I am the best at....

[Wahoo91]

There are generally considered to be 4 main skill areas. According to most theory's in this area you can not be good at all 4 (e.g. you will have a best, 2nd best, 2nd worst, and worst skill set).

These areas are as follows:

LOGISTICS
The procurement, distribution, maintenance, and replacement of matériel or data or the management of the details of an operation. Most people with this skill are detail oriented.

TACTICS
Actual enactment of procedures or maneuvers to achieve an end, an aim, or a goal. Most people with this skill live for the moment.

DIPLOMACY
The art or practice of conducting relations or tact and skill in dealing with people. Most people with this skill are *people* people.

STRATEGY
The development of a plan of action intended to accomplish a specific goal. Most people with this skill are *big picture* oriented.


My question is this:
How would you rank yourself along these 4 categories of skills?

I have been tested specifically for these items and my 4 are:
1. Strategy
2. Diplomacy
3. Tactics
4. Logistics

[astroglide]

i would guess tactics, strategy, diplomacy, logistics

[tek]

I would think that if one is proficient at tactics, strategy and logistics (in that order because you need to know what tactics you have to work with and then design a stretgy to utilize them and then work out the logistics) then diplomacy would not be needed...

[Clarkmeister]

1a. Strategy
1b. Diplomacy
1c. Tactics
4. Logistics

[Victor]

tactics
strategy
diplomacy
logistics

[Victor]

where/how were u tested?

[Wahoo91]

I would think that if one is proficient at tactics, strategy and logistics (in that order because you need to know what tactics you have to work with and then design a strategy to utilize them and then work out the logistics) then diplomacy would not be needed...

There is a very interesting set of questions that come out of thinking about these 4 skill sets. The one I think about is "which of these is the *best*" as opposed to "which of these am I *best at*".

After thinking about it long and hard I came up with my own answer and that was diplomacy, which is not my *best* skill, but I thought that if my gravestone was inscribed with "this guy had a lot of friends and was well liked by everyone" that would be pretty good.

Unfortunately I think my gravestone will be inscribed with something like "he was really logical and efficient" which does not have the same ring.

Anyways...
To answer your question, you really do not *need* diplomacy if you do not mind standing on the top of the heap *by yourself*. However, I would ask what is the use of *winning* if everyone hates you at the end?

Anyway just a thought.

[Wahoo91]

where/how were u tested?

I was tested at work as part of a leadership program for executives.

The testing was composed of three separate tests that were then combined, analyzed, and disseminated by a team of *experts* (behavioral science PhDs and human resource leaders).

I had several one-on-one sessions to go through the test results to verify they matched with my real life preferences and dislikes.

You can get very similar results from the most common personality test (Myers-Briggs). If you know your type (e.g. as one part of this I determined that I am ENTJ) I have materials that indicate what your skillset strengths/weaknesses are at a more crude level (e.g. not as specifically accurate as the full battery of tests).

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been tested specifically for these items and my 4 are:
1. Strategy
2. Diplomacy
3. Tactics
4. Logistics

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is me too.

[tek]

Well Wahoo, look at The Donald. I doubt he is the easiest to work with, but he has certainly mastered the skill order as I listed them...

As to what is the use of winning if everyone hates you? Well, let's see. People kissing your butt. Money, money, money. Power. Chicks (despite the worst toupee ever).

Get the point? /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Well Wahoo, look at The Donald. I doubt he is the easiest to work with, but he has certainly mastered the skill order as I listed them...


[/ QUOTE ] Are you basing this assesment of The Donald just upon what you see on the Apprentice? I imagine Trump is a very charismatic man, who gets people to agree on things. You have to be if you want people to work hard for you. His image on that show is totally played up for ratings, IMO.

[CCass]

1. Diplomacy
2. Strategy
3. Tactics
4. Logistics

1 and 2 are definitely correct, I might have 3 and 4 reversed.

[Senor Choppy]

[ QUOTE ]
After thinking about it long and hard I came up with my own answer and that was diplomacy, which is not my *best* skill, but I thought that if my gravestone was inscribed with "this guy had a lot of friends and was well liked by everyone" that would be pretty good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Diplomacy and being well liked are not the same thing.

I don't naturally make friends unless making an effort to do so, but can be a lot more diplomatic than most if I apply myself.

Having said that: 1) Strategy 2) Tactics 3) Logistics 4) Diplomacy

[tek]

What good would being diplomatic, charismatic, etc be if one were unable to evaluate tactics, plan strategies and execute logistics?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
What good would being diplomatic, charismatic, etc be if one were unable to evaluate tactics, plan strategies and execute logistics?

[/ QUOTE ] You are asking to me answer or refute something I never said.

Diplomacy is vital in the business world, but where it lies on the value scale is debatable.

[Wahoo91]

There is no right answer of course, but if you could pick one skill to be awesome at, and suck at the other three, which one would you pick (and why)?

[astroglide]

i can't imagine many people would pick anything other than their existing #1. mine would be tactics.

[Senor Choppy]

I doubt everyone is satisfied with their greatest skill. If we were discussing our creative vs. mathematical skill, I'd certainly reverse the two.

I'd stick with strategy for my #1, but would definitely give up logistics as a secondary skill if given the choice.

[astroglide]

in this case i do think that people develop them as a result of their personality, but i guess an argument could be made that it defines their personality. but wasn't logistics your third skill? i would probably put it 2nd on you.

[Wahoo91]

I would reverse diplomacy with strategy.

[Utah]

Strategy (Very High)
Tactics
diplomacy (weak)
Logistics (Very Weak)

[Senor Choppy]

[ QUOTE ]
wasn't logistics your third skill? i would probably put it 2nd on you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I was to guess based solely on my personality, logistics would be higher, (and strategy is #1 entirely because of this). But, playing a decent variety of games lately has shown how weak I am at strategy overall and how much stronger I am tactically. In chess I have absolutely no gameplan and basically move around at random at the beginning just hoping to survive until the game becomes more tactical in nature. And playing board games against C.D., he always has a more well-defined strategy going into games, but I can overcome this tactically a vast majority of the time.

I was thinking about how this related to poker, and it seems like my strength is solid overall strategy, but I think it's actually solid tactics combined with logistics.

I think your assessment of yourself was right on btw.

[Wahoo91]

I have given a lot of thought about how this relates to poker and I am fairly certain that the two most important traits are Strategy and Diplomacy.

Strategy is big picture thinking, and involves significant amounts of intuition, which is absolutely required to be a very good poker player.

Diplomacy is the art of creating goodwill among your fellow man. Absolutely required to do that is a very high level of insight into what your fellow man is thinking and feeling in order to say and do just the right thing. This insight into other's thinking and feeling allows us to determine why people are betting as they do and what hands they may have right now and what they may do in the future (e.g read hands).

Logistics is no help at all at the poker table. I can not find one use for it in that role.

Tactics I have given some thought and am not sure what role it plays and how important it is.

[tek]

You don't need diplomacy at the poker table unless you play with the guys at the office. And intuition and diplomacy are seperate skils.

Anyway, who said this topic was related to poker?