These two dominant models of strengths are slightly different in concept. Strengthsfinder is more workplace-oriented, helping people to do better in their careers and organisations to work better. Values In Action (VIA) is character-oriented, helping people to achieve virtue. I outlined them in the previous article, how to identify your strengths through questionnaires, but I want to look at these two models in more detail.
Given these basic conceptual differences, I wondered whether their respective questionnaires would return slightly different results. If you look at the list of strengths below, you’ll notice there are overlaps, but maybe these labels aren’t measuring the same psychological constructs. Maybe ‘Positivity’, measured with the workplace in mind is different to ‘Optimism’ measured with virtue in mind. Here’s the list of strengths in each model:
StrengthsFinderAchiever |
VIAWisdom and Knowledge |
The bold headings for the VIA are the virtues, the strengths below them are the routes to expressing that virtue. These categories were not empirically determined, although there are arguments as to why they’re distributed as such.
|
The first thing you’ll notice is that there are more strengths in the StrengthsFinder, but the second thing you’ll notive is that the VIA model has no compunctions about grouping similar strengths under one label. Most of the time they are similar, but some of them I feel might be better off separated. For example, ‘hope’ and ‘optimism’ are similar but not quite the same thing; hope accepts the possibility of failure where as optimism is almost dismissive of failure. And ‘future-mindedness’ is put under the same label, even though if you were future-minded and pessimistic, your forward thinking nature could be called a strength but it wouldn’t be picked up as well by the VIA questionnaire.
The VIA strengths are meant to be positive and wholesome, to not have potential to detract if not used or attract jealousy when they are. If more people exercised these strengths, the world would be a better place, both for the individuals and the people they affect. This is kind of the point.
StrengthsFinder is all about performance, becoming more effective and more productive. This does not mean you can’t be virtuous with the StrengthsFinder strengths or effective with VIA: it’s just worth keeping in mind the intentions of the models when you’re deciding which one to use.
For example, my earlier suggestion was to stick to your strengths, on the basis that it’s a harder journey to go against the grain. But with the VIA model based on building character, you might find something like love or honesty at the bottom of your profile. It seems incorrect to say to someone “forget being honest; it’s not your strong point so you might as well just lie to people!”
If your aim is to improve your performance in some domain, then either go with StrengthsFinder or use common sense when interpreting your VIA profile; focus on the top strengths, but be aware there might be benefit in developing weaknesses of character while there’s probably little benefit in developing performance-based weaknesses.
As I said before, there is a lot both models agree on. Ultimately, it’s impossible to know whether the strengths listed in both models relate to the same things without looking at both questionnaires, and doing a dedicated study and analysis. But I expect they are very close, so out of curiosity I did my own experiment; I took both tests to compare the results.
I went to Authentic Happiness first to take the VIA Inventory of Strengths, then the next week I took StrengthsFinder 1.0, using the code from my Now, Discover Your Strengths book. The Authentic Happiness website stores your results, so I intentionally didn’t look at them so as not to unconsciously influence my answers to the StrengthsFinder.
With a sample size of 1, my experiment is flawed, but still, the results were very interesting! These are my profiles:
My VIA Strengths
Curiosity and interest in the world – You are curious about everything. You are always asking questions, and you find all subjects and topics fascinating. You like exploration and discovery.
Love of learning – You love learning new things, whether in a class or on your own. You have always loved school, reading, and museums-anywhere and everywhere there is an opportunity to learn.
Hope, optimism, and future-mindedness - You expect the best in the future, and you work to achieve it. You believe that the future is something that you can control.
Judgment, critical thinking, and open-mindedness – Thinking things through and examining them from all sides are important aspects of who you are. You do not jump to conclusions, and you rely only on solid evidence to make your decisions. You are able to change your mind.
Caution, prudence, and discretion - You are a careful person, and your choices are consistently prudent ones. You do not say or do things that you might later regret.
My StrengthsFinder Strengths
Harmony - You look for areas of agreement. In your view there is little to be gained from conflict and friction, so you seek to hold them to a minimum.
Intellection - You like to think. You like mental activity. You like exercising the “muscles” of your brain, stretching them in multiple directions. This need for mental activity may be focused; for example, you may be trying to solve a problem or develop an idea or understand another person’s feelings.
Futuristic - “Wouldn’t it be great if . . .” You are the kind of person who loves to peer over the horizon. The future fascinates you. As if it were projected on the wall, you see in detail what the future might hold, and this detailed picture keeps pulling you forward, into tomorrow.
