Certainly we should take at SWOT at strategic planning exercises.

But why not take a SWOT at other things?

Why not take a SWOT at decision-making? For example, we could use SWOT when determining how to solve a problem or how to come up with various solutions for problems: we can use the 4 SWOT perspectives to generate solutions [IDEATION] or to test solutions [INTELLECTION] or both.

Why not take a SWOT at hiring decisions? We could assess various candidates under the 4 SWOT perspectives.

Why not use SWOT to fight perfectionism? If are not happy with another person's work we can look at that work from the 4 SWOT perspectives…as a test for reasonableness. Particularly, we can look at the risks and or the threats associated with accepting their work. And we can couple that SWOT with the ‘80% Rule’ where - if the work is 80% is good as we could do it ourselves then there's no need to be working to create a better solution. Obviously, this ties in with delegation – so, we can use SWOT to help us delegate more effectively.

When you think about it, we can take a SWOT at almost everything!

Our roundtable, is working together on Simon Sinek’s ‘Discover Your Why’ exercises. I suppose, at the surface level, we could conclude Simon Sinek believes that Why is innate in us and the discovery-of-why process is about remembering experiences and interpreting those experiences in a manner that helps us understand the secrecy [so to speak] of our [hidden] Why.

I find this 'Discover Your Why' exercise very complementary to the STRENGTHSFINDER concepts around uncovering your [hidden-like-secrets] talents and converting them into strengths. Certainly, we can accomplish both these things - discovering our why and discovering our talents - without needing to understand whether drive precedes purpose or purpose precedes drive.

On the other hand, the human condition is fascinating.

And some of us are interested in digging deeper.

I'm suspecting I am one of those people.

In his book 'Good Leaders Ask Great Questions', John C Maxwell said "purpose gives you drive".

That got me thinking. Does purpose give you drive or does drive give you purpose?  I think, at the surface level, John C Maxwell is correct - purpose does give you drive. At least, purpose bolsters your drive and purpose fans your flames of motivation...so to speak.

That said - Where does purpose come from? Does it magically or genetically appear when we are born? Are people destined with a built-in purpose, coupled to a major life-task...i.e., working to understand that purpose? And, does the extent people are able to figure out their life purposes correlate to their ability to generate internal drive?...i.e., the more they know their purpose, the stronger their internal drive.

Is that the way it works?

Or, are people born with a curious internal drive and that drive naturally causes them to do things and when they do things they achieve results. Then, when they observe those results and particularly those results that provide them gratification, people get a sense of purpose – a sense of purpose that aligns with their gratifying results. And, if they find the gratification compelling enough then they consider it to be aligned with 'internal purpose'. Then, with this sequence of thoughts and actions repeated and repeated over time, people conclude - “This is my purpose!”

Is that the way it works?

This conundrum goes to the heart of the very big question: Was each person created with a specific purpose? The alternative being that we were not created with specific purposes and if that is the case then a logical next question is - Are we supposed to create our own purpose?

Regardless...

Don't you think we the ‘captains of our own ships’, able to [if not designed to] determine where our ships are going?