One note before we begin. This article uses a uniquely Japanese business term: jinzai (人財). In ordinary Japanese, “human resources” is written 人材, where the second character means “material.” At INA&Associates we deliberately replace it with 財, meaning “asset” or “wealth.” So jinzai literally reads as “people as assets.” Unlike the Western HR framing, where staff are often treated as a cost line to be optimized, this single character swap signals our core belief: people are the company’s greatest capital, not its overhead.
The people who truly become an organization’s wealth are not only those who score a flawless 100 on everything. A person who has clear weaknesses, yet can score 120 in one area, is also a tremendous asset.
This does not mean weaknesses should be left unattended. What matters is not erasing weaknesses to make everyone average, but finding the place where a person’s strength can come alive. I believe this is the heart of managing people as assets.
Key points of this article
- A flawless 100 brings stability, but a sharp 120 creates new value for the organization.
- With self-awareness in the individual and good design around them, a sharp person’s weakness becomes character rather than organizational risk.
- Hiring that judges where a strength comes alive matters more than hiring that screens out weakness.
- In INA’s people-as-assets management, we value creating places where each person’s strength becomes a business, rather than demanding an average score.
Why an organization does not grow strong on flawless 100s alone
A flawless 100 matters. People who keep their promises, work steadily, and give those around them a sense of security are the foundation of an organization.
But when an organization needs to move forward, an average score is sometimes not enough. The person who notices a problem no one is watching. The person who builds a new point of contact with customers. The person who takes on a difficult negotiation. The person who picks up on a discomfort that numbers cannot measure. These are the people who create the next value.
Such people do not necessarily score 100 in every subject. They may be poor at detailed organization. They may lack caution. They may be more particular than others and look difficult to handle.
Yet it is precisely that sharpness that reaches places the average cannot.
A company is not a place to shape everyone into the same form. It is a place that turns human differences into business strength. So rather than gathering only people without weaknesses, we need to think about how to make the most of people whose strengths are clearly defined.
This is a point where Japanese organizational culture and Western norms often diverge. Many Western workplaces already reward individual standouts; Japanese companies have historically prized harmony and the uniformly capable generalist. As an INA reader in any market, the takeaway is the same: as I wrote in The Challenge of Being a People-Investment Company, for INA people are the greatest asset. If they are assets, we should not line them up into one shape; we should search for the place where each person’s value comes most alive.
Is a sharp weakness really a weakness?
Seen differently, a sharp weakness is often the flip side of a strength. A fast worker can overlook details. A deep thinker can take time to decide.
Of course, we must not romanticize weaknesses. Causing trouble for customers. Breaking promises. Lacking respect for others. Those are not individuality; they are issues to be fixed.
But if we try to erase every weakness in the same way, we can end up shaving off the person’s strength along with it.
For example, if we ask an inventive person to do nothing but check repeatedly out of fear of mistakes, their movement stops. If we demand instant decisions at all times from a careful, quality-focused person, their value disappears.
Gallup explains that in strengths-based organization building, the point is not to ignore weaknesses but to understand and manage them in relation to strengths. This is a very practical way of thinking. (For Western readers familiar with the strengths-based management literature, this is the same principle as CliftonStrengths, applied here within a Japanese company’s emphasis on team complementarity rather than individual heroics.)
A weakness is not something to erase, but something to handle.
The individual knows their own weakness and takes responsibility for it. The people around them understand the person’s strength and design the role accordingly. Only when both are present does sharpness become an asset.
Three conditions for making the most of people with a 120-point strength
Making the most of a sharp person takes more than the individual’s own effort. The organization also needs a design that can receive the strength.
First, put the strength into words. “That person is amazing” alone cannot be used in an organization. What exactly is amazing? Is it the power to propose, the volume of action, the analytical ability, or relationship building? Putting the strength into words reveals what work to entrust.
Second, before blaming the weakness, decide its scope of impact. More important than the existence of a weakness is who it affects and how. If the impact is small, it can be complemented. If the impact is large, we need to work out countermeasures together with the person.
