Lifestyles Inventory Assessment Strengths, Weaknesses, & Goal Improvements

Arik Seiler arikwynn@yahoo.com GM 591: Leadership and Organizational Behavior
Professor Sharolyn Hergott
November 4, 2011

After an honest and conscious examination of the self, the Life Styles Inventory has probed my responses to several statements, thereby creating an analytical tool of my personal human behavior and orientations. With these results I am able to assess my strengths and weaknesses, which will allow me to fabricate constructive methods to develop myself into a more refined individual. According to the results, my “primary” thinking style is “Dependent,” depicting a score of 75 and indicating that this style is most representative of me. My “backup” thinking style is “Competitive” with a score of 65. I would have to immediately agree to both results as I am extremely competitive, to the point where at times it is seen as unattractive and exhausting to others. In my current situation, I would have to agree that dependency is up there, however generally I feel that I am highly independent. Being “Competitive” is a trait that has been engrained in me since I was a young child, as it is factored into how I was raised and the culture I was born into – that being a German-style upbringing. Combining this form of culture, being a competitive athlete since the age of five, and with a strict father who expected nothing less than perfection, I was quickly forced to adapt to developing a winning attitude with a persistence to achieve higher goals. This thinking style has allowed me to excel in the sport of swimming, achieve honor grades, win multiple awards, acquire a full scholarship to a prestigious university, and has now encouraged me to attain my Masters and work towards a career beneficial to our environment and future. To be quite frank, speaking of all this is somewhat arduous as it comes off as cocky and arrogant. In spite of this, the truth will allow for a more compelling interpretation. Generally, I am reserved about my achievements as “Modesty is the color of virtue” – Diogenes of Sinope. Today, I live in an economy that has restricted me from a career position, a salary, and any other benefits necessary to living in this society. Despite constant rejection, which is a custom I am not acclimatized to, I continue to push forward, seeking alternative paths to achieve my dreams and goals – all of which can be accredited to my “can-do” competitive attitude. “Competitive” lies not too far behind “Dependent.” However, I do not agree with the description. According to the results, which lies closer to the “High” range, “I compete primarily to get admiration and attention; I need to come out ahead of others to feel important; my preoccupation with my own concerns can cause others to see me as self-centered; I accept complex tasks for attention despite being fully prepared” (LSI). Now analyzing myself, I compete because I crave the workout, personal challenge, and team camaraderie. The admiration and attention is definitely a plus, but it is not the driving force. I need to “come out ahead” because I expect nothing less of myself and have been trained since a young boy to always be the best, yet in tandem, respect my opponent(s). I do not come off as self-centered because I dislike expressing my achievements. As a matter of fact, the majority of all my awards lay tucked away in a dusty box. There is no need to flaunt or dwell on past achievements for too long, but to consistently strive for the next aspiration. I do on the other hand accept complex tasks. I accept almost every task because I want to prove my worthiness in hopes of acquiring satisfaction and reward from others (at the present moment, that main reward being a job). From the “general” scheme of competitiveness, I do relate to “a tendency toward an aggressive nature and a fear of failure” (LSI). Despite this elucidation, I distinguish how my competitive strength can negatively impact others, which is why a compensating thinking style such as “Humanistic-Encouragement” (my lowest percentile) could greatly improve my more refined thinking style. Seeing “Dependent” as a primary thinking style came as a slight shock to me; Then again, I can see how it has become a necessity given my present situation. I grew up in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia for a good portion of my life, where rights and liberties were non-existent in comparison to what we have in the United States. Furthermore, my family and I experienced a lot of traveling, especially having family both in Germany and the United States. Often, due to their laborious work schedule, my parents would send my younger brother and I to these countries alone, where we were expected to take care of one another. The collaboration of all these events and lifestyle allowed us to become very independent individuals. Nonetheless, behaviors change. After graduating from university in a time of high unemployment, my behavior of being independent quickly transpired to a state of vulnerability, where I was forced to move back home completely reliant on my parents’ finances. The feeling of being financially dependent on my parents, who already have very little, has taken quite a psychological toll on me, but it simultaneously fuels the fire for me find work, earn and save money, and find a place of my own. My “Dependent” score lies on a thin line between the High and Medium percentile. According to the “High Range” verdict, “I tend to feel helpless; my effort makes little difference; I allow others to control much of what I do; I feel overwhelmed and threatened most of the time; I misinterpret people’s actions; I am too agreeable; I doubt myself; all of which can lead to depression and development of stress-related illness” (LSI). Conversely, I am, “highly sensitive to people’s feelings, modest, and tactful” (LSI). My interpretation of this is “yes and no.” I do agree that at times I feel helpless, but that is a consequence given my state of affairs. I lack experience in the field, therefore I tend to “doubt myself” because I am in the middle of a significant learning process, which also makes me feel that my effort contributes little influence. Personally, I have always been “too agreeable,” which I see as a weakness because it allows people to take advantage of me as a resource. I do acknowledge my strengths of being modest and tactful, although I am not always sensitive towards people’s feelings because I grew up in a household where we did not express many of our emotions. The transition to become more sensitive to others has been an ongoing