nature when it finds itself on clear opposite ends of a scale when it comes to thinking, feeling and behaving patterns.  General differences in themes do not qualify them to be contrasting.

What is important when talking about "Contrasting Themes" is to take into account that no two Themes in the CliftonStrengths assessment are incompatible to appear as a pairing - either dominantly or as Non-Patterns.  Therefore, even though certain themes appear to be "opposing" in nature, it is absolutely possible for a person to have both those themes in, for instance, their Top Five - although it is rare. 

Within the CliftonStrengths Assessment, these so-called Contrasting Themes will, in most cases, also be found on opposite clustering ends of the Full 34 Sequence Report - thus if one of the themes is dominant, you can expect the other to be close to a Non-Pattern, or at least lower on the list.  Again, this is not set in stone as you may encounter people where this is not the case.  (For interest’s sake, a great example of a well-known person, within the Strengths Movement, with dominant Contrasting Themes is Marcus Buckingham, who has both Futuristic and Context in his Top Five.)

What are some examples of "Contrasting Talent Themes"?

It is also important to understand what the essential contrasting attributes are within two themes that "push" against each other, thus causing them to be contrasting.  Some themes could be contrasting to more than one other theme - although in different attributes. 

Some obvious examples of "Contrasting Themes", and their essential contrasting attribute(s), include:

• Futuristic and Context
• Future mindset or historic mindset
• Command and Harmony
• Confrontational or conflict avoiding
• Empathy and Analytical
• Emotional or Rational
• Discipline and Adaptability
• Structured or unstructured
• Communication and Intellection
• Verbal processing or intellectual processing
• Consistency and Individualization
• Factual fairness or individual fairness
• Deliberative and Positivity
• Pessimism or optimism
• Deliberative and Self-Assurance
• Risk-averse or risk-taking
• Maximizer and Includer
• Excluding (selective) or including (indiscriminate)
• Maximizer and Restorative
• Strengths-building or weakness-fixing
• Relator and Woo
• Introvert or Extrovert
• Ideation and Consistency
• Creative or unimaginative
• Connectedness and Analytical
• Intuitive or factual
• Competition and Harmony
• Win for one or win for all

Important:  Do not simply assume that two themes will be contrasting in sequence on a report.  If you only have the Top Five results of the CliftonStrengths Report, you should never attempt to predict that another theme will be much lower down in the sequence simply because it is contrasting in nature.  

What is the impact if a person has two contrasting themes pairing dominant?

First of all, when this happens, it is obviously rare.  But there is nothing wrong with the person!  In actual fact, in most cases it "broadens the spectrum" of someone thinking, feeling and behaving in a specific manner.  

For instance, someone with a dominant Deliberative and Self-Assurance will have a natural energy and need to be both cautious and to engage with risk. At times, this may cause some inner conflict within them, or even be confusing to others.  Confusion in others may come from the way someone invests energy in contrasting aspects on both ends, or have the capacity to do so.  When someone is unaware of the impact of talent, energy and need, other people may experience them as uncertain or even insecure.  This is simply because it is so rare to find people with these "seemingly opposing" attributes. 

When contrasting themes are mismanaged, it may actually lead to uncertainty and inner confusion.

When well managed, it is a thing of beauty to experience how someone plays a wide scope within a specific arena.  For instance, with Deliberative and Self-Assurance, they will cover all the necessary bases before engaging in risk, giving people both certainty as well as the excitement of risking the new. The typical "calculated risk taker".

At the end, if themes are complementary, contrasting or super in nature of dynamics, it is all about how you manage the energy and need.

Well managed talents become a strength.  Mismanaged talents become a detriment.

-->

Understanding Dynamics of Talent Themes - "Complementary Themes"

by Dries Lombaard

"Complementary" means combining in such a way as to enhance or emphasize the qualities of each other or another. 

When we apply this definition to the CliftonStrengths Talent Themes, a case can be made that any combination of themes that may combine will have a complementary effect on each other.  This is true.  However, when we apply the term "Complementary Themes", we indicate that it is a combination of two or more themes with similar characteristics that therefore emphasize the qualities of each other.

Talent Domains

The first important understanding regarding complementary themes lies within the four Talent Domains, namely the "Executing, Influencing, Relational and Thinking" Domains.  

Within these Domains, you can always regard themes to be strongly complementary.  This is due to the similar characteristics they share within a Domain, which point to a similar type of energy and need within the themes.

In my previous blog post I explained the effect of "Super Themes".  At times it is easy to confuse "Complementary Themes" with "Super Themes".  An easy way to distinguish the difference is to keep in mind that although all Super Theme combinations are complementary of each other, not all Complementary Themes will be Super Themes. (See previous post).

When can we regard a combination as "complementary" in nature?

As a rule of thumb, it is helpful to ask yourself if two themes "seamlessly attach" to each other when they both appear as dominant themes in a profile.  The complementary aspect comes in when both (or more) of the themes align well in terms of the energy and need they share, but on top of that one of the themes adds a very specific aspect that the other theme lacks, thereby complementing it.  

For example: 

Input and Ideation.  

Both are Thinking Themes, the one (Input) adding the researching aspect of gathering information and sharing it, whilst the other one (Ideation) brings strong creativity and fresh thinking to the mix.  The complementary nature here is that Input would have a creative and fresh approach to its research because of Ideation, while Ideation would tap from the researching energy of Input in order to add information to its creative process.

Positivity and Includer.

The theme of Positivity brings the energy, hope and vibrancy to the mix, which will complement Includer with its need to include everybody and not leave anyone behind, and also to be included.  This complementary nature will mean that Positivity will reach more, where Includer will have a lot more energy and vibrancy in its including nature.

