Big Five Personality Assessment Reflection - Coursework Example

Big Five Personality Assessment Reflection Student: Instructor: Course: Institution: Date: Introduction According to a research by Furnham, et al. (2009), personality is a major determinant of performance in organisational settings. This means that training, experience and talents are not the only factors that affect performance and motivation at the workplace. For instance, Woods, et al., (2016) argue that highly introverted and conscientious individuals are likely to perform exemplary in leadership roles in organisations. A study by Bartone, et al., (2009) also concluded that employees who are more neurotic tend to have irrational ideas and poor stress management skill. Such findings make a strong case for use of tools such as the big-five model to analyse personalities in business and other professions. The big-five model is founded on the assumption that people fall into distinct personality groups that determine aspects of their behaviour, attitude, and interpersonal relations [San16]. The big-five model defines personalities along five main dimensions; openness, contentiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism. An individual’s overall score along these dimensions can be used to determine their personality for application in professional and psychological aspects of their lives [Bli13]. The big five can be a very effective tool in understanding a person personality and ways in which it can be improved or strengthened to enhance their work performance and motivation to engage in professional undertakings. [Spe13]. In this paper, I will detail an analysis of the results of my big-five test, with view of understanding how my personality affects my motivation and work performance. I will also discuss how I can improve my work performance based on the result of my big-five analysis. A very brief description of the Big Five Model of personality in general The big five model assesses personality traits through five key dimensions of people’s personalities [Wol12]: Openness-this dimension measures a person’s openness to new ideas, experiences and adventures. Conscientiousness- This measures the level of organisation, work ethic and reliability in a person. Extraversion- this measures a person’s level of sociability and enthusiasm. Agreeableness- this dimension measures the level of friendliness and compassion to others. Neuroticism-this measures the level emotional stability and self-control in individuals. An individual’s score along the five dimensions can be used to identify their personality types and how it can affect their performance and motivation at work. The validity of the tool is emphasised by the fact that personality traits remain static over a person’s life. Due to its reliability and simplicity, the big five model has been used widely by psychologists and human resource practitioners as the primary tool to understand and interpret personality traits since the 1990’s. This means it’s a broad overview to personality traits. However, big five can be used as a guide towards further research within a particular dimension or grouping of related traits [Bha14]. The big five model is a result of decades of research work by notable psychologists including Ernest Tupes, Raymond Christal, Lewis Goldberg. While several attempts to describing personality traits have been advanced, the Big five or the five-factor model has been generally accepted across psychological circles as the best approach towards identifying personality types [Nea12]. Relative strengths and weaknesses in my personality profile I took a Big-five personality test whose results I have included as appendix 1. The results of my big-five test indicate that I scored 88% on openness to experience/intellect. This means that I am a highly creative, original and curious person. People who score high on this dimension tend to be ever curious about new ideas and experiences to the extent that they are not comfortable with routine tasks [ala15]. Such individuals are also likely to look for jobs or engage in tasks that lead them to their self-actualization [Woo16]. These results were an accurate assessment of my personality along this dimension as I have severally expressed my dissatisfaction to work due to routine tasks that don’t challenges my creative and imaginative abilities. However, high openness in some cases comes out as unpredictability or stubbornness in traditional hierarchical organisational structures [San16]. This means that such individuals may occasionally disagree with authority figures particularly when they lack room to express opinions or put their ideas to practice. I scored 86% on conscientiousness. This result confirms my ability to organise my work and manage my time prudently. I am also very careful whenever I am performing my duties to ensure every part fall into its part. According to a study by Woods, Patterson, Koczwara, & sofat, (2016), individuals with high conscientiousness have a relatively higher likelihood of engaging in post-training learning. This means that training efforts involving such persons are likely to be more effective than in other big-five factors. My score on extraversion is 53%. This means that I may not be extremely social. The result also means that I am not particularly reserved. High scorers in the extraversion dimension tend to be very friendly, talkative, outspoken, forgiving and excited by being in the limelight. Low scorers are introverted, reserved and tend to avoid situations that may lead to conflicts. According to a research conducted by Bartone, Eid, Johnsen, Laberg, & Snook, (2009) on a group of army cadets during summer training and academic semester, Extroversion and hardiness emerged as major predictors of leadership effectiveness whereby extroverted individuals made effective leaders. Being moderate in both extremes means that I can be able to avoid conflicts that arise from dominating colleagues and at the same I can articulate my opinions candidly. My score on agreeableness is 57%. My average score means am relatively neutral on sympathetic and irritability extremes. According to Zeidner, et al. (2011), high scorers in this dimension tend to be compassionate to other peoples’ needs and are likely to cooperate with them