Section Manager at a Major Service Company (650 employees, 10 direct reports)
This management training was a completely different experience from any training I had taken before.
The biggest difference was that, as a pre-assignment, I took the aptitude assessment and was able to enter the program after first visualizing my own management style, communication tendencies,
and the way I engage with subordinates through objective data.
The assessment helped me understand in concrete terms the kinds of behaviors I had been taking unconsciously and what kinds of approaches would be effective for different subordinate types.
What left the strongest impression on me was realizing that “the way you communicate and engage has to change completely depending on the subordinate’s traits.”
For example, with more introverted subordinates, it is more effective to listen carefully and create a safe atmosphere before speaking.
By contrast, with more extroverted subordinates, motivation rises more easily when opinions are expressed directly and positive feedback is given quickly and with energy.
Being able to feel, based on the assessment results, that “my own style does not necessarily work for everyone” was a new kind of realization I had never had before.
The feedback from the assessment was also extremely concrete, with abundant advice such as what kind of communication is effective for which subordinate and how I can make better use of my own strengths.
I learned firsthand that it is not enough just to say something. To make it truly land, you need to understand each subordinate’s traits and adjust your words and approach accordingly.
This broadened the range of ways I can communicate and gave me confidence that I can run a team in a way that truly makes use of diversity.
The training itself was also highly practical, with many role-plays and game-style exercises, which made it possible to enjoy the process while bringing things down to the level of actual execution.
Because I joined after first understanding my own type and the types of my subordinates, the workshops and exercises felt far more real and meaningful, and the insights became several times deeper.
It went beyond a conventional training program where you merely “understand” something. I genuinely felt that I could now “put it into practice in the workplace” and “manage in ways that fit each individual person.”
It was precisely because we took the aptitude assessment in advance that I was able to realize both the real difficulty and the real value of management that respects individual differences.
It was a valuable experience in which time passed very quickly and I learned a great deal while genuinely enjoying the process.
Frequently Asked Questions (Based on User Feedback)
What are the benefits of taking the 5D Profile Assessment?
Because the assessment results objectively describe each person’s strengths and weaknesses in clear language, it becomes much easier to understand what should be learned in the training. This raises clarity of purpose and makes it easier to participate proactively.
In addition, the assessment materials are available not only for the individual, but also for supervisors and team members, so the training was able to teach specific ways of managing subordinates and communicating with them, rather than relying on general theory alone. That was a major advantage not found in other training programs.
Furthermore, because this was a management training program, participants were also able to ask questions tailored to the traits of their own subordinates, which was another benefit made possible by an instructor with consulting experience.
How long did the training in these case studies take to complete?
From inquiry ➡ proposal ➡ contract ➡ online assessment ➡ training design and development ➡ training delivery ➡ instructor feedback ➡ review meeting, the process took about three months in total. That is the standard timeframe.
Is it possible to take only the aptitude assessment?
Yes. In this case, because the goal was to improve management by using the assessment results of subordinates, the subordinates took the assessment on its own.
Later, the same subordinates were also able to make use of their results by participating in followership training and leadership training, so the assessment did not go to waste.
President of a Major Food Company (3,500 employees, 18 executives)
This time, our company conducted a special executive training program for all 15 executives. This program was not just about absorbing knowledge or theory. Its purpose was to help each executive fully draw out their own leadership individuality and strengths while strengthening management capability that could truly be practiced in the field.
One major feature of the program was that every participant first completed an individual aptitude assessment, and the training itself was then structured based on those assessment results.
Because each executive joined the program after objectively understanding their own leadership style, challenges, and communication tendencies,
every exercise was much easier to take as a matter of direct personal relevance, and the depth of insight was remarkable.
During the program, the executives exchanged views with one another repeatedly through highly realistic case studies, role-plays,
and discussions based on situations that could easily occur in actual business practice. What impressed me most was that the program created an atmosphere in which people could openly and safely share
their own weaknesses and the differences between themselves and other executives, things that normally do not easily surface. The methods for dealing with subordinates whose values were completely different from one’s own,
or with teams sharply divided in their views, were especially eye-opening.
The approach of solving problems through a structured “opinion exchange method” using actual internal company cases was completely different from the invisible pressure-based style that our executives had often relied on in the past.
The training also respected each person’s individuality and strengths in how they exercise leadership and make decisions,
and because the exercises were tied directly to real management challenges, it strongly deepened trust and unity among the executives themselves.
In addition, the program dealt concretely with themes that are central to organizational leadership,
such as the difference between leadership in normal times and in crisis, how to present a vision and communicate it to subordinates,
and how to manage in a way that makes use of diversity.
There were also many exercises that could be approached almost like a game, along with work directly linked to solving actual business issues, and the executives evaluated it very highly, saying things like, “This was the most practical training we have ever taken,” and “It helped not only my own growth, but also the activation of the organization as a whole.” Through this executive training, not only were each person’s individuality and strengths brought out more fully, but coordination and mutual understanding among the executives also deepened, making it a major turning point that helped us move as a stronger leadership team into the next stage of growth.
Going forward, we would like to continue this kind of practical training supported by science-based individual analysis materials, so that we can further energize the organization as a whole and strengthen overall management capability.