Module 4: Discussion (Ogl-520)

Instructions:

In each module, you will have the opportunity to participate in an online discussion forum.

This week, there are two multi-part prompts (as well as the usual application prompt) up for discussion.

It might be helpful to copy / paste the discussion prompts into an offline document (Word, for example), compose your responses offline, and then return to paste your responses here. (Please include each discussion prompt prior to your responses.)

With respect to your initial thread/ post responding to the prompts, similar to the Critical Thinking and Application Prompts, each discussion topic prompt is generally worthy of at least 750 words (2 – 3 well-written paragraphs) in response. Be sure to connect with (and informally cite in-text) any applicable readings / videos from the module’s learning materials. Following this procedure in the discussion forum will help students who may be struggling with their graduate-level writing skills see the approaches that others are taking in response to these types of prompts.

With respect to your replies to others’ posts (three per discussion topic), these can be more informal and are there just to help you all share important connections and build a sense of community. (You only need to create one thread for your initial post, responding to both prompts, in this case – you don’t need a separate thread for each question.)

NOTE: Some of these prompts will require some advance planning.

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

Discussion Prompt 1B: What have you learned about your personality as a result of this activity? Can you think of some specific examples of how your personality influences your behaviors at work (or in other organizations with which you are involved)?

Discussion Prompt 1C: With respect to what you learned about your Big 5 personality characteristics, what do you consider to be your greatest leadership strengths? How can you capitalize on these strengths? (Refer to, and connect with, the “Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management” reading – on the Module 4 Learning Materials page- as part of your response.)

Discussion Prompt 1D: With respect to what you learned about your Big 5 personality characteristics, are there behaviors that you feel the need to control or more effectively monitor? If so, how might that be accomplished?

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

What behaviors are most often observed in this person? Based on your interactions with this person, what might be some of their more obvious Big 5 personality characteristics? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. ClickHERELinks to an external site..) https://www.verywellmind.com/the-big-five-personality-dimensions-2795422

Discussion Prompt 2B: How can you work most effectively with this person? What can you do just a little differently (style flexing) in order to more effectively meet their needs and desires? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. ClickHERELinks to an external site..) https://www.verywellmind.com/the-big-five-personality-dimensions-2795422

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

Discussion Prompt 3: Thinking back on Module 4, with respect to building your leadership expertise, pick three concepts / theories / ideas from the module that you would consider the most powerful and useful, and (for each of the three) describe how the idea can be adapted into your evolving leadership practice.

Please post your initial response to the discussion topic question(s), and reply meaningfully to at least three of your fellow classmate’s posts. I HAVE PLACED EXAMPLES BELOW FOR YOU TO LOOK AT FOR THIS POST

Examples:

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

My Big 5 personality results are as follows:

- Extroversion: 16th percentile
- Emotional Stability: 34th percentile
- Agreeableness: 87th percentile
- Conscientiousness: 72nd percentile
- Intellect/Imagination (Openness to Experience): 93rd percentile

These results suggest that I am highly open to new experiences and learning, highly agreeable, and conscientious, but more introverted and moderately lower in emotional stability.

Discussion Prompt 1B: What have you learned about your personality as a result of this activity? Can you think of some specific examples of how your personality influences your behaviors at work (or in other organizations with which you are involved)?

The assessment reinforced several insights about how my personality influences my behavior in the workplace. My high openness to experience (93rd percentile) means I thrive in dynamic environments, enjoy tackling new challenges, and am drawn to innovation. This aligns with research showing that openness is strongly linked to creativity and adaptability (Kraus, 2010). At work, this manifests in my willingness to explore new project management strategies or introduce novel problem-solving methods.

My high agreeableness (87th percentile) indicates that I prioritize collaboration, empathy, and maintaining positive team relationships. This makes me an effective team player and helps me resolve conflicts diplomatically. However, research suggests that highly agreeable individuals may sometimes struggle with assertiveness (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 143), which is something I must be mindful of when making firm leadership decisions.
My lower extroversion (16th percentile) means I tend to prefer structured, one-on-one interactions over large group discussions or spontaneous networking. While this helps in deep, meaningful conversations, it can also limit opportunities for professional visibility.
Finally, my lower emotional stability (34th percentile) suggests that I may be more sensitive to stress and external pressures, which means I need to focus on managing workplace challenges without becoming overwhelmed (Aronson, Ch. 8, p. 231).

Discussion Prompt 1C: With respect to what you learned about your Big 5 personality characteristics, what do you consider to be your greatest leadership strengths? How can you capitalize on these strengths? (Refer to, and connect with, the “Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management” reading – on the Module 4 Learning Materials page- as part of your response.)

Based on my Big 5 results, my greatest leadership strengths come from high openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. According to Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management (Kraus, 2010), effective leaders balance task-oriented structure (conscientiousness) with relationship-building (agreeableness), while openness allows them to navigate uncertainty and foster innovation.

