Strategic or Detailed?
Ever had the experiencing of driving down the highway while listening to a distant radio station? As you got further and further away from the broadcast source, the station began to fade out, often to be replaced by another station located at a different, equally distant location. The two stations might fade in and out in a back-and-forth battle of the airwaves, but you couldn't listen to both at once: to tune one in was to tune the other out.
This is a good illustration of the second dimension, which has to do with how you gather information or find out about things -- what "station" your "mental radio" is tuned to. There are two major sources of information about the world.
 |
One source of information is your five senses -- what you can see, hear, smell, taste, and touch. That kind of information tells you about the present realities of what is now. Such information is concrete, specific, factual, and often leads to a focus on practical considerations. (That's the Detailed pole.) |
|
The other source of information is a sort of "sixth sense" that allows you to read "between the lines" or focus on "what lies underneath" the facts. That kind of information tells you about future possibilities or what could be or might be later. Such information is abstract, global, imaginative, and often leads to a focus on theoretical (that is, conceptual or creative) considerations. (That's the Strategic pole.) |
Hence, Detailed types usually describe themselves with words like "observant, pragmatic, precise" while Strategic types usually choose words such as "intuitive, creative, big-picture".
Here are some more clues to help you pinpoint which style is more like yours.
| Do you have a linear or a nonlinear style? Detailed types usually process information in a linear, step-by-step, analytic fashion. Strategic types often process information in a nonlinear, impressionistic, synthetic fashion. |
| How do you respond to change? As a group, Detailed types like the known, the tried and true, the way things are, as opposed to Strategic person' general preference for the unknown, the unexplored, the way things might be but aren't yet. As a result, in general, Detailed types tend to be more "conservative" (if it ain't broke, don't fix it), while Strategic types tend to be more "liberal" (boldly go where no one has gone before). Change always involves both threat and opportunity; but Detailed types tend to focus on the threat (which is more likely to be part of the present reality), Strategic types on the opportunity (which is more likely to reside in the future). |
| What bugs you? Both types tend to have negative stereotypes of the other. Detailed types may look at their Strategic colleagues and think of them as "head in the cloud" types or as change junkies, as blue-sky theorists who are sadly lacking in common sense. Meanwhile, Strategic types can view their Detailed co-workers as "stick in the mud" types who suffer from tunnel vision, can't see the forest for the trees, and are obsessed with the "good old days". (In fact, the world needs both: trail-blazers and maintainers, idea rats and results-oriented folks. As G.K. Chesterton once put it, the job of liberals is to keep making new mistakes, while the job of conservatives is to make sure that old mistakes never get corrected -- plenty of meaningful work for everybody. Remember that stereotypes are not realities, but exaggerations: the stereotypes are neither helpful nor accurate, but they are powerful and commonplace.) |
| What are your work preferences? In general, Detailed types do best with jobs that let them focus on the short range and on specific, practical realities in the present -- what one author calls "a steady stream of facts" -- that lead to tangible, concrete results that can be seen, touched, felt. But Strategic types usually do best with jobs that let them focus on the long range and on creative, visionary possibilities for the future -- a "steady stream of ideas" -- that lead (at least in the near term) to intangible, abstract results that are "in one's head". |
My informal test for this dimension is to ask a person what time it is. A very literalistic Detailed type will be painstakingly (some might say nitpickingly) precise: "It's exactly 10:06 and 32 seconds! No, wait... 33... 34... 35..." A very ideophoric Strategic type will be (to some, annoyingly) approximate if not even metaphorical: "It's ten-ish" or "Wow, it's late!" or even "Since Einstein, we now know that time is relative, so pick any time you like." Put differently, Detailed types like to narrow the question (to ensure precision), while Strategic types like to widen the question (to ensure that all the relevant links to other, related ideas are explored fully).
Professional assessment tools are available through Business Development Group if you want a formal evaluation of where you fall on this or the other dimensions explained here. But many people can make a reasonable guess about whether they are more Detailed or more Strategic, even if they fall close to the middle of this dimension. Which are you?
Copyright (c) 2001 -- Business Development Group
All rights reserved