In order for managers and employees to effectively get along in the workplace they must first learn how to understand and appreciate one another. The Journal of Adlerian Theory published an article discussing the various personalities’ styles in the workplace. The report states that being able to recognize characters from “in workers and managers is important for those who lead or manage as others as well as for those who consult or treat workers and leaders” (page 2). The purpose of this paper is to summarize Exhibit 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7 assessments, it will also summarize my primary personality aspects, cognitive abilities that I can apply to my workplace, and mitigate any shortcomings.
Exhibit 2.5, 2.6, 2.7
Exhibit 2.5 is an assessment that measures the extraversion or positive affectivity of a person. According to the text a person, which is positively effective, is “predisposed to experience positive emotional states and feel good about themselves and the world around them” (page 43). People, who are extroverted, tend to be more sociable and affectionate towards others. Exhibit 2.6 is to measure the neuroticism or negative affectivity. Negative affectivity in the textbook is defined as people tendencies to “experience negative emotional states, feel distressed, and view themselves and the world around them negatively” (page 44). This is the exact opposite at positive affectivity.
People, who have high neuroticism, are more likely to experience more stress over time and often have negative moods at work/ home. Exhibit 2.7 is a measure of agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experiences. The textbook explains agreeableness as individuals “who get along well with other people and those who do not” (page 45). People, who are agreeable, are very likable, care for others, and tend to be affectionate. A person, who is conscientiousness, is “careful, scrupulous, and persevering” (page 45). People, who score high in the area, are found to be very tidy and organized, as well as self-disciplined. People, who are open to experiences, have “broad interests and are willing to take risks” (page 46).
Summary of My Testing Results
In Exhibit 2.5 I scored high on positive affectivity. and answered all of the questions with “true”. This result would show that I am a happy person and views my work and the world around myself positively.
My results of Exhibit 2.6 indicate a low level of negative affectivity. I means that sometimes he feels tense all day because of the challenges he has ahead of myself at work and also gets nervous from time to time. This would again reaffirm the results of Exhibit 2.5 which I have a positive outlook on life. The results of Exhibit 2.7 proved what I was already aware of. I tends to be an agreeable person who is open to experiences. I scored the lowest on conscientiousness, implying that is can be somewhat careless.
I have a strong personality and a lot of good characteristics to offer as a leader. I did very charismatic and pragmatic. As a leader, this would be necessary in times of boosting morale and encouraging others around myself. my view on things from a positive light as well and tends to be open-minded. Cognitively I am numerically conscious, is also able to use reasoning, deductive abilities, and is perceptual. I scored the lowest on conscientiousness, which as a leader could mean that he is willing to take more risks.
The purpose of this paper was to summarize Exhibit 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7 assessments, define My primary personality aspects, cognitive abilities that he can apply to the workplace, and mitigate any shortcomings. People all over the world tend to operate based on feelings and innate habits they learned from their surroundings. Having a clear understanding of these feelings and how it drives our individual personalities can create successful business relationships.
Jennifer M. George, Garth R. Jones (2012). Understanding and Managing Organized Behavior. 6th Edition. Published by Prentice Hall Sperry, Len (1995). Individual Psychology. Personality Styles in the Workplace, Volume 51 (Issue 4), pages 422.