Learner - You love to learn. The subject matter that interests you most will be determined by your other themes and experiences, but whatever the subject, you will always be drawn to the process of learning.
Focus - “Where am I headed?” you ask yourself. You ask this question every day. Guided by this theme of Focus, you need a clear destination. Lacking one, your life and your work can quickly become frustrating.
I have to say, these are pretty accurate for me. Curiosity and love of learning are probably my main drives, tempered by my caution and critical thinking. So I’m curious about the world and how it works, but I don’t go jumping in caves just to see what’s in them, and you won’t find me at tarot card readings. I also like to know as many facts as possible before making a decision, and get a both sides of a story (I think I’m going to write many ‘Vs’ articles).
My StrengthsFinder results propose harmony, which is true, I’m the “can’t we call get along?” type, and focus which is also accurate as I’m more of a ‘choose a destination and go there’ person than a ‘go with the flow’ type, which is probably where the futurism comes from.
So, it seems you now have me at a disadvantage; you know so much about me, and I know so little about you. All I know is that odds are, you live in the UK or US, are viewing this site with Microsoft Internet Explorer, and will stay here for 5-15 minutes before you move on. Doesn’t seem quite fair…
Anyway, the strengths that appear in each output are very comparable. The outputs are roughly the same, but flipped. Look at it this way:
In most cases, the questionnaires results have equivalents. You could make a case that ‘Hope and Optimism’ is similar to ‘Focus’, but it’d be a weak one; focus is more about getting to a certain place in the future rather than having a time-perspective pointing that way most of the time. ’Caution’ and ‘Harmony’ have no equivalent, although my 6th strength on the VIA list is ‘Forgiveness and Mercy’, which is similar to Harmony.
This is very encouraging! It shows that both questionnaires are measuring similar things, at least in me. It also makes it easier to recommend one; if they are measuring similar things, go for the VIA at Authentic Happiness – it’s free. If you want to try StrengthsFinder, you’ll need a code from the book StrengthsFinder 2.0 to take the latest version of the test (my results above came from version 1.0).
If you do take one of the tests, I dare you to put your results in a comment. You’re supposed to be doing the things you read on sites like this, not just passively reading them!
Plus I’ll feel less exposed. 
Recommended Reading:
- StrengthsFinder 2.0: A New and Upgraded Edition of the Online Test from Gallup’s Now, Discover Your Strengths
- Character Strengths and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification
- Average to A+: Realising Strengths in Yourself and Others
Share
I’ve done the VIA tests too — very interesting stuff to find out about yourself. You’ve inspired me to revisit my results.
Good stuff, look them up and post them here. Or on your own site. Go ahead. I dare you.
Warren – Great post – enjoyed your insights on the top two assessments out there to help people understand what is great about them!
You are definitely true to your talents. A deep thinker and focused learner. Trying to reconcile the two assessments with each other speaks to your Harmony, also. Your clear slant toward where to take this points to your Futuristic and I see some Analytical and perhaps a bit of a Deliberative peaking out, too.
I’ll rise to the challenge – I am proud of my talents!
They are: Strategic, Learner, Connectedness, Input and Woo – then Maximizer, Ideation and Positivity.
My latest VIA pegs me with: Curiosity and interest in the world, Hope, optimism and future-mindedness, Humor and playfulness, Creativity, ingenuity, and originality and Love of learning.
Different constructs and different ways to look at oneself. There are definitely connections between the two as there are between many of the assessments out there. My view is that assessments measure different things. If we consider the complexity of an individual, think of the assessments as showing us the various faces of the person – sort of like a Rubik’s Cube. We can look at them from many different angles, but there is an internal (hidden) mechanism that controls the movements of the various external pieces. I believe the talents revealed by the StrengthsFinder instrument are the levers that control that mechanism. I also believe this is the closest we have come to date to uncovering the soul’s code that James Hillman talks about in his work.
I am glad you have taken an interest in Positive Psychology and look forward to seeing what you do to forward this science in coming years! The world needs young leaders to take up the challenge of finding a solution to the world’s ailments. Thanks for stepping up to the task!
Thanks for the detailed reply Candace! I immediately thought of ‘harmony’ as being between people, I didn’t think of it in terms of ideas. That’s actually quite useful.
You might be right with the Rubik’s Cube analogy. I’m not sure about StrengthsFinder but there was a twin study done on the VIA strengths which showed a decent effect of genetics on the outcome of the questionnaire. It showed that strengths are enduring and ‘hardwired’; or at least, we are born with a propensity to become hardwired in a certain way. It’d be interesting to see a similar study using SF.
Good to see you took up the challenge! The experiment size is 2 now, and we’ve both got similarities in our profiles so maybe they are measuring the same things.
Thank you for the kind words!
Thanks for posting these fantastic blogs Warren which I discovered today. I purchased now discover your strengths yesterday and I’ve been reading everythign I can about strengths since then. Thought I would also take up the challenge!
According to strengthsfinder my talents are:
Context, harmony, consistency, intellection and restorative.
I’m happy that I received context, intellection and restorative, as I feel that these are areas that could be turned into strengths by acquiring further knowledge and skills. However, I’m unsure how I could take the talents of harmony and consistency and turn these into strengths.
As for the VIA i scored:
Love of learning
Judgement, criticial thinking and open mindness
Fairness, equity and justice
Modesty and humility
Curiosity and interest in the world
So again, some similarities between the two tests.
Thank you Diana for the kind words. It’s nice to be appreciated!
Thanks for posting your results up. As Candace mentioned above, Harmony isn’t just about navigating people towards amiable relationships, but it can be harmony between ideas or concepts. You have other ‘mental’ strengths (intellection, curiosity, love of learning, critical thinking), so harmony could be built into a strength by combining different ideas together, seeing the similarities between positions, and so on.
Yes it’s good to see similarities between the tests, since both had different ways of approaching the research. It makes a stronger case that there ‘is something’ that these questionnaires are measuring.
Warren
Hi
Will post my scores later (including Realise2). If you haven’t tried Realise2, suggest you do. A very different & broader experience.
Not sure what I think the implications are of this yet, but in StrengthsFinder 2.00 (the book) Tom Rath says “What StrengthsFinder actually measures is talent, not strength. … We named it StrengthsFinder because the ultimate goal is to build a true strength, and talent is just one of the ingredients in this formula.”
So, StrengthsFinder measures talents (NOT STRENGTHS), which they define as “a natural way of thinking, feeling or behaving”. They suggest that these:
talents x time spent developing your skills & knowledge base = strengths (which they define as “the ability to consistently provide near-perfect performance”.
Aim low huh?
Hmmm
cheers darren
Hey Darren!
I haven’t tried Realise2 yet, though I’m sure I’ll get to it at some point and see how it compares to these two again.
Yes, that’s the same as the old book. So I guess a StrengthsFinder talent is equivalent to a VIA strength, and the SF strengths are equivalent to… VIA strengths that you’ve deliberately developed.
Why does this feel like World of Warcraft all of a sudden?
Surely someone has done some concept mapping of these major frameworks? If not …
Nope. Not that I’m aware of.
Hi,
Great article and discussion, thank you.
I’ve done both VIA and Realise2. Love of learning tops the list for me on both. I got the StrengthsFinder2 book a few days ago but haven’t done the survey yet.
One of the things I had been confused by, before reading the R2 report, was the difference between strengths and skills. When I had read the StrengthsFinder book, their list seemed to me to be more skills than strengths, which confused me. The R2 report describes strengths as things we can do well, which also energise us. Skills are things we can do but which leave us drained. That was a useful distinction for me.
The R2 report identifies strengths we are using, unused strengths,learned behaviours and weaknesses. I like the separation between natural strengths and learned behaviours. When I do the strengths Finder test, I’m wondering whether it will separate these in the same way as, like most people, there are skills I have at work that I’m good at, but I don’t enjoy them and they don’t energise me.
cheers
Adele
Yes that’s an interesting way of looking at it, though I still haven’t looked into R2 at all. I think the problem with the definitions is that there is no theory behind what a strength ‘is’ or should be. All the definitions of strengths appear to basically be just made up. Even in R2, (I’m assuming!) the researchers have just ‘decided’ that a strength gives you energy, and skills don’t. It sounds nice and tidy but it’s still made up, in a sense.
Because of this, the strengths models are very likely to differ; they are simply not all looking for the same things. Although there have been no formal comparisons of the models (at least not that I’m aware of – there may be), there does seem to be overlap between them which suggests that maybe there ‘is’ something we could call ’strengths’, and these different models are tapping into different aspects of it, along with some other stuff (which might be skills, as you say).
Having said that, maybe there isn’t such a ‘thing’ as strengths, and it’s just incidental that we’ve applied this word to humans, in which case a ‘bottom-up’ research approach is the only way to go. Particularly since these models have been made with an applied end in mind, to be useful in business and coaching, to make money from etc. – and not just an old fashioned quest for truth.
Interesting ideas anyway, thanks for stopping by and leaving a comment Adele!