Leadership Development for Myers and Briggs -myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theLeadership Development for Myers and Briggs. Answer: Introduction Myers and Briggs 16 Personality Test is a test conducted to have a better understanding of the personality and characteristics of an individual. The test consists of an introspective self-report questionnaire that includes the psychological perspectives of an individual in order to determine the personal characteristics (Knobbs and Grayson 2012). For example, the questionnaire consists of questions that highlight how an individual perceives their surrounding people, situation, and environment. The personality test is developed based on Carl Jung theory that highlights four main psychological functions of individuals (Verhoeven and Daelemans 2014). The functions include thinking, sensation, feeling and intuition and according to the theory, one of the four psychological functions is dominant on an individual most of the time. This report emphasizes on analyzing the results generated after I conducted the MBTI 16 personality test on me. Therefore, based on the generated test results, I will evaluate my personality and psychological functions. Analysis of the Results Generated from MBTI 16 Personality Test Personality Type After taking the MBTI 16 Personality test, my personality type was determined to be Defender (ISFJ-T) (Refer to Appendix 1). According to the test, the psychological and characteristics of my personality includes introversion, sensing, feeling and judging that includes following characteristics. Figure 1: MBTI Personality Test (Source: Verhoeven and Daelemans 2014) Based on the four psychological functions generated from the test, my behavioral and psychological characteristics reflects quietly warm, factual, sympathetic, detailed, organized, dependable, thorough, systematic, realistic, conservative, caring, practical, stable and helpful. Discussing the Results The test result suggested an introvert nature for my personality. The percentage came as high as 63% in my ability and flexibility of interacting with my surrounding environment. As mentioned by Behaz and Djoudi (2012), the introvert characteristics emphasize on intrinsic feelings rather than considering extrinsic simulations. I agree with the results of being an introvert because, in reality, I do feel hesitant and shy in interacting with my surrounding people and environment readily. For example, I am generally hesitant in initiating conversation with people. This is because I am unsure how my surrounding people will take me when I approach them. Moreover, due to my introvert nature, it takes my time to mix with my surrounding people and the environment. For example, when I joined the university, it took me a considerable amount of time to socialize with my classmates. I could see that my classmates were happily interacting with each other whereas I was sitting in a corner and obse rving them. It is when a classmate approached me; I started socializing with her and the group. However, I also took the time to share a friendly bond and relationship with her initially. This is because of my sensitive and fearful nature. I am afraid of being hurt that has eventually developed my introvert nature. Secondly, between intuitive and observant trait, the result suggested an observant nature for me. As asserted by Sethuraman and Suresh (2014), the observant characteristic emphasizes on the actual things and world happening in the surrounding environment. I agree with the nature of the trait, as I enjoy experiencing, seeing, feeling and touching. Due to this nature, I find difficulty in considering possibilities and theories. As a result, evaluating the possibilities for future and exploring fantasy scenarios are not prominent traits of the observant (M Ayobi and Ustani 2014). Moreover, due to this behavioral trait, I proficiently deal with facts, concrete objects, and tools. I am unable to give sufficient and adequate effort when I am emphasizing on one thing at a time rather than multi tasking. Thirdly, the result generated a higher percentage of feeling 66% as my nature. This suggested that my ability to make decisions is highly influenced by my feelings. According to Zhang et al. (2012), an individuals decision influenced feelings highlights personality traits such as caring, conservative and helpful. My decision-making ability is highly influenced by my feelings. I always prioritize and consider the feelings of my surrounding people and myself before making any decisions. I am generally concerned about the impact of my decision on my surrounding people. This nature prohibits me to consider the practicality of the situation and hinders my thought process. I am so influenced by feelings while decision-making that I often lose my ability to think and judge the situation and the people. Due to this behavioral characteristic, I have taken wrong decisions. On the contrary, this nature has allowed me to help and care about others. Fourthly, 57% highlights a judging trait as my personality. The tactics scale determines how an individual approaches the available options and plan thereby, determining individual attitudes towards the certainty of life (Montequin et al. 2012). Due to this trait, I generally do not prefer keeping my options open. As a result, I come up with various contingency plans to proceed and deal with the challenges when they arise. Therefore, I prefer sticking to a plan rather than being influenced by the flow. I also prefer maintaining a checklist and generally put a cross when the things are done. Due to a judging trait, I have a strong ground ethnically and prioritize my duties. Lastly, 81% highlights a turbulent trait as my personality. As mentioned by Al-Dujaily, Kim and Ryu (2013), individuals with turbulent traits are sensitive to stress and self-conscious. Due to this trait, I experience a wide range of emotions very frequently that hampers the ability to make decisions and confidence. I always strive for improvement and tend to be a perfectionist. For example, due to this trait, I feel easily saturated and bored in a single thing. Conclusion In this report, it can be concluded that the MBTI 16 Personality Test generated my personality as Defender (ISFJ-T). According to the scales, my personality highlighted behavioral traits such an introvert, observant, feeling, judging and turbulent. The questionnaire of the test had questions emphasizing on various psychological and functional attributes and I was to relate to it completely. I agree with the fact being an introvert, as I feel hesitant and shy in socializing with my surrounding people and the environment easily. Due to my observant personality, I emphasize more on real things rather than considering my surrounding world. Moreover, my ability to take decisions are highly influenced by feelings that prohibit me to judge my surrounding world. References Al-Dujaily, A., Kim, J. and Ryu, H., 2013. Am I extrovert or introvert? Considering the personality effect toward e-learning system. Journal of Educational Technology Society, 16(3). Behaz, A. and Djoudi, M., 2012. Adaptation of learning resources based on the MBTI theory of psychological types. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 9(1), pp.135-141. Knobbs, C.G. and Grayson, D.J., 2012. An approach to developing independent learning and non-technical skills amongst final year mining engineering students. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(3), pp.307-320. Ayoubi, R. and Ustwani, B., 2014. The relationship between student's MBTI, preferences and academic performance at a Syrian university. Education+ Training, 56(1), pp.78-90. Montequn, V.R., Balsera, J.V., Fernndez, J.M.M. and Nieto, A.G., 2012. Using Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) as a Tool for Setting up Student Teams for Information Technology Projects. Journal of Information Technology and Application in Education (JITAE), JITAE, 1(1), pp.28-34. Sethuraman, K. and Suresh, J., 2014. Effective leadership styles. International Business Research, 7(9), p.165. Verhoeven, B. and Daelemans, W., 2014. CLiPS Stylometry Investigation (CSI) corpus: A Dutch corpus for the detection of age, gender, personality, sentiment and deception in text. In LREC (pp. 3081-3085). Zhang, D., Yao, N., Pritchard, E.M., Cuthbert, L. and Ketteridge, S., 2012, October. Effective teaching of technical teamwork to large cohorts of engineering students in china. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2012 (pp. 1-6). IEEE.