Page 213 - Ray Dalio - Principles

with their preferred role. The five types identified by the TDP are Creators, Refiners,
Advancers, Executors, and Flexors.

• Creators generate new ideas and original concepts. They prefer unstructured and abstract
activities and thrive on innovation and unconventional practices.
• Advancers communicate these new ideas and carry them forward. They relish feelings and
relationships and manage the human factors. They are excellent at generating enthusiasm
for work.

• Refiners challenge ideas. They analyze projects for flaws, then refine them with a focus on
objectivity and analysis. They love facts and theories and working with a systematic
approach.
• Executors can also be thought of as Implementers. They ensure that important activities
are carried out and goals accomplished; they are focused on details and the bottom line.
• Flexors are a combination of all four types. They can adapt their styles to fit certain needs
and are able to look at a problem from a variety of perspectives.
Triangulating what I learn from each test reinforces or raises questions about the pictures of
people I’m forming in my head. For example, when people’s MBTI results suggest a
preference for “S” (focus on details) and “J” (planful), and they come out as executors on the
Team Dimension assessment, there is a very good chance that they are more detail-focused
than right-brained and imaginative, which means that they would likely fit better in jobs that
have less ambiguity and more structure and clarity.
f. Focusing on tasks vs. focusing on goals. Some people are focused on daily tasks while others are
focused on their goals and how to achieve them. I’ve found these differences to be quite
similar to the differences between people who are intuitive vs. sensing. Those who tend to
focus on goals and “visualize” best can see the big pictures over time and are also more likely
to make meaningful changes and anticipate future events. These goal-oriented people can step
back from the day-to-day and reflect on what and how they’re doing. They are the most
suitable for creating new things (organizations, projects, etc.) and managing organizations that
have lots of change. They typically make the most visionary leaders because of their ability to
take a broad view and see the whole picture.
In contrast, those who tend to focus on daily tasks are better at managing things that don’t
change much or that require processes to be completed reliably. Task-oriented people tend to
make incremental changes that reference what already exists. They are slower to depart from
the status quo and more likely to be blindsided by sudden events. On the other hand, they’re
typically more reliable. Although it may seem that their focus is narrower than higher-level
thinkers, the roles they play are no less critical. I would never have gotten this book out or
accomplished hardly anything else worthwhile if I didn’t work with people who are wonderful
at taking care of details.
g. Workplace Personality Inventory. Another assessment we use is the Workplace Personality
Inventory, a test based on data from the U.S. Department of Labor. It anticipates behavior and
predicts job fit and satisfaction, singling out certain key characteristics/qualities, including
persistence, independence, stress tolerance, and analytical thinking. This test helps us
understand what people value and how they will make trade-offs between their values. For
example, someone with low Achievement Orientation and high Concern for Others might be
unwilling to step on others’ toes in order to accomplish their goals. Likewise, someone who is
bad at Rule Following may be more likely to think independently.

We have found that something like twenty-five to fifty attributes can pretty well describe
what a person is like. Each one comes in varying degrees of strength (like color tones). If you
know what they are and put them together correctly, they will paint a pretty complete picture
of a person. Our objective is to use test results and other information to try to do just that. We
prefer to do it in partnership with the person being looked at, because it helps us be more
accurate and at the same time it’s very helpful to them to see themselves objectively.
Certain attributes combine frequently to produce recognizable archetypes. If you think
about it, you can probably come up with a handful of archetypal people you meet over and