personality and business psychology

Anonymous
timer Asked: Mar 6th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $5

Question description

My topic is " Personality and Business Psychology" please follow the instruction that i post on it. The have example to show what kind of style you need to use on my paper. Please organize well with good grammar. No plagiarism!! Make sure 100% is your own work. The paper should have 1500 words. Thanks !!

MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE MGT6A9 Coursework 1: Specifications and guidance Table of Contents SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT SPECIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 2 1. TASK. ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. MARKING CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 3. DEADLINES ............................................................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 4. CW1 SECTION-BY-SECTION REQUIREMENTS AND HINTS ............................................................................................... 2 Section 1. Results and Interpretation ....................................................................................................................... 2 Section 2. A critique of the tests and the testing methods ....................................................................................... 3 Section 3. A targeted development plan .................................................................................................................. 3 APPENDIX ONE. COURSEWORK 1 SAMPLE FORMATIVE SUBMISSIONS ................................................................................. 4 FORMATIVE SUBMISSION SAMPLE 1: MBTI ........................................................................................................................ 4 FORMATIVE SUBMISSION SAMPLE 2: THE BIG 5 ................................................................................................................. 5 APPENDIX 2: COURSEWORK 1 SUMMATIVE FULL SAMPLE WITH MARK SHEET AND COMMENTS .............................................. 8 Sample Personality Test Report: .............................................................................................................................. 9 1.0 Results and Interpretation: ................................................................................................................................. 9 2.0 Academic Critique: ........................................................................................................................................... 10 3.0 Development Plan: ........................................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 My Results and Action Plan: ............................................................................................................................ 13 References: ............................................................................................................................................................ 14 CW1 Sample: Summative Marking Sheet .............................................................................................................. 15 APPENDIX 3 CW1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA .............................................................................................................. 16 1 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE Summative Assessment Specifications see below for Formative submission details) 1. Task. Write a 1500 word report (+/- 10%) on your own self-assessment. This will include the following sections (scroll further down for details): 1. RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION (Around 300 words). Your results from two personality tests (provided either in class and/or made available on Blackboard), and an interpretation of these results. Bullet points are recommended. You do not have to write an introduction. 2. ACADEMIC CRITIQUE (Around 600 words). Using your own observations and those of outside sources indicate the flaws and strengths of the tests and the testing methods 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Around 600 words). A targeted development for a given job scenario (detailed requirements below). Please note: You may well have taken one of these tests previously, and we strongly encourage you to compare your results now with any other previous tests. We are especially interested in your critique, and the results themselves may give you some valuable insights. 2. Marking criteria Your work will be graded on the following criteria (approx. 25 marks each but as in the real world all are essential): • • • • Critical thinking and objectivity: throughout your work demonstrate that you don’t automatically believe the results, that we need to interpret tentatively Content and insight: throughout, especially the Development Plan (details below) Application of theory (especially in the critique: demonstrate understanding of reliability/validity and bring in academic criticism from well regarded sources). Format: throughout your work, clear language, well formatted citations, clear and frequent paragraph breaks and sub-headings. PLEASE SEE APPENDIX 1 for samples to show how much detail you can include in the 200word formative submission, and APPENDIX 2 for a sample summative report. 