How I Work

Two assessments — Working Genius and DISC — run independently, converge on the same pattern: I see what others miss, then stay with it until it ships. Here's what that looks like on a team, and what to expect when we're in the trenches together.

The Judicious Accomplisher

Working Genius · DT

Working Genius assessment (Table Group, Patrick Lencioni), Dec 2025. Two geniuses, two competencies, two frustrations. Mine pair Discernment (evaluating ideas on instinct) with Tenacity (driving them to done).

Discernment

Genius

Evaluates ideas with instinct and pattern recognition.

Tenacity

Genius

Drives projects to completion against resistance.

Wonder

Competency

Asks why things are the way they are.

Enablement

Competency

Provides the support needed to get things moving.

Invention

Frustration*

Generates original ideas from a blank page.

Galvanizing

Frustration*

Rallies people around an initiative.

* Working Genius calls these “Frustrations” — a term for activities that drain energy when sustained, not ones I dislike. I genuinely enjoy inventing and galvanizing; creating new things is a core part of my hobbies and side projects. The framework is flagging that neither works as my daily job function — not that I steer clear of them.

What I crave

Trust. Let me use my judgment, instincts, and read of the situation. I bring the data and the gut together before I surface anything, so by the time I raise a call it's already been stress-tested on my end. I'll share receipts and reasoning as deeply as you want — what I need is for the default to be that the call is mine to make once both have been heard. That trust is what turns a strong operator into a force multiplier.
Clarity. Deadlines and parameters. Tell me exactly what “done” looks like — the non-negotiables, the constraints, and the thing that makes the outcome count as a win — then let me do what it takes. A sharp target is the single biggest multiplier on anything I own; fuzzy ones quietly cost more cycles than any other drag on a team.
A vision worth chasing. A real outcome to build toward — ambitious, interconnected, maybe unproven. The kind of target a team isn't sure how to reach yet. Discernment plus Tenacity is wasted on clean, routine execution; it's built for the chewy stuff where the finish line is hard to get to and the path has to be figured out along the way. Point me at that kind of work and I'll outrun what my résumé suggests.

What crushes momentum

“Prove it past the data and your gut.” I lead with the data and only raise a call once the gut and the evidence agree — I don't float half-formed reads. Feedback, challenges, and new angles are welcome and usually sharpen the call. What grinds momentum down is re-litigating the same ground without new information — and when that happens, I'll keep circling back with more data and more gut inquiry until it lands — which is rarely an efficient use of either side's time.
Ambiguity without a frame. Unclear standards, moving goalposts, or “we'll know it when we see it.” When the target is fuzzy by accident, I'll push to sharpen it before I sprint. When it's fuzzy by design — genuinely pioneering work, something unproven or never been done before — I'm glad to dive in, provided both sides agree up front that this is trial-and-error and we're playing the long game. Under those terms, a single failed attempt is a data point, not a reason to cut the effort.

Discernment plus Tenacity. Evaluate the call — then drive it home.

The short version

DISC Profile — The Examiner

SC / Scd

DISCstyles™ assessment, Dec 2025. High-S, high-C: the analyst who builds the systems other people rely on — patient under pressure, exacting on the details, tenacious about follow-through. Productivity peaks in focused work, alone or in tight, trusted pods.

Strengths

Brings objectivity and a deliberate, systematic approach to multi-faceted technical problems.
Follows through. Strong emphasis on completeness over flash.
Factual, authoritative communication on subjects where I've done the work.
Patient with people and processes — especially new teammates learning a system.

Work style

Tireless on complex problems. Will chase a root cause past the point most people give up.
Need to see projects reach closure — half-shipped is worse than not shipping at all.
Quieter in large meetings; vocal and direct once I've formed an opinion worth stating.
Researches to novel facts and angles that tend to reshape the decision.

Watch-outs

Can go quiet when I'm chewing on something — silence isn't agreement, it's processing. Ask.
Slower to commit until the data is in. Can read as hesitant in rooms that reward fast opinions.
Patience with process can tip into tolerance for stuck systems if I don't check myself.
Meeting-heavy calendars tax me fast; I do my best output in sustained focus blocks.

If we're going to work together

Point me at

— A gnarly, interconnected problem somebody else called unfixable.
— A stalled program that needs ownership through to done.
— A vendor, architecture, or plan that needs an honest second read.
— Anything where follow-through is the failure mode.

I can do this when the job calls for it

— Cold-start ideation from a blank canvas with no constraints.
— All-hands evangelism and rally-the-room keynotes.
— Stakeholder conversations where reading the room matters more than closing the loop.

Not my natural genius, but years of leadership roles mean I've done plenty of both. I thrive more when those aren't the core of the role.

Don't point me at

— Moving targets where “done” is negotiable by the hour.
— Roles where constant pitching or stakeholder evangelism is the primary deliverable.
— Environments that reward speed of opinion over depth of follow-through.
— Jobs that treat gut judgment as decoration rather than input.

Think we'd work well together?

Let's talk →Or see the receipts →