and support their ambition. However, Wolff & Kim (2012) argue that high agreeableness may also be an indicator of naivety and gullibility which may ruin interpersonal relations if exploited. On the other hand, Myszkowski, et al. (2015) note that low agreeableness personalities are responsible for unhealthy competition within organisations and teams. Low agreeableness may also cause the loss of cohesion between teams as such personalities may sometimes behave rudely or harsh during interaction with team members. I believe that my 57% score makes me somewhat neutral to both extremities related to agreeableness. I scored 32% on neuroticism. This means I am generally stable emotionally. Individuals who score high on this dimension have a tendency to get worried, anxious, angry and insecure during periods that may trigger such emotional reactions. Low scorers of neuroticism are generally calm and don’t react impulsively to stress conditions. While low neuroticism may be reassuring in situations that require and calm or careful approach to task execution, it may appear as a dull or uninspiring personality that is less concerned with taking risks and pursuing ambitions. On the hand, high neuroticism personalities may not be suited to positions where crucial decisions that require patience and calmness are made based on environmental factors [Bha14]. Analysis of my motivation and work performance in relation to my big five test results Furnham, et al. (2009) in their study involving 202 fulltime employees concluded that between 9% and 15% of variance in respondents motivation was accounted for by demographics and big fives traits. This means that there is proven correlation between personality traits and their performance at work. My high score in contentiousness is a major determinant of my diligence and logical decision-making ability in my past and current professional performance. This has been advantageous to me as I have regularly favourable consideration by top management and work incentives in different places where I have worked. I also believe that being strong in this dimension has enabled me to seek new experiences and self-improvement beyond what is readily available to me. In the end I have become an informed professional, with ability to lead by example in different administrative posts. However, I often feel that my preference for order and highly organised operations hinders my ability to innovate and experiment with handling unpredictable outcomes. This has been a major impediment to me whenever I have to play a team role in unpredictable tasks particularly related to sales and marketing activities. My average scores on extraversion and agreeableness have affected my ability to contribute significantly to team efforts in organisations and academic teams that have played a role. According to Wolff & Kim, (2012), individuals with low scores on agreeableness may have limited ability to form strong professional/work networks as opposed to highly extroverted personalities with high level of agreeableness. However, I have the ability to deliver excellent results when working on individual projects at work that in a way or the other benefit the strategic vision in place. I also find it somewhat difficult to sustain small talk in my workplace particularly when I have important performance targets to meet. I believe my average scores on extraversion may hinder future career options in sales and human resource functions of an organisation. How I can improve your Error: Reference source not found in the future I believe that my openness to new ideas and experiences offers me an opportunity to try out new ideas and experiments in pursuit of self-actualization in my career growth and development. Numerous findings by organisational behaviour researchers such as Elorza, et al (2016) contend that highly creative individuals tend to disregarded convention and hierarchy in pursuit of higher goals and achievements. I believe that I can contribute positively to the efficiency and effectiveness in my professional tasks by participating in training sessions and teambuilding activities meant to improve my communication and interpersonal skills. I believe this will improve my level of agreeableness and extraversion to the effect that I can share ideas with colleagues and support them where I can. The ability to socialise with team mates is an important element in enhancing cohesion and organisational efficiency in work performance [Mic12]. I will also focus on personal career growth and development in an effort to further enhance my organisational ability and reliability. I am already a highly organised and disciplined individual. However, hard-work and self-improvement is crucial in ensuring I am relevant and reliable as I grow into my career and make decisions at a higher level. Conclusion Evidently, the big five model is an effective tool in analysing the personality of individuals through the five main dimensions. The big five test is a fairly effective and reliable tool in identifying the personality factors as I agreed with the results of my test. The big five model is widely accepted as an effective tool in business and psychological research all over the world. The results of my test indicate high scores in openness and contentiousness. This means I am a highly organised individual with openness to creativity, new ideas and experiences. However, I scored average on agreeableness and extroversion. This indicates I am relatively less sociable and also somewhat unable to cooperate well with others to advance common courses. I scored low on neuroticism meaning I am relatively calm and emotionally stable. I can perform even better at work if I focus on improving my communication, socialisation and interpersonal skills through activities such as teambuilding and seminars. References San16: , (Santos, et al., 2016), Bli13: , (Blickle, et al., 2013), Spe13: , (Specht, et al., 2013), Wol12: , (Wolff & Kim, 2012), Bha14: , (Bhatti, et al., 2014), Nea12: , (Neal, et al., 2012), ala15: , (Moran, 2015), Woo16: , (Woods, et al., 2016), Mic12: , (West, 2012), Appendix 1 Big five personality assessment results link. http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/results/?oR=0.9&cR=0.806&eR=0.594&aR=0.694&nR=0.438&y=1980&g=m Read More