Growth Resources - Recent changes [en]

General Framework

Flc — Sun, 13 Sep 2026 05:02:35 GMT

Framework’s Development

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:02, 13 September 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 32:		Line 32:
	The observations from the large field were from primary sources: direct observations of companies and their people, and secondary sources: testimony from publishing companies, consultants, journalists, and various documents collected. The interaction between the large and small fields happened once the first framework was built. Observations from the small field and between the two case studies stimulated new observations in the large field, and vice versa, while moving back and forth between the large and small fields after the testing phase began.		The observations from the large field were from primary sources: direct observations of companies and their people, and secondary sources: testimony from publishing companies, consultants, journalists, and various documents collected. The interaction between the large and small fields happened once the first framework was built. Observations from the small field and between the two case studies stimulated new observations in the large field, and vice versa, while moving back and forth between the large and small fields after the testing phase began.

	The framework was built <ref>See more information in these articles about [[Hypotheses_Formulation \| the formulation of the hypotheses]], [[ Anticipated_Conclusions\| the anticipated conclusions]], and [[Indicators_and_Their_Measurement \| the indicators of the framework and their measurement]].</ref>, and successfully tested on case studies of the small testing field<ref>[[Framework_First_Test \| See here ~~nore~~ information about the two case studies used to test the first framework.]]</ref>. The concepts, assessment techniques, and theories supporting the frameworks in psychology, sociology, social interactionism, organizational behavior, leadership, and semiotics (the analysis and philosophy of signs) have been documented<ref>See [[ Theories_Behind_the_Framework \| here about the theories ~~beind~~ the framework]], and [[Operationalization_of_Concepts \| here about the ~~operationslizations~~ of the concepts.]]</ref>.		The framework was built <ref>See more information in these articles about [[Hypotheses_Formulation \| the formulation of the hypotheses]], [[ Anticipated_Conclusions\| the anticipated conclusions]], and [[Indicators_and_Their_Measurement \| the indicators of the framework and their measurement]].</ref>, and successfully tested on case studies of the small testing field<ref>[[Framework_First_Test \| See here more information about the two case studies used to test the first framework.]]</ref>. The concepts, assessment techniques, and theories supporting the frameworks in psychology, sociology, social interactionism, organizational behavior, leadership, and semiotics (the analysis and philosophy of signs) have been documented<ref>See [[ Theories_Behind_the_Framework \| here about the theories behind the framework]], and [[Operationalization_of_Concepts \| here about the operationalization of the concepts.]]</ref>.

	The first framework laid the foundation for the second phase, which lasted from 2006 to 2012. Personality research has firmly confirmed the universality and nature of the factors employed. The Internet enabled unprecedented levels of data collection, usage, and analysis. Although observations were saturated after the first framework was created, the rise of coaching, advancements in well-being, and the use of typology assessments created new opportunities for observation. After 2005, major exploration areas became increasingly focused on the U.S., particularly the Bay Area.		The first framework laid the foundation for the second phase, which lasted from 2006 to 2012. Personality research has firmly confirmed the universality and nature of the factors employed. The Internet enabled unprecedented levels of data collection, usage, and analysis. Although observations were saturated after the first framework was created, the rise of coaching, advancements in well-being, and the use of typology assessments created new opportunities for observation. After 2005, major exploration areas became increasingly focused on the U.S., particularly the Bay Area.

Adaptive Profile

Flc — Sat, 12 Sep 2026 23:47:00 GMT

Relearning individual and group Performance

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 12 September 2026
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=Introduction=		=Introduction=
	[[File:Profile Detailed.png\|right\|400px]]		[[File:Profile Detailed.png\|right\|400px]]
	This article presents some key characteristics of adaptive profiles. Adaptive profiles are profiles like the one on the right. They represent a person’s social behavior and performance in context. The measures are pivotal in GRI's approach to understanding how people behave, think and feel more objectively. The ~~information~~ is also used at a job and organizational ~~level~~.		This article presents some key characteristics of adaptive profiles. Adaptive profiles are profiles like the one on the right. They represent a person’s social behavior and performance in context. The measures are pivotal in GRI's approach to understanding how people behave, think, and feel more objectively. The profile representation is also used to characterize the behaviors required at the job and organizational levels.

	=What the Adaptive Profile Tells=		=What the Adaptive Profile Tells=
Line 18:		Line 18:
	Measures comparable to the GRI are usually presented in various formats, such as reports, histograms, scatter charts, or pie charts. The different formats are combined in reports.		Measures comparable to the GRI are usually presented in various formats, such as reports, histograms, scatter charts, or pie charts. The different formats are combined in reports.

	The conciseness of the adaptive profiles has proven ~~its advantage in~~ efficiently learning, memorizing, and using information about people and jobs whenever needed: What’s expected in the job ~~that~~ can be found in people? What energy does it take to adapt to the job or a situation? With the adaptive profiles, the comparisons and answers are immediate. Each of the four factors adds meaning to the three others. The four factors combine in the profile, bringing many nuances that would be impossible with a different representation.		The conciseness of the adaptive profiles has proven advantageous for efficiently learning, memorizing, and using information about people and jobs whenever needed: What’s expected in the job can be found in people. What energy qnd skills does it take to adapt to the job or a situation? With the adaptive profiles, the comparisons and answers are immediate. Each of the four factors adds meaning to the three others. The four factors combine in the profile, bringing many nuances that would be impossible with a different representation.

	Our brain interprets symbols by processing them instantly, along with the information connected to them, other information, and context. As we have studied at GRI, the data conveyed by the profiles rapidly becomes extensive. With the profiles, once learned, users can enhance the quality of their judgment whenever necessary, which, with people, can be constant, especially in management. Once learned, the visually condensed representation is the most powerful aspect of the measure.		Our brain interprets symbols by processing them instantly, along with the information connected to them, other information, and context. As we have studied at GRI, the data conveyed by the profiles rapidly becomes extensive. With the profiles, once learned, users can enhance the quality of their judgment whenever necessary, which, with people, can be constant, especially in management. Once learned, the visually condensed representation is the most powerful aspect of the measure.
Line 38:		Line 38:

	=Relearning individual and group Performance=		=Relearning individual and group Performance=
	~~Like~~ with any other measure ~~and~~ instrument, trusting their utility for the first time requires understanding the limitations of what they ~~are replacing~~ and envisioning the benefits of the new measure. Being interested in a more objective, refined understanding of how people function and adapt only happens after experiencing the limitations of one's own private techniques and eventually of ~~other techniques being used~~.		As with any other measure or instrument, trusting their utility for the first time requires understanding the limitations of what they replace and envisioning the benefits of the new measure. Being interested in a more objective, refined understanding of how people function and adapt only happens after experiencing the limitations of one's own private techniques and, eventually, those of others.

	Learning the adaptive profiles takes little time, typically around 15 hours. Both their learning and use ~~happen with an~~ interest and curiosity in how people and organizations can better ~~perform~~. The adaptive profile will then be useful for that end, not just by looking at individuals but also at what their ~~organization needs~~ to perform, and ~~for which the profiles~~ will provide new perspectives.		Learning the adaptive profiles takes little time, typically around 15 hours. Both their learning and use are driven by interest and curiosity about how people and organizations can perform better. The adaptive profile will then be useful for that end, not just by looking at individuals but also at what their organizations need to perform, and it will provide new perspectives.

	=Notes=		=Notes=

Row Results

Flc — Mon, 31 Aug 2026 20:14:21 GMT

Results Data

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:14, 31 August 2026
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 159:		Line 159:
	\|-		\|-
	! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)		! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
			\|-
			\| 2026 \|\| Romania \|\| 5:51.88 \|\| Great Britain \|\| 5:52:76 \|\| 0.88
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2025 \|\| Netherlands \|\| 6:08.10 \|\| Canada \|\| 6:10.83 \|\| 2.73		\| 2025 \|\| Netherlands \|\| 6:08.10 \|\| Canada \|\| 6:10.83 \|\| 2.73
Line 249:		Line 251:
	\|-		\|-
	! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)		! Year !! Winning Crew !! Time !! Second Place !! Time !! Margin(sec)
			\|-
			\| 2026 \|\| Netherlands \|\| 5:17.75 \|\| Great Britain \|\| 5:17.81 \|\| 0.06
	\|-		\|-
	\| 2025 \|\| Netherlands \|\| 5:27.67 \|\| Great Britain \|\| 5:29.93 \|\| 2.26		\| 2025 \|\| Netherlands \|\| 5:27.67 \|\| Great Britain \|\| 5:29.93 \|\| 2.26