Leadership Self-Assessment Leadership Potential Self-Assessment The Leadership Potential assessment (Lussier & Achua, 2010, p. 3) yielded a score of 31 where the range was from 0 to 35; 0 representing low leadership potential and 35 representing the highest leadership potential. In this assessment the higher the score, from a generic standpoint, the more potential for leadership exists. However, it does not assess your willingness to do what it takes to lead or desire to lead. SWOT Analysis Strengths.

My high rating on question 1 of the assessment indicates that I am willing and interested in providing leadership to groups of people. Effective leaders influence followers and their followers influence them. The influencing process is between leaders and followers, not just the leader influencing followers; it’s a two way street. Question 2 indicates that I am also capable of being a good follower by providing input and being able to influence leadership. I am ready and willing to share my thoughts and ideas. The assessment showed that I posses the desire to influence others as a leader or a follower.

As an account manager I have more power than others in my organization to influence some situations, this influence includes, power, politics and negotiating. Question 4 related to my ability and desire to share management responsibility as a leader. My ability to learn new things and enjoy change is shown in my response to question 6. I enjoy working with people and enjoy sharing management responsibility. Effective leaders need to be able to get along with people and want to see them succeed as well as being successful yourself. Weakness.

One area that could use improvement includes my interest in getting people to listen to my suggestions and implement them. Since I am in a position to dictate that my ideas get implemented I can sometimes want to skip the influencing step and dictate what will happen due to impatience. From a political standpoint power and influence are extremely important in getting my ideas advanced. Building alliances with co-workers, clients and management is necessary in getting ahead and showing that you completely understand the requirements of the situation. Opportunities.

Opportunities include working with my team to build leadership skills within the team and to be more patient when I don’t get agreement on my way of thinking. I need to provide leadership but also be willing to wait until the team has come to agreement prior to implementation. Threats. Using a dictatorial leadership style rather than influencing others can be politically incorrect and cause my team to struggle. This style may cause “group think” which may result in unacceptable outcomes and unintended consequences. Networking is important in leadership and politicking.

Personality Profile Self-Assessment – Big Five and Myers-Briggs Big Five Model The Big Five Model (Lussier & Achua, 2010) personality assessment showed a consistency in surgency, conscientiousness, and openness to experience all with scores of 33. In the dimensions of agreeableness and adjustment they scored at 26 each. According to Maynard Brusman, substantial research over the past two decades on the Big Five profile has compiled a list of ideal characteristics. The ideal leader is defined in terms of resilience; energetic, outgoing and persuasive; visionary; competitive; and dedicated to a goal. SWOT Analysis Strengths.

Surgency, conscientiousness, and openness to experience all scored 33. According to Lussier and Achua (2010) the high surgency score indicates that I would be perceived as leaderlike and have the characteristics of working hard and being able to bring about change. This personality dimension relates to extraversion and leadership and people high in surgency tend to want to be in charge. Extraversion has an interpersonal component and is strongly related to positive affect like being enthusiastic, energetic, interested and friendly. Pervin & John (1999) found that extraverts show less anxiety over negative feedback.

These people are highly motivated to seek social situations and to be dominant in those situations (Pervin & John, 1999). People high in surgency are motivated by change, variety in their lives, challenge, and are easily bored. This personality dimension is also seen as adaptive, ambitious and hardworking. Conscientiousness is related to such things as achievement, perseverance, credibility, conformity, organization and responsibility. According to Lussier and Achua (2010) people with this trait are characterized as willing to work hard and put in the extra time and effort to accomplish goals to achieve success.

These people are internally driven and are motivated toward achievement through social conformity (Pervin & John, 1999). I also scored a 33 in the openness-to-experience dimension which includes traits related to being willing to change and try new things (Lussier & Achua, 2010). Openness describes the breadth, depth, originality, and complexity of an individual’s mental and experiential life. Traits also include: imaginative, nonconforming, unconventional and autonomous.

Openness is also associated with tolerance of ambiguity, the capacity to retain new information, being very focused, and the ability to be aware of more feelings, thoughts and impulses simultaneously (Pervin & John, 1999). People high in openness tend to have deeper more intense experiences. These individuals are motivated to seek out new experiences and to look for complexity. I find that I have many of the traits of surgency, conscientiousness and openness not due to natural ability or personality but due to the understanding that to get ahead in life in the manner that I wanted to, these were the characteristics that I needed to develop.