Activator and Maximizer.

Both themes are strong Influencing, they therefore share the need to create response and reaction.  Activator will be strongly motivational and fast out of the blocks, adding speed and energy to the launching of Maximizer to take people or things to the next level of excellence.  Maximizer will complement Activator in the sense that it will probably be more selective in who it activates, being strong on backing the strengths in individuals and projects first.

Complementary Themes can also play across the Domains:

Developer and Maximizer.

Where Maximizer is impatient in nature and drawn towards influencing more people (groups), Developer is very patient and loves the one-on-one development in small steps rather than giant leaps.
In this sense it is strongly complementary.

Analytical and Arranger.

The need of Analytical is to gather and work from a clinical factual base of verifiable data and facts. Add this to Arranger and you get a specific approach to the organizational brilliance of Arranger, where they make sure they have the right data and facts and then organize accordingly.

Again, as you will notice, any theme combination can be complementary in nature - even the so-called Contrasting Themes (next post).

But where two or more themes add strong complementary dynamics in enhancing each other, they will be regarded as being "Complementary Themes".

Also, as always, do not regard the above descriptions as an exact science.  Always keep the individual, and human, element in mind that comes from the person owning the themes.

Understanding Dynamics of Talent Themes - "Super Themes"

Understanding Dynamics of Talent Themes - "Super Themes"

by Dries Lombaard

The amazing online assessment tool by Gallup, namely "CliftonStrengths" (previously "Clifton StrengthsFinder"), has been my tool of choice for more than a decade, as a means for the accurate assessment of personal talent and potential.

Throughout this time, I have discovered many dynamic angles that can be applied when you analyze the 34 Theme Sequence of a person. 

In this blog, I will describe three terms that we use to help coaches identify dynamic interactions between specific talent themes.  These are "Super Themes", "Contrasting Themes" and "Complementary Themes".

Super Themes

We refer to two (or, in rare cases, more than two) talent themes that combine within a person's dominant themes (usually Top 10) as "Super Themes" when the two themes are:

• so similar in all their attributes (thinking, feeling and behaving) that you may find it challenging to spot the differences between the two themes;
• similar in their nature to the extent that there may only be one or two specific attributes that distinguish the two themes as different in nature; and
• enhanced strongly, with both a similar energy and need within each other.

For example:  Input and Learner.

People often ask what the differences are between these two themes.  They seem to be extremely similar in nature in the thinking, feeling and behaving patterns.  They also share similar energy and need patterns. Things like reading, studying, learning and sharing of knowledge are elements shared strongly by both themes. And furthermore, you very often find these two themes pair up in a profile - either both being stronger or both being weaker.

When studied more intently, one will see that there is one very clear difference between Input and Learner.  Input has a need and energy for information (gaining and sharing), whereas Learner has a strong need and energy for application, especially to obtain relevant and useful skills that can be applied.

When these two themes combine, like they very often do, they have a dynamic effect on each other that accelerates the energy and need in both - as if they are "feeding" off each other inter-dynamically. This causes Input to be stronger because of the dynamic relation to a strong Learner, and Learner to be strengthened by the dynamic strong influence from Input.

Another example:  Achiever and Responsibility.

These are extremely similar talents.  Both need to work hard, finish well and take on a lot.  Both love to be trusted with goals and responsibilities.  They have very similar energy and needs.

When you look closer, you will see that there is, however, a difference.  Achiever is mainly energized by clear goals and the regular achievement of tasks.  Responsibility finds its energy to deliver a task, completed fully, to someone, and then get feedback on it.  

For Achievers the mere completion is feedback - therefore they love making lists and ticking items off as they proceed.

Responsibility is much more personal in nature.  They want to know who needs something done, by when, and how exactly they need to be supported.

You can therefore come to the conclusion that the main difference between Achiever and Responsibility is the presence, or absence, of emotional drive within the execution.  For Responsibility, it is very personal.  They have a lot of emotion invested in the way they deliver and how they support, as well as in the feedback they receive. 

Achievers are less involved on an emotional level - for them it is simple:  give me the goal, and the deadline, and I will finish it. Done.

I often find that both Achievers and Responsibilities will work hard and finish well - but Responsibility will lie awake at night, wondering if they did everything as expected and if their work is up to standard.  Responsibility is not released when the job is completed, but only when someone releases them on delivery - most often with a mere "thank you".  Then they feel that their job is done.

So, you can see that when these two combine (as they often do), it creates an extreme executional drive towards achievement and delivery. Therefore this energy as a Super Theme combination should always be managed well.  

(For the management of these talents, refer to this article on Achiever and this one for Responsibility).  Also read this if you have a strong Responsibility talent. 

The "art" of Strengths Coaching relies a lot on your ability as a coach to spot the dynamics between themes.  Therefore I would like you to see if you can identify why the following themes are seen as "Super Themes" rather than mere strong complementary themes.  See if you can identify which specific characteristic separate these as two different themes.  

• Achiever and Focus
• Achiever and Competition
• Consistency and Belief
• Adaptability and Strategic
• Analytical and Deliberative
• Includer and Woo
• Command and Self Assurance
• Empathy and Individualization

Are there any others you could identify? 

All interpretations as well as the terms "Super Themes", "Complimetary Themes" and "Constrasting Themes" are that of the author,  acquired through years of Strengths Coaching experience, and it is not verified, acknowledged or  or scientifically tested by Gallup Inc, the developers and owners of the CliftonStrengths assessment. The Theme Names used, like "Achiever", "Responsibility", "Input",  "Learner" etc are registered trademarks and the intellectual property of Gallup Inc.  The author has no affilliation with Gallup Inc.