challenge, but has significantly improved, which I must accredit to my girlfriend. Nonetheless, this analysis of my thinking styles is an eye-opener that I plan to utilize to my benefit. One thinking style that seems to hinder my overall effectiveness is “Humanistic-Encouraging,” which, not surprisingly, depicts my lowest percentile. This is limiting my effectiveness in organizations because according to the findings, I lack in supporting and encouraging others to push forward. I may be reluctant to focus on the needs and aspirations of others because my attention is more focused on myself. Refining my “Affiliative” style would greatly improve my association with others in the work place and in parallel, compliment my “Humanistic-Encouraging” style. For example, if I focus more attention on building relationships with employees, learning their interests and challenges, I can utilize whatever knowledge and experiences I have to help overcome their goals, and work obstacles. An improvement in “Affiliative” style ameliorates the “Humanistic-Encouraging” style because they are interrelated through an emphasis of relationship building and people management. As a “manager,” my thinking styles affect each of the four functions of management in a variety of ways. The responsibility of “Planning” involves setting goals, performance objectives, and distinguishing action plans. “Organizing” involves the development of “work structures and systems” while utilizing resources to fulfill expectations and standards. “Leading” requires motivating and communicating with employees to work conjointly with a unified goal and objective. “Controlling” calls for “monitoring performance” and taking “corrective action” to verify that objectives and tasks have been met (Schermerhorn, J., Hunt, J., Osborn, R., Uhl-Bien, M., 2010, p. 14). When it comes to these four processes of management, my thinking styles as a “perfectionist, competitive, power-oriented, dependent, approval-seeking, and avoidance-seeking” become self-defeating. I seek to “achieve overly systematic goals and plans” with a preeminence on detail, which can potentially blind the overall objective. Being highly competitive, I develop unrealistic goals, which overwhelms employees, as expectations are impossible to meet. As a result, motivation and work performance will deteriorate. Although being “Power-oriented” is widely accepted in the business world, it can still keep me detached from my staff members, which lessons communication within the hierarchy and leaves for a less effective work process. Being “Dependent” and seeking “Approval” leaves me to second-guess myself as I seek guidance and consent from others. This reduces my ability to bring confidence to my team, which employees will see as a weakness. They expect their leaders to be certain, aware, and accountable. “Avoidance” thinking can leave me to exclude constraints and risks, which will hinder the workflow and expected outcomes. To note, these first six styles fall on the upper medium range of my circumplex. The thinking styles of, “Achievement, Self-Actualizing, Humanistic-Encouraging, Oppositional, Conventional, and Affiliative,” also affect the four processes of management. “Achievement” managers “lead by example” and motivate employees to accomplish realistic objectives. “Self-Actualizing” managers develop pragmatic targets for their employees and are effective because they have a clear perception on the task and their employee’s ability, which allows them to navigate roles more methodically. “Humanistic-Encouraging” managers are those developing primary relationships with their staff and seeking to help inspire their personal and work goals through support and inclusive decision-making. “Oppositional” managers have high standards and can often be seen as aggressive and condescending. However, paired with a strong “Humanistic-Encouraging” thought process, these managers can achieve their high standards because they are supportive of their staff. “Conventional” workers follow guidelines and standards, which are necessary and ethical, yet belittle creative thinking. This can attenuate the implementation of support and encouragement. “Affiliative” managers have good people skills because they affiliate themselves with the rest of the staff and persuade teamwork, personal goals, and express a genuine solicitude for the individual. Although these six thinking styles depict scores less than those six previously expressed, they still fall within the medium range epitomizing well-rounded qualities. Growing up in the Middle East surrounded by multiple ethnicities, the cultures, norms, and behaviors were intertwined, which cultivated individuals with very unique characteristics. You cannot compare that lifestyle to growing up in the United States, because views here are more monochromatic. Despite our diversity, people who immigrate to the United States integrate an Americanized culture. In Saudi Arabia, you live an expatriate life influenced by a multinational and multicultural environment. I grew up in walled communities amid security guards equipped with machine guns where leaving the premises alone as a child was discouraged. These barriers compelled us to forge relationships with our international neighbors and participate in community events, which led me to begin swimming. The team atmosphere was magnetic and drew me into its folds. The physical and mental challenges of the sport aligned with the expectations of my father inadvertently developed my competitive and unremitting attitude. Friends who played sports, excelled in school, and strived for a successful future surrounded me. The diverse milieu unknowingly orchestrated the tune of a symphony, which I continue to follow. The LSI analysis categorized my thinking styles in the medium range varying in percentile, suggesting well-rounded behaviors as a leader. Nonetheless, many of my weaker thinking styles need to improve to sustain equilibrium. My goal is to develop “Humanistic-Encouraging” because it is an area of expertise that I lack. Building on this will benefit me in the long run as an individual and leader. This assessment has been an eye-opener, criticizing my personal characteristics like no other. It is how you choose to utilize the criticism that can either help or hinder your career development. You are only as strong as your weakest link; therefore you should ameliorate what you lack.
Sources

LSI: http://www.survey-server2.com/lsiuniversity-sso/rpt5.asp

Schermerhorn, J., Hunt, J., Osborn, R., Uhl-Bien, M. (2010). Organizational Behavior. (11th ed.) (page 14). John Wiley & Sons.