4. CW1 Section-by-Section Requirements and hints Section 1. Results and Interpretation RESULTS Simply present the numerical results of both tests. For example: Belbin: (This example is for Belbin only): - Preferred styles: Teamworker (14), Plant (12) 2 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE - Less preferred styles: Resource Investigator (10), Specialist (9), Implementer (9) - Styles to avoid: Completer Finisher (8), Shaper (4), Coordinator (3), Monitor evaluator (1) INTERPRETATION: Explain the results, according to the test. (This example is for Belbin only): - Preferred roles: According to the results I am strong as a member of a team … - Secondary roles: If the team needed it, I could take on other roles….. - Roles to avoid: I show little skill at the leadership roles of Shaper and Coordinator… NOTE 1: Most other tests don’t use ‘preferred styles’ etc. This is specific to Belbin ONLY). With MBTI for example just put your 4 letters and indicate how clear each one was. NOTE 2: If you take any version of a test which isn’t the one we give you in class or make available on Bb you need to include a copy, explain where you found it, any differences with the ones we give you in class and a clear critique of that specific test that you took. You will lose marks if you don’t. Section 2. A critique of the tests and the testing methods This is where you comment on the accuracy, validity and reliability of the test and the results. Two themes are recommended here. Within each section just give the main points of your analysis. The test method: how clear were the instructions, was there sufficient time, were you distracted etc. The test itself: was any of the language unclear, how were the final results calculated, were the tasks logical, were the choices clearly distinguishable etc – this is where you need the references to outside sources to support your arguments. Section 3. A targeted development plan Task: The requirement is to assume that a potential employer in the marketing industry will give you these same tests in 6 months’ time with a view to recruiting you onto their trainee management programme. They won’t see your current results. Assume you really really want this job. NOTE: DO NOT FIND A DIFFERENT JOB ADVERT, JUST BASE YOUR IDEAS ON THIS SPECIFIC SCENARIO, AND IF YOU MAKE ANY PLAUSIBLE ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT IT YOU NEED TO JUSTIFY THEM BRIEFLY. 1. List the key personality test results the company is likely to find desirable for the post in terms of the tests you took. List them in bullet points (e.g. SH and IM in Belbin’s model). 2. Outline the key differences between your results in each test and the desirable ones. 3. Explain what you can do to narrow the gaps in the time available, as follows: 3 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE 3 a: How to change your personality. Here’s an example using MBTI: “The company would probably like managers to be sociable (‘E’ rather than ‘I’) but it is unlikely that I can change how I am in the 6 months available, given my clear ‘I’ result, but I can start next week by joining a London Meetup group…” 3 b: How to target specific items in each test which will skew your results towards the more desirable characteristics: Perhaps you scored ‘not sure’ between I and E on the MBTI test, but decided on balance you were more I. Assuming the company would prefer I over E, you could identify the ‘I’ statements on the test and choose those. It’s still you, you’re just emphasizing those parts of your personality which are desirable for the job. Please note, we are not asking you to explain how to fix the results, it’s simply about emphasizing more those elements of your personality which already exist. In the Belbin, for example, Belbin himself states that any of your less preferred roles will become prominent if there is a lack of that role in the team overall. So moving from, say 5 points to 9 points isn’t such a leap. And given the margin of error of some of these tests this could easily be allowable. Of course if you score 0 on a role which you think will be desirable then you need to point this out. Appendix One. Coursework 1 Sample formative submissions Formative submission sample 1: MBTI The purpose of the formative submission is so the lecturer knows that you understand every aspect of the coursework. A lot of text is not necessary. This one is 186 words. TEST: MBTI RESULTS: INFJ INTERPRETATION: introverted preferring solitude, depending on intuitive thoughts, preferring people over tasks and being methodical rather than spontaneous CRITIQUE: Threats to validity (testing methods): I was tired after a big lunch, the instructions weren’t very clear, this probably affected my results. Threats to validity (the test itself): the MBTI forces a binary choice, I am not entirely E or I, for example, but we have to choose one (sources include: Smith (2017), Jones (2016) and Evans (2015). Overall I feel I am actually more E than I, but the other results seem to be accurate. 4 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Probable desirable results: ENTJ Comparison: I need to change my I to E and F to T. How to change I to E: my result was only slightly I, so in 6 months, assuming the results are valid, I could quite easily score E. I could perhaps put myself in more sociable situations, spend more time with colleagues after work. And/or, E is clearly part of my nature already so it would be justifiable to simply choose more of the E statements in that section. Commentary on this formative sample: This sample clearly shows the writer understands the requirements of every section. Results are presented and interpreted, the critique observes the testing methods and one major flaw in the test itself with references, and the development plan shows awareness of the timescale and critically assesses the likelihood of being able to achieve a different result. Formative submission sample 2: The Big 5 JOHN SMITH MGT6A9 WEEK 6 20XX FORMATIVE SUBMISSSION COURSEWORK 1 [200 WORDS] 1. RESULTS / INTERPRETATION: N -4 E 0 O 3 A 4 C 10 Key results: According to the interpretation I am 50/50 extrovert/introvert, fairly emotionally stable, very conscientious. 2. Critique Methods: I was tired, late at night, this probably affected the validity of my results. The test itself: I agree to an extent but for the conscientiousness score I marked aspirationally rather than accurately. Those items were easy to spot, this is acknowledged by Costa and MacCrae themselves (2010), and Block (2010). 