Order 1124826: My Individual Results and Applications
tutorthammy
Self-Assessments.docxSelf-Assessment Chap 2
Are you Introverted or Extraverted
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
21-27 pts.
Feedback:
Understanding Your Score on the IPIP Introversion-Extroversion Scale
Extroversion characterizes people who are outgoing, talkative, sociable, and assertive. It includes several facets, including friendliness, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity level, excitement-seeking, and cheerfulness. The opposite of extroversion is introversion, which refers to the personality characteristics of being quiet, shy, and cautious. Extroverts get their energy from the outer world (people and things around them), whereas introverts get their energy from the internal world, such as personal reflection on concepts and ideas. Introverts are more inclined to direct their interests to ideas than to social events.
This is the short version of the IPIP Introversion-Extroversion Scale, so it estimates overall introversion-extroversion but not specific facets within the personality dimension. Scores range from 0 to 40. Low scores indicate introversion; high scores indicate extroversion. Introversion-extroversion norms vary from one group to the next; the best norms are likely based on the entire class you are attending or with past students in this course.
Your score falls within the range of In-between extroversion and introversion. The ranges are: High extroversion (35-40), Moderate extroversion (28-34), In-between extroversion and introversion (21-27), Moderate introversion (7-20), and High introversion (0-6).
Total Score: 23 pts.
Self-Assessment Chp 4
How do you cope with Stressful Situations
Problem Solving
Score : 7 pts.
7-11Feedback : People cope in various ways with stress and various challenges in life. While the preferred coping strategy depends to some degree on the source of the stress, people also have a natural preference for some types of coping strategies more than others. Coping strategies also change over different stages of one’s life. The Stress Coping Preference Scale estimates your current preference to use four sets of coping strategies: problem solving, social support, avoidance and blaming others. These do not represent the full set of ways that people cope with life’s challenges, but they are common tactics. Moreover, they are identified as helpful or dysfunctional approaches to stress management. Average People with high scores on this subscale tend to deal with stress by actively attempting to remove the stressor by changing the situation. This coping strategy is associated with higher resilience and usually improves your ability to manage stress. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 16. The average score in similar measures of coping is between 8 and 9.
Social Support
Score : 10 pts.
6-10Feedback : Average People with high scores on this subscale tend to deal with stress by actively seeking emotional support, information or guidance from others. This coping strategy is part of the ‘tend and befriend’ response that some research suggests is more common among women than among men. Generally, coping through social support has a beneficial effect and is identified as a favorable approach to stress management. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 16. The average score in similar measures of coping is slightly less than 8.
Avoidance
Score : 14 pts.
10-16Feedback : High People with high scores on this subscale tend to deal with stress by cognitively and/or behaviorally acting in ways that prevent the person from coming to terms with and resolving the source of stress. While avoidance may be effective when the problem is short-lived and beyond one’s control, research concludes that this coping strategy is usually an ineffective approach to stress management. In fact, it significantly differentiates people with high and low resilience. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 16. The average score in similar measures of coping is around 6.
Blaming Others
Score : 4 pts.
0-5Feedback : Low People with high scores on this subscale tend to deal with stress by directing their energy to identify and seek justice against those perceived as the source of the stressor. This form of coping may include exhibiting emotions or engaging in behaviors that get back at the alleged perpetrators. Blaming others is generally considered a maladaptive response to stress because it redirects energy away from productive approaches to deal with the stressor. Furthermore, this strategy can potentially alienate others, which reduces opportunities for social support. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 16. The average score in similar measures of coping is around 7.Total Score: 0 pts.
How Strong Are Your Growth Needs
Growth-Need Strength
Score : 34 pts.
30-42Feedback : Moderate growth needs This well-known scale estimates the strength of your growth needs. Growth need strength indicates the strength of your growth needs, including self-esteem, personal achievement, self-actualization. Although organizational behavior scholars now doubt that people have a predetermined needs hierarchy, it is well established that we do have growth needs. Scores on the Growth Need Strength Scale can range from 12 to 60. Higher scores indicate that you have a higher growth need strength (i.e., stronger growth needs). As the graph shows, total score below 30 indicates a relatively low growth need strength, whereas a score above 42 indicates a relatively high growth need strength.
Total Score: 0 pts.
Rational decision style
Score : 11 pts.
10-14Feedback : The decision making style inventory estimates the extent to which you prefer rational and intuitive decision making. Both the ‘rational’ and ‘intuitive’ decision styles have a maximum score of 20 points and a minimum score of 4 points. Notice that you can have higher or low levels of BOTH decision-making styles. For example, you might score very high on both rational and intuitive decision making. This is not contradictory. Some people engage in more intense rational and intuitive thinking. Moderate preference for rational decision making People with high scores on this scale like to make decisions based on facts and logical analysis. They try to avoid or ignore gut instinct when it contradicts objective information.
Intuitive decision style
Score : 16 pts.
15-20Feedback : Strong preference for rational decision making People with high scores on this scale like to make decisions based on their inner feelings or ‘gut instinct’. They try to avoid rational choices if they are inconsistent with their intuition.
Total Score: 0 pts.
Self-Assessment Chap 8
Encourager
Score : 7 pts.
3-7Feedback : Low preference People who score high on this dimension have a strong tendency to praise and support the ideas of other team members, thereby showing warmth and solidarity to the group. The average score in a sample of MBA students is 10.25.
Gatekeeper
Score : 11 pts.
8-11Feedback : Moderate preference People who score high on this dimension have a strong tendency to encourage all team members to participate in the discussion. The average score in a sample of MBA students is 10.0.
Harmonizer
Score : 11 pts.
8-11Feedback : Moderate preference People who score high on this dimension have a strong tendency to mediate intragroup conflicts and reduce tension. The average score in a sample of MBA students is 9.85.
Initiator
Score : 10 pts.
8-11Feedback : Moderate preference People who score high on this dimension have a strong tendency to identify goals for the meeting, including ways to work on those goals. The average score in a sample of MBA students is 9.79.
Summarizer
Score : 6 pts.
3-7Feedback : Low preference People who score high on this dimension have a strong tendency to keep track of what was said in the meeting (i.e., act as the team’s memory). The average score in a sample of MBA students is 8.44.
Total score: 45 pts.
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
15-75 pts.
Feedback: Understanding Your Score on the Team Roles Preferences Scale The Team Roles Preferences Scale estimates your preferred roles in meetings and similar team activities. The instrument calculates your preferences on five team roles: Encourager, Gatekeeper, Harmonizer, Initiator, and Summarizer. These are among the most important roles in teams, but you keep in mind that teams have several other roles that are not measured by this scale. Scores for each of the five team roles subscales range from 3 to 15.
Avoiding Interruption
Score : 6 pts.
5-7Feedback : Your textbook described several dimensions of active listening. Five of these dimensions are estimated in this self-assessment: Avoiding Interruption, Maintaining Interest, Postponing Evaluation, Organizing Information and Showing Interest. Together, these five dimensions represent the total active listening score. Each subscale has a potential score ranging from 0 to 9 points; the total active listening score has a range from 0 to 45 points. Higher scores indicate that the person perceives that he or she has a higher level of each skill. The following graphs compare your results to the range of scores among a sample of over 200 MBA students. Average score People with high scores on this dimension have a strong tendency to let the speaker finish his or her statements before responding. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 9. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 5.9.
Maintaining Interest
Score : 6 pts.
6-9Feedback : High score People with high scores on this dimension have a strong tendency to remain focused and concentrate on what the speaker is saying even when the conversation is boring or the information is well known. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 9. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 4.6.
Postponing Evaluation
Score : 5 pts.
4-6Feedback : Average score People with high scores on this dimension have a strong tendency to keep an open mind and avoid evaluating what the speaker is saying until the speaker has finished. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 9. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 5.4.
Organising Information
Score : 5 pts.
5-7Feedback : Average score People with high scores on this dimension have a strong tendency to actively organize the speaker’s ideas into meaningful categories. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 9. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 6.4.
Showing Interest
Score : 6 pts.
5-6Feedback : Average score People with high scores on this dimension have a strong tendency to use nonverbal gestures or brief verbal acknowledgements to demonstrate that they are paying attention to the speaker. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 9. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 5.7.
Total score: 28 pts.
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
21-28 pts.
Feedback: Moderate active listening People with high scores on this total score have a strong tendency to actively sense the sender’s signals, evaluate them accurately and respond appropriately. Scores on this active listening total score range from 0 to 45. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 27.9.
Total Score: 0 pts.
Score : 10 pts.
3-15Feedback : Persuasion refers to using logical and emotional appeals to change others’ attitudes. This is one of the most widely used influence strategies toward others in any position (e.g., co-workers, bosses, subordinates).
Silent authority
Score : 10 pts.
3-15Feedback : The silent application of authority occurs when someone complies with a request because the target person is aware of the requester’s legitimate or expert power. This influence tactic is very subtle, such as making the target person aware of the status or expertise of the person making the request.
Exchange
Score : 6 pts.
3-15Feedback : Exchange involves the promise of benefits or resources in exchange for the target person’s compliance with your request. This tactic also includes reminding the target of past benefits or favors with the expectation that the target will now make up for that debt. Negotiation is also part of the exchange strategy.
Assertiveness
Score : 4 pts.
3-15Feedback : Assertiveness involves actively applying legitimate and coercive power to influence others. This tactic includes demanding that the other person comply with your wishes, showing frustration or impatience with the other person and using threats of sanctions to force compliance.
Information control
Score : 6 pts.
3-15Feedback : Information control involves explicitly manipulating others’ access to information for the purpose of changing their attitudes and/or behavior. It includes screening out information that might oppose your preference and embellishing or highlighting information that supports your position. According to one survey, more than half of employees believe their co-workers engage in this tactic.
Coalition information
Score : 8 pts.
3-15Feedback : Coalition formation occurs when a group of people with common interests band together to influence others. It also exists as a perception, such as when you convince someone else that several people are on your side and support your position.
Upward appeal
Score : 7 pts.
3-15Feedback : Upward appeal occurs when you rely on support from people higher up the organizational hierarchy. This support may be real (senior management shows support) or logically argued (you explain how your position is consistent with company policy).
Ingratiation
Score : 6 pts.
3-15Feedback : Ingratiation is a special case of impression management in which you attempt to increase the perception of liking or similarity to another person in the hope that they will become more supportive of your ideas. Flattering the co-worker, becoming friendlier with the co-worker, helping the co-worker (with expectation of reciprocity), showing support for the co-worker’s ideas and asking for the co- worker’s advice are all examples of ingratiation.
Total score: 57 pts.
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
24-120 pts.
Feedback: Understanding Your Score on What's Your Approach to Influencing Co-workers? Influence refers to any behavior that attempts to alter someone’s attitudes or behavior. There are several types of influence, including the eight measured by this instrument. This instrument assesses your preference for using each type of influence on co-workers and other people at a similar level as your position in the organization. Each influence is scored on a scale from 3 (Bottom 10 percentile) to 15 (Top 10 percentile).
Total Score: 0 pts.
Yielding
Score : 10 pts.
9-13Feedback : Moderate Yielding Preference Yielding involves giving in completely to the other side’s wishes, or at least cooperating with little or no attention to your own interests. This style involves making unilateral concessions, unconditional promises, and offering help with no expectation of reciprocal help.
Compromising
Score : 12 pts.
11-16Feedback : Moderate Compromising Preference Compromising involves looking for a position in which your losses are offset by equally valued gains. It involves matching the other party’s concessions, making conditional promises or threats, and actively searching for a middle ground between the interests of the two parties.
Forcing
Score : 10 pts.
9-15Feedback : Moderate Forcing Preference Forcing tries to win the conflict at the others' expense. It includes ‘hard’ influence tactics, particularly assertiveness, to get one’s own way.
Problem Solving
Score : 14 pts.
11-16Feedback : Moderate Problem Solving Preference Problem solving tries to find a mutually beneficial solution for both parties. Information sharing is an important feature of this style because both parties need to identify common ground and potential solutions that satisfy both (or all) of them.
Avoiding
Score : 11 pts.
8-12Feedback : Moderate Avoiding Preference Avoiding tries to smooth over or avoid conflict situations altogether. It represents a low concern for both self and the other party. In other words, avoiders try to suppress thinking about the conflict.
Total score: 57 pts.
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
20-100 pts.
Feedback: Understanding Your Conflict Handling Preferences This self-assessment estimates the extent to which you prefer to use each of the five conflict handling styles identified in the conflict management literature: yielding, compromising, forcing, problem solving, and avoiding. Scores for each conflict handling style range from 4 to 20. A higher score indicates that you have a higher preference for that style of conflict handling. Norms vary across cultures, occupations, and other groups, so these norms might not be representative for you. Also, keep in mind that these scores represent self-perceptions. Evaluations from others (such as through 360-degree feedback) may provide a more accurate estimate of your preferred conflict handling style.
Total Score: 0 pts.
Total score: 35 pts.
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
27-37 pts.
Feedback: Average Romance of leadership is a phenomenon in which followers (and possibly other stakeholders) want to believe that leaders make a difference in the organizations' success. People with a high romance of leadership score attribute the causes of organizational events much more to its leaders and much less to the economy, competition and other factors beyond the leader’s short-term control. This ranges from 10 to 50, with higher scores indicating that the person has a higher romance of leadership. The following norms are derived from a large sample of European employees with an average age in the mid-30s and work experience averaging about 15 years. However, these norms should be viewed with caution because the romance of leadership scale is a recent development and norms for any instrument can vary from one group to the next.
Total Score: 0 pts.
Self-Assessment Chap 13
Tall hierarchy
Score : 7 pts.
6-10Feedback : This self-assessment calculates your preferred organizational structure. Specifically, it estimates the extent to which you prefer a mechanistic or organic structure, as well as the three dimensions of a mechanistic structure: tall hierarchy, formalization and centralization. The following graphs compare your preferred organizational structure scores to a sample of over 200 MBA students. However, due to cultural, occupational and age differences, these results might be less relevant to you. Average preference People with high scores on this dimension prefer to work in organizations with several levels of hierarchy and a narrow span of control (few employees per supervisor). Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 15. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 7.8.
Formalization
Score : 12 pts.
12-15Feedback : Strong preference People with high scores on this dimension prefer to work in organizations where jobs are clearly defined with limited discretion. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 15. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 9.4.
Centralization
Score : 6 pts.
0-6Feedback : Low preference People with high scores on this dimension prefer to work in organizations where decision making occurs mainly among top management rather than spread out to lower level staff. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 15. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 7.7.
Total score: 25 pts.
RANGE BASED FEEDBACK:
22-29 pts.
Feedback: Average preference People with high scores on this overall score prefer to work in mechanistic organizations, whereas those with low scores prefer to work in organic organizational structures. Mechanistic structures are characterized by a narrow span of control and high degree of formalization and centralization. Organic structures have a wide span of control, little formalization and decentralized decision making. Scores on this subscale range from 0 to 45. The average score among a sample of MBA students was 24.9.
