This reminds me of the "CliftonStrengths" assessment, which I've been trying to get more information on. It's doing the rounds in the indie publishing community

This reminds me of the "CliftonStrengths" assessment, which I've been trying to get more information on. It's doing the rounds in the indie publishing community right now and people get so excited about how they're "high strategic" or "low intuitive" or whatever, you just hear it everywhere. There's authors buying books, courses, coaching, etc. I _thought_ all of this stuff was disproved a long time ago, but I still haven't figured out if this "Clifton" one is somehow different or if it's just authors falling for people charging a bunch of money to train them on their "strengths" as if they mean anything. I suppose even if they _don't_ mean anything, if they help the person introspect and figure out what works for them it's worth it in some way. It just really grinds my gears to see these "consultants" or "coaches" talk about this stuff as if it is totally evidence-based and backed by science. Unless maybe Clifton is different somehow?