Encourage innovation and creative problem-solving: My high openness allows me to embrace diverse perspectives, making me well-suited for leading adaptive teams (Adaptive Leadership Article, p. 5). I can use this to drive creative solutions and motivate employees to think outside the box.
Leverage conscientiousness for strategic planning: With a 72nd percentile conscientiousness score, I can maintain organizational structure and accountability while ensuring projects stay on track. This aligns with best practices in adaptive leadership, where planning and flexibility must coexist (Adaptive Leadership Article, p. 3).
Use agreeableness for team cohesion: My high agreeableness makes me effective at diplomatic conflict resolution and trust-building. To maximize this, I should maintain a balance between empathy and assertiveness, ensuring decisions are both people-centered and firm (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 144).
By leveraging these strengths, I can lead with both strategic insight and emotional intelligence, creating a work environment that fosters both efficiency and collaboration.

Discussion Prompt 1D: With respect to what you learned about your Big 5 personality characteristics, are there behaviors that you feel the need to control or more effectively monitor? If so, how might that be accomplished?

Despite my strengths, there are areas I need to monitor and adjust.

Managing stress and resilience: My lower emotional stability means I may be more reactive to workplace pressures. Research in The Social Animal (Aronson, Ch. 8, p. 233) suggests that emotionally reactive individuals may experience greater interpersonal strain. To mitigate this, I can develop coping mechanisms such as structured debriefing, mindfulness techniques, or delegation to prevent burnout.
Improving assertiveness in decision-making: With high agreeableness, I sometimes prioritize harmony over hard decisions. While fostering positive relationships is a strength, it is crucial to avoid over-accommodating others at the expense of strategic goals (Kraus, 2010). Implementing structured decision-making frameworks can help ensure that objectivity takes precedence over personal preference.
Enhancing extroverted behaviors when needed: While my low extroversion aligns with deep thinking and structured work styles, it can limit leadership visibility. Research in Influence (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 146) suggests that leaders who actively engage in visible networking tend to foster stronger professional influence. I can actively schedule networking opportunities and practice engaging in larger group settings to develop this skill.

By actively monitoring these behaviors and applying adaptive strategies, I can continue to refine my leadership approach for maximum effectiveness.

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

I selected a colleague with whom I want to improve communication, and I have observed specific personality traits that shape our interactions. This individual appears to be highly task-focused and detail-oriented, which suggests a high level of conscientiousness. They prefer structured interactions that prioritize efficiency, often sticking to the facts and avoiding unnecessary small talk. Additionally, they exhibit low extroversion, as they tend to keep conversations brief and prefer working independently rather than engaging in collaborative brainstorming sessions.

Another notable trait is their low openness to experience, as they are often skeptical of new ideas or changes in processes. They prefer structured, tried-and-true methods over experimentation, making them resistant to innovation unless it is presented in a highly logical and step-by-step manner. These characteristics indicate that my colleague is goal-driven, methodical, and cautious about change, which means that any attempts to improve our collaboration must be tailored to their communication and work style. Recognizing these traits is essential for developing a strategy to work together more effectively (Kraus, 2010).

Discussion Prompt 2B: How can you work most effectively with this person? What can you do just a little differently (style flexing) in order to more effectively meet their needs and desires? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. Click HERELinks to an external site..)

To work effectively with this colleague, I need to adjust my communication approach to align with their high conscientiousness and low extroversion. Since they prefer structured and logical communication, I will ensure that any discussions remain concise, fact-based, and relevant to their work priorities. Instead of engaging in casual small talk, I will get straight to the point, keeping emails and meetings focused on tangible outcomes and next steps.

Additionally, because they have low openness to experience, I need to be strategic when introducing new ideas. People with low openness often resist change unless it is presented as a logical extension of existing processes (Aronson, Ch. 8, p. 236). To navigate this, I will introduce new ideas incrementally, framing them as solutions to existing challenges rather than radical changes. By focusing on practical benefits and providing clear, evidence-based reasoning, I can reduce resistance and encourage collaboration.

Finally, I will respect their preference for autonomy by ensuring that I do not overwhelm them with excessive discussions or unnecessary collaboration. Instead, I will check in only when necessary and provide direct, actionable insights to keep our interactions efficient and effective. By aligning my approach with their personality traits, I can enhance communication and build a more productive working relationship (Kraus, 2010).

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

Over the past week, I actively adjusted my communication style with this colleague to see if style flexing would lead to more effective collaboration. First, I modified the way I structured our conversations, ensuring that my emails were clear, concise, and task-focused. Instead of engaging in unnecessary small talk, I provided specific action items and direct questions to make interactions more efficient. As a result, I noticed that my colleague responded more promptly and provided detailed, actionable responses in return.

Second, I introduced new ideas gradually rather than all at once. Instead of presenting a large-scale change, I broke it down into small, manageable steps, offering concrete examples of how the adjustment could improve efficiency. My colleague, who is usually hesitant about new approaches, was noticeably more open to discussing the proposed changes when they were framed as an improvement to existing methods rather than a complete overhaul.

Finally, I respected their preference for autonomy by minimizing unnecessary meetings and allowing them space to process information before following up. As a result, our interactions became more fluid, efficient, and productive. My colleague seemed more engaged, asked clarifying questions, and was willing to collaborate more openly than before. This experience reinforced the importance of adapting my communication approach to align with different personality types, ultimately leading to a more effective and cooperative working relationship (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 146).

Discussion Prompt 3: Thinking back on Module 4, with respect to building your leadership expertise, pick three concepts / theories / ideas from the module that you would consider the most powerful and useful, and (for each of the three) describe how the idea can be adapted into your evolving leadership practice.

