Each student is required to conduct the following personality self-assessment activities from:
- Week 1 – Myers Briggs Profile
- Week 3 – Costa & McCrae Big 5 Personality Traits
- Week 5 – McClelland Needs Analysis
- Week 7 – Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument
Assessment Description
Over the trimester you have been asked to complete four self-analysis tools to assist you to develop an understanding of yourself. Based on your findings from these you will need to complete a critical self-analysis including:
- Present a brief review of your personal self-assessment findings.
- Present a detailed critical analysis of the findings. A detailed critical analysis includes the use of 3rd party evidence and references to explain and support the meaning of your findings.
- Reflect on your critical analysis, discuss what this means for you as a future leader or manager.
Introduction
Individual self-analysis appears worthy to procure several insights, including strengths and weaknesses. Based on these insights, an individual can make improvements and become a better leader or manager in the future. In this study, the weight is on various Personality Self-Assessment Activities. These tests have been conducted to obtain results, and subsequently, a critical analysis is to be drawn. Depending on critical analysis, essential recommendations will be highlighted. These recommendations are strategies to become a better individual, professional, and manager or leader in an organization. The integration with diverse organizational behavior theories looks compelling to understand multiple aspects of personality.
Overview of Findings
Several self-assessment tests have been conducted, and I have found things that I never imagined. Myers Briggs Profile unveils that I am an extrovert person. It is a great strength because I always take a keen interest in everything. Of course, it intensifies my contribution. Intuition is my significant weakness, and it can restrain me from working in teams. I always like to work with other people, and the element of intuition may impair the relationship. My strength is that I feel better than others do. When working on an individual assignment or participating in a team, I can feel the behavior of people. Instead of creating a perception, I always judge other people. It can be strength or weakness, as both elements should be carried out when working with multiple people. When examining the big five personality traits, I can find openness as my pre-eminent strength. My score is 81%, which shows that I always try to learn new things and integrate with new experiences. I enclose broad interests, which make a dynamic individual. I scored more than half regarding conscientiousness, and it is also my strength. Being disciplined and organized when becoming part of someone or something is my strength. My score regarding extraversion is 56%. My weakness is that I am not talkative. Sometimes, I become assertive to contribute effectively. Sometimes, I become defensive. Consequently, it seems a little weakness, as I am not so certain about it. I like to cooperate with other people, which is my strength. Nonetheless, emotional instability sometimes decreases my contribution. McClelland Needs Analysis assessment streamlined wonderful results. I am always a good achiever, as I want to achieve something when working in an organization. I am also good at affiliation, but social relationships or connections depend on need, mode, and behavior patterns. I never want the power to influence others. I am very certain regarding my goals and objective, and it is reflected in this test. Findings from the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument are also impressive. When working in a group or team, I always accommodate people, and it has become a significant strength. Yet, the biggest weakness is that I am not collaborative, as I just scored 26%. Sometimes, I cannot satisfy people’s concerns when collaborating. It is one of the points to consider for becoming a better future leader or manager. These are some findings from self-assessment, as these are combined from four different tests.
Critical Analysis of Four Topics
Myers Briggs Profile:
Being an extrovert in an organization is invariably crucial to keep an eye on different things. This typical behavior is only applicable to a dynamic and open organizational culture. Even in a centralized culture, being extroverted may become a big challenge. Lack of sense is my weakness, as my ability to work in teams or groups can be dismantled due to excessive intuition. I am good at feeling, as it scored 19%. Critically, preferring feeling to thinking all the time can be ineffective. Being a stakeholder of the company, I have to contain realistic thinking in an organization to make the right decisions. The perception also needs to improve, as I have to perceive the behavior and shape motivation strategies for employees as a leader. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, self-actualization is a top-level need of employees in the company. By perceiving growth and development needs, I can shape strategies to enhance the visibility of motivation (Amato & Amato, 2005).
Costa & McCrae Big 5 Personality Traits:
Scoring well in the openness is good because navigating new ideas and things is always better for individual and organizational performance. Critically, being open in work culture may isolate an individual from goals and objectives. Even during peak hours or in the case of workloads, openness may become irrelevant. Improvements in consciousness are needed. In the workplace, there is a need to be responsible, dependable, and consistent. In the organization, a person must be extrovert because he has to portray his assertiveness to build a healthy relationship. I do not think the score regarding extroversion is enough to build good relationships (see appendix). Agreeableness depicts the good nature of an individual, and in the workplace, it can be demonstrated. Though, regarding emotional stability, I have to make some improvements. Being an emotionally insecure individual is destructive, which may hit the performance of both individual and company hard (Anglim & Grant, 2016).
