What are your strengths?

Have you ever been asked in a job interview, "What are your strengths?"  I can tell you how the character Michael Scott from The Office would answer that question (here's the scene).  He would say, "Why don't I tell you what my greatest weaknesses are - "I work too hard.  I care too much.  And sometimes I can be too invested in my job."  And when asked by the interviewer David Wallace about his strengths, Michael responds with, "Well, my weaknesses are actually strengths."

It's probably best to avoid gimmicks like the one Michael Scott used.  For example, I've also heard some individuals respond to the question, "What are your weaknesses?" by answering with, "I am a perfectionist."  Again, we see the gimmick of answering a question about a weakness by talking about a strength.  But is perfectionism really a strength?  Perfectionists are usually highly motivated, conscientious, hard-working individuals who strive for flawlessness.  On the other hand though, perfectionists can also be seen as rigid, inflexible, and overly critical too.  Moreover, given that perfection is rarely achieved, perfectionists tend to experience high levels of stress, anxiety, and burnout.  So which is it?  Strength or weakness?

A group of investigators analyzed over four decades of research, involving 95 studies and over 25,000 working age individuals in a variety of contexts (see "Is perfect good? A meta-analysis of perfectionism in the workplace") and found that perfectionism is actually a much bigger weakness than most of us assume (see also their summary "The Pros and Cons of Perfectionism" in Harvard Business Review).  First, the results of their analysis supported that perfectionism does have significant benefits, as these individuals do tend to be more motivated, work longer hours, an be more engaged at work.  However, the results also suggested that these benefits come at significant cost, with perfectionists demonstrating higher levels of burnout, stress, and depression.

Importantly, there are likely to be two kinds of perfectionism.  Individuals with the first kind, which is called excellence-seeking perfectionism, tend to fixate on and demand excessively high standards, not only of themselves but of their co-workers too.  Individuals with the second kind, which is called failure-avoiding perfectionism, constantly worry about making failing to live up to their own and others' expectations.  Importantly, the "beneficial" effects of perfectionism are generally stronger for those with excellence-seeking perfectionism, while the "detrimental" effects are stronger for those with the failure-avoiding perfectionism.  Most importantly, the investigators of this study showed that in general, performance and perfectionism are not related - perfectionists are not any better nor any worse than non-perfectionists when it comes to job performance.  They conclude, "Taken as a whole, our results indicate that perfectionism is likely not constructive at work."

So there you have it.  Michael Scott was wrong all along!  I am as shocked as you are...