One of the most powerful concepts from this module is the Gain-Loss Theory of Attraction, which suggests that people are most influenced by changes in perception rather than static opinions (Aronson, Ch. 8). This theory has significant implications for leadership and team dynamics, particularly in the area of feedback and motivation. If team members receive constant praise, it can lose its impact, but if recognition is gradually increased in response to effort, it feels more meaningful. I can apply this by being intentional with positive reinforcement, ensuring that feedback is not just given as routine encouragement but strategically used to signal genuine progress. Instead of overwhelming my team with praise, I will focus on acknowledging specific improvements over time, reinforcing motivation and trust in my leadership.

Another key takeaway is the role of liking in persuasion, as outlined in Influence: Science and Practice (Cialdini, Ch. 5). People are more likely to comply with requests from those they like, and this applies directly to leadership—building rapport with a team enhances influence. This does not mean manufacturing artificial connections, but genuinely engaging with others, demonstrating empathy, and finding shared interests. From a leadership standpoint, this aligns with adaptive leadership principles, which emphasize flexibility in interpersonal approaches to build credibility and trust (Adaptive Leadership Article, p. 4). To leverage this in my leadership practice, I will prioritize developing authentic connections with team members through meaningful conversations and by aligning my leadership style with their motivations. If people feel valued and heard, they are more likely to be engaged and cooperative.

Finally, behavioral style flexing is a critical concept that underscores the importance of adapting communication and leadership approaches based on personality differences (Kraus, 2010). People respond differently based on their individual traits, and leaders who adjust their style accordingly create a more cohesive and effective team environment. My Big 5 results indicate high intellect/imagination but low extroversion, meaning that while I thrive on strategy and innovation, I am naturally more reserved in group settings. Understanding this allows me to be more intentional in adjusting my communication style, ensuring I engage with more extroverted team members in a way that resonates with them. Additionally, being aware of my team’s personality traits will allow me to facilitate collaboration more effectively. This concept reinforces that leadership is not about enforcing a single approach but about being flexible and responsive to the needs of the team.

By integrating these concepts—leveraging gain-loss dynamics in feedback, using likability to build influence, and flexing my behavioral style—I can strengthen my leadership approach in a way that drives engagement, trust, and team cohesion.

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

Below is my results from the Big 5 Personality Test:

I scored the highest with an 89 in the Conscientiousness factor. According to the trait descriptions, Individuals who score high on conscientiousness are characterized as being reliable, hardworking, and efficient. They tend to be well-organized and responsible, and are motivated to achieve their goals. They may also exhibit a strong sense of self-discipline and perseverance. I believe this to be a very accurate representation of my work ethic professional and academically. One of the questions in the assessment was “do you get your chores done right away”. In my personal life, I always start my day with chores to have a clean house. I can also relate this in my professional work ethic because I typically get my tasks done straight away. Personally, I am not fond of being the person that things are waiting on so I prefer to knock them out as soon as I can.

My lowest score on the assessment was a 34 in the Intellect/Imagination factor. In my professional life, this is definitely accurate. I am very much a “if it’s not broke, don’t fix it” type of person in the workplace. I like routine, predictability, and steadiness. More often that not, I will be at least open to hearing new ideas though. This can be a result of the type of work I do. Working for the government (Department of Energy), things are very not innovative and processes typically aren’t changed without a justifiable reason. I also love routine so when that’s disrupted, I remain flexible but I typically questions why it’s disrupted.

The reading, Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management, covers the idea of development and effects of commitment. For staff members who fulfil interesting and complex tasks in a self-determined way, a higher degree of commitment could be proven (Kraus, 2010, p. 12). With respect to the results of my Big 5 personality characteristics assessment, this concept can be considered one of my greatest leadership strengths. Not only do I get my tasks done right away, I also remain committed on tasks no matter their complexity. More often than not, I also maintain a good self-driven attitude and typically don’t need much guidance. The reading, Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management, provides a graph (figure 4, pg. 13) that describes the influential factors of commitment and what the outcomes of the factors are. Some positive effects of commitment leadership that apply to myself is motivation, better performance, and feeling well about my work. These positive outcomes are important to display in a leadership approach so that your project team can have a good role model for their work ethic.

With scoring lower on the Intellect/Imagination side, I do believe I need to closely monitor having a closed mind. This isn’t a problem in my personally life as I’m always up for a new adventure, but in my professional life, I don’t like changed unless it’s warranted. People low in this personality trait are often much more traditional and may struggle with abstract thinking (Cherry, 2025). In order to accomplish monitoring this downside effectively, I need to stop and remind myself that change isn’t bad. Change can bring new elements to the table and make processes better in the long run. Active listening is a key aspect that will help monitor close mindedness.

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with: What behaviors are most often observed in this person? Based on your interactions with this person, what might be some of their more obvious Big 5 personality characteristics? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. Click HERELinks to an external site.Links to an external site..)