I am a relatively social person and I enjoy the company of others, I enjoy novel experiences and persevere once I start something. I am reliable, very well organized and can be counted on to complete projects once engaged. The adjustment personality dimension relates to emotional stability (Lussier & Achua, 2010). People that score high in the adjustment dimension tend to be nervous, high-strung, insecure, poor under pressure, negative, hostile and worrying. Low scorers tend to be calm, relaxed, self-controlled, secure, positive and hardy. My score indicates that I am either totally stable nor neurotic. I agree with the analysis and have learned to remain calm even in tense situations. Weakness. The lower score was in the area of agreeableness with a score of 26. The agreeableness personality dimension includes traits related to getting along with people (Lussier & Achua, 2010). People weaker in this dimension tend to be critical, rude, cold, difficult, uncompassionate, unfriendly, harsh and callous. People high in this dimension tend towards conformity in groups, toward modesty, not being demanding and being sympathetic.

Pro-social behavior is common among individuals high in agreeableness as well as being motivated to helping people in general. There may be a link between the motivational processes in regard to this trait, such that agreeable individuals strive for intimacy and unity in groups they belong to, which provides emotional rewards (Pervin & John, 1999). Opportunities. I view the agreeableness score as an opportunity to work on getting along with co-workers better to be more efficient.

I don’t see a major problem with a score of 26, as it is weakly correlated with leadership (Lussier & Achua, 2010). Threats. My lack of agreeableness and tendency to be overly critical can be a problem from a leadership perspective. I need to remind myself to use tools from situational leadership to address my lack of patience. My lack of sympathy, short temperedness and self-control can be viewed as lack of emotional intelligence. From a political perspective agreeableness and trust are extremely important factors in success.

Politics is a system of getting what we want in an organization (Lussier & Achua, 2010) and a deficiency in agreeableness can be detrimental in being able to advance my ideas. Politically effective leaders marshal resources to accomplish personal and professional goals via the power and influence of their relationships (Lussier & Achua, 2010). I have learned that building strong relationships within an organization is critical to my advancement. I have had to learn to work with many people that I may not particularly like but recognized that I needed their support to advance my positions.

Myers-Briggs The Myers-Briggs (MB) personality is administered to all employees in my company and displayed in our workspaces. The purpose of this analysis is to assist each of us in better understanding of ourselves and each other. The basic concept is that if we know our co-workers personality type as well as our own, we will understand how it affects the way they approach their work; we will be better able to determine the correct approach in working with each other to achieve superior results with less conflict.

My MB type is INTP, Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, and Perceiving. INTPs live in a world full of theoretical possibilities. INTPs have a great deal of insight and are creative thinkers which allow us to grasp complex abstract thoughts. James (2000) states that about 1% of the general population are INTPs which makes it one of the rarest types. The basic dynamic of the INTP can be described in the following table: RANK of FUNCTION FUNCTIONORIENTATION Dominant |Thinking |Introverted (Ti) | |Secondary |Intuition |Extraverted (Ne) | |Tertiary |Sensing |Introverted (Si) | |Inferior |Feeling |Extraverted (Fe) |

As an INTP, according to BSM Consulting (2011), my primary mode of living is focused internally where life is dealt with rationally and logically. My secondary mode would be external, where I perceive things via my intuition. INTP’s value knowledge above all else. INTPs direct energy towards the inner world of thoughts and emotions. They are organized and structured in their thinking and ideas and often come up with theories and explanations to explain new areas of scientific research. INTPs seek to understand the full complexity of any situation and enjoy solving difficult intellectual problems.

INTPs generally have the following traits: – Love theory and abstract ideas – Truth seekers – INTPs want to understand things by analyzing underlying principles and structures – Value knowledge and competence above all else – Have high standards for performance which they apply to themselves – Independent and original, possibly eccentric – Work best alone, and value autonomy – Have no desire to lead or follow – Dislike mundane detail – Creative and insightful – Future oriented – Usually brilliant and ingenious Trust their own insights and opinions above others – Live primarily inside their own minds, and may appear to be detached and uninvolved with other people SWOT Analysis Strengths. While there are many strengths of the INPT personality type, leadership is not among the innate traits. Leadership for an INTP has to be a choice and learned skill. Strengths for an INTP include making decisions on the basis of logic and using objective considerations. We are concerned with the truth and principles of justice as well as taking an objective approach to problems solving.

INTPs are analytical and critical and tend to see the flaws in a situation. The classic temperament of an INTP has a basic driving force that searches for competence or excellence in everything. INTPs are not found in large numbers at the top of a formal organization structure; it is more likely to find them as executives outside of the administrative structure. As visionaries INTPs prefer to communicate the general outline their vision and let others do their work without further involvement. INTPs lead by the strength of their ideas.

INTPs are creative problem solvers that possess the ability to develop unique solutions to extraordinary problems (James, 2000). Weakness. From a leadership perspective INTPs have many weaknesses. According to BMC Consulting (2011), the leadership style is uncommunicative and they believe that employees will know what is expected without being told. Commitment and dedication are expected and everyone is expected to have the same commitment as me. These unspoken unrealistic expectations can lead to poor morale for both the INTP leader and the employees.

INTPs generally do not seek out management positions and from a personal perspective I agree. After a brief 2 year experience with middle level management, I made a choice to be more of a high-level individual contributor. In many situations I run large teams or groups of people to drive for a specific goal but have always chosen not to take on the administrative duties. I really just don’t want to be bothered with the nit picky details of deciding on promotions, raises, sick time, etc…these details don’t contribute to the specific goal.

I’m more than willing and enjoy assisting subordinates to analyze problems, outline goals conceptually and apply logical thinking rather than personal examination. I tend to interact with team members or subordinates intellectually rather than emotionally. INTPs don’t enjoy telling other people what to do and how to do it; they also don’t enjoy enforcing procedural rules and regulations. INTPs generally do not like to lead or control others. Opportunities. Opportunities include recognition of my base line characteristics and to continue to improve on my interpersonal skills.

I need to develop more patience with errors and other indicators of what I see as inefficiency and incompetence. I need to learn to be more aware of others need to be appreciated and that their points of view need to be viewed respectfully. I need to remember that an appreciative word when honestly given has merit and not a waste of time. I also need to consider that a few words of praise or mention of things that I consider well done prior to bringing up areas of disagreement can be helpful in problem resolution. In order to maximize effectiveness in dealing with others INTPs should attempt to: Less complex and theoretical when conveying ideas and concepts to others – More open to the fact that others may value things that are not logical – Understand that logical critical analysis many be take personally by others – Look beyond theoretical explanations and focus on specifics and detail Threats. According to Paladin and Associates (2005), others often find the aloof, intellectually astute, confident demeanor INTPs project to be intimidating or condescending. Not being able to communicate with others in today’s work environment is just not acceptable.

INTPs talents are best served when the ideas they conceive are turned over to others for implementation, this puts them at risk for not being recognized or valued. INTPs lack interest in working out the details necessary to bring their ideas to fruition (James, 2000). From a management perspective, INTP tend to take work back from other employees that they think are incompetent and therefore do not delegate well. I see this in myself and need to realize that it is impossible to do everything myself. I need to work on spending time to develop others skills for my own sake as well as that of others.

It is easy for me to see the faults in others; I need to remember to be aware of my own failings and work to correct them. Motive Profile Self-Assessment Leader Motive Profile theory identifies the effective leadership personality profile. According to David McClelland, regardless of culture or gender, people are driven by three motives: – achievement – affiliation, and – influence/power. Based on the motive profile I have an equal need for power (33) and achievement (33) with a lesser motivator of the need for affiliation (26). SWOT Analysis

Strengths. My strengths include the non-conscious concern for achieving excellence via my individual efforts as well as a need to get things done via my influence over others. I get great satisfaction from the exercise of getting others to agree and push my ideas forward. Empowering my team and finding ways to connect with the team and customers is always satisfying. According to Lussier and Achua (2010) the Leader Motive Profile includes a high need for power that is greater than the need for affiliation and with a moderate need for achievement.

McClelland argues that a high power motivation, greater than the affiliation motive is predictive of effectiveness (Ratzburg). The power motive is necessary for effectiveness because it does induce me to engage in social influence behavior which I would not do naturally. Weaknesses. According to Lussier and Achua (2010) people with a high need for achievement tend to seek individual achievement and when not interested in leadership positions, there is the chance that personalized power requirements will take over and derailment can occur. I can see in my own actions that this does occur.

My natural tendency is to become dictatorial when in stressful situations and the need to achieve the goal drowns out other considerations. High achievement motivation is predicted to be indicative of effective entrepreneurship and leadership of small task oriented groups. It is also negatively related to the effectiveness of high-level managers in complex organizations or in political situations (Ratzburg). Opportunities. As an Alliance Manager for IBM within a large telecommunications organization there are many times that I need to be better in the realm of politics.

I need to temper my need for achievement and remember my larger long term career goals and behave accordingly. Threats. My need for achievement also gets in the way of my being able to delegate appropriately. I am often reluctant to delegate authority and responsibility. My desire to be personally involved with too many tasks can result in poor performance in areas of management. Personal Value Self-Assessment The values that an executive brings to an organization influence the strategic development of that organization.

The Personal Value assessment shows my top three values as professional, intellectual, and financial; all with high scores of 200. SWOT Analysis Strengths. Weaknesses. Opportunities. Threats. Political Behavior Self-Assessment According to Lussier and Achua (2010) politics is the process of gaining and using power within an organization. Organizational politics can be described as self serving and manipulative behavior of people and groups to promote their own agendas at the expense of others, and at times the expense of organizational goals.

Organizational politics is related to leadership in the context of groups, where followers are influenced by the leader to ensure their commitment and involvement toward the stated goals of the leader. In the Use of Political Behavior my scores indicate that I use the four areas relatively equally. Highest scores were in the areas of “learning the organizational culture and power players” and “developing good working relationships, especially with your boss”. SWOT Analysis Strengths. Since I work in a very technical field, I have always been able to rely on my competence or expert power as a way to influence those around me.

I have been able to form bonds with people from many different disciplines within the organization and have used their influence as well as my own to move my agenda forward. Having worked in, and succeed in many different organizations from engineering and marketing, to sales and distribution, I have had to develop many different leadership skills to influence different personality types. I have been lucky in having great mentors where I could observe their abilities that impacted these companies through treatment and use of authority under different settings.

I have developed my skills of decision making; setting agendas and interaction with others to mobilize support based on learning from these mentors. I learned that building coalitions (connection power) and cross functional teams is essential to moving higher in political organizations. Weaknesses. I scored a 4 in the area of “gaining recognition” and see that I could use improvement in this area. Methods that I can use to my political advantage in order to gain recognition include: – timing opportunities to highlight my contributions ensure that I have executive management support for difficult decisions – make use of broader team expertise and subject matter experts to get my point of view across – show respect for hierarchy in spite of hurdles it creates and time involved. Opportunities. Opportunities lie in the area of being able to smother organizational politics that do not advance the goals of the organization and recognizing the difference between personal goals and organizational goals. Being seen as someone that does more to advance corporate goals than my own will only enhance my leadership credibility.

My opportunity is to ensure that my team members see me as a loyal, honest team player. Threats. I see being able to align organizational goals with the goals of my individual team members as a potential threat from a political perspective. An already established area of weakness lies in my need to improve my ability to delegate and trust that members of my team can excel in their jobs. Crucial to this is my selection of the right people to carry the ball forward and to make the appropriate resources available to assist them when necessary.

Inability to do this will cause team breakdown and lackluster job performance for the team and myself. Normative Leadership Style Self-Assessment The normative leadership model was developed to help leaders decide how much involvement subordinates should have in the decision making process to get the most effective results. My Fiedler LPC result showed a propensity for task based leadership and a focus on getting the job done correctly (Lussier & Achua, 2010). I have a tendency to focus on getting the job done first and then consider the relationship ramifications.

Based on my scores on the Normative Leadership Style profile (Lussier & Achua, 2010) of S1 = 3, S2 = 3, S3 =4, and S4 = 2, I have developed the ability to chose the appropriate leadership style based on the level of the person I’m dealing with and the situation. My score demonstrates that I use the facilitate style more than the others. This style creates an environment where the team gets to provide input and I attempt to be supportive and encouraging, but the final decision is still mine. SWOT Analysis Strengths.

The strength of this facilitating style is that it provides a framework for the team to work in that is within the boundaries I have set up. Facilitation requires participation and concurrence on the decision without pushing the ideas of the leader (Lussier & Achua, 2010). I have found that this style tends to assist in developing support from my team members and coworkers, while the job is done effectively. My team is extremely competent, want to be involved in the decision making process and are highly satisfied with their positions which creates an environment where this participative style can be successful.

Weaknesses. A weakness of this style may be that it requires an investment of time. A decision style is in certain circumstances a better fit when time is in short supply. Based on information provided in the path-goal model, when the task or project is too complex or ambiguous a directive leadership style may provide more structure and the team members feel less pressure. Opportunities. Opportunity can be found in determining when to use a more autocratic style. It may be that I need to get more input from my management chain in certain decisions that are time sensitive. Threats.

A threat to this style is that I may be seen as a weak leader by higher level management, leaving too much authority and responsibility in the hands of the team. Communication Style Self-Assessment SWOT Analysis Strengths. Weaknesses. Opportunities. Threats. References BSM Consulting, Inc. (2011). Portrait of an INTP . Retrieved from www. personalitypage. com/INTP. html Big Five Personality Factors. (2000). Retrieved from http-server. carleton. ca/BigFive. html Brisman, M. (n. d. ). Leadership Personality: Do you have the Big Five Traits? Retrieved , from www. workingresources. com/nss-folder/pdffolder/leadershippersonality. df James, P. (2000). A description of the INTP Personality Type. Retrieved from www. intp. org/intprofile. html Leadership and organizational politics. (2011). Retrieved from www. alagse. com/leadership/13. php Lussier, R. N. , & Achua, C. F. (2010). Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill Development (4th ed. ). Mason, Ohio: South-Western. Paladin Associates, Inc. (2005). Portrait of an INTP. Retrieved from www. paladinexec. com Pervin, L. , & John, O. (1999). Handbook of personality: theory and research. New York: Gilford. Ratzburg, W. H. (n. d. ). Motivating Organizational Members. Retrieved from jam3c. tripod. com/id8. html