When asked, "What are your strengths?", you might suddenly find yourself at a loss for words. You have done the work. You have been relied upon by others. But explaining your own strengths is difficult.
In such moments, you don't need to define yourself from the start with labels like "I am a leader type" or "I am good at communication." First, write down what you have actually done. The answers lie in your daily actions rather than in words that describe your personality.
The reason you don't know your strengths is that they are things you do "naturally"
Listening to consultations and organizing the issues. Turning vague instructions into concrete tasks. Prioritizing in chaotic situations. These are actions that may be normal to you, but are helpful to those around you.
However, "things you like," "things you can do," and "things that help others" are not the same. There are tasks you may like but not produce consistent results in, and tasks you are good at but find draining if you continue doing them. To find strengths you can use in your work, it is helpful to categorize and organize these aspects.
Question 1 | In the past year, who has asked you for what?
Looking back at the last year, write down three instances where someone asked for your help. Fixing a document, being entrusted with logistics, summarizing opinions. It doesn't have to be a major success. Things you were entrusted with outside of work—such as in your family or community activities—can also serve as material.
Question 2 | What did you do at that time?
Saying things like "I tried hard" or "I cooperated" won't reveal potential strengths. Write your actions using verbs, such as "I organized the other person's points," "I broke the work down into small steps," or "I determined the priorities."
For example, if a deadline was approaching and you organized the stakeholders' input, assigned responsibilities and deadlines, and moved the project forward, focus on the "action of organizing a chaotic situation and connecting it to execution" rather than an evaluation like "being responsible."
Question 3 | What changes occurred in the other person or the work?
Things like "decisions were made quickly," "the need for rework decreased," or "the other person felt at ease." If you have numbers, record them, but don't feel forced to create them. Conversely, when things didn't go well, try to break down the causes, such as lack of information, ambiguity of roles, or time constraints. It is important not to judge whether you are suited for something based on a single failure.
Question 4 | In what kind of environment were you able to perform well?
Even for the same person, there are times when it is better to have time to think alone, and times when it is better to progress while talking with someone. There are cases where you can move better when deadlines are clear, and others where you can innovate more when you have discretion.
Write down notes on "alone vs. team," "time buffer," "your own discretion," and "how you feel tired afterwards." The ease with which you can exert your strengths depends on the environment.
Question 5 | What do those around you want to entrust to you?
If you ask someone you trust, "What are my strengths?", it often ends with compliments. Instead, try asking about specific tasks.
- "What specific tasks are helpful when you leave them to me?"
- "In what situations do you find it easy to rely on me?"
- "Conversely, is there anything you would want to confirm before handing a task over to me?"
The perspective of those around you is not necessarily always correct. However, it still provides material for learning about characteristics of your behavior that you hadn't noticed yourself.
Try writing these four lines for three instances on a single sheet of paper
- Situation: Who was in trouble and why?
- Action: What did you think and how did you move?
- Change: How did the other person or the work change?
- Conditions: With whom and in what environment did you work?
If there is an action common to all three, that is a potential strength. For the next week, try the same action in a different situation. Verifying whether it is reproducible is the key to distinguishing a one-time success from a "usable strength."
As a way to look back at your experience and organize your abilities and things you value, the Job Card introduced through the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare's commissioned projects is also a good reference.
Analysis is a "subsidiary line for thinking," not an "answer"
Even after writing out your experiences, there are times when you don't know why you were able to act the way you did in those situations. In such cases, there are methods to organize behavioral characteristics and judgment tendencies from different angles.
At NEXT SCIENCE's Human Solutions, we use information from the Talent Databank as one reference to organize how a person thinks, acts, and relates to others. The Personal Behavioral Characteristic Analysis (BASIC) is an option for thinking about how to apply your strengths by comparing them with your actual experiences.
Analysis results do not determine your abilities or your future. They are meant to be used in conjunction with your own experiences, dialogue with those around you, and trials in your work.
Summary | Strengths are "verified" rather than "guessed"
Especially when you don't know your strengths, don't start with abstract self-evaluation. Write down three past actions. Find common threads. Confirm the conditions under which you were able to perform well. Try them in your next job. If you follow that order, it becomes easier to connect these to your actual role and work style.
For related information, please also refer to What is the Talent Databank? and an article on thinking about the difference between essence and surface. You can check the analysis menu in the Talent Databank list.
The Talent Databank is not a medical diagnosis or psychological test, and it does not determine the superiority of abilities or future events. Please make important decisions regarding hiring, termination, personnel evaluation, career path, investment, and management in conjunction with actual capabilities, experience, situation, and, if necessary, the advice of experts.