I have a coworker who I would guess falls low in the emotional stability factor level. According to the Big 5 Assessment, individuals who score low on emotional stability tend to be more prone to negative emotions, such as anxiety, depression, and anger. They may be more reactive to stress and may find it difficult to cope with challenging situations. It can be difficult to effectively communicate with people who are always negative or easily stressed out. This coworker I want to effectively communicate with is negative all ten hours of the day. That kind of behavior can spread like wildfire on a project. It makes it hard to even want to interact with that person because of the negativity that comes with every conversation. I typically don’t go to this person unless I absolutely need to.

As I mentioned in the prompt above, I typically don’t go to this person with anything unless it’s required. This definitely isn’t the right approach. My first response when dealing with this person is almost getting irritated with the negativity. However, it can be easy to not understand what’s going on in the inside of a person’s head when dealing with conflict. People high in neuroticism experience a lot of stress, worry about different things, and feel anxious (Cherry, 2025). Dealing with negativity and anxiousness can be difficult and sometimes not seen on the surface. In order to successfully communicate with this person I need to style flex my open-mindedness. I need to be willing to change the method of performing a task if that means I can better work with the coworker higher on the neuroticism side. Addressing this person with a hard core attitude with create a clash because their emotions play such a higher role in their decision making.

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

This week at work, I tried to flex my neuroticism trait to better understand how to communicate with this coworker who falls on the high side opposed to me who falls on the lower side. I approached work tasks with the mindset that it doesn’t necessarily matter how the task gets done as long as it gets done properly. This allowed me to work along my coworker in a method that reduced negativity and anxiousness. I forced myself to be more conscious of this person’s emotions while performing this task rather than putting feelings on the back burner, which can make someone feel even more anxious.

Discussion Prompt 3: Thinking back on Module 4, with respect to building your leadership expertise, pick three concepts / theories / ideas from the module that you would consider the most powerful and useful, and (for each of the three) describe how the idea can be adapted into your evolving leadership practice.

Being Liked- One of the strongest determinants of whether we will like someone is the belief that someone likes us (Aronson, 2018, pg. 705). This is a useful and powerful theory because as a leader it’s important to be liked, in my opinion. Not necessarily a people pleaser, but understanding how your behavior as a leader can affect how your project team perceives you and likes you. More often than not, it’s easier to work alongside and under leaders who you like and respect. This theory does come with balance in order to be successful. Those who seem to like everyone appear to be less discerning with their affections and therefore aren’t nearly as desirable as those who are more choosy (Aronson, 2018, pg. 708). On the contrary, A leader must remain neutral and not give off the perception that he or she is overly likable towards everyone.

Effects of Praise & Favors – This is theory of understanding how and when to use criticism versus praise. As a leader, this is important to understand in order to successfully develop and grow your employees or project team. There are scenarios when praise is required but there are also scenarios when criticism will be more affective. Sometimes the human motive for accuracy and shared understanding wins out over the desire to be liked, appreciated, and showered with praise. We certainly want love and admiration, but just as important, we also want to be known and understood (Aronson, 2018, pg. 714). Developing this theory into my leadership style will allow me to understand what my employees need to take the next level in their position.

Personality Assessments – The Big 5 personality assessment is a great theory to better understand how people operate and why based on their personality type. As a leader, I think this is important to understand about your employees because it will help know the results coming from that person. Expectations can remain the same but the method of attack on tasks will be performed differently. It’s important to understand your team’s strengths and weaknesses.

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

The Big Five O90 – C62.5 – E79 – A69 – N27

Humanmetrics Jung Typology E22 – N47 – T6 – J12

The results of my Big Five Personality Test indicate a strong inclination toward openness (90), extraversion (79), and agreeableness (69), with moderate conscientiousness (62.5) and low neuroticism (27). These results suggest a natural curiosity for new ideas, a preference for engaging in creative and strategic thinking, and a tendency toward strong interpersonal connections. My high extraversion supports effective communication, allowing me to engage with colleagues and facilitate discussions with ease. Additionally, my low neuroticism provides a strong foundation for handling stress and maintaining composure in high-pressure environments. While my conscientiousness is moderately high, it reflects a balance between structure and flexibility, enabling me to be organized without being overly rigid. This trait is particularly valuable in my role as a sales director, where the constant drive for achievement is essential due to the granular analysis of sales figures on a daily, weekly, monthly, and annual basis (GutCheck, 2018). Similarly, my agreeableness suggests that I am team-oriented and cooperative, which contributes to effective collaboration in professional settings.

Additionally, my low neuroticism enables me to remain calm and logical under pressure, an essential quality for leadership roles that involve crisis management and decision-making in uncertain situations. The detailed breakdown of personality facets and sub-facets in the Mind Tools article further clarified the meaning of each trait. Understanding that volatility, depression, and angry hostility fall under neuroticism provided deeper insight into the benefits of scoring low in this category (Mind Tools, n.d.). Given these factors, I appreciate having a stable emotional baseline and do not find it concerning that I ranked lower in neuroticism on the Big Five assessment.

These results provide meaningful insights into my behavioral tendencies and professional interactions. My high openness and extraversion indicate that I thrive in dynamic environments where strategic thinking and innovation are valued. I am naturally receptive to feedback and willing to adapt to new challenges, which makes me effective in leadership roles. My ability to communicate with ease allows me to serve as a connector within teams, bridging gaps between individuals and fostering collaboration. The stability associated with my low neuroticism further enhances my reliability, particularly in high-stakes situations, like sales, where remaining composed is crucial.

In the workplace, my preference for big-picture problem-solving over routine, detail-heavy tasks aligns well with leadership and strategic decision-making roles. My comfort with change and ambiguity allows me to navigate complex environments effectively. My extraversion and agreeableness make me an approachable team member, someone who can engage with others and foster an inclusive environment. However, working with highly detail-focused or reserved individuals may require me to adjust my communication style to ensure alignment. This is an interesting challenge for me. While I am generally organized and have been recognized for this trait, it is not consistent across all areas. I tend to desire organization so strongly that, if I cannot structure something effectively, I may allow it to remain in disarray. This is an area where I recognize the need for improvement in order to create better balance in my work habits. In relation to leadership, this aspect of my personality can be beneficial. Because I have experienced both structured and unstructured tendencies, I can better understand the differences in work styles and adapt accordingly. However, it remains essential that I quickly recognize and adjust to these tendencies in order to maximize team efficiency and foster strong professional relationships.

The combination of these personality traits results in several leadership strengths that can be further leveraged. My high openness positions me as a visionary thinker, excelling in strategic planning and innovation. This strength is particularly beneficial in roles that require adaptability and the ability to drive forward-thinking initiatives. My extraversion and agreeableness enhance my ability to connect with others, making me a strong communicator and motivator. These traits can be capitalized on to encourage collaboration, build trust within teams, and resolve conflicts effectively. My low neuroticism allows me to maintain composure and think logically under pressure, a crucial trait for leadership roles that require crisis management and decision-making in uncertain environments. The breakdown of personality traits provided in The Big Five Personality Traits Model and Test (Mind Tools, n.d.) offered valuable insight into the sub-facets of neuroticism, including volatility, depression, and angry hostility. Understanding that these characteristics fall within this category reinforced my appreciation for scoring low in neuroticism, as it suggests resilience and emotional stability. Given the demands of leadership, I find this trait to be an asset rather than a limitation.

The concepts from Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management (Kraus, 2010) provide further support for how my personality traits align with effective leadership strategies. My high openness allows me to lead innovation-driven teams, fostering an environment where new ideas are explored and developed. My extraversion and agreeableness contribute to effective stakeholder engagement and team collaboration, ensuring that I can build strong relationships and maintain a positive team dynamic. Recognizing these strengths will allow me to continue developing as a leader, particularly in environments that require strategic foresight and interpersonal effectiveness. Despite these strengths, there are areas for improvement that require attention. My moderate conscientiousness suggests that while I am organized, I may sometimes focus on big ideas at the expense of details. To address this, implementing structured checklists and accountability systems will help ensure that execution aligns with strategic goals. My slightly low judging score (J12) indicates that while I am adaptable, I may benefit from a more structured approach to decision-making. Utilizing project management frameworks such as Agile or OKRs will provide the necessary structure to keep processes aligned (Kraus, 2010). Additionally, my slightly low thinking score (T6) suggests that while I rely on a mix of logic and intuition, I may need to incorporate more data-driven decision-making strategies. Implementing evidence-based leadership tools such as SWOT analyses and cost-benefit assessments will enhance the rigor of my decision-making process.

By recognizing both my strengths and areas for development, I can refine my leadership approach to be both adaptable and structured. Leveraging my natural abilities in communication, innovation, and crisis management while integrating systematic decision-making processes will ensure continued professional growth. This self-awareness, coupled with a commitment to intentional improvement, will allow me to maximize my effectiveness as a leader and contribute meaningfully to organizational success.

References

Cherry, K. (2025, January 29). What are the Big 5 personality traits? Verywell Mind. Retrieved from https://www.verywellmind.com/the-big-five-personality-dimensions-2795422Links to an external site.

GutCheck. (2018, July 5). Using the Big 5 personality traits to understand consumers. GutCheck. Retrieved from https://gutcheckit.com/blog/big-5-personality-understand-consumers/Links to an external site.

Kraus, R. (2010). Organizational psychology in the context of project management.

Mind Tools Content Team. (n.d.). The Big Five personality traits model and test. Mind Tools. Retrieved February 12, 2025, from https://www.mindtools.com/a2utf1j/the-big-five-personality-traits-model-and-testLinks to an external site.

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with: What behaviors are most often observed in this person? Based on your interactions with this person, what might be some of their more obvious Big 5 personality characteristics? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions.

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

For the purpose of this Prompt, I’ll be using a coworker, Luke.

Luke’s personality traits, as observed through his behavior and interests, align closely with the Big Five personality framework. His introverted nature suggests a preference for independent work and a need for encouragement to share ideas in group settings. As an engineer, he likely scores high in conscientiousness, demonstrating strong attention to detail, structure, and problem-solving skills. His engagement with creative hobbies such as Dungeons & Dragons, video games, and woodworking indicates a high level of openness, suggesting he enjoys strategic thinking and imaginative challenges. While he values relationships, as evidenced by his marriage and participation in group activities, his moderate agreeableness may mean that he does not always seek social interaction in professional settings. Additionally, his likely low neuroticism (Cherry, 2025) suggests that he remains calm under pressure, though he may also be reserved in expressing emotions in the workplace.