3. a. Desirable results: N E -6 6 5 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE O A C 7 0 3 b. Key differences: In marketing extraversion would be preferable, as well as a lower C score to allow for spontaneity. Decision-making will need an element of disagreeableness to implement unpopular decisions. c. How to change: My present C score was skewed so if I was more honest in 6 months’ time it would help. For my E result I could target those items which are easy to spot relating to extraversion and score those differently - I already have elements of both so it’s not unethical or impossible for me to become more extraverted in the time available by spending more time socially. INDICATIVE FEEDBACK ON THIS COURSEWORK (FORMATIVE SUBMISSION FROM JOHN SMITH ABOUT THE BIG 5) (You will get more feedback than this on your work): Overall: this demonstrates knowledge and insight into all elements of the work: • • • • • Results are clearly presented Interpretation shows insights into the meaning of the elements, demonstrates critical thinking Critique of the method shows awareness of situational influences Critique of the test itself shows awareness of key criticisms, with support from two authoritative sources, this also suggests awareness of the theoretical basis (the original authors are cited) Development plan shows clear and plausible desirable results, awareness that being honest could change results, that targeting specific statements could change results and that elements of his personality might simply need to be encouraged in order to score higher in E. This demonstrates good critical thinking, awareness of the time scale and of the ethics of fixing results. 6 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE 7 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE Appendix 2: Coursework 1 Summative full sample with mark sheet and comments JOHN SMITH MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SUMMATIVE SUBMISSION SAMPLE PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A SAMPLE REPORT, IT HAS BEEN ADAPTED AS FOLLOWS: • • • THE REFERENCES HAVE BEEN REMOVED OR ANONYMIZED BY USING, FOR EXAMPLE, REFANONYMIZED (20XX) – MANY CRITICISMS ARE MADE HERE, IT’S UP TO YOU AS STUDENTS TO FIND THE REFERENCES YOURSELVES. REFERENCES TO THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR AND DATES HAVE BEEN REMOVED SOME SECTIONS ARE REDACTED IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE STUDENTS TO FIND THEIR OWN INFORMATION AND CREATE THEIR OWN CONTENT IN THOSE SECTIONS 8 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE Sample Personality Test Report: 1.0 Results and Interpretation: 1.1 Belbin: Results: Belbin Excel Test: Completed: 27th February 20XX - Preferred styles: Monitor Evaluator ME (12) & Completer Finisher CF (10) - Less preferred styles: Implementer IM (8), Shaper SH (8), Resource Investigator RI (8) & Specialist SP (8) - Styles to avoid: Coordinator CO (6), Teamworker TW (4), Plant PL (3) Interpretation: According to these results I will display strong strategic and critical analysis skills capable of making decisions void of emotional bias (ME), as well as strength in scrutinising the final task/work for errors (CF) (Belbin, 2017). The combination of an ME and CF role can cause me to negatively influence others that I deem to be completing an insufficient quality of work. (ME & CF) If need be I am also more than capable of adopting the abilities of an IM, SH, RI and/or SP. By formulating strategies to ensure efficiency (IM), thrive under pressure (SH), capable of inspiring others to progress with their tasks (RI & SH). While running the risk of being inflexible (IM), being insensitive to others feelings while overwhelming them (SH & SP), and dislike for change. (IM, SH, RI & SP) According to the test I show little skill in a CO role, I will instead be more likely to over compensate for others rather than over delegate typical of CO. Unlike a TW I am not inclined to avoid confrontation for the benefit of another members feelings. In regards to problem solving I would be less inclined to use creative solutions expected of a PL, and instead use logical strategies. 1.2 Myers-Briggs: Results: 9 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE In Class Myers-Briggs Test: Completed: 1st February 20XX - Extroversion E (7) vs. Introversion I (3) - Sensing S (9) vs. Intuition I (1) - Thinking T (6) vs. Feeling F (4) - Judging J (10) vs. Perceiving P(0) Result: ESTJ Interpretation: ESJT - (Adapted from REFANONYMIZED 20XX) According to my results I am a moderately extroverted person, with some introverted tendencies. Suggesting I am capable of completing work individually, but thrive in social settings, where I am comfortable voicing my views. The results also suggest I have a strong trust in facts, processes and am detail orientated. However I struggle with theoretical concepts that I cannot support with information. Concerning thinking vs. feeling, I am only slightly more prone to logic and rationale than I am to being compassionate and people orientated. In the final section I scored as a completely judging rather than perceiving personality. This result suggests a lack of flexibility, but enjoyment of structure and routine. 2.0 Academic Critique: “In the social sciences, it is often unclear whether the problem is the theory, the measures, or both” (Li, R. 2011) 2.1 Belbin: According to REFANONYMIZED (20XX) the Belbin test is not a personality test. It measures behaviour rather than personality. Personalities remain “fairly constant”, while an individual’s ability to adapt to an environment 10 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE by altering their behaviour is certain. This notion of fluidity and adaptability may account for my results and lack of “test-retest” reliability. As I have taken the test many times before and have consistently produced different results my “test-retest” reliability is low. This however does not ensure that the test is inaccurate. Instead this may have occurred due to my ability to adapt to my environment, and reveal that I am highly influenced by those around me. In general however studies have