M5 – Personality

Don’t forget to “log in,” first. Then, respond to this post by scrolling to the bottom and selecting “Post Comment.”

  • Remember, initial posts are due Wednesday at 11:30 PM
  • Your posts must be professionally written and articulated well for a 300-level collegiate course.
  • Select “Reply” under your classmates post to respond to them.  Remember, replies to your classmates are due by Saturday at 11:30 PM

M5 (Week 5) Assignment

As a current or future supervisor, you will be responsible for leading a team of employees to help achieve organizational objectives. Understanding personality and values will help you determine the best techniques to keep your team focused, motivated and effective.

What is your biggest take away from this chapter on Personality and Values?  How will you use it as a supervisor in the future?

98 Comments for “M5 – Personality”

Alyssa Fowler

says:

My biggest take away from chapter five, which was based around personality is that I identified with a lot of the key factors throughout the chapter in what we should be able to know about others, as well as ourselves. I thoroughly enjoyed the MBTI model, mostly because I feel as though I possess all of those qualities at a certain level and I have demonstrated those characteristics in my own work. It does create a sense of accomplishment and desire for what the future may hold for me. I have also been able to identify some weaknesses of mine, which were mostly based around being able to pick up on how others feel especially when they are surface acting.

Chris

Chris

says:

One of my biggest take aways from this chapter is the importance of a supervisor to “learn” their employees. You have to realize that most of your employees were probably raised differently or come from very different backgrounds. These differences could be economic, societal, or perhaps even regional. As someone who spent many years in the south I have observed a big differences in social norms, especially the family unit and the raising of children. People who were raised in the northeast United States are very different than those raised in the deep South or the Midwest, People from the West Coast are very different than those from the East Coast. I’m not saying that one is better than the other, but am just noting that there seems to be many, very distinct differences. With that said, if you have a geographically verse group of employees, their value system and subsequently their personality types may be very different. I think that it is extremely important to make an effort, without prying of being too nosey, to get to know your employees. Its also very important to try to understand the different values that each employee has so that you learn how to promote diversity and tolerance amongst you co-worker.

Moses

says:

That’s all true. But what I loved about this chapter is that there’s this system that discusses and describes our differences without using geography or where we are from or how we were raised. And it is objective and can describe any one individual pretty well. This chapter is the toughest for me yet because it seems to cover a wide range of topics other than personality and values on behavior. I am learning a lot from this one!

Saskia.Parkerson

Saskia.Parkerson

says:

Good evening Chris,
I like that you mentioned that your employees were probably raised differently than you and will react to situations differently because of that. You brought some good insight to the table through your post. All employees are different and the most important thing for supervisors to remember is that everyone is different and that not everyone will react the same.

Alyssa Fowler

says:

I agree that it is so important for managers to establish some sort of relationship with their employees so they can tell when something is off with them. It also helps to create a sense of safety and security in the workplace, as I have had many managers who I felt very comfortable with when addressing all types of situations and that was mostly because we had established a level of trust with one another. I do feel this is the most important thing about being a manager, is remembering that we are all human and we all go through things. Some may think it makes them more vulnerable and more easy to take advantage of but I believe it to be viewed as a strength, when a manager can take a step back from work and empathize with their employees and coworkers.

Austyn

Austyn

says:

The most interesting take away from this chapter came in the form of one of the “Myth or Science” sections. Can we accurately judge individuals’ personalities a few seconds after meeting them? It turns out we can! After giving people only a few seconds to introduce themselves to each other, participants were asked to rate each others extraversion. Surprisingly, most ratings were in-line with the individuals self-reported extraversion! The section goes on how we can make these same extrapolations from online profiles or pictures as well. Its important to trust your gut sometimes!

ateslow

says:

Yes! i agree that was a very interesting sections, although I am very curious what would happen misjudges. Personally though i just cant believe that someone can really judge someone based off there online profile since it so easy in this day in age to project false information to the people viewing your profile.

Saskia.Parkerson

Saskia.Parkerson

says:

Good evening Austyn,
I also liked the thought process behind being able to judge someone after a few seconds of knowing them. We get an initial thought about someone and most people will not forget that first impression when it comes to working with that person later on. Being able to work with people is important for supervisor and not continuing to think the same of that person even based off of their first impression.

cgmcmakin

cgmcmakin

says:

My biggest takeaway from this week was that knowing and understanding the different personalities of the people around you is vital in having a productive and cohesive workplace. Furthermore, considering specific personality types is important when determining job responsibility delegation. Dr. Larry G. Lee, author of “Personal Diversity Management”, confirmed that interpersonal relationship insights help individuals understand and interpret behaviors from diverse perspectives (Sharon Fink, Considering Personality as an Element of Diversity). Awareness of the variety of personalities in your workplace helps supervisors manage their employees and helps employees manage their relationships with each other.
Another takeaway I saw was that most of these personality types have coinciding downfalls. This must be considered as well when hiring, promoting, or delegating tasks. For example the Big Five trait, conscientiousness, is considered to be the strongest predictor of job performance but they are susceptible to putting their work first and ignoring other important things like family and helping other co-workers. While a conscientious person may excel in job performance, their personal pitfalls may do more bad than good for your organization.

arbankston

says:

Personality is going to vary amongst every individual and as a manager it is important to be aware of the differences among employees and how to work with them. Tests are available to identify personalities and while they may not always be accurate, they’re at least a starting point. You can also observe and identify patterns in behavior and actions displayed by employees. I think the most important part of understanding personalities is also learning your own personality and how you work with others as well as lead others.

cgmcmakin

cgmcmakin

says:

With your first statement, I think you could dive deeper into the varying personality types of individuals. I don’t believe that you should completely trust personality types because while two people may fall into the same exact category, they are likely to different values and exhibit different downfalls of the same personality which could in turn make them two completely different people. I thinks it’s as important to know the pitfalls of each personality type as well as the positives.

mabarreto2

mabarreto2

says:

I agree full-heartedly with your comment about understanding your own personality being the most important part. I feel like people tend to do very little self-reflection. People should learn about themselves more so they can better understand what makes them tick. If people did this more, they can change behaviors and identify patterns within themselves to create solutions to their own problems. Working on yourself is paramount when being in charge of a group of people.

racheledson

racheledson

says:

Hello,
I completely agree that since personalities and values are different for each individual, learning about the pros and cons of various personalities and implementing various personality tests can be a big asset to companies. As we learned in the text, using various tests and theories (such as the MBTI and Holland’s personality-job fit theory) can help managers speculate which candidate would be the best fit for the job (Organizational Behavior, 137). I like how you also mentioned who this chapter can help us learn about ourselves. Albeit I did not think of that, it really would help to learn about my personality type and work on my self-monitoring.
Great post!

Chris

Chris

says:

Yes, it is extremely important as a manager to have a solid working understanding of your own personality traits and value systems. As a manager, you are going to supervise people who may not have the same value system that you do. You have to remember that expressing your values may be offensive to someone with a different set of values. Personality differences can be tricky as well so it is very important to understand your own so that it does not impose on others.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

Yes, those personality tests can be helpful. Many times, just learning who they are, talking with them about non work stuff and taking an interest in them as people helps go a long way.

