For those interested, you might want to read about Walter Michel’s Strong and Weak situations - Mischel averred that, in "strong" situations, behavior is relatively uniform regardless of one's personality characteristics. In "weak" situations, that is, those that lack clear behavioral expectations, behavior is not constrained by the situation and is free to covary with personality.
Solid points. I was rereading Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Shunryu Suzuki. In it he mentions three ways to assess people and situations:
1. Observation.
2. Control
3. Avoid.
I try to keep this in mind when assessing a situation and/or helping a fellow teammate. I start with the first, if this fails; I jump in. If this fails, then sometimes, we have to move on. Moving forward can seem cold and callous, but what other options do we have?
As stated previously, if the individual lacks character, AND is unwilling/unable to put in the work. We must be willing to confront the brutal facts (Collins.2001). A sandbag must be cut loose....
Such an important topic! 🙌 The fallacy of composition—the assumption that what’s true for one part is true for the whole—often leads us to misjudge people’s true character. It’s easy to focus on a single action or behavior, but true character is shaped by consistency over time, not by isolated moments.
How do you avoid falling into this trap when assessing someone’s character? Do you focus on patterns of behavior, or are there specific red flags that guide your judgment?
Let’s have an open conversation about how we can better assess character without falling for misleading first impressions! ⬇️
IDK if we can ever know who people really are. The best we can do is to watch how others react and respond in certain situations and form judgments and opinions that help us predict how they will respond to the same or similar situation in the future. For direct reports, I recommend sticking to behaviors that are tied to job performance. Do I really care if an employee salts his/her food before tasting it first, maybe? It depends on if that behavior predicts future performance on the job (it most likely doesn't). I like what Marcus Aurelius said, "Be tolerant of others, but strict on yourself."
This reminds of the Duolingo CEO's interesting method to assess executive hires: he pays the taxi driver for feedback on how they treat them on the drive from the airport. Character is really evaluated out of the limelight, when others aren't watching
This is an important subject for today because it has become so easy to be someone you are not. Fired be AI and supported by various aps, we can take on different personas through internet searches and established profiles in business sites like LikededIn.
In OneTRUTH Leadership I take the same approach you suggest utilizing questions to discern the TRUTH and find the core.
For those interested, you might want to read about Walter Michel’s Strong and Weak situations - Mischel averred that, in "strong" situations, behavior is relatively uniform regardless of one's personality characteristics. In "weak" situations, that is, those that lack clear behavioral expectations, behavior is not constrained by the situation and is free to covary with personality.
btw - i copied and pasted from the internet. I don't use the word averred in my daily language. Too fancy for me.
Good morning,
Solid points. I was rereading Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Shunryu Suzuki. In it he mentions three ways to assess people and situations:
1. Observation.
2. Control
3. Avoid.
I try to keep this in mind when assessing a situation and/or helping a fellow teammate. I start with the first, if this fails; I jump in. If this fails, then sometimes, we have to move on. Moving forward can seem cold and callous, but what other options do we have?
As stated previously, if the individual lacks character, AND is unwilling/unable to put in the work. We must be willing to confront the brutal facts (Collins.2001). A sandbag must be cut loose....
Thank you for your time.
Such an important topic! 🙌 The fallacy of composition—the assumption that what’s true for one part is true for the whole—often leads us to misjudge people’s true character. It’s easy to focus on a single action or behavior, but true character is shaped by consistency over time, not by isolated moments.
How do you avoid falling into this trap when assessing someone’s character? Do you focus on patterns of behavior, or are there specific red flags that guide your judgment?
Let’s have an open conversation about how we can better assess character without falling for misleading first impressions! ⬇️
#TrueCharacter #FallacyOfComposition #Leadership #PersonalGrowth
IDK if we can ever know who people really are. The best we can do is to watch how others react and respond in certain situations and form judgments and opinions that help us predict how they will respond to the same or similar situation in the future. For direct reports, I recommend sticking to behaviors that are tied to job performance. Do I really care if an employee salts his/her food before tasting it first, maybe? It depends on if that behavior predicts future performance on the job (it most likely doesn't). I like what Marcus Aurelius said, "Be tolerant of others, but strict on yourself."
This reminds of the Duolingo CEO's interesting method to assess executive hires: he pays the taxi driver for feedback on how they treat them on the drive from the airport. Character is really evaluated out of the limelight, when others aren't watching
This is an important subject for today because it has become so easy to be someone you are not. Fired be AI and supported by various aps, we can take on different personas through internet searches and established profiles in business sites like LikededIn.
In OneTRUTH Leadership I take the same approach you suggest utilizing questions to discern the TRUTH and find the core.
Here is a relevant article you might enjoy... https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/who-captain-bob-price/?trackingId=OrUIqnFnQMSEdmzCTzxCDA%3D%3D