Understanding these personality traits allows for the implementation of style flexing strategies to work more effectively with Luke and improve his motivation. Given his passion for strategic and creative endeavors, leveraging his interest in structured challenges can enhance engagement. He is likely high in openness, which suggests that his NEO sub-facet of fantasy is also high (Mind Tools, n.d.), explaining his enjoyment of role-playing games such as Dungeons & Dragons. Because he enjoys problem-solving scenarios, framing work tasks in a gamified format could be beneficial. For instance, breaking projects into quests or challenges may make tasks more engaging and aligned with his thinking style. A useful approach might be to ask, “If this were a game level, what’s the best way to make it past this level?” as a way to stimulate his strategic mindset.

Because Luke is naturally shy, he does not feel comfortable participating in high-energy brainstorming sessions. To accommodate this, I adjusted his schedule to extend our one-on-one meetings while reducing his required team engineering time. This will allow him more time to process ideas individually before engaging in group discussions, making him more comfortable contributing. Yukl and Mahsud (2010) emphasize that adaptive leadership requires recognizing individual differences and adjusting communication strategies accordingly. In Luke’s case, this means creating an environment where he feels comfortable sharing his insights while minimizing unnecessary social pressure. Additionally, structured feedback will be more effective than general praise or criticism. Instead of vague affirmations such as “Great job,” offering specific, task-based feedback like, “Your attention to detail on X project made the process smoother. Let’s apply that to Y,” will reinforce his strengths and provide a clear path for improvement. This realization has been a game-changer in my leadership approach with Luke already this week. Connecting projects to his love of woodworking, which requires precision and patience, may also serve as a useful motivational tool. Drawing parallels between his professional work and woodworking—such as emphasizing that refining a project takes careful adjustments over time—may make his tasks feel more personally relevant.

To test the effectiveness of these strategies, I plan to implement a new approach in the coming week. A Dungeons & Dragons-style problem-solving exercise will be introduced into a work-related project to see if this format resonates with his strategic thinking preferences. Additionally, I will focus on delivering feedback in a more structured, task-oriented manner, emphasizing detailed observations over broad statements. To further assess motivation, I will ask Luke how he remains engaged with D&D and explore whether similar approaches can be incorporated into his work environment.

During execution, I will observe whether Luke becomes more engaged when work is framed as a structured challenge. Another key observation will be whether he responds better to individual feedback versus group-based discussions. Yukl and Mahsud (2010) argue that effective leaders continuously refine their approaches based on situational demands and team member responses. This aligns with my adaptive approach in assessing Luke’s engagement and refining techniques accordingly. If he opens up more or becomes more responsive when given time to think, it will reinforce the importance of providing him with a structured yet flexible approach to communication. Moving forward, I will refine these techniques based on his responses, ensuring that our working relationship continues to improve and that he remains motivated and engaged in his professional role.

References

Kraus, R. (2010). Organizational psychology in the context of project management.

Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019835Links to an external site.

Effective leadership is not simply about authority or decision-making; rather, it is a nuanced practice that involves understanding human behavior, psychological principles, and the dynamics of influence. Reflecting on Module 4, three concepts emerge as particularly relevant to my evolving leadership practice: the principle of liking, the insights from Karima Hana Meksem’s discussion on leadership attraction, and the application of the Big Five Personality Model. Each of these concepts provides a distinct yet interconnected perspective on leadership effectiveness, emphasizing the importance of social connection, personal perception, and adaptability in leadership roles. By integrating these ideas into my leadership approach, I can foster stronger professional relationships, enhance team motivation, and cultivate a presence that encourages both trust and engagement.

The principle of liking, as outlined by Robert Cialdini (2009, p. 142), underscores the psychological tendency for people to be more easily influenced by those they find likable. Furthermore, Elliot Aronson (2018, p. 303) emphasizes the health benefits of relationship connections. This idea is further reinforced by the findings of Dan Buettner and Sam Skemp (2016), whose National Geographic expedition sought to uncover the healthiest and longest-living populations in the world. Their research led to the identification of five regions, now known as Blue Zones, where people experience exceptional longevity and well-being. Within these regions, they identified nine common lifestyle habits, collectively referred to as the Power 9. One of these principles, Right Tribe, highlights the impact of social circles on long-term health. The world’s longest-lived individuals tend to form close-knit groups that reinforce shared values and behaviors, demonstrating how social networks can significantly influence lifestyle choices and overall well-being (Buettner & Skemp, 2016). Liking is not merely a superficial social preference but a fundamental mechanism that shapes interpersonal dynamics, decision-making, and workplace cohesion. This principle suggests that individuals who establish commonalities, provide authentic compliments, and exhibit warmth and approachability are more likely to inspire cooperation and engagement from their teams. In my leadership practice, this concept can be adapted by ensuring that professional interactions are rooted in genuine connection rather than transactional exchanges. By actively seeking to identify shared interests with colleagues, offering meaningful praise, and demonstrating emotional intelligence in workplace interactions, I can enhance trust and build stronger professional relationships. Implementing this principle will not only improve collaboration but also create an environment where employees feel valued, ultimately increasing overall engagement and productivity.