Third, build a team that complements one another. If you try to make a sharp person complete everything alone, the weakness stands out. But when someone good at organizing, someone good at coordinating relationships, and someone good at execution join forces, sharpness turns into results.
Gallup’s strengths research also finds that organizations connecting strengths to daily work see positive effects on engagement and results. The numbers deserve careful reading, but at the very least it is clear, even from a hands-on sense, that “development that makes the most of strengths” has more meaning than “development that only fixes weaknesses.”
People take pride in their work when their strength has been useful to someone. That pride nurtures a sense of responsibility.
The people-as-assets management INA wants to cherish: turning sharpness into wealth
The people management INA aims for is not about forcing everyone into the same mold. It is about creating places where each person’s strength becomes value within the business.
Of course, a company has minimum standards. Being sincere. Keeping promises. Holding respect for customers and colleagues. Even with weaknesses, this foundation must not be removed.
On that basis, I do not want to easily let go of “someone a little difficult to handle, but with a real strength.” Within such people, the power to move the organization to its next stage often lies dormant.
For example, in real estate work we need people who are good at detailed administrative processing. At the same time, we need people who draw out an owner’s true feelings, people who sense a tenant’s anxiety, and people who can change the mood in a difficult negotiation. No company stands on just one of these. (This is a useful lens for an overseas investor evaluating a Japanese property management partner: ask not whether the team is uniformly polished, but whether it has covered each of these distinct strengths.)
So in hiring and development, I believe we must not look only at “how few flaws there are.” More than that, I want to see “where this person’s 120 lies,” “whom that strength serves,” and “whether the weakness can be complemented by the team.”
As I also touched on in Five Criteria for Identifying the Right-Hand Talent of a Small or Mid-Sized Company, what an organization needs is not a mere all-rounder. It is a person who can fulfill responsibility with their own strength, heading toward the destination.
Making the most of a sharp person also requires resolve on the management side. Do not force unsuited work on them. Search for a role where the strength lives. Do not leave the weakness to the individual alone; support it with systems. Only when we go this far can we truly call it investing in people.
Summary | Rather than erasing weaknesses, create places where strengths come alive
A flawless 100 brings stability to an organization. That is a precious value.
But a sharp 120 shows the organization a new view. Reaching customers we never reached. Noticing problems we never saw. Moving forward work that had stalled. Such power is hard to generate from an average score alone.
A weakness is not something to hide. It is something the individual is aware of, takes responsibility for, and complements with those around them. When that is possible, a weakness is not a reason to deny the person, but information for handling the strength correctly.
I do not want the company to be a place that shaves away human potential. I want it to be a place where a person’s strength becomes a business, and that business delivers value to society.
A person with a sharp weakness who scores 120, rather than an ordinary flawless 100. I want to be a company that can turn such people into wealth.
As I wrote in Why Integrity Matures, skills change. But integrity and the stance of making the most of strengths accumulate. Managing people as assets means believing in that accumulation.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1. What kind of person is a “sharp” talent?
A. Not someone uniformly high across the board, but someone who can deliver a major strength in a specific area. They have weaknesses too, but their strength is clear.
Q2. Isn’t it risky to hire someone with weaknesses?
A. It depends on the nature of the weakness. A weakness in sincerity or in keeping promises is a problem, but a weakness that can be complemented through role design becomes an asset.
Q3. What matters in management that makes the most of strengths?
A. Putting the strength into words, judging the scope of the weakness’s impact, and building a team that complements one another. A design that does not leave it to the individual alone is essential.
Q4. What does INA’s people-as-assets management prioritize?
A. We do not judge people by their average score alone; we look at whom each person’s strength serves. While managing weaknesses, we create places where strengths become a business.
Related reading
- Five Criteria for Identifying the “Right-Hand Talent” of a Small or Mid-Sized Company | Designing It Before the Leader Becomes Isolated
- Why Integrity Matures | A Theory of Managing People as Assets in an Age When Skills Grow Obsolete
Citations & references