Alyssa Fowler

says:

I touched base on the fact that it is important to be in tune with yourself and your strengths and weaknesses in my post. I strongly agree that yes, you can benefit from knowing your employees but if you do not take the opportunities to grow into a more self aware and empathetic person, you will just be another manager asking your employees to do things you would never do. In my opinion, many people are not self aware which creates a lot of animosity in a workplace. This can help to be avoided on all parts, when employees are more likely to be open to different personality characteristics and express their emotions in healthy ways that benefit the team as a whole rather than just one individual. I loved this chapter.

asreber

asreber

says:

My biggest take away from this chapter was the Big Five Personality Model. I had not heard of this model before. I found it interesting because the five basic dimensions can accurately predict how people will behave in real life situations. This would be beneficial in a work setting where you need to assign specific tasks to the right person. I also found the Dark Triad interesting. When I saw the “Dark Triad” heading, I immediately thought of a sinister organization trying to take over the world. In a way its true, because it allows you to identify personality traits that can bring harm to their careers and ultimately your organization in the right setting or situation.
As a future supervisor these personality tests and traits can be useful, but I also think that they are not the whole answer and should be kept in perspective.

Austyn

Austyn

says:

asreber,
Absolutely! You can’t value an employee solely off of a personality test, but these tests used with other methods can help narrow down an employee selection. Especially if there are alot of applications! As for the dark triad. People who have these traits are toxic, and like you said can ultimately cause harm to your organization.

Austyn B

Austyn

Austyn

says:

The most interesting take away from this chapter came in the form of one of the “Myth or Science” sections. Can we accurately judge individuals’ personalities a few seconds after meeting them? It turns out we can! After giving people only a few seconds to introduce themselves to each other, participants were asked to rate each others extraversion. Surprisingly, most ratings were in-line with the individuals self-reported extraversion! The section goes on how we can make these same extrapolations from online profiles or pictures as well. Its important to trust your gut sometimes!

Michael Dilny

Michael Dilny

says:

My biggest takeaway from this chapter was the Big Five Model and person-job fit based on Holland’s Typology of Personality and Congruent Occupations. It was also interesting to see that the Myer-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) tended to be unrelated to job performance.

I have personally taken MBTI a multitude of times for job applications and on the internet (self-assessment) and am convinced I did not get the jobs because of it. It seems every time I am required to take that test; I get almost immediate non-consideration for the job. However, most of these types of jobs have been entry-level retail positions (I consistently test as an ENTJ). I wonder if they are using these results for job fit as opposed to job performance? I’m also curious how well it would work for that since it seems a likely indicator for job fit although I didn’t see this discussed in the text. Although they did say it could be used for career guidance.

It was interesting to see that the big five model was a good indicator of behavior in real-life situations. It is easy to see how these various factors would have an impact on job performance. Tests to gauge these factors could come in handy from a management point of view to weed out the potential problem child; however, I think they should be used in conjunction with observation. Holland’s Typology could come in handy for fitting people into the organization. One example would be someone requesting to move into another department say a writer wants to move into the research department; this tool could come in handy to see if they would be a good fit in that department. Not to say they shouldn’t be able to move, but perhaps the company would set performance metrics to be met in the new department. Perhaps over six months, they have to meet expectations (they also receive a bonus) or to go back into the writing department.

Either way, I think there are ethical considerations at hand when assessing personality traits solely by written assessment. I realize the book mentions observable personality traits as well, but I don’t see this coming into play when someone is screened out and not offered an interview based on an assessment. Let’s look at another scenario: the applicant does receive an interview after taking the assessment, is the interviewer subject to confirmation bias because they have seen the personality traits of the applicant before the interview (how does this impact observable traits)? It may be worth consideration to bar the interviewer from access to the personality assessment (only the person screening resumes has access). I think that the qualified candidates should be not weeded out solely by the assessment, but by assessment and observable personality traits. The book did say it was best to use both, but I did not see where they said when to implement each. I think all of these points warrant consideration as a hiring manager.

fagallagherroach

fagallagherroach

says:

I agree with your assessment. These tests can do more harm than good if used in the wrong context and if the same person has access to the personality test and oversees the interview. Even with the best intentions a person can be persuaded in one direction or another if they are armed with prior information or knowledge. It would be ideal if the personality test was given by one person, the interview given by another, and a third group/person looks over both independently to make the final determination. That would lessen the bias factor.

Chris

Chris

says:

The personality assessment tests is an interesting practice. I actually had never heard of such a thing. With all of the issues that are arising in the law enforcement profession, I wonder why agencies do perform these tests on potential candidates before they are hired. While not it may not necessarily be a solid determination of the caliber of officer that you have, these tests may discover personality traits or value systems that could be detrimental in many many ways. Just a random thought.

Moses

says:

From my experience as a supervisor in the past and now being supervised along with many others, I am really interested in these terms and descriptions of what I have been experiencing at work as far as individual personalities and values. It’s a bit ambiguous at first but after reading more into all the terms and definitions, it will become clear, I’m sure.

A big take away is now that I have learned some descriptive terms for types of people, it explains a lot and allows me to see where changes or some strings can be pulled to create a workplace with mixed personalities, an effective and great place to work. It helps to know that one personality and a set of values isn’t set in stone and that we want to do well in our jobs and can make adjustments to make that happen. Instead of seeing that one coworker as a bully I can see her with her own self doubt or low self esteem issues and that she is human after all!
It definitely requires a smart objective supervisor to actually make a workplace work for everyone in it. Taking a course in Organizational Behavior is a good place to start!

jbjohnkins

jbjohnkins

says:

M5 Discussion
The established set of attitudes held by someone is defined by your mindset. I always believe that your mindset towards your job is a huge part of whatever work you do. I also believe that the best mastery is choosing which mindset you have for your situation. My experience, in supervising I found that the best group is the one with all different personalities that help the situation. But then you have to choose which personality works best for each job. Which the book described as Situation Strength Theory. What I took away from this chapter was the segment on Situation Strength theory. And how Personality affects your situation and behavior. The idea that people’s personality translates into behavior depending on the situation is crucial in hiring people. I think that’s half of the hiring process is getting what type of personality you have. I did not know the words to describe what Situation Strength theory was. Which the book says the elements of Situation Strength theory is Clarity, Consistency, Constraints, and Consequences. It’s important to know what behavior you should have in certain situations. As a manager, everyone should be on the same page and be able to handle each task. And knowing their personality favors which job your employee should have. Because you know their behavior. Or how the book explains how organizations do it. Imposing rules based on human behavior so there is no room for people doing unethical stuff. Feeling free to miss work, or engage in inappropriate acts. But most employees don’t hire people like that because of the personality conflict. This is what I took away from chapter five. I would inspect my employee’s personality and see their behavior at work. And how they handle situations. And structure the work environment to be enjoyable, as we learned in the last chapter, a great work environment creates better output from workers. I believe in doing the right things; that is my character and personality. “Gianluigi Buffon”

mawetherington

mawetherington

says:

Some of the biggest take aways from the chapter about personality was the role of heredity and environment and its impact on peoples’ development. This chapter provided explanations to questions, such as “why can’t we find solid workers, ones who are passionate about their jobs?” Additionally, this chapter has helped me see some of the strong traits especially from the Big Five Traits Model in myself. Eventually, as a supervisor, I would like to implement peoples’ individual/collectivist values across culture and be comfortable with the person-organization fit.
For the most part, I always believed that genetics defined our personalities and there wasn’t much we could do to change it. Although reading this chapter has proven that heredity is important, trait activation theory shows that it may be more of a nature and nurture- personality and the situation both affect work behavior, but when the situation is right, the power of personality to predict behavior is higher (Organizational Behavior, 150). At every job, this question is asked when we have lost lots of workers, “why can’t we find solid workers, who is passionate about working?” At these jobs, personality tests weren’t implemented. However, implementing the Big Five Personality Model has test scores of traits that do an accurate job of predicting how people behave in a variety of real-life situations and remain relatively stable for an individual overtime (141). I know that as a manager of any department, I would want to implement a personality test that compliments the applicant, while validating the hiring process. This chapter also made me reflect on my primary personality traits- consciousness and agreeableness and sometimes their challenges in the workplace. For example, I have experienced first-hand the frustration of learning a complex task, only to be more focused on performing rather than learning as described on page 142. However, these traits have help me understand those who are similar and spot those same learning patterns. The workplace is becoming more diverse and as a manager, it’s important to understand the values of other people (what matters to them) and their cultural upbringing. Another thing as a manager, I would like to find and keep employees who understand and believe in the organization’s culture, vision and values. With person-organization fit, it means people are attracted to and selected by the organization that matches their values and they leave an organization that is not compatible with their personality (154). This gives the worker the ability to choose the kind of place they want to work and organizations the ability to showcase their qualities as a company.
Ultimately, chapter 5 explains how vital personality and values are instrumental and complementary in the workplace and it’s important to strike a balance.

ccgallegos

says:

Hello, I really enjoyed reading your post! I thought it was really well thought and articulated nicely with supportive examples from the text. I also used to think that personality was more hereditary until I was in nursing school and learned more about the nature vs nurture component. Recently I read in a psychology magazine that there is reason to believe that a persons peers early in life have one of the largest influences on decision making and i’ll be curious if one day that is linked into the personality component. After working as a corrections nurse and speaking with the incarcerated, from their life experiences I could definitely see how peers may have a greater influence than we give credit!

mabarreto2

mabarreto2

says:

The biggest take-away from this chapter is realizing the individual traits of every employee. Every employee is different in their own way. Personality matters a lot when building a team. ‘Fit’ is another big take-away from this chapter. Personality and values go hand-in-hand with ‘fit’. An organization can only be strong if everyone gets along and can come together to perform the task at hand. The individual traits every employee brings to the table can be used to create an outstanding team.
As a supervisor, I will use the employees’ individual traits to create an excellent team. The most important part of hiring an individual is the interview process. Here is where you can get a feel for what the employee can bring to the table. Here is also where you can determine if they will be a good fit for your team or organization. I’ve seen employees not fit in with an organization and it’s not a pretty sight for them or for the organization. As a supervisor, I will find the people that have the best fit for my team and my organization to create an all-star team of employees that will uphold the values we stand for.

jbjohnkins

jbjohnkins

says:

I think your right mabarreto2 personality does matter. I like when you talk about forming a team. Some of the greatest people in history when it comes to business are part of a great team. Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and so much others. And I think its important to build a team with different personalities, but also realizing what they want and aiming towards that. Just building a good structure for your team or employee’s to follow.

rsrudoy

rsrudoy

says:

Hello!

I totally agree, personality absolutely matters. The interview process I feel like also isn’t just about how one can perform the job but can the candidate mesh and blend in with everyone’s personality. Like you said in your post, a strong organization can only be successful if the personality and values are similar. I also liked that as a supervisor you would trait as your backbone in creating a successful team. I think if managers today focused on values and personality as well, there would be less workplace conflict.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

Fit is a big part of an organizational culture. Not only within the culture, but within the team as well. It is often hard to weed out those in the interview stage just through straight questions. It needs to be observed how they present themselves as well.

atfinnigan

atfinnigan

says:

Realizing the potential of individuals in the workplace is one of the most difficult tasks of upper management. The work place is filled with a lot of different, unique personalities that require complicated interpersonal relationships to manage. To be able to find the value in an individual and use that knowledge to better understand how to use that person in a way that benefits you or your company in an invaluable leadership skill. I have heard my boss refer to it as managing personalities and expectations. Knowing what type of environment people thrive in and what to expect out of them means you are not going to put too much or too little of a work load on someone, a person with an overly elevated work load can have just as low of productivity, in terms of work value per dollar, as someone with and exceptionally low work load.

If the value of an individual is recognized and a work plan is custom fit to their personality time you can maximize the production of that person. There is also value in being able to use your knowledge of people and their personalities to spot potential “problem individuals”. Recognizing individuals whose complex personalities may disrupt the group dynamic. Furthermore, people who displace personality traits identified in the “dark triad” should perhaps be avoided, as the toxic behavior displayed by people with these traits can destroy a group dynamic. The ability to spot manipulative individuals and weed them out before they can cause harm is a necessary part of upper level management. I have personally seen individuals like this enter a long-standing group and by the time they were finally removed/fired members who were instrumental to the group’s success had left because of them. So, to a supervisor both recognizing someone’s personality both to realize their potential and to remove potential problems is two key components of a successful manager.

bfarnes

bfarnes

says:

It’s always impressive how quickly introducing a toxic personality to a group can completely destroy the group’s dynamic. And like you said, the toxic person makes the rest of the group want to leave, and it’s typically the best people who have the easiest time getting a different job, so you can end up with that one person lowering the overall quality of that department’s or group’s employee base. Unfortunately I don’t think I’ve ever worked anywhere that was actually good at identifying and removing these types of people.

jesterle

says:

Each and every person has their own individuality and personality that they bring to the work table. Their personality is an immense way of how they handle situations in the work place. What sparked interest for me was reading up on the Big Five Model. These characteristics are conscientiousness, emotional stability, extraversion, openness to experience, and agreeableness. Out of all of these, emotional stability stands out the most because it has a high impact on job satisfaction. If I were to become a supervisor, I would say it is extremely important to study up on different personalities and these 5 characteristics because chances are as a supervisor, I would encounter multiple different personalities. It is important to know about different personalities because then, you have the knowledge to be able to know what that person might need when it comes to the work environment. Making sure that everyone is able able to express their thoughts is important in order to keep the workplace an enjoyable place to work at.

arbankston

says:

I agree, I think getting to know the people you work with and how personalities mix with each other is valuable in the workforce. Some individuals might have personalities that just don’t combine well so keeping those individuals separate during group work or helping to facilitate an area for common ground could help a lot as well.

gdgrigals

says:

My biggest takeaway from this chapter on Personality and Values is to understand how different emotionally are the employees and how to motivate them better. Learning their personalities better and understand their mindset and why they do things what they do. I enjoyed learning about how to handle situations better with the employees and show them that their supervisor is interested in them to feel valued and make the company successful. For example, dark-triad is one of the important knowledge to know about because of that people do things that they shouldn’t be doing and the supervisor can avoid something bad from happening. In the future as a supervisor, I’ll learn more about people that work under my wing and treat them well.

fagallagherroach

fagallagherroach

says:

The biggest take away from this chapter, I have received is the unreliability of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator for employee selection. I for one have been subjected to this test on numerous occasions. I was assured that it was capable to predict/substantiate job performance and group cohesion. And it is difficult to understand that so many organizations use it in their applicant selection process. I am relieved to hear that it is great for self-evaluation and introspective and not for future employee selection. I have always thought that such tests had their place but not to put to much stock into them. People will always try to put their best foot forward during the examination. I had not heard of the Big 5 until this chapter. I would be more inclined to use this as a future indicator for employee selection.

I am a strong proponent of the old fashion face to face interview. As an accountant I know too well that anyone can make anything look good on paper (just tweak the numbers/answers to make the rosier picture). People will inherently answer questions on a survey/personality test to get the job. The personality tests should be used to help the individual learn their strengths and weaknesses to better themselves and the organization. I feel if they know that the test is for those purposes, they will most likely be more truthful in the answering process.

bfarnes

bfarnes

says:

I’m curious if any of the places where you’ve taken the Myers-Briggs actually made any changes based on the results? I’ve taken it at my last three workplaces, and I have yet to see any sort of alterations to job duties, promotions, or decisions regarding leadership roles come from any of the testing. It always just seems to be an interesting diversion that has everyone talking about their results for a couple weeks and then it just goes back to business as usual. I would be really interested to see if there was a company that actually tried changing things based on the results and how it worked out for them.

ccgallegos

says:

Hello, I am with you on this. I like the Myers Briggs for what it can bring a person when evaluating oneself, but like you said when it comes to employment the answers may be skewed if someone thought it could deter them from getting the position. I hadn’t heard of the big five either until this chapter and now that I am aware, I wonder if I will recognize its presence in future career opportunities. I am also a fan of the face to face interview, but like my personality states (ESFJ) I have a good way with people and sometimes find I am able to talk myself into positions I wanted as an impulsive desire- with age I am learning how this is unfair to the industry who hires me especially when I am bored a year later and ready to move on. My convincing abilities has been both a blessing and curse, I’m learning to not abuse it!

fagallagherroach

fagallagherroach

says:

I have seen management use the results from MBIT to the detriment of some very capable and deserving people. And I have seen people who knew how to skew the results for their benefits get positions and promotions who were not fitted for the job. It harmed the organization, and the people who should have been placed in the position left the job and found employment elsewhere. Just because a person tests well does not mean they necessarily have the tools to complete the tasks. I have also seen as noted where the test was given, and no noticeable change was made in the positive or negative. It was as you said something to talk about for a few days or weeks

Chris

Chris

says:

Face to Face interviews are good but they to can be manipulated by the interviewee. The proverbial answer the question like he/she thinks the interview wants to hear it. Effective interviewing is a skill and I think a lot of employers do not put enough emphasis on training the interviewer. I think that perhaps both would tend to a more accurate of an assessment of the interviewee. Great post.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

I wouldn’t use it in the interview phase, but actually use when in the training phase – after hiring. There are ways to “interpret” personality during the interview stage without using such tests.

Phillip

Phillip

says:

I enjoyed this section of the textbook, as I have always found personality and mood interesting. I think that my biggest take away was the use of the five big traits in predicting work behavior. As a manager I will be using this in a few different ways. The first will be to assign tasks based on the trait that people represent such as placing those with high emotional stability in areas of customer service, those that are conscientious into work that requires detailed specific requirements and so on. Using the five big traits will also help me in the future with employee selection and retention. I was excited to learn that you can estimate not only performance and job satisfaction but that you can also look at the probability of longevity within the position.
It is being in the emergency services I also have an interest in the dark triad. I have seen a lot of potential employees that present many of the traits within the dark triad and this now gives me the information I need to combat the potential harm that it may cause. Overall there is bits and pieces of the entire chapter that I will be taking away and using in my position as I move forward.

Shayne Jones

Shayne Jones

says:

I appreciate your thoughts on the Dark Triad! Most managers do not think about this aspect of society and personality. I have worked in organizations who test and other organizations that do not test. I really cannot think of a time when the test made a difference. People who tend towards the dark triad know how to answer in ways that make them seem the perfect choice for a job. Only after the person has worked for a while do they relax enough to demonstrate their real personality.

Phillip

Phillip

says:

I agree. I have wondered if there is a better way to deliver the tests or if there is one that is given based off observations and if that would be valid or have a biased attached. Thank you for bringing up that point.

Michael Dilny

Michael Dilny

says:

I also was interested in the Dark Triad, and I agree there is a lot of information in the text to help identify these types of personality traits. I agree with Shayne as well. I think that these types of individuals are working outside the scope of morality in which most people operate in (I would like to think so anyhow); therefore they are able/willing to game the tests. I would think it would be difficult to gauge Dark Triad characteristics or any other solely based on a written test. The reason I feel this way is that they lack the visual cues such as body language, facial expressions, eye movement, etc. I dated a woman who worked for a prestigious law firm and assisted the attorneys in picking Jurys (Her degree was in psychology). I would think someone trained as a psychologist would be much more likely to detect personality traits than a written test or the average hiring manager. It would be interesting to do a cost-benefit analysis to see if it is worthwhile to pay a psychologist to work in the HR department or be on a panel interview.

nkdong

says:

What is your biggest take away from this chapter on Personality and Values? How will you use it as a supervisor in the future?

My greatest takeaway from this chapter is how we can take advantage of and “use” different peoples personalities to increase workplace efficiency and team success.

In the hiring process, depending on the line of work and availability of candidates, you can be extremely particular in the type of employee you hire. Perhaps a certain personality type would work better for a particular position. If you have a high availability of candidates, you can choose a qualified candidate for the position while also selecting a personality that works with your organization and the people in it (assuming they take a personality assessment). I suppose if you have very few candidates or extremely limited time, you may not be able to take advantage of personality typing.

In the case of employees that you already have, understanding personalities can be extremely beneficial in conflict resolution. I don’t know how other organizations are, but I dealt with plenty of conflicts on a daily basis. Understanding how different people think, or why they think that way can help people work together, assuming a certain level of open-mindedness. If possible (if employee skills permit), we could relocate certain types of people to be around others that may get along better. It’s limited in my organization, but is absolutely possible.

Phillip

Phillip

says:

I for one have had an issue with this in the past. I failed to take personalities into consideration when assigning tasks and people and it ended up hurting my business. I feel that it is a very important aspect that supervisors need to consider in their daily work. I think it would help supervisors to issue personality tests to their employees even after they are hired to see where they will fit in to the group.

mjteegardin

mjteegardin

says:

I didn’t think of using the understanding of personalities to separate those with conflicting ones, but it’s a great idea. We have had conflicts at work because everyone works differently and it would have been useful then. We can’t really separate the employees where I work, but I think by understanding each others personalities it would create a more successful working environment.

racheledson

racheledson

says:

What is your biggest take away from this chapter on Personality and Values? How will you use it as a supervisor in the future?

My biggest take away from Chapter 5 is how big an effect different personalities and values have on the workplace environment. Because employees differ in personalities and values, understanding the differences and learning how to find ways to effectively showcase them can bring about workplace satisfaction and effectiveness. Since using “personality [and value] tests… help managers forecast who is best for a job” (Organization Behavior, 137), I would want to use tests such as the MBTI or TAT. For instance, when looking at the exhibit of Holland’s personality-job fit theory (TAT), we see that imaginative and emotional people tend to prefer jobs that allow them to showcase their creative side. As a supervisor, hiring the imaginative person listed above would be a large asset if I wanted them to paint something for me but not as much an asset if I wanted that person to be an accountant. When looking at my previous work history, I tend to have had higher workplace satisfaction in jobs that were congruent with my conventional personality type rather than incongruent. I liked having a set routine and following it in detail. As a supervisor, I would try to utilize the various theories and tests to determine what types of personalities would be an asset and find ways to be understanding to employee’s who may offer a different asset in their personality type.

dcheek3

dcheek3

says:

David Cheek Post

There were a few take away items from this chapter that I thought were valuable. There are many personality traits and that there are ways to categorize people. I work for a large company and they had leadership training a few years ago on this subject. We took a test and then they divided us into groups according to our personality traits. Surprisingly most of us were very similar. We were then explained about the different traits and how they can affect work performance. Very much the same as the book described it. The big five traits brakes down personality traits and predicts how job performance will be. As a supervisor I can use this information to take and educated guess on which employees prefer to work in groups, alone, and who should do what to increase our success and happiness at work.

Another part of the chapter that I felt was important was the values section. Values are very important to me and I would rather an employee does what is right rather what is best for the bottom line. I did notice that what I think are values may not necessarily be the same as what other people think are values. For example, the book mention something about pay being based off seniority versus performance. I didn’t really think this to be a value trait, but it is. Values are basically things you grew up on or are accustomed to. I don’t feel it’s right to dump pollutants in a creek, but years ago that was standard operating procedures and some of those workers may think nowadays we are going through extra steps that is just wasting money that the company/employees could partake in.

Phillip

Phillip

says:

David,
What value may there be in hiring someone with a different set of values then what the group holds or you personally hold and do you think the risk would out weigh the benefit? For me personally I find for me having that outside thinker, betters the group and really forces people to think. Great post and I look forward to hearing from you.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

Society always tends to categorize people. It can be used to manipulate or used to motivate. Many businesses (and leaders) will only see the bottom line and are not concerned with ethical decisions and behavior.

wmputman

says:

I found a couple sections of the text more interesting than the rest, primarily the section on the dark triad and the section about self-monitering. The dark triad is an interesting concept, mainly because it contrasts the other personality tests and the Big Five traits so much since these are undesirable traits, opposed to the Big Five traits which would be considered desirable traits. I believe that being able to see the dark triad traits in others and monitering them in yourself is a major skill to have, it will help keep you out of dangerous situations in the workplace and in life. For example, If you can identify and stay out of the way of someone with the personality types of machiavellianism or psychopathy, you can avoid being used for another’s gain and at the very least try to stay out of their way. Also, if I was manager I would try my best to squash any sign of dark triad personalities right away in a positive and personality enhancing way.

My other takeaway from this chapter came from the section on self-monitoring. When reading about self-monitoring it occurred to me how much I subconsciously try to apply this tactic to my everyday life. I try to use it to stay on everyone’s good side and remove any unnecessary conflict from my life. In my experience, you just have to monitor in what ways you adapt or adjust your behavior for a given situation. Sometimes you have to avoid changing your behavior, because it could come back and affect you negatively later on. I believe self-monitoring is a very useful skill for a manger. As a manager if you can adapt your behavior to be most compatible with each of your employees or coworkers, you can get more out of each person and more out of yourself as well.

bfarnes

bfarnes

says:

The self-monitoring section was one of my takeaways as well. It’s interesting to me to see how otherwise talented and capable people can damage other people’s perceptions of them by not being able to “read the room”. I like that you also looked at it from the perspective of a manager self-monitoring when dealing with their employees. I suspect it’s more common for management to feel that if they’re the boss then why should they have to change their behavior, but all of the truly good bosses I’ve had would make sure they were acting appropriately for everyone, both superiors and reports.

tcshelton

tcshelton

says:

My biggest takeaway on personalities and value was that as a supervisor it is going to be important to learn other people’s personalities. Learning them will help you understand why people do the things they do and also why you do the things you do. So many people talk about how millennials have a bad reputation, which I can understand why they would see these things, but a big shocker for me was that the dominant work values stated in OB, 137 say they are confident, financially successful, self-reliant, but team oriented. These are great positive things to hear about millennials, of course I am one. The dark-triad is another thing that I was very interested in. I can say that I would like to be able to identify these traits as a supervisor because I will better know how to handle situations. Obviously, I wont know everything as a supervisor, but it is going to be able to find and identify things such as those listed above.

dcheek3

dcheek3

says:

David Cheek’s response to tcshelton

The book was probably written by a millennial (joking). I agree that as a supervisor it is very important to know about the personalities of the people around you. This helps you group people for projects or how to reduce conflict when their are issues. A lot of people may present themselves much differently at work than how they would normally. Knowing how someone truly is could allow you to assign workloads and group projects accordingly. Perhaps, making it less stressful and more productive for your team.

bfarnes

bfarnes

says:

I had two main takeaways from the chapter on Personality and Values, one that explains the behavior of a past employee, and one that will help simplify certain aspects of choosing team members in the future.

In this chapter there is a section on self-monitoring that describes a “competent, hardworking” employee that just isn’t well-liked by her management. This could have been written about someone that used to work for me, and it describes their situation perfectly. Despite being highly knowledgeable and producing consistently high-quality work, I could never get them to understand that the way they spoke to leadership, especially in situations where we needed that leadership to make some sort of change, was not appropriate and didn’t reflect well on them. They were never able to tone-down their abrupt and black-and-white worldview, and because of that I had to constantly deal with people who just didn’t want to work with them on projects. The concept of self-monitoring finally puts to words something that I had always struggled to identify.

The other takeaway for me was the section describing how people are generally good at accurately gauging someone’s personality only seconds after meeting them. I remember hearing something similar years ago about interviewing candidates, and seeing it repeated helps confirm that sometimes it’s good to just trust your initial impressions when you’re deciding who should be on your team. It’s easy to second guess yourself into hiring a candidate that is extremely qualified on paper but just seems off when you first meet them in person. I expect to do more hiring in the future, and generally anyone we bring in for an interview is going to be qualified for the role on paper, so knowing that I should give some weight to that initial impression when I first meet them is helpful.

Shayne Jones

Shayne Jones

says:

Personality can be the hardest thing for a manager to take into account when hiring or managing a team. Tests to measure personality are difficult to use. In 30 years of management, I was involved with suitability testing of candidates for employment using the MTBI tests. Nearly every time hiring was made using this test; the candidate did not last! I am not assuming that the analysis was flawed. But I am saying of the 15 applicants I interviewed for a disaster specialist position in 2 years the test did not produce the desired outcome.
Hiring using personality tests for me does not work. What I have noticed is the best employees come from surprising sources. In the military, you take who you are assigned. You lead, follow, or get out of the way. It was simple; the process forces managers to deal with all sorts of personalities and attributes that most managers normally would not. If a manager was ineffective a managing, then they either adopted a new approach or moved aside.

dcheek3

dcheek3

says:

David Cheek’s response to Shayne Jones

I don’t necessarily agree with administering personality tests during a hiring process. When applying for a job people may be in a different state of mind than when they are at a company long enough to get comfortable and show their real personality. Our company has made similar mistakes by hiring or promoting someone because of a tests. Most have failed at their job. It’s not a bad idea to provide personality training throughout a career tho. Some of the information is valuable for self awareness and to improve how you interact with some types of people.

Nathaniel Savel

Nathaniel Savel

says:

The text really allowed me to understand the importance of personality and values and how they will help you determine the best techniques to keep your team focused, motivated and effective. First and foremost it helped me understand techniques to hire the right personality for the job. Being a member of the fire service has allowed me to understand that our job takes a very unique personality. It can be difficult to figure out someone’s personality from an interview to make sure they are the correct fit but it is very important. Someone in the fire service needs to be able to like to be physically active, be able to interact with the public, and needs to have that team-oriented thinking in order to be successful.
This reading has allowed me to learn of a technique when I am in an administrative position to try and make sure I am hiring the correct personality. “Personality assessments have been increasingly used in diverse organizational settings. In fact, eight of the top 10 U.S. private companies and 57% of all large U.S. companies use them” (Robbins, 2014). This just goes to show how effective they are. So the technique i will take from this is to employee these preliminary personality tests to try and determine who will be the best fit for the organization. There are many other things to take from this chapter as well. Personality tests are one that I believe will be extremely beneficial to myself and whatever organization I am involved with.

