Imagine an F1 driver refusing to adjust his technique despite constant crashes in the last few races. Or a pit crew member who acknowledges his tardiness in changing the tires ibut never seem to improve on his performance. In the high-speed world of racing—and in the workplace—performance isn’t just about talent; it’s about our attitude to adapt, refine, and overcome our weaknesses.
Just like in F1, talented professionals handle their limitations and personal flaws in different ways. Some fine-tune their approaches with humility and grace while others modify their behaviours begrudgingly. Some accept their flaws but couldn’t care more to improve, and others deny their weaknesses entirely.
With the growing popularity of the use of CliftonStrengths assessment in the workplace, more are seeing the impact of overused strengths.
After attending a course on personal mastery, it dawn on me that some work on their perceived weaknesses in lightness while others manage their weaknesses begrudgingly.
Out of the reflection, I wrote this article to explore four types of archetypes. It is an attempt to showi how each archetype views personal flaws, deals with weaknesses and the impact on others.
1. The Enlightened: Accepts personal flaws and intentional to manage weaknesses
These individuals recognize that their strengths can become liabilities when overused. They accept their personal flaws and insecurities as part of being human. Rather than making excuses for their mistakes, they consistently seek to refine and grow. They understand deeply that strengths produce results only in the right context. When strengths are used without consideration of the environment and timing, they easily become weaknesses. Therefore these individuals worked hard to grow their self-awareness and adapt to the dynamic environment.
The Enlightened sees mistakes as learnings and stepping stones to success. There is a lightness when they share about their mistakes and what they have learned.
Example: Meet Arjun, a project leader in a fintech company. His CliftonStrengths Command talent theme makes him a decisive leader especially in high-pressure situations. He doesn’t shy away from challenges and he shines in crisis. He also knows that his Command theme gives him a certain presence, which can often be perceived as intimidating. When feedback revealed that his directness intimidated colleagues, he didn’t just brush it off. He sought coaching, learned how to balance assertiveness with gentleness and care, and became a leader his team trusted rather than feared.
Impact: The Enlightened creates a culture of growth. Their willingness to receive feedback, inspires others to self-reflect and improve. When leaders are in this category, their teams are engaged, motivated, and feel safe.
2. The Insecure: Resists personal flaws but will seek to improve weaknesses
These individuals struggle with admitting their weaknesses—it often feels like a blow to their ego. They do however make effort to change and improve their behaviours but often stops short to do the deeper work.
These individuals might be unaware in how their resistance shows up to others because of their efforts and sincerity to improve on their weaknesses. There is an unconscious belief that when one’s insecurities are surfaced, one will experience some form of shame. The resistance shows up when one’s insecurities are triggered. The instinct is to hide these insecurities.
For many of these individuals, the characteristics are often similar - responsible, hardworking, caring and they might even go the extra mile. However, away from the visible eyes, the behaviours and the pursuit of results are fueled by the need to hide one’s deep insecurities. Resentment, envy and self-doubt are common companions.
Example: Jia Wei, a senior analyst in a Real Estate company, thrives on her Analytical and Maximizer talents. She dissects data with precision but tends to dismiss others’ ideas too quickly because she feels the ideas are lacking in substance. When colleagues pointed out this specific behaviour, her reaction and body language showed her resistance to feedback. She brushes the feedback aside by rationalizing that she is a person with high standards.
After repeated friction with her team, she tries to improve on her communication but becomes increasingly resentful with those who are resisting her. Unknown to her, her resentment spills out in other areas of interactions.
Impact: The Insecure are often strong contributors at work. They pride themselves in delivering results and have strong ego. What frustrates others are often the lack of awareness in interpersonal dynamics. Their insecurities spilled out in team interactions and contribute to the lack of safety in the team.
3. The Deadweight: Accepts personal flaws but ignores weaknesses
These individuals are aware of their weaknesses but make no real effort to change. They accept their flaws as part of who they are and expect others to work around them. They like others to see their strengths and expect others to ignore their weaknesses. Team members are often frustrated because of the additional work to cover for these people’s inadequacies.
Example: Daniel, a senior consultant in a consulting firm, has Ideation and Strategic as his top talents. He’s brilliant at brainstorming new strategies but terrible at execution. He openly admits, “I’m just not a details person,” and continues to miss deadlines. His team constantly has to scramble to cover for his weaknesses. The lack of effort to improve increases frustration and resentment within the team.
Impact: The Deadweight are often guilty of dragging teams down. While their self-awareness is a small step forward, their lack of action forces others to compensate for their shortcomings. Over time, this erodes team trust and lowers productivity.
4. The Blinded: Resists personal flaws and ignores weaknesses
These individuals neither acknowledge nor address their weaknesses. They power through work without self-reflection, often creating frustration and chaos around them. They do not realize strengths are based on context and use their strengths with no consideration to situations.
They blame external factors when environments limit their results and hardly stop to examine themselves.
Example: Kevin, a regional sales director in the banking sector, has Competition and Achiever as his dominant talent themes. He only focuses on profits and dismisses feedback about his aggressive approach. “Sales is about winning,” he says, ignoring how his cutthroat tactics are driving his team away. His department has the highest turnover rate, yet he remains oblivious, blaming others for being “too weak.”
Impact: The Blinded creates toxic work environments. Their blindness to their flaws leads to very disengaged teams, high turnover, and long-term damage to company culture. The worst part? They often don’t realize the destruction they’ve caused until it’s too late.
Which Archetype might fit you most closely?
Summary: Each person brings strengths as well as weaknesses to any team. At the end of the day, the way we handle our weaknesses impact the people around us. My hope is that this article can be a resource to prompt further reflection.
Written by Victor Seet
Activator • Communication • Strategic • Self-Assurance • Command
Victor is an accredited ICF Advanced Certified Team Coach (ACTC) and Professional Certified Coach (PCC) based in Singapore. He is also a Newfield Certified Ontological Coach and CliftonStrengths Coach. Victor facilitates teams to leverage their collective strengths, get clear on ways of engagement and ways of working to strengthen team and interpersonal dynamics. Victor specializes in integrating strengths-based and ontological approach into his team coaching and leadership workshops. Victor is Director of Coaching and Leadership Development at StrengthsTransform™
