Originally, based on my own LSI and supported by the other reviews in TLE 1 I chose to focus on achievement, power and humanistic encouraging main domains to work with.
To develop my achievement, I chose to systematically to focus on my own goals and targets over the overriding targets from others. This development area was also suggested by the CFA review for me to work with. The second development activity was to focus be more organised and by that increase the efficiency and output.
To support achievement, I also chose to work with power and being more decisive and clear (or managerial) in my leadership behaviour, since my dominant way to work is more soft and humanistic encouraging. The Power was chosen as the development area because …show more content…
But at the same time, I see that the areas I thought are the most problematic (achievement and power) might be the reflection to the opposite areas that I was not able to recognise (consciously) for the original action plan. I chose the achievement as a primary area to work with, but my LSI Other show that achievement is in fact at a quite good level. I did not see avoidance as a problematic area in my LSI Self-part but LSI Other indicate to look that part. When looking the symptoms that indicate Avoidance (from LSI 1 self-development guide) I on one side agree that I am not sharing my feelings or facts from my personal life in the work environment. I am too “professional” with my colleagues. Also, I know that someone can and will see my choice not to eat lunch in our company restaurant as the signal not being “committed” to the group since eating together makes relatively strong cultural bonds (and people will share their personal life during lunch discussions). This is something I am aware of but decided to keep up my own path since I do not like eating heavily during the day. I have explained that on many conversations and sometimes I will go to eat lunch just to show good spirit. At least these two “symptoms” I recognise to have and I am aware, but making dramatic changes in those might be against my true personality and wants ( and to go against my own wants is also violating my action plan development item 1).
Similarly, I chose originally to develop “Active Listening” underachievement/humanistic-encouraging domains, but that might be in unconscious action to work with or be more aware of my oppositional behaviour that was seen by LSI Other reviewers and now I recognize that as well (even the results are in lower mid-sector so I am still in constructive size with my oppositional
To develop my achievement, I chose to systematically to focus on my own goals and targets over the overriding targets from others. This development area was also suggested by the CFA review for me to work with. The second development activity was to focus be more organised and by that increase the efficiency and output.
To support achievement, I also chose to work with power and being more decisive and clear (or managerial) in my leadership behaviour, since my dominant way to work is more soft and humanistic encouraging. The Power was chosen as the development area because …show more content…
But at the same time, I see that the areas I thought are the most problematic (achievement and power) might be the reflection to the opposite areas that I was not able to recognise (consciously) for the original action plan. I chose the achievement as a primary area to work with, but my LSI Other show that achievement is in fact at a quite good level. I did not see avoidance as a problematic area in my LSI Self-part but LSI Other indicate to look that part. When looking the symptoms that indicate Avoidance (from LSI 1 self-development guide) I on one side agree that I am not sharing my feelings or facts from my personal life in the work environment. I am too “professional” with my colleagues. Also, I know that someone can and will see my choice not to eat lunch in our company restaurant as the signal not being “committed” to the group since eating together makes relatively strong cultural bonds (and people will share their personal life during lunch discussions). This is something I am aware of but decided to keep up my own path since I do not like eating heavily during the day. I have explained that on many conversations and sometimes I will go to eat lunch just to show good spirit. At least these two “symptoms” I recognise to have and I am aware, but making dramatic changes in those might be against my true personality and wants ( and to go against my own wants is also violating my action plan development item 1).
Similarly, I chose originally to develop “Active Listening” underachievement/humanistic-encouraging domains, but that might be in unconscious action to work with or be more aware of my oppositional behaviour that was seen by LSI Other reviewers and now I recognize that as well (even the results are in lower mid-sector so I am still in constructive size with my oppositional