Robbins, S. (2014). Organizational Behavior. 17th Edition. San Diego, CA:Pearson.

mawetherington

mawetherington

says:

That is a great point to bring up especially in your line of work in being a member of the fire service. The requirements are non-negotiable so it would be vital to have something like the situation strength theory to access if someone is right for the job. The personality tests in this situation would also help the prospective applicant/new hire know if this was truly the job for him or her. I enjoyed your post because it made me stop and think about how a job such as yours requires certain personality traits/types.

mreichgott

mreichgott

says:

Incorporating Big Five Model testing for future and current employees creates personality-job and person-organization fits for a more efficient and productive organization. As new employees apply for positions, the goal of management and the job seeker should be to find the right ‘fit’, even if it’s not the traditional model for the job. Employers must be flexible and open to non-traditional hires if it matches the testing and employees must be open to positions that may not match their self-image. Testing also removes any perceived biases from interviewers that might interfere with the best hiring choices. It’s also important for organizations to publicize their mission and vision so applicants’ values match or are willing to engage in deep acting once on the job. A value system has an innate hierarchy that could create tension and turnover if not matched. Also, how the company balances social and moral values with work productivity for the company must be communicated early and enforced through employee and managerial action and education.

Internally, the diversity of personalities, age, culture, and experience will reduce counterproductive work behaviors as hiring managers create depth of staff beyond hard skills. A strong situation strength in the work environment can eventually be scaled for different positions and personalities, as employees prove value and creativity within the structure. Testing current employees every five years helps identify updated strengths and weaknesses, along with goals, especially as terminal and instrumental values evolve the longer employees stay with a company. Reassigning responsibilities to match personalities demonstrates value for the employee as a person, maximizing fit to create efficiencies for the company. It’s expensive to hire and train new employees, even if the testing matches the perfect hire.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

Those soft skills are becoming more and more of what corporations look for. Of course it depends on the job, but fit within the org culture and team and overall philosophy play a huge roll.

kcampbell8

kcampbell8

says:

My biggest takeaway would be all that I learned about personality tests and the value they have. I also learned a lot of interesting things about personality traits and values. I resonated a lot with the concept of terminal values and instrumental values. As a supervisor in the future, I intend to pay careful attention to both and encourage positive terminal values to produce instrumental values. After learning about the value of personality tests, I plan to use them in the future as a supervisor. I think it is important in management for people to work with others who really know them and understand them and how they handle different situations differently. I think personality tests can help an organization’s members understand each other on a deeper level. It can also help predict who will fit best in certain roles and jobs. However, I would not put a huge emphasis on sticking to the results of a personality test in making decisions or reading someone. Rather a personality test is a valuable tool that can be used along with getting to know someone and interacting with them.

mreichgott

mreichgott

says:

I agree with you, Kirsys: relying too much on the results of the personality tests is like believing that you’re hiring robots. Humans are too complex to be plugged into mathematical formulas of diversity. And our dynamic nature is good for business, which must always renew itself for an ever changing consumer set.

I agree that ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ terminal goals would have to be in-line with your organization’s mission, especially with so many different value systems and pros and cons of personality traits contributing to instrumental values. Your employees will have to have bought into the culture, throughout the generations. Many people consider economic success and freedom as positive terminal goals, but the definitions of those goals (i.e. wealthy vs obscene richness) and personality traits that we use to get there are not universal.

bkanuk

says:

According to Robbins, “Organizational Behavior,” stated that the personality frameworks described the strengths and weaknesses of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Big Five Model. (p. 140). What I take away from this chapter is that many of our behaviors derived from our personalities and value system, and each person has different personality traits. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Big Five Personality Model describes a person’s type of personality through exploration of the facets of personality. (p. 140). Some organizations use those indicators to see if they would qualify for a supervisor job. Most organizations use the Myer-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), which is a personality assessment indicator. (p. 140). Moreover, the chapter discussed how important values are. According to Robbins, (2014), “Organizational Behavior,” stated that values rank in terms of intensity, and obtain the person’s value system. (p. 152). Values can be attitudes and motivations, and they can influence one’s perception. (p. 152).

Some supervisor’s use the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator which could be helpful when assessing the applicant’s personality traits. In that case, it would be up to applicant to see if they are willing to take the personality traits assessment survey. The MBTI indicator would assess the applicant to see if they are a visionary, a skeptic, or independent. The MBTI indicator would also assess the applicant’s personality and see if they qualify for the job. This MBTI could be a valuable assessment indicator for increasing self-awareness and could help in their career guidance.

Works Cited:
Robbins, S. (2014). Organizational Behavior. 17th Edition. San Diego, CA:
Pearson.

mreichgott

mreichgott

says:

Bertha – I think you bring up a good question about whether the potential employee can opt out of the personality test, and whether that’s the best response when presented with the MBTI, Big Five, or other evaluations. As I get older, I prefer to find the ‘right fit’ in a job, versus landing a position I believe is what I want to do. On my most recent interviewing cycle a few years ago, I did get turned down for a position I was qualified for because my test results indicated I wasn’t a complimentary fit for the business owner and the others in the small office. It did work out for the best for both of us, although my ego initially took a hit.

The other good question that the chapter eludes to is weighing values in the workplace. Terminal and instrumental values are connected to the work environment and individual efforts within the group dynamic. Recently, though, social and religious values have weighed in on job decisions and present incredible challenges for managers, and even the court systems in some cases. Maybe that falls under the person-organization theory? Can we ask if an applicant has any values that will prevent them from completing assigned tasks? I think those questions will continue to get harder to answer, not easier.

nahong

says:

I have personally never taken a personality test, so for me what I take away the most from this chapter is the different kinds of personality test there are. While reading the chapter, when it would describe different personality traits I would try to compare them and figure out which one I am. For example on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator I was picking which one I would fall under, which is a little hard without actually taking the test, but to what characteristics I thought I had. I also found it interesting that the MBTI didn’t have strong supporting evidence, the Big Five Model test score were based on how people would behave in real life situations. With this test it has the ability to let employers know some specific traits each person will have and the contribution they will have to a company.

As a supervisor I could use these test to determine how applicant would be beneficial to the company. These test can tell a lot about a person such as, there work ethic, how they will do under pressure, but also how they will work with other employees in the company. By doing multiply test could only help benefit the company and allow future success for the company in itself.

bkanuk

says:

I agree that the MBTI assessment tool describes the different personality traits. The MBTI indicator can assess the applicant’s personality trait and see if they qualify for the job. This MBTI indicator could be a valuable assessment indicator for increasing self-awareness and can help an individual with their career guidance. The values are also important to see if the applicant fits the job in an organization. In Robbins, “Organizational Behavior,” describes Holland’s Typology of personality and congruent occupations.

tcshelton

tcshelton

says:

The personality assessments seem to be tricky, however, I have learned that they do identify many traits in which you didn’t even know yourself. My current job now made me take one when I started and my supervisors were easily able to identify what kind of person I was before they interviewed me. I think analyzing and using these tests will definitely help you choose good candidates for your workplace.

wmputman

says:

I feel there is a lot of room for error in the personality tests since there are so many factors to be considering when going over someone’s personality. To give it a test I went and took the Myers-Briggs Personality Test and found it to be pretty close to where I felt I would land with a few off parts you would normally expect. Because of this, I agree with the way you would use it as a supervisor since I also think that having applicants take these tests would do no harm, and in the best case scenario benefit the organization.

ccgallegos

says:

As a future supervisor the importance of understanding personality in individuals is imperative. If as the supervisor you have a better idea of the person’s traits and characteristics, it can help steer the leadership and approach given as well as provide a better understanding to the rhyme and reason behind their job performance. An understanding of values is important as well but may not surface as easily. What a person values shouldn’t be assumed and can differ between cultures, upbringing and can change over time. In the future, to better understand an individuals values, I would recommend a group project where everyone has a chance to assess their values using a system similar to that at the end of the chapter, and then if they wanted, they could share with the group what they found or maybe what surprised them.
In the past, working as Director of Independent Living at a Retirement Community, each department director was responsible for leading a monthly meeting and could construct that meeting however we chose. My executive director had the entire team go to an escape room, where you have several clues and a certain amount of time to get out. For my meeting, all the directors took their results from the MBTI and was shown the Disney character equivalent to lighten things up. I then had the entire team do a values assessment where each person was given a stack of cards and had to whittle the words down to the top twelve-word choices that resonated most with them. Everyone participated and enjoyed the meeting; but I believe the fact that we worked for a non-profit organization that we truly believed in and that our culture was one of a work life balance, we had a group of individuals open to a meeting like this and perhaps it wouldn’t always be appropriate. There always seem to be so many variables.

kcampbell8

kcampbell8

says:

I agree, understanding the personalities of individuals you are working with is imperative. Humans are complex, and understanding others creates a way for us to have empathy and get along better. We can also connect through communicating, like you said, in a meeting or working as a team.

ccgallegos

says:

Humans can be very complex! It is quite interesting to think about all the influences that come together to make up our personalities and you are exactly right, it is a great way to remember to have empathy and patience with one another!

mbeza

mbeza

says:

It was interesting reading about the multiple personality test that are available. I would say that the biggest take away from the chapter would be the test and the multiple personalities that are described. As someone who has taken personality test before, I feel that as much as they can describe someone by the answers given, the answers themselves can be skewed. If you know that you are taken a personally test, would you not be more inclined to over think the questions rather than instinctively answering them? Therefore giving you a false positive on your personality identification.
Don’t get me wrong, I think that the use of them is a great benefit, and if the test are used with each other then I can see how that can be a huge asset to a manger. A manger understanding individuals and their personalities can be used to better manage, communicate and mentor employees. Having the test to show the positives and the negatives (Dark Triad), will give managers a better overall concept of job capabilities and limitations for employees. Are they a perfect system, no, we as humans are always changing, but they the test can be a great asset if used correctly .

nahong

says:

I personally have never taken a personality test, but I was actually wondering the same thing. If someone is taken a personality test for potential job position, what are the chances that they answer with what they think there employer would want to hear. I do believe they can be beneficial on getting some traits exposed and how they will help with the success of the business. It will determine if employees will work well together and also figure out some characteristic about the individual.

tcshelton

tcshelton

says:

Sometimes I think it can get tricky taking those tests because we trick ourselves into what we think is the right answer, which in turn there is no right answer. However, being completely familiar with personality assessments can help as a supervisor it can also go both ways because there can be people who try to cheat the system and put answers they THINK the hiring manager would want to hear.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

There are other ways to get to personality beyond tests. It’s not to end all to discovering fit, but it can be very helpful as manager assimilate these new staff into the organization and culture. Additionally, it is helpful determining how to motivate employees to be productive.

says:

Having taken the MBTI and many other personality tests in the past, I believe that they are a tremendous tool that can truly benefit a team and organization. However, I think it is very important to remember that people are constantly changing and that the results from these tests are not absolute. Every time I went over the results of my test with a doctor or professional, they communicated very clearly that these tests did not define me, but rather provided information about what my personal tendencies and responses are to the world around me. That being said, there are always going to be factors that these tests cannot take into account and careful interpretation needs to be utilized.

As a supervisor, I would implement the use of various personality tests for those under my authority. These tests have the ability to help individuals discover “blind spots” that may be impeding them from achieving higher levels of productivity, efficiency, and even satisfaction. These not only impact the level of consciousness that produces better output in the workplace, but can also allow for a more fulfilling home life. When properly utilized, and provided professional interpretation, these tests can be another way to invest in your workforce, which will create a more positive organization culture.

asreber

asreber

says:

This is a great contribution to the discussion. I agree that these tests don’t define employees. For instance in the point counterpoint in this chapter, “Millennials Are More Narcissistic Than Their Parents”, the identified differences in people are not generational but life stage related (Organizational Behavior, 160). This means that “millennials are no more narcissistic than baby boomers” were at the same age (160). Also people will become more confident and outgoing as they gain more life and work experience. This supports your idea that people are “constantly changing”. The results of these tests should change as life and or work circumstances change.
I also agree that you need to apply “careful interpretation” of the results. Since there is more to the employee than just their personality traits, you need to be careful what meaning is assigned to the testing results. For instance you want to be very careful on characterizing someone with the psychopathy. That trait could be good for a project like giving bad news to people, like giving out foreclosure notices. It would be of benefit in this situation to lack the ability to experience guilt or remorse.

cjdarling

says:

Nice post. I agree with you as well that these tests are not absolute my any means. A big corporation that utilizes these assessments for all for all of their employees is Lowe’s. The issue I see with this is that say you apply to Lowe’s as a cashier, after you apply you will be sent a link for theses tests. So before the hiring manager even meets you for an in person interview they are getting a representation that may or may not be true on a piece of paper. I can bring this into a different theater due to my background. When going through the hiring process to be a law enforcement officer one of the final steps is a psychological test. This test is given after several rounds of interviews and the only thing that has to take place after the successful passing of the test is the meeting with the sheriff, chief, or colonel dependent on the agency testing for. This process seems to make more sense and be more reliable than seeing a number and deciding that you will not call someone for an interview based on an initial test.

rsrudoy

rsrudoy

says:

Hello!

I agree with your comment stating that we as individuals are changing so these tests are not absolute. I personally hate those type of tests. I remember a few years ago applying for jobs was so tedious due to those type of tests. Then if you don’t “pass” with a certain score, you’ve automatically been disqualified from the position. I really don’t think that’s fair. I used to work as a retail manager for many years and till this day, personality tests wouldn’t be something I use as a reason to qualify someone for a position. I’d rather meet in person with the candictate and get to know them face to face before saying no.

Jennifer Griffen

Jennifer Griffen

says:

What is your biggest take away from this chapter on Personality and Values? How will you use it as a supervisor in the future?

My biggest takeaway from this chapter on Personality and Values, is that if I am given personality test results for my subordinates, I can use these results as possible clues or guidelines to predict future job performance. I could also use this information to determine how they would fit into my team and who they would work best with. Also, I understand that there will always be variables regarding environment, human behavior and experience that cannot be accurately measured by a test. However, that is how my logical brain thinks as an ISTP according to the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator or MBTI. For years I tested as an INTJ and felt it was very accurate. I took the test over again this semester because there have been drastic changes in my life and perception of the world, but the personality basics of I and T are still there. That is my point, I will use it as a guideline, these test results are not written in stone. If mine can change, then anyone else’s can.

The Big Five Model appears to be a better indicator of job performance. Since it is based on only five traits, emotional stability, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness; it is a faster way to evaluate an employee as opposed to sixteen different personality types like in the Meyers-Briggs model. Although it may be a better personality model, I do disagree with one thing, the extravert at work. They do not always make the best managers. When an introvert is the boss, they can be a very dominant “take charge” type of person. The only difference is, an introvert must adjust for the situation, it is not a knee jerk reaction to be gregarious. Being labeled as an introvert does not mean that there is shyness or timidity present, simply that people have the tendency to drain your energy where extraverts feel energized by other people.

