Personality Type Assessment (Week-2 Individual Assignment) CMGT/530 – IT Organizational Behavior July 1, 2012 Personality Type Assessment The first section of this paper details the elements that a personality type assessment typically measures. The second section contains discussion on the personality type assessment of the author of this paper. In the third and last section, the author shares how his personal assessment outcomes could affect his work relationships with his colleagues. Elements of Personality Type Assessment
A personality profile assessment is typically an objective test where an individual gives yes or no responses to a series of systematic and deeply constructed behavioral and situational questions. These objective questions at a fundamental level assesses the individual’s cognitive mental process and orientations and based on the responses classifies the individual into one of the several personality types. Each of these personality types is associated with different sets of possible behaviors and tendencies that the individuals are most likely to exhibit.
This classification of personality types is by a personality inventory framework called the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), created by Isabel Briggs Myers after extensive testing and research on the theory of psychological types introduced in the 1920s by Carl G. Jung. At the basic level, the MBTI differentiates people’s cognitive functions in four ways, as defined by four mutually exclusive pairs of the dominant or likely mental preferences, and the combinations of these four pairs lead to a set of 16 personality types (MBTItoday. rg, n. d. ). The first pair of preferences, extroversion (E) and introversion (I), is for mental energy orientation. The extroverted individuals are expressive, assertive, outgoing, sociable, and draw their mental energy from the interactions with the outside world. The introverted individuals are reflective, reserved, quiet, and draw their mental energy from the dwelling in the inner world of thoughts and ideas (Center for Applications of Psychological Type, 2012).
The third pair of preferences, thinking (T) and feeling (F), is for rational mental cognitive processes of forming judgments and making decisions. The individuals who primarily rely on their thinking for forming judgments are objective, analytical, and logical. They use logic, reason, and cause-effect analysis to handle any problems and tasks they face for achieving results. The individuals who primarily rely on their feelings for forming judgments rely on their personal emotions and value system.
They are concerned about impact of their actions and decisions on other people (Center for Applications of Psychological Type, 2012). The fourth pair of preferences, judging (J) and perceiving (P), is for mental orientation while dealing with outside world. The individuals who prefer judging rely on the rational cognitive functions of thinking or feeling. They prefer the world around them to be structured, organized, and orderly. The individuals who prefer perceiving rely on the irrational cognitive functions of sensing and intuition.
They typically are open, spontaneous, and flexible; and look forward to experiencing the world in its natural state (Center for Applications of Psychological Type, 2012). Personality Type Self-Assessment The writer used Jung typology test to complete the self assessment of his personal style and the results indicated that the writer belongs to personality type ISFP; that means the writer prefers introversion over extroversion, sensing over intuition, feeling over thinking, and perceiving over judging (HumanMetrics, 2012).
The writer found himself taking the assessment test few more times to confirm the derived results. According to personality inventory of MBTI and the Myers and Briggs Foundation (n. d. ), the individuals with personality type of ISFP have tendency to seek a peaceful, easygoing life with a “live and let live” philosophy. They tend to enjoy life as it comes and define their own pace. They tend to be quiet, caring, considerate, and have a pleasant demeanor. They tend to be very devoted to their family and friends, and have a strong set of values that they cherish.
They tend to dislike conflicts, disagreements, and imposing of their opinions on others (Myers and Briggs Foundation, n. d. a). After looking at the results, the writer understood some of his own tendencies and consoled himself that he did not have to good at everything. He opined that the knowledge of these personality types can help in developing a deeper understanding of people around him. Also while taking the assessment, for some of the questions the writer was forced to choose yes or no when he believed the answer was neither, and there were no in-between options to choose from.
So the writer agrees with Robbins & Judge (2011) that the problem with these assessment tests is that they force a person into one type or another. According to Mccaulley (1990) every person uses all eight processes (E, I, S, N, T, F, J, and P) but intrinsically prefers one of each opposite pair. In the normal course of life, people develop preferences by doing what comes most naturally. As they grow older and wiser, they develop as well as use more of the lesser preferred processes (Mccaulley, 1990).
Reflecting back on his life, the writer agrees the personality type ISFP correctly indicates his default tendencies. Moreover, the writer also believes that over the years he has developed more shades to his personality and has become more balanced. Effect of Personal Assessment The assessment provided an opportunity for the writer to do some self-introspection and become more aware of self. Also the knowledge and understanding of 16 distinctive personality types helped the writer to appreciate others possessing different personality types.
When employees can understand their type preferences, they can approach their work in a manner that best suits their style, including managing their time, problem solving, best approaches to decision making, and dealing with stress (Myers and Briggs Foundation, n. d. b) . The writer could analyze better the good and not-so-good relations he has experienced with his prior bosses and colleagues. The personality type assessment also helped the writer to reexamine his behavior with prior colleagues and identify the scope for improving relationships with his colleagues at the workplace.
As a software development manager in a leading health care organization, the writer will make use of the new understanding of his own personality to improve upon his managerial functions and his handling of the different situations. These functions includes managing others, developing leadership skills, organizing tasks, creating teams, training for management as well as staff, conflict resolution, motivation, coaching, diversity, recognition as well as rewards, and change management (Myers and Briggs Foundation, n. d. b) . References Center for Applications of Psychological Type. 2012). Mbti overview. Retrieved from http://www. capt. org/mbti-assessment/mbti-overview. htm HumanMetrics. (2012). Jung typology test. Retrieved from http://www. humanmetrics. com/cgi-win/jtypes1. htm MBTItoday. org. (n. d. ). History of the myers briggs type indicator. Retrieved from http://mbtitoday. org/about-the-mbti-indicator/a-mini-history-of-the-myers-briggs-type-indicator/ Mccaulley, M. H. (1990). The myers-briggs type indicator: a measure for individuals.. Measurement & Evaluation In Counseling & Development (American Counseling Association), 22(4), 181.
Retrieved from https://search. ebscohost. com/login. aspx? direct=true&db=f5h&AN=9705111082&site=eds-live Myers and Briggs Foundation. (n. d a). The 16 mbti types. Retrieved from http://www. myersbriggs. org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/the-16-mbti-types. asp#ISFP Myers and Briggs Foundation. (n. d. b). Mbti type at work. Retrieved from http://www. myersbriggs. org/type-use-for-everyday-life/mbti-type-at-work/ Robbins, S. P. , & Judge, T. A. (2011). Organization behavior (14th ed. ). New York, NY: Prentice Hall.