McClelland Needs Analysis:
In this particular test, my achievement score is 24, and it is quite higher than other elements such as affiliation, autonomy, and power. Achieving something in an organization is worthy to contribute to success effectively. Nevertheless, it can make an individual selfish, especially when playing the role of manager or leader. Average score regarding affiliation is a big thing to worry about because, ultimately, I have to work with a team or group to meet goals. Affiliation is a kind of organizational behavior, which can bring flexibility, speed, and reliability. I am not an autonomous person, as I always depend on others. Despite, critically, when carrying multiple tasks, autonomy must be adopted to meet expectations. The score regarding power need is low, and it reflects my intention. But being a leader in the company, I have to depict the positive use of power to direct and control employees (Rybnicek et al., 2019).
Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument:
According to this test, my dominating style is collaborating owl. It is a fact that I always try to investigate issues with others to find a solution, which is to be generally accepted. Critically, it may not work all the time because I have to consider other’s ideas, thoughts, and reservations, as well. In a dynamic work culture, when resolving dysfunctional conflicts, it seems crucial to align with several stages such as potential opposition, cognition and personalization, intentions, behaviors, and outcomes. I scored well in competing for force because I used to contain aggressive behavior when dealing with dysfunctional conflict, derived from poor communication and lack of openness. In consequence, being a leader, I can be quite able to solve the conflict openly by streamlining my intentions and ideas. Critically, aggressive behavior may hurt someone. The most important thing is to create a win-win situation when resolving the conflict (Psychometrics.com, 2019).
Recommendations
- Based on perceived strengths and weaknesses, some key areas are to be improved to become a better future leader in an organization. For Instance, in terms of conflict management, there is a need to improve the accommodation style. When managing a team or group in the company, being a manager, I have to maintain healthy relationships. Accommodating seems to create a win-lose situation to preserve the relationship. Sometimes, it seems better to keep organizational interest in the minds instead of being so certain by using a competing and collaborating approach. Therefore, the big recommendation is to be dynamic when resolving the conflict as a future leader (Sharma & Mehta, 2017).
- The weakness, as mentioned above, is a lack of perception. Preferring to judge other people in an organization seems useful. On the other hand, when designing the job and allocating work tasks as a manager or leader, the need for perception can be identified. As a result, considering perception is a big recommendation. For Instance, Personality Job Fit Theory comes into life. Conventionally, based on perception, a candidate’s personality types, such as realistic, investigative, social, conventional, enterprising, and artistic must be identified or perceived to create a fit between personality type and work environment. Perception sometimes looks imperative than judging, and the possible transition seems mandatory (Erdogan & Bauer, 2005).
- In the need analysis, the weakness is the lack of affiliation. The appropriate recommendation as a future leader is to create a culture of diversity and inclusion to justify the affiliation. If all individuals aim to achieve something separately, goals cannot be achieved. As a leader, establishing this culture is a valid approach to collaboratively achieve something, which further creates value for all key stakeholders and organizations. Schwartz’s value taxonomy shows openness to change, as hedonism and stimulation can be done through well-controlled affiliation (Sarris, 2013).
Conclusions
In the end, it is to presume that self-assessment tests are relevant sources for an individual to become a better professional in the company. Based on the changing trends, behavior, intentions, and work patterns may be changed, which may also create an impact on results. The future leader must aim to emerge in a learning culture to contain continuous improvements. This comprehensive analysis was based on four major self-assessment tests, and findings set the foundation to anticipate the need for change and become a productive or result-oriented leader in the corporation.
References
Amato, C.H. & Amato, L.H., 2005. Enhancing Student Team Effectiveness: Application of Myers-Briggs Personality Assessment in Business Courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 27(1), pp.41-51.
Anglim, J. & Grant, S., 2016. Predicting Psychological and Subjective Well-Being from Personality: Incremental Prediction from 30 Facets Over the Big 5. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(1), pp.59-80.
Erdogan, B. & Bauer, T.N., 2005. • Enhancing Career Benefits Of Employee Proactive Personality: The Role Of Fit With Jobs And Organizations. Personnel Psychology, 58(4), pp.859-91.
Psychometrics.com, 2019. Conflict Management – Essential To Organizational Performance. [Online] Available at: https://www.psychometrics.com/assessments/thomas-kilmann-conflict-mode/ [Accessed 14 February 2020].
Rybnicek, R., Bergner, S. & Gutschelhofer, A., 2019. How individual needs influence motivation effects: a neuroscientific study on McClelland’s need theory. Review of Managerial Science, 13(2), pp.443-82.
Sarris, A., 2013. Individual differences’, in Organisational psychology research and professional practice. Organisational Psychology, pp.176-86.
Sharma, H. & Mehta, S., 2017. The Impact of Conflict Resolution Mechanism on Employees’ Motivation: A Study of Bank Employees. IUP Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(3), pp.65-77.