Nathaniel Savel

Nathaniel Savel

says:

Jennifer,
I had a similar takeaway from the chapter. I was unaware of how important personality tests could be. While it shouldn’t be the deciding factor on how you view someone or effect how you view someone it can help you decide whether that person will be successful at your organization. As the chapter discusses, there are issues with it such as people may not answer truthfully but it is still a very good tool to use. I think you said it right when you said the results aren’t written in stone. It is definitely a good tool to keep in your pocket and use but you shouldn’t base everything on it.

Thomas

Thomas

says:

Even though I never been an supervisor before, only as a employee and worker I believe this chapter could help when I be a future supervisor. In chapter 5 of organizational behaviors it states that personality is the sum total of ways in which an individual reacts to and interact with others (Organizational Behavior, 137). It also stated in the same page that measuring personality and personality test have been used increasingly in the diverse organizational settings and the test was useful in company’s hiring decisions. It also help the manager of the company or industry into finding out which applicant would be the best fit for the job (Organizational Behavior, 137). Then there is value where it is the basic convictions where the specific modes of conducts is personally or socially preferable to the opposite (Organizational Behavior 151). While personality is the sum of individuals reacting to or interacting with others, value represent the basics of specific modes of convictions.
I believe the best action to take with a team is the understand one another before starting the task or project at hand. When in a group or team for an company or organization, the members in the team must work with one another and depend on each other to get the work, task, project, and etc. done by working together. However, this could only work if the members understand each other and put their differences aside to make it work and get the job done. Nothing could be done if a team can’t cooperate with one another so I believe understanding and knowing one another within the team could not only help with cooperation, but also future team building exercises and getting to know each member before the team would be made for organizations and companies.

Jennifer Griffen

Jennifer Griffen

says:

The personality tests can be a valuable tool to be able to figure out which employees work well together. I have been in situations where the team was the mismatch of the century and it did not work well, too much friction. I like the fact that you stated it would help you to get to know a team member as individuals and for the team to know one another. Sometimes when we think of a team, everyone gets lumped together as one entity and individual personalities can get lost. I’ve been a manager and I liked getting to know my employees as people. I especially like knowing what motivates them, what gets their creativity flowing. With that knowledge, you can bring out the best in them which is beneficial for any company and it helps the employee feel they are an important part of the organization.

mbeza

mbeza

says:

Thomas, I know you stated that you have never been a supervisor before. What is interesting is the wide application of the test. Understanding your own personality traits can be a huge benefit to yourself. It can help you identify your strengths and weaknesses when it comes to job performance, job identification and job satisfaction. Knowing what you can handle, what your limits can help in your progress. To be a good manger you must be able to understand and communicate with your employees, but you must first be able to understand yourself. You are already on a very successful path, keep it up.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

Glad to see you are getting some application out of this chapter and the class. You will be a leader or manager at some point in your life, so use these examples to help you motivate your employees into being productive.

mjteegardin

mjteegardin

says:

The biggest takeaway for me was learning about the big five-personality model and Holland’s typology of personality and congruent occupations, because before this chapter I didn’t know anything about those. I did however take a supervisor seminar that taught me a lot about the myers-briggs type indicator. I found the big five to be interesting because in a way I found we used some of it during a hiring process and I didn’t even realize it. We used the emotional stability when we asked if applicants have experienced a stressful situation and if so how did they handle it. We used the extraversion when we asked about if applicants worked better in teams or by themselves. I’m curious to see if we could add questions to the application process so it includes all of the big five.

With the Holland’s typology I found that I was a mix of a lot of the personality characteristics even though I’m an accountant. It would be interesting to see how we could add incorporate some of this typology into the interviewing process. However I believe the Big Five to be more resourceful in the interview process because I found a mix of the types could work well for an accountant like being investigative is great during audits.

Thomas

Thomas

says:

It is good to have a mix of personality characteristics because it could be used in other job positions other than accounting. It could help you find out what other job positions that you could apply for as well.

tpstickel

tpstickel

says:

There are ways beyond personality tests to find the right fit for employees before you hire them. As you mentioned, there are questions that get to the underlying issues that companies really want to know….how you will fit, what you value, how well to you get along with others. As you hire new accounts, you will see how that can be accomplished.

Sarah Griffen-Lotz

Sarah Griffen-Lotz

says:

The Big 5 model was my biggest takeaway. I knew about the MBTI types from a career counseling class I took a couple of years ago, but we didn’t cover the Big 5 in depth. It seems more reliable during the hiring process, while the MBTI model might help people figure out their career path. It also seems that it’s more of a fun way to understand yourself, versus a tool that determines job performance (Organizational Behavior, 140).

In the future, I’d use the Big 5 to assemble efficient teams. It’s backed with more research, so it may be better to rely on. In the context of being an art director who needs to assemble a creative team for a corporate interactive touch screen project, traits such as openness would be beneficial if I needed to choose a lead designer for a project. That person would be innovative and creative, which would benefit the project’s aesthetic value. For a lead programmer, I would choose a person who ranks high in conscientiousness. They are more organized and efficient, fitting for the logic driven role of a programmer. Some personality traits are best suited for different functions. Making a strategic choice based on these would likely result in a more efficient and effective team.

says:

Hi Sarah, thanks for sharing about the Big 5. Just like you, I hadn’t heard about the Big 5 in depth until this chapter, and I think it provides a lot of value for an organization. I especially found in interesting how professionals are now analyzing the inverse of these Big 5 positive measures to measure additional traits (Organizational Behavior, 146). Thanks for sharing and good luck on the quiz!

cjdarling

says:

Hello Sarah, I also was not familiar with the Big 5 concept until this chapter. I appreciate how in depth this course has gone so far into what does and doesn’t work in a business environment. Anyone is majoring in business administration or is looking to work in HR/Management the content in this course is invaluable. I agree with you that certain jobs “require” a certain personality. For example someone who does not enjoy conversing with people they do not know would not do very well in a customer service position. While on the other side someone who is a customer service worker may not fair as well as an auto mechanic.

cjdarling

says:

Personality, defined in our text as the sum total of ways in which an individual reacts to and interacts with others. Values, defined in our text as basic convictions that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-states of existence. One of the more obvious contrasts between personality and values is that a persons values are learned and formed as a young person while a personality is influenced by both hereditary and environmental influences. What is your biggest take away from this chapter on Personality and Values? The biggest concept I take away from this chapter in our text is the contrasts between personalities and values, the potential that exists for the use of personality tests as part of recruitment, and how a wide array of personalities and sets of values effect an employee and therefore the workplace. I found the concept of The Dark Triad and how they are not all necessarily a negative thing in low amounts. How will I use what I have learned in this chapter as a supervisor in the future? I will take what I have learned in this chapter and in the future as a supervisor I will more likely than not utilize personality tests as a part of the recruiting process and I will provide training to line supervisors to ensure that they understand and are prepared to handle the multitude of diverse personalities present in the workplace. From this chapter I have also learned the contrasts between the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator test and the Big Five personality test, based on research I feel more inclined to utilize the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in the future.

Sarah Griffen-Lotz

Sarah Griffen-Lotz

says:

It was surprising to read about the OB context of the Dark Triad. In the context of psychology, those are called personality disorders. It makes sense that the average person exhibits certain small amounts of these negative traits. Nobody is perfect, and these help to explain some of the specific ways how. Clinically speaking, it must become a personality disorder when someone ranks too high on one or more of these traits.

Leave a Reply