While taking the leadership/management diagnostic in class, I was wondering if I was answering all the questions correctly or at least giving the answer closest to what I wish I could've been an option. I scored equally high on C and I, Conscientiousness and Influence, and scored second highest on D, Dominance. When having to pick one high score, Professor Kurpis believed C (conscientiousness) was my most accurate quality. I guess when it comes to my personal life, I'm more of an I (Influence) personality type: political, enthusiastic, persuasive, trusting and optimistic. However, when it comes to management, of work and academics, I'm definitely more of a C (conscientiousness) type personality. I have a tendency to be very careful with my work. I like to take my time when doing work, that way I can get it right the first time, which sometimes is a problem because it is likely to slow me down when it comes to finishing things. I'm a neat freak when it comes to handing in papers or keeping clean notes. I have my own system of studying. I love classes with professors that follow a detailed syllabus and don't mind changes in a syllabus as long as its announced to the class and not some secret, spontaneous change that will ultimately benefit nobody. I also like to know the reason behind the things that I am told to do. For example, when my parents would tell me I was not allowed to eat the entire bag of oreo cookies. I always got "Because I said so!". If I had been told exactly why I couldn't eat all of it, I would've known it was because all that garbage for food makes you sick to your stomach, and I could've avoided a serious stomach pain.
I wish I could've been a D (Dominance) personality type. I'm glad that D was at least my second highest scoring type. I think I could learn to become a type D personality. Perhaps I would turn into a D if it was needed of me to become that personality or possess some of those traits in order to succeed in my environment. I believe this assessment proved to work accurately on several people in class. However, there's always a problem when it comes to assessing someone through these type of tests. Lets say a manager does not hire someone because they scored highest in a personality type that they did not need or want for the position. They might be missing the bigger picture! A person should not be constricted to the options they are given on a test to determine who they are. What if you actually meet the person and they appear to be completely different than what the test determined? Also, assessing someone's preferences through a test is not as accurate as assessing them in person. Even if you do hire that person, their working characteristics might prove to be completely off with what the system had diagnosed them to be. A manager sets standards in their mind about the employee and can be disappointed if the standards do not match his or her behavior. I would not use this in other personal interactions. As right as it was in class with several cases, it seems to me that it would not apply all the time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that there is a problem when assessing people with these type of tests, however I think these tests are to gather an idea rather then completely judge you on it. For example in my test I think more people would agree im extremely conscientiousness as opposed to dominant but I wasn't. I hope people really don't put too much stock into these tests, but I think they do tell a decent amount about what a person thinks about themselves.
ReplyDeleteI also found a lot of the possible answers to be ambiguous. . .I could have answered differently depending on my mood. It is too subjective
ReplyDelete