Meksem’s (2015) discussion on leadership attraction introduces a compelling perspective on how a leader’s self-perception and personal presentation influence their effectiveness. While not a formalized psychological theory, the article highlights the connection between a leader’s confidence, perceived attractiveness, and the way they are received by others. Meksem argues that individuals who embrace their unique qualities and project confidence are more likely to be viewed as competent, charismatic, and influential. This concept challenges traditional notions of leadership by emphasizing the importance of self-awareness and self-presentation. If, as Meksem asserts, “attractiveness lies in the leader’s heart,” then it follows that authenticity and inner confidence are inseparable from effective leadership. Leaders cannot mask the truth of their inner selves, as genuine presence and self-assurance are naturally projected outward. This sentiment aligns with one of the most valuable insights from this week’s learning: in order to lead others effectively, one must first cultivate self-acceptance and personal well-being. Integrating this idea into my leadership practice involves fostering a strong sense of self-confidence while remaining authentic. Rather than viewing attractiveness purely in a physical sense, I interpret Meksem’s insights as a call to cultivate an internal sense of presence, poise, and personal branding. Leaders who demonstrate confidence, articulate their vision clearly, and carry themselves with assuredness naturally command respect and influence. By being mindful of how I present myself, both in terms of professional demeanor and in the way I communicate, I can strengthen my ability to engage and inspire those around me.

The Big Five Personality Model provides an additional framework for enhancing leadership adaptability by offering insight into how different personality traits influence leadership styles and team dynamics. Understanding my own personality traits, as well as those of my colleagues, allows for a more tailored and effective leadership approach. Applying the Big Five Model in leadership means recognizing that team members have varying levels of extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness, all of which influence how they respond to motivation, feedback, and collaboration. In one of this week’s exercises, we analyzed a colleague’s personality through this framework to develop a tailored re-engagement strategy. My focus was on an exceptionally talented engineer who struggles with time management and meeting deadlines. After reviewing his assessment results, I discovered he scored very low in conscientiousness, which provided a critical explanation for his tendency to procrastinate. Cherry (2025) explains that individuals with low conscientiousness often struggle with task completion and prioritization, rather than actively resisting structure. Understanding this allowed me to adjust my leadership approach, focusing on structured check-ins, external accountability mechanisms, and breaking tasks into smaller, manageable milestones. This experience reinforced how psychological insights can improve managerial effectiveness and team cohesion. Another way I will apply this model is by adjusting my leadership style when engaging with introverted employees, who may require more structured one-on-one interactions, while highly conscientious individuals may thrive under clear expectations and well-defined goals. Understanding these nuances will enable me to lead with empathy, ensuring that each team member’s strengths are leveraged to their fullest potential.

Each of these concepts—the principle of liking, leadership attraction, and the Big Five Personality Model—reinforces the idea that leadership is as much about influence and self-awareness as it is about decision-making and strategy. By integrating these insights into my leadership practice, I can refine my ability to connect with others, present myself with confidence, and adapt to diverse personalities in the workplace. Leadership is not a static skill but an ongoing process of growth and refinement. Through conscious implementation of these principles, I aim to cultivate an approach that is both data-informed and deeply attuned to the psychological and interpersonal factors that drive team success.

References

Aronson, E. (2018). The social animal (12th ed.). Worth Publishers.

Buettner, D., & Skemp, S. (2016). Blue Zones: Lessons from the world’s longest lived. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 10(5), 318–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827616637066Links to an external site.

Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and practice (5th ed.). Pearson Education Inc.

Meksem, K. H. (2015, July 27). Leadership attraction: How successful leaders… [LinkedIn post]. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/leadership-attraction-how-successful-leaders-karima-hana-meksem-phd-1/Links to an external site.

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

Below are my results. It kind of felt all over the place but once I started reviewing the explanations of each one on a deeper level, it really started to come together and make sense.

I think the part that stuck out to me most was the high percentile of conscientious. I’ve learned that I’m very much the type of person that likes to stick to a routine, which I guess makes sense that I had such a high conscientious percentile, but I think that has helped me in the workplace in quite a few ways. I think it has disciplined me to avoid distractions and work through what needs to get done. Prismocean.com mentions that people with a high percentile of this trait “respect authority, and consistently fulfill your obligations to systems and people. Your deliberate nature means you carefully ponder decisions in advance, seeking to avoid mistakes”. (PrismOcean, n.d.). I can confirm that I often review things in advance and if I do make mistakes, I often re-review things for accuracy to catch said mistakes prior to the receiving end catching it.

I think that my high percentile of agreeableness is a trait that makes me a strong leader. I think it’s a balance of advocating for yourself while also taking the account of others into consideration, which is important in a leadership role. Agreeableness allows me to consider those needs of others and work towards satisfying everyone versus just myself.

I think the only trait that I tend to mentor more than others is the fact that I tend to be quite introverted. I think that at times, this can come off as either uninterested or unwilling to collaborate with others. This is something that I’ve been considerate of for quite some time and have adjusted my persona to better work with others, but at times I do feel like I could do better.

Prism-Ocean. (2022, May 26). PRISM-OCEAN Profile – VCXYZ. PRISM-OCEAN. https://prismocean.com/profile/vcxyz/

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

I know that most will probably take the approach of listing someone in the workplace that they can communicate better with, but I’m going to take a different approach and list my mother. I think her and I have very different communication styles and personality traits, often making it difficult to effectively communicate.