shown the Belbin test to “show good or acceptable reliability overall” The Belbin test is only a valid test of behaviour if the respondents are unable to accurately identify their behaviour and report it without bias, (REFANONYMIZED 20XX) and then be correctly interpreted by the observer. In my case I am unsure if I was able to do this. While I was free from distractions during the test I do believe I was subconsciously answering the questions biasedly, to ensure I wasn’t placed in a role that I did not like such as TW. Proving my test to be invalid. It should also be noted I had spent the hours prior analysing and completing my literature review for my dissertation. Which I believe was reflected in my ME score, however my lack of creativity during the days prior to the test may have influenced my responses the to the questions and hence my low PL score. I agree that I possess strong critical analysis skills, and favour logic and structure expected of as a ME. I both agree and disagree with my results specifically with my scores in the CO role. According to (REFANONYMIZED 20XX) CO’s have a tendency to over delegate tasks, and I often find myself over compensating for others instead of over delegating. However I am very goal orientated and often find myself guiding the group towards to achieving our shared objectives. Also mirrored by my CF tendencies. I do however disagree with my PL score. As an Event’s Management student I often have to be creative and construct new and exciting solutions to issues. 2.2 Myer-Briggs: The Myer-Briggs (MBTI) test according to REFANONYMIZED (20XX) is a measure of psychological preferences that shapes how people see the world and make decisions. The use of forced choice to measure preference allows respondents to be simply categorised into one of the sixteen personality types (REFANONYMIZED 20XX). This process and logic has been called into question by several academics and professional bodies such as REFANONYMIZED and REFANONYMIZED 20XX because the test displays respondent’s preference and not true ability. (REFANONYMIZED 20XX) 11 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE The test is considered by some academics to have low “test-retest” reliability, however this is not the case for me. Instead my results are reflective of REFANONYMIZED views presented in (REFANONYMIZED 20XX). That people are likely to only shift from one choice to another in one pairing (thinking vs. feeling), while the other remaining preferences remain constant over time. On an individual basis the MBTI is a more reliable test for me than my Belbin test. However REFANONYMIZED contradicts this conclusion. The use of sixteen “broad” personality types that are explained using positive and vague sentences allows respondents to identify with their personality summaries, and may in fact not be reflective of the respondent’s true nature discussed by REFANONYMIZED (20XX). The test has also been criticised by REFANONYMIZED (20XX) ’s study for failing to account for gender differences in the thinking vs. feeling section. A process that did not occur in my test, which may have led to a different result, as I only had a small preference for thinking over feeling. The use of a simple scoring and numerical scale did remove bias in the interpretation of results, adding to the validity of the test. However I disagree with the answers in the test being exact opposites, and some responses were not reflective of my ideal option, forcing me to choose a preference that was not entirely reflective of my views. 3.0 Development Plan: 3.1 Desired Results Speculation: 3.1.1 Belbin: EDITOR’S COMMENT: IN THIS SECTION THE SUGGESTED DESIRABLE BELBIN RESULTS HAVE BEEN REMOVED OR MADE UNIDENTIFIABLE. AS STUDENTS YOU NEED TO PRESENT YOUR OWN IDEAS FOR THIS SECTION AND IT WOULD BE GIVING YOU TOO MUCH OF AN ANSWER FOR US TO PROVIDE THESE HERE. I have little confidence in the Belbin test itself, due to my regularly changing results. As this is a trainee management position however, I speculate that the company is looking for xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxx xxx xxxx xx xxxxx xx xxxxxxxxxx xx xxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxx. Xx xxxx X xxxxxxx xxxx xxxx xx xxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxx XX, XX, XX xxx/xx XX xxxxx. • XX (Xxxxxx): xx xxxxxx xxx xxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx, xxx xxxx xxxx xxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxx. • XX (Xxxxxx): xx xxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxx xx xxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx, xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxxxx xx ‘xxxx xxx’ xxxx xxxxxxx. • XX (Xxxxxx): xx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xx xxx xxxx. Xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx. 12 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE XX (Xxxxxxxx): xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx, xxx xxxxxxxxxxx xx xxxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xx xxx xxxxxxxxx. 3.1.2 Myer-Briggs: I speculate that the company would prefer: • X xxxx X: Xx x xxxxxxx xxx xxxx xxxx xx xx xxxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxx, xxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xx xxx xxxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxx xx xxxx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx xx xxx xxxx xxxxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxx. • X xxxxx X: xxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxx xxx XXXX xxx XXXX xxxx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxx xx xxxxxxx. XXXX xxx xxxx xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xx XXXX xxxxx. Xxxx xxxxxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxx (x.x. x xxxxx xx xxx xxxxxxx xx XXXX xxxxxxxx xx xx xxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxx x xxxxxxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxxx – XXXX). • X xxxx X: xxx xxxxxxx xx xxx xxxxx xxx xxxxxxxx xx xxxxxxxxx xxx xxxx xxxxxx xx xxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx. X xxxx X: Xxx xxx xx xxxxxxx xx xxxxxxxx xx xxxxx xx xxx xxxxxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxxxxxxx. Xxxxxxx xxx xxxxxxx xx xxxxx xx xxxxxx xxxxxxx xxx xx xxxxxxxx xxxxx xx xxxxx, xxx xx xxxx xxxxxxx xx X xxxxxxxxxx. 