Personal Effectiveness Report - Assignment Example

Table of contents 0 Introduction 1 Purpose 2 Scope of Limitations 3 Background 2.0 Literature Review 2 Introduction 2.2 History 2.3 Summary3.0 Discussion3.1 List of indicators3.2 Purpose of indicators test3.3 Definition and Result of the indicators tests3.4 Analysis3.5 Compatibility4.0 Conclusion5.0 Recommendations6.0 References1.0 IntroductionIn this report a team with two people wants to find how to work more effectively and more easily with a partner. Different personality characteristics cause different ways in works.

Personality characteristics are unique for each and every one. As such, working in a team personalities can collide or even assent different kinds of problems.1.1 PurposeThe purpose of this report is to discuss Mr. Eason and Mr Abdulrahman will be able to work effectively and efficiently as a team or not. And then will give some recommendation let them work together.1.2 Scope and LimitationsThis report is just show the two people’s find the ideal way to start their project.However, they have characteristics and different ways to do things, as such, the report does not ascertain accurately the characteristics, it is a collection of data assembled together and assessed from the two participants.1.3 BackgroundMr.

Eason and Mr. Abdulrahman as a marketing officer and advertising officer employed by the Western Australia State Government. They have been assigned to run the campaign with a big problem perplex the government. That is in recent years, many young people have died because of the alcohol related violence. Now with a report written by the Mr. Eason and Mr. Abdulrahman to found working in a team personalities can collide or even assent different kinds of problems.2.0 Literature Review2.1 Introduction2.

2 History2.3 Summary3.0 Discussion3.1 List of indicators1. Hemisphere dominance 2. Myers Briggs Type Indicator3. Interaction styles 4. Big Five Locator 5. Self-monitoring test 6. Emotional Intelligence test3.2 Purpose of indicator testThis six indicators are help Mr Eason and Mr Abdulrahman understand their own and test their character whether they can work together more effectively and efficient or not.And the test also help them find some problem and gives some recommendation let them work more easier.3.3 Definitions and Result of indicator test 3.3.1 Hemisphere dominanceAfter the test Mr Eason’s and Mr Abdulrahman’s Hemispheric Dominance test, the result was as shown in the table below.

According to the theory of left-brain or right-brain dominance, each side of the brain controls different types of thinking. Additionally, people are said to prefer one type of thinking over the other. For example, a person who is "left-brained" is often said to be more logical, anarchically, and objective, while a person who is "right-brained" is said to be more intuitive, thoughtful, and subjective. According to the left-brain, right-brain dominance theory, the right side of the brain is best at expressive and creative tasks.

Some of the abilities that are popularly associated with the right side of the brain include:recognizing faces,expressing emotions,music,reading emotions,color,images,intuition and creativity.And The left-side of the brain is considered to be adept at tasks that involve logic, language and analytical thinking. The left-brain is often described as being better at:language,logic,critical thinking numbers and reasoning.(“left-brain-right-brain,” n.d.)EasonEason’s responded as a right brained person 8 questions, and responded as a left brained person to 11 questions.

According to the Hemispheric Dominance test, Eason use the left side or his brain the most.Type of Cognitive Processing Brief DescriptionLinear Processing information from part to whole in a straight forward logical progression.Sequential Processing information in order from first to last.Symbolic Processes symbols an pictures; likes to use letters, words and mathematical symbols.Logical Processes information piece by piece using logic to solve a problem.Verbal Processes thoughts and ideas with words.

Reality-Based Processes information based on reality; focuses on rules and regulationsAbdulrahmanHemisphere dominance test showed that Abdul responded as a right-brained person to 7 questions and responded as a lift-brained person to 12 questions. In short, Abdul uses the left side due to the most exercise. Type of cognitive processing Brief description Linear Processing information from part to whole in a straightforward logical progression.Sequential Processing information in order from first to last.

Symbolic Processes symbols an pictures; likes to use letters, words and mathematical symbols.Logical Processes information piece by piece using logic to solve a problem.Verbal Processes thoughts and ideas with words.Reality-BasedProcesses information based on reality; focuses on rules and regulations.(“http://capone.mtsu.edu/studskl/hd/LRBrain.html”,n.d.)From this test,we found Mr Eason and Mr Abdulrahman are also use the left side or their brain the most.So in the work they will to be adept at tasks that involve logic, language and anarchically thinking.

The way of thinking in the work they will be very close, to better communicate, to develop in line with their plans and methods. 3.3.2 Myers Briggs Type IndicatorThis test is show the looks at their tendencies and characteristics across four dimensions of personality:Extroversion/Introversion describes their approach to managing their energy level.Sensing/Intuition describes their style of thinking about facts and ideas.Thinking/Feeling describes their orientation to personal values.Judging/Perceiving describes their approach to goals and time management.

The goal of the Type Finder is to help you find the personality type, out of sixteen possibilities, that best reflects your attitudes and behavior.(“theory-behind-typefinder”,n.d)Eason: Extravert(44%) Sensing(25%) Feeling(38%) Judging(22%)Moderate preference of Extraversion over Introversion(44%)Moderate preference of Sensing over Intuition(25%)Moderate preference of Feeling over Thinking(38%)Slight preference of Perceiving over Judging(22%)Abdulrahman:Abdul type is: (ESFJ)Extravert (56%) Sensing (1%) Feeling (38%) Judging (1%)Moderate preference of Extraversion over Introversion (56%).

Marginal or no preference of Sensing over Intuition (1%).Moderate preference of Feeling over Thinking (38%).Marginal or no preference of judging over perceiving (1%).Myers Briggs TypeEason (EFSJ)Abdulrahman (EFSJ)Extravert44%56%Sensing25%1%Feeling38%38%Judging22%1%From this test,Mr Eason and Mr Abdulrahman are also the same type EFSJ.That means they have the same tendencies and characteristics across four dimensions of personality.In this type,they describes their approach to managing their energy level,describes their style of thinking about facts and ideas,also their orientation to personal values,and their approach to goals and time management.

So they can more easier in their work,make the work more effectively and efficiency.3.3.3 Interaction stylesInteraction Styles are how you appear to and interact with others. While your temperament indicates why you do the things you do, your Interaction Style indicates how you do what you do. Both are a part of your personality type.While you can use any Interaction Style to suit the moment, there will be some that feel more comfortable to use than others and probably one that feels the most natural to you.

Interaction styles are based on how informative or directive you are when interacting with others, and whether you primarily tune into your inner world or the outside world for information.(“interaction-styles”,n.d.)Eason:Chart-the-Course:12 In-Charge:9Behind-the-Scenes:12 Get-Things-Going:15The result shows Mr Eason is the type of Get-Things-Going.His focus is on interaction, often with an expressive style. They Get-Things-Going with upbeat energy, enthusiasm, or excitement, which can be contagious.

Exploring options and possibilities, making preparations, discovering new ideas, and sharing insights are all ways they get people moving along. They want decisions to be participative and enthusiastic, with everyone involved and engaged.Abdulrahman:Chart-the-Course:11 In-Charge:9Behind-the-Scenes:1 Get-Things-Going:1 And Abdulrahman is type of Chart-the-Course.People of this style focus on knowing what to do and keeping themselves, the group, or the project on track.

They prefer to enter a situation having an idea of what is to happen. They identify a process to accomplish a goal and have a somewhat contained tension as they work to create and monitor a plan. The aim is not the plan itself, but to use it as a guide to move things along toward the goal. Their informed and deliberate decisions are based on.Eason and Abdulrahman is not the same type in this test.Eason is more focus on interaction and exploring options and possibilities, making preparations, discovering new ideas, and sharing insights are all ways they get people moving along.

Abdulrahman is focus on knowing what to do and keeping themselves.He focus the process, how to do one thing, according to the plan he developed, step by step to complete.They can be a good combination of the two characters,Abdulrahman is responsible for developing detailed plans, step by step. Eason is responsible each team member to mobilize the enthusiasm, their ideas, the advantages are found out. 3.3.4 Big Five LocatorBig five locators are openness,conscientiousness,extraversion,agreeableness,and neuroticism.

Beneath each global factor, a cluster of correlated and more specific primary factors are found; for example, extraversion includes such related qualities as gregariousness, assertiveness, excitement seeking, warmth, activity, and positive emotions.The Big Five model is able to account for different traits in personality without overlapping. During studies, the Big Five personality traits show consistency in interviews, self-descriptions and observations. Moreover, this five-factor structure seems to be found across a wide range of participants of different ages and of different cultures.

(De Janasz, 2011, p. 19)Eason:Emotional Stability:13Extroversion:17Openness to Experience:18 Agreeableness:17Conscientiousness:19 Abdulrahman:Conscientiousness 17Extraversion 13Agreeableness 18Openness to Experience 14Emotional Stability 14According to the test,Eason is higher score in conscientiousness and openness to experience.Then Abdulrahman is agreeableness and conscientiousness.They are all conscientiousness,that’s means they were have the they will be more responsible, more serious effort to work together. 3.3.