What behaviors are most often observed in this person? Based on your interactions with this person, what might be some of their more obvious Big 5 personality characteristics? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. Click HERELinks to an external site.Links to an external site..)

I think some major differences would be that my mother is a lot more extroverted than I am. Additionally, I think she tends to be more responsive than conscientious. This spontaneity often collides with my routine, making it difficult on both of our ends.

One thing that I’ve had to adjust is recognizing energy levels and not committing myself to social settings when I don’t feel comfortable. Since my mom is opposite of me, she’s often wanting to be social which is something that I struggle with. I think leaning on my agreeable trait helps here, as well. I try to be considerate of her wants/needs when we spend time together and allow myself to be less restricted so that I don’t come off as inconsiderate or uninterested. I think finding a middle path that serves and fulfills us both is something that we’ve gotten better at along the way.

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

This week I decided to go out and join some former colleagues for dinner. Although this may seem normal for many people, I’ve been working from home for nearly 10 years so I’ve sort of mastered the art of staying in and keeping work colleagues as a virtual-only relationship. Going out with them alone pushed me outside of my comfort zone and allowed me to be more extroverted. However, I also allowed myself the entire evening to really push the boundaries of my usual routine/conscientious approach. We met for dinner, and when someone offered to carry on the conversation elsewhere afterwards, I agreed and joined. This allowed me to meet their needs a bit more and actually was nice letting down my guard and constant routine for a bit.

Similarity

I think similarity was an important concept this week because it forces us as leaders to be more critical in situations that similarity comes into play. Cialdini mentions “We like people who are similar to us. This fact sems t hold true whether the similarity is in the area of opinions, personality traits, background, or lifestyle.” (Cialdini, 2009, p. 148). And although it’s true, Cialdini also highlights that people can manipulate similarity to increase their likeness. I think that being more aware of similarity is beneficial when in a leadership role, not only to ensure we foster a diverse team, but also ensure we’re considerate of possible manipulation.

Liking

I know this is a more broad portion from this week, but Aronsons part of the chapter that covers what attracts us to others-and gets us to like us? was an interesting read. He goes over how things such as similarity, proximity, competence, and even physical attractiveness are things that we subconsciously consider when liking or being liked. In terms of competence, he states that we “stand a better chance of doing well at our life tasks if we surround ourselves with people who know what they’re doing and have a lot to teach us.” (Aronson, 2018, p. 308). This highlights why we surround ourselves with specific people but also allows us to look within at our own traits when we feel “unlikable”.

The Big Five Personality Test

The big five personality test was a great way to reflect on things that individually feed to our personality. The reason that this was one of my favorite parts of this week is because I plan to use it for my current team as well as for future direct reports that onboard onto my team. Having them do this and share their results with me will be beneficial and allow myself to be a better leader by catering to their individual wants/needs.

Aronson, E. (1972). The social animal. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA13398978

Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and Practice. Prentice Hall.

-___________________________________________________________________________________

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

Extroversion-81

Emotional Stability-74

Agreeableness-40

Conscientiousness-84

Intellect/Imagination-84

I agree with the results of my personality test. I think there is a level of subjectivity because it is multiple-choice. My agreeableness score is low, and based on the trait description “express their opinions forcefully” is very accurate. In my job, it is necessary to be assertive, but I also think that I can listen to other’s opinions and make a decision based on their input.

Discussion Prompt 1C: Concerning what you learned about your Big 5 personality characteristics, what do you consider to be your greatest leadership strengths? How can you capitalize on these strengths? (Refer to, and connect with, the “Organizational Psychology in the Context of Project Management” reading – on the Module 4 Learning Materials page- as part of your response.)

I scored low in Agreeableness from Open-Source but when I took the MSED (2025) Big 5 test I scored high in Agreeableness which lends credence to the subjectivity I previously implied. I would consider Agreeableness to be one of my better qualities. I appreciate the feedback and am willing to admit that someone else’s idea is better and take steps to implement it.

Mental health is listed as a link to agreeableness and emotional stability. I have struggled with depression for a long time and already use the services of a therapist. I scored well in Intellect/Imagination and after reading the trait descriptions it discusses how people who score well in this category can have difficulty with routine tasks. I do find myself struggling to perform mundane and repetitive tasks because there is no satisfaction upon completion. What I have found works best for me is telling myself that once I can move on to tasks that I feel are more challenging.

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

Openness- Low; Conscientiousness- Low;Extraversion-Low;Agreeableness-Low;Neuroticism-Low

Using the Big 5 Personality Traits (MSED, 2025), I used a coworker as my example for this week. Using the descriptions listed in the personality test I assigned him a score of Low or High based on the list. There is an individual that I have been mentoring/training for a while now. They are an incredibly smart individual but have difficulty getting started on tasks. Additionally, our job is to assist in training the waterfront submarine’s engineering departments. I frequently have to admonish this individual because when he provides feedback after an evolution, they are condescending when addressing the group. The content of their feedback is 100% correct but their presentation was poor.

Discussion Prompt 2B: How can you work most effectively with this person? What can you do just a little differently (style