3.2 My Results and Action Plan: As an ESTJ I believe I would be an ideal candidate based on the MBTI test. However my completely xxxxxxx preference in the workplace may be considered an issue, due to the connotation that I am not flexible, and would favour imposing logic to regain routine and control to overcome this inflexibility. Due to my personally low “test-retest” reliability I am very distrusting of this test. Nevertheless I would be inclined to select answers that favour interpersonal interactions, logic and goal attainment. All of which are skills and qualities I believe to be important to managers and myself in the workplace. In order to achieve the aforementioned types I could practice taking the Belbin to improve my “test-retest” reliability and produce results reflective of these roles. 13 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE References: [THE REFERENCES HAVE BEEN DELETED IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE STUDENTS TO FIND THEIR OWN. THERE WERE AROUND 20 REFERENCES IN THIS WORK.] PLEASE SEE THE NEXT PAGE FOR THE SUMMATIVE COMMENTS AND GRADING FOR THIS WORK 14 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE CW1 Sample: Summative Marking Sheet CONTENT 74 EXCELLENT THROUGHOUT EXCEPT FOR LACK OF DETAIL IN PT 3 CRITICAL THINKING 84 REALLY EXCELLENT OBJECTIVITY AND QUESTIONING PROCESS THROUGHOUT FORMAT 70 EXCELLENT OVERALL BUT TOO LONG 81 OUTSTANDING UNDERSTANDING OF THE TESTS, THEIR MEANINS AND VARIANTS. APPLICATION THEORY OF Grade: 77 (excellent work but needed slightly more on Belbin development, and was slightly over the word count) SOME INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS: • • These are our comments on your summative submission. The grade is, of course, important, but what is just as important is the comments we have made on your work. We strongly recommend that you read these comments as they can help you enhance your skills in the future. The grades are now final, subject to possible scrutiny by the exam board and the external examiner so we can’t discuss the grade itself. However if you would like more detail about how to improve, please get in touch. FIRST TEST RESULTS SECOND TEST LISTED: INCLASS PREFERRED MUST BE 2 OF BELBIN, MBTI, VAK RESULTS INTERPRETED 300 WORDS TESTS CRITIQUED 600 WORDS DEVELOPMENT PLAN 600 WORDS (NOT THEIR OWN ADVERT) CHANGE PERSONALITY EMPHASISE CERTAIN TEST ITEMS COMMENTS ON ;MARKING CRITERIA: CONTENT, CRITICAL THINKING (C.T.), FORMAT, AND APPLICATION OF THEORY BELBIN Y MBTI Y Both excellent, MBTI takes account of PCI very well too Treatment of both tests is excellent, on content, on critical thinking: very strong arguments, balanced too, well supported, shows deep reading, thought and understanding of the underlying theoretical issues. Again excellent, good list of plausible and justified desirable traits, good treatment of MBTI but no methods of changing personality are mentioned, no mention of the timescale. Unfortunately didn’t address Belbin results in enough detail, plausible though they were. No methods of changing personality are mentioned, no mention of the timescale. 1694 SOME WAY OVER WORD COUNT 1500 +/- 10% 15 MGT6A9 COURSEWORK 1 SPECIFICATIONS AND GUIDANCE Appendix 3 CW1 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Criteria/ Scale Content and insight Critical thinking and objectivity Applicatio n of theory Format 8 90100% As for distinction and with exceptional content and insights As for distinction and with exceptional insights 7 8089% As for distinction and with outstanding content and insights As for distinction and with outstanding insights 6 7079% Excellent content and insights into personality testing 5 6069% Very good content and insights into personality testing 4 5059% Good content and insights into personality testing 3 4049% Satisfactory content and insights into personality testing 2 3039% Limited content and insights into personality testing 1 1129% Very limited content and insights into personality testing 0 010% Not assessabl e Excellent analysis of the tests and with a purely objective approach Very good analysis of the tests and with a mostly objective approach Good analysis of the tests and with a mostly objective approach Limited analysis of the tests and with a mostly subjective approach Very limited analysis of the tests and with a very subjective approach Not assessabl e As for distinction and with exceptional understandin g and insights into theory As for distinction and to an exceptional professional level As for distinction and with outstanding understandin g and insights into theory As for distinction to an outstanding professional level Excellent understandin g of theoretical perspectives on personality testing Excellent professional standards of format, presentation and guidance for reader. Very good understandin g of theoretical perspectives on personality testing Very good professional standards of format, presentation and guidance for reader. Good understandin g of theoretical perspectives on personality testing Good professional standards of format, presentation and guidance for reader. Satisfactory analysis of the tests and with a occasionally objective approach Satisfactory understandin g of theoretical perspectives on personality testing Satisfactory professional standards of format, presentation and guidance for reader. Limited understandin g of theoretical perspectives on personality testing Limited professional standards of format, presentation and guidance for reader. Very limited understandin g of theoretical perspectives on personality testing Very limited professional standards of format, presentation and guidance for reader. Not assessabl e 16 Not assessabl e

