Beth Person

5. Making Smarter Career Choices

Organization Demo

Introduction 00

Back to Table of Contents

We’d all like to have a crystal ball to consult to give us clarity about how to secure a sustaining and satisfying route through law school and on to a fulfilling career. While you can’t look into the future directly, you do have resources within that can be tapped. Use the chapters in this report and the accompanying activities to look inward for important clues to help guide your career planning. Investigate what gives you meaning, energy, and excitement, as well as allows you to use your strengths. Leverage these insights to point you toward the most fruitful practice areas, work settings, and career options to explore in more depth.

There is no ideal time to start, but, as it can take time to find your path, putting off starting until the “right” time most likely means missed opportunities and/or greater stress down the road. Given you will likely commit at least a year of your life to your choice, consider time spent now as a valuable investment in your future.

At Work Guidance 01

Back to Table of Contents

This section gives you tips about how to improve interactions with your colleagues, managers and subordinates at work.

This section provides personalized guidance for ten common “at work” scenarios.  This guidance is written to be helpful for both individuals and their managers or colleagues.  For each scenario, this section provides a personalized advisory narrative.  It also includes topics that will be an “Energizer” and “Stressor” for the individual as well as a scenario-related strength and weakness.  Finally, this section includes a personalized tip for the individual on how to perform best in the scenario.

Why it is important: Many people crave personalized guidance and mentoring at work - and this section provides just that in an automated fashion that is available on demand anytime a need arises.  This guidance will help individuals, and their managers, be more effective at work.

Communication At Work Guidance

Talking to their Manager

Beth typically loves to be able to share in discussion of the theories and models she is using. It also works well for Beth to have her manager identify the theory or model being used as long as it is a logically accurate fit. Beth's pursuit of perfection, using the right models and holding herself to higher standards means that sometimes it is hard for her to provide deadlines for when tasks will be done.

Energizer Evaluating which theory and model best applies to the situation Strength Determining the best theory by which future action will be made
Talking to your manager
Stressor Lack of a solid theory and model being addressed Challenge Providing clear deadlines for tasks
Tip Beth should work to answer those questions that have tighter deadlines

Talking to Colleagues and Staff

Beth is typically great with helping colleagues develop their competence and understanding the theories of why they are doing it the way they are. Her focus on abstract theories sometimes misses the emotional support that certain coworkers need.

Energizer Discussing the theories relevant to a coworker's job Strength Communicating the overall reasons
Talking to Colleagues and Staff
Stressor Colleagues who keep bringing up illogical reasons Challenge Overloading a colleague with theory
Tip Beth should spend less time on theory

Difficult Conversations

For Beth, she will often find a creative logical solution to implement rather than have the argument directly. When the argument does come up, then Beth is likely to focus on logical methods to finding a solution. If she has not found a workaround solution and the issue is left to fester, then sometimes it can result in an explosive argument.

Energizer A common criteria for evaluating success Strength Focusing on the logical ramifications
Difficult Conversations
Stressor Illogical arguments Challenge Holding in problems so long that there is the risk of an explosion
Tip Beth should acknowledge the value of others' emotions

Doing Presentations

Beth is typically very good at taking complex theories and finding ways to display and share them very effectively in her presentations. She typically does her best work on her presentation while alone or with only one or two other experts. If there are too many people involved in building the presentation or lots of emotional issues than Beth is likely to find working on the presentation very taxing.

Energizer Dealing with interesting theoretical topics Strength A presentation that links clearly to logical processes
Doing Presentations
Stressor Having to deal with lots of people to build the presentation Challenge Presentations with a strong emotional appeal
Tip Beth should take time to connect the material to the people

Managing At Work Guidance

Setting Goals

For Beth, it is typically very important that any goals being set fit into the logical situation at her work. Beth likely prefers focusing on goals that directly relate to her and her projects. If either setting the goals or achieving the goals requires a lot of interaction with others and is dependent on their success then Beth will likely be frustrated.

Energizer Goals which require learning and increasing competency Strength Knowing which goals make the most future logical sense
Setting Goals
Stressor Illogical goals with no clear way to determine accuracy Challenge Setting goals that increase interaction with others
Tip Beth should work to set deadlines and increase cooperation for her goals

Team Building

Beth is typically very good at understanding the correct ideal theoretical arrangement for the team. She is very good at understanding the logical order for the team that allows each person to expand their skills and still get the job done effectively. While Beth is typically patient with people as they learn new skills if a team member continues to make the same mistake repeatedly than Beth can become very frustrated.

Energizer Architecting how the team can be its most effective Strength Advising and guiding the team to be more effective
Team Building
Stressor Having team members who are illogical Challenge Having patience for team members who repeat the same mistake
Tip Beth should take more time socializing with team members


Beth is likely to prefer leading by doing her best to help make sure each person is doing their best. She will probably have a focus on leading through a logical and rational approach. Sometimes her preference for logical approaches can leave others feeling disconnected.

Energizer Considering the logical approaches and models used for the mission Strength Making sure that things are logically aligned with the mission
Stressor Too many illogical objectives involved in the mission Challenge Creating an emotional connection with those involved
Tip Beth should take extra time understanding what people involved with the mission need


Beth is likely to prefer delegating by gathering information and then determining what makes the most logical sense before delegating. Beth is probably most comfortable when everyone keeps things at a logical level. Her approach to gather information and confirm accuracy can sometimes not enough attention is paid to dates and deadlines.

Energizer Having space to determine the best process for the delegated tasks Strength Creating logical guidelines for the person being delegated to
Stressor Too much strong emotional response to the delegated tasks Challenge Setting specific deadlines
Tip Beth should take extra time to set final and intermediary deadlines

Growing At Work Guidance

Time Management

Beth is likely to work well with a high degree of independent time to refine the her projects. All her work towards perfection is likely to mean that when suddenly presented with a deadline she can adapt and produce well.

Energizer Having plenty of private time to refine the ideas and projects Strength Taking as much time as needed to refine projects
Time Management
Stressor Being pressured to rush important projects Challenge Laying out clear timelines for when to stop working on projects
Tip Beth should work on defining a few key intermediary deadlines

Getting Feedback

Beth is likely to really appreciate being given feedback that is logical and relates to process at hand. Beth is probably very good and continually refining her thinking as she gets more data. Beth may sometimes fail to give an appropriate reaction to emotional feedback.

Energizer Clear logical reasons for what they need to improve Strength Correcting and making improvements based on logical feedback
Stressor Lots of emotional content in the feedback Challenge Providing emotional support to the person giving feedback
Tip Beth should try to give positive support to the person providing feedback
At Work Guidance Authors
Original work by: Sterling Bates Gene Bellotti © Step Research Corporation

Work Setting Detailed Analysis 02

Back to Table of Contents

This chapter shows how you compare to satisfied attorneys in 6 different work settings based on your scores from the Sheffield Assessment

To help you assess how you might fit in different work settings, this chapter shows you how your results on the Sheffield Assessment compare to those of our sample of satisfied attorneys working in 6 different practice areas.

The Work Setting Detailed Analysis summarizes your results by comparing you to our sample in two key ways. Highlighted are the three traits where your scores are most similar to our work setting samples and the three traits where your scores are least similar. In addition, the right side of your display takes into account your scores on all 22 traits on the Sheffield Assessment, ranking your potential fit across the work settings from most to least similar.

Many factors contribute to success and satisfaction in a work setting. Use this ranking of work settings, and the top three matching and mismatching traits, as a starting point for investigating which setting might offer you the best fit for your future career.

Click the list of practice areas on the right to examine how you compare to satisfied attorneys in each of them.

Work Setting Detailed Analysis Authors
Original work by: Sterling Bates Mark Levin Karl Schmitt © Step Research Corporation