Six Types of Working Genius (Patrick Lencioni)

Each of us brings a unique combination of personality preferences and personal strengths to our jobs. This quick on-line assessment created by The Table Group cuts through the potential complexity of these combinations by asking what work gives us joy? What tasks frustrate us? And by using this in a team, how can we best work together?

Please watch this 10-min video before joining the discussion:
https://youtu.be/aSmp5vMOPqs?si=O28g-g9wZOHWAzbT

------------------------------------

1. How might the effectiveness of a team change if all members had similar "working geniuses" versus a diverse range of strengths?
2. In what ways could recognizing the "activation" phase as distinct from ideation and implementation improve organizational processes?
3. How can organizations balance the need for innovation (Wonder and Invention) with the practicalities of execution (Tenacity and Enablement)?
4. What are the potential drawbacks of assigning tasks based solely on an individual's "working genius"? How can teams mitigate these risks?
5. How does the concept of complementary roles (e.g., Wonder and Invention, Galvanizing and Enablement) challenge traditional notions of leadership and teamwork?
6. Should organizations encourage employees to focus exclusively on their strengths, or is there value in developing areas of frustration? Why?
7. How can the Working Genius model be applied to improve cross-departmental collaboration in large organizations?
8. What are some potential limitations of the Working Genius model when applied to diverse cultural or organizational contexts?

-------------------------------------

To provide an enjoyable experience for fellow participants, here are three ground rules during discussion events:

1. Step up and step back. (If you feel that you’ve been talking too much, step back to listen more. If you feel that you’ve been relatively quiet, step up to share your perspective or ask a question)
2. Listen to understand, not to respond.
3. Be open-minded and value differences.