Tutor Answer

lance.w24
School: Boston College

Hello there. Please find the attached file. In case of any clarification feel free to consult

Running Head: PERSONALITY TEST

1

Business Psychology





PERSONALITY TEST

2

1.0 Results and Interpretation
1.1 Myers-Briggs Test:
-

Extroversion E (4) vs. Introversion I (6)

-

Sensing S (2) vs. Intuition I (8)

-

Thinking T (8) vs. Feeling F (2)

-

Judging J (7) vs. Perceiving P (3)

Result: INTJ
Interpretation:
The results suggest that I am an innovative independent, strategic, logical, reserved, and
insightful and that am driven by my original ideas to achieve improvements that are based on my
line. The result indicates that am moderately introversive having a scale of I (6) and somewhat
extroversive E (4). The result suggests that am a self- individualistic person who tend to create his
ideas rather than depend on those provided by others. I don’t like taking part in group consultations,
and thus I much prefer observing rather than contributing ideas to a group, therefore, dislike the
aspect of being the center of attention.
Being more intuitive makes me have an imagination of capabilities and create a big picture
on how something could be if put into use and thus like describing things in a figurative way
(Quinn et al. 2014). I pay little attention to the reality and make less application on the practical
ideas. The results further suggest that am good at thinking and decision making rather than
depending on the feelings as indicated on the scale on thinking T (8) Vs. The feeling F (2). I
logically make decisions and also enjoy identifying mistakes during conversations. I have less
scale that makes me base my decisions on emotions and how others get affected. Regarding

PERSONALITY TEST

3

judgment am moderately perfect scoring J (7) in judgment and perceiving P (3). The results on
judgment suggest that I prefer to leave matters settled rather than open, implying that am strict on
following the rules and deadlines and abiding by them rather than being flexible to avoid getting
myself into mess.

1.2 Belbin ...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Awesome! Exactly what I wanted.

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors