Management Assessment - Essay Example

From my personal Jungian personality type, I am a loyal, amiable, and willing to make sacrifices for the greatest good. This means that I am a dedicated person to the god of my job, especially in the struggle to achieve results. Management style thus is a dedicated type of management that does not offer room for laxity. As a manager with these qualities, I expect my team to be team players in their work, show dedication and willingness to work. However, this type of management style is suitable for careers such as a masseur, vet, painter, mechanic or clerical supervisor.

This means that I have few people to manage in my daily operations. This helps in avoiding overworking others, as I would expect them to show equal dedication to work just like their manager. In most cases, this type of management leads to coercion and pushing other people, some times to the extreme limits. Although this type of management achieves results and targets at an early stage, employees feel more used and exploited, leaving them demotivated. It could lead to a high employee turnover in a large organization.

Five traits, described as The Big Five Personality Model determine the personality traits of a manager. They determine the strengths and weaknesses of a of the leadership qualities as a manager. Extroversion means that an individual is gregarious, assertive and sociable. This contradicts with introversion, which holds that people are reserved, timid and quiet. Managers who portray extroversion qualities are good managers, as they do not limit themselves to their own individual perceptions. Introverts are weak managers who are unsocial, reserved and timid.

Agreeableness refers to an individual’s propensity to differ with others. People who possess a high level of agreeableness tend to be cooperative, warm and trusting. This defines the characteristics of a strong manager as they can cooperate with others easily, show high levels of warmth and trusting enough. However, weak managers’ forms the group of people who score low on the agreeableness scale tend to be cold, disagreeable and antagonistic. This type of managers thus cannot compare with high levels of agreeableness.

Conscientiousness measures the level of reliably of a person by others. Characteristics of a manager with a high level of conscientiousness include responsibility, organization, dependability, and persistent. Such managers are strong and highly reliable. On the other hand, weak managers score lowly on the conscientiousness scale. This is because they are easily distracted, disorganized and unreliable, qualities defining poor managers. Emotional stability described with its converse neuroticism taps into a person’s stability, the tendency of calmness, self-confident and secure.

Strong managers are those possessing high emotional stability, and are calm, self-confident and secure. Openness to experience addresses an array of interests and fascination with novelty. Thus, managers with extreme openness are highly creative, curious and artistically sensitive. On the other hand, weak managers have weak emotional stability. Personality determines the management style people prefer applied to them. People scoring high on emotional stability are happier than those scoring low.

Compared to other big five, the association of this trait to the job satisfaction is high. Thus, people lows on emotional stability are hyper-vigilant and are more prone to physical and psychological effects of stress. Extroverts tend to be happier in their jobs as well as their lives than the introverts are. They tend to perform better than the introverts and require strong interpersonal interaction. Since they have a high level of social dominance, they show exhibit a high level of assertion than the introverts.

Thus, they are more likely to engage in more risky behaviour and miss from work more than the introverts. Managers who score high on openness to experience are more creative in science rather than in art. Since creativity