5 Self-MonitoringSelf-monitorers try to understand how individuals and groups will perceive their actions. Some personality types commonly act spontaneously and others are more apt to purposely control and consciously adjust their behavior. Self-monitoring, is defined as, a personality trait that refers to an ability to regulate behavior to accommodate social situations. People who closely monitor themselves are categorized as high self-monitors and often behave in a manner that is highly responsive to social cues and their situational context.

High self-monitors can be thought of as social pragmatists who project images in an attempt to impress others and receive positive feedback.(De Janasz, 2011, p. 24)Eason: According to answer the 13 questions, got the score 40.And the High self-monitoring are defined as those with scores of 53 or higher.Abdulrahman:As we know that there are two kinds of self-monitoring test, which are High-self-monitor and Low-self monitor. In fact, people who are tending to the High-self monitor are those who concern how other people think about them, while the Low-self monitor is inclined to those who don’t worry about people.

Abdul score is 43 that is under the required number of High-self monitor. From this test Eason and Abdulrahman are all get the high score in the self monitor,they are high-self monitor.When they work together,they will supervise each other, help each other, at work and better play their role in making the work more effective and more efficient. 3.3.6 Emotional Intelligence testThe result shows Eason got 32 he has a good level of emotional intelligence.Abdulrahman according from the test got 24,that’s means he should 4.

0 ConclusionWhereas it is true that there is a great level of similarity with respect to the Myers-Briggs test results that were determined, it should not be understood that similarity of these individuals alone is a determination that success will ultimately, of their partnership. Where is it is of course the hand goal of this analysis, and indeed of the partnership to produce a positive outcome, the overall similarity with respect to the different scores that were achieved denotes a potential situation in which the strengths of each team member are not necessarily complemented by the strengths of the other.

Additionally, the weaknesses of each team member are not necessarily lessened as a result of the strengths of their counterpart. In an ideal situation, these would be complementary and the overall process of engagement and teamwork would become easier as a direct result of the different ratios of strengths and weaknesses of both individuals exhibit. However, due to the overall level of similarity that exists between these team members, it is likely that the difficulty will arise within the partnership and hardship will be evidenced with respect to the fact that both individuals will be strong within the same topics, and many of the same ways, and both individual will likely be the with regard to several aspects of the project, both with an extraordinarily similar way as well.

As a function of addressing these differentials, as negligible as they are, and seeking to promote a more meaningful relationship within the partnership of teamwork, the recommendation section will focus specifically upon what means of address can be directed towards improving the situation that has thus far been defined.5.0 Recommendationsin much the same way that individual tasks are delivered to team members as a function of ensuring that projects and goals are met on time, the results of this Myers-Briggs test should be utilized to direct a new focus towards the way in which these team members engage with aspects of the project at hand.

For instance, in recognizing the fact that neither one of these individuals scores necessarily high with respect to leadership, it is necessary to encourage a preliminary decision to be made with regard to which individual within this partnership will be the one responsible for encouraging deadlines to be met, making important decisions, and otherwise exhibiting a degree of leadership. If this preliminary decision is not made, it is highly likely that a situation will be evidenced in which a total lack of leadership weakens the end result that these individuals would otherwise be able to achieve.

Likewise, whereas the strength of logic and left brain dominant activities is exhibited within both individuals, a designation of weaknesses should also be categorized and assigned with respect to a review of processes and consideration for the way in which an alternative approach might necessarily improve upon the effectiveness and quality of the work that is being performed. By keeping metrics of weakness in mind and reviewing them, these stakeholders will be much more likely to improve the overall finished result of their interaction; rather than relying solely upon their very similar strengths as a function of completing the project at hand.6.0 References(Practicing College Study Skills: Strategies for Success 3rd edition, to be published 2003,form http://capone.mtsu.edu/studskl/hd/hemispheric_dominance.html)(Copyright © 1998-2013 HumanMetrics.

All Rights Reserved,from http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jtypes2.asp)Berens, L.V. (2008). Understanding yourself and others: An introduction to interaction styles 2.0. California: Telos Publications.Rothmann, S. & Coetzer, E. P. (2003) The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29 (1), 68-74Janasz, S. D., Wood, G., Gottschalk, L., Dowd, K., & Schneider, B. (2007). Interpersonal Skills In Organisations. Sydney: McGraw-Hill Irwin.(De Janasz, 2011, p. 19)(De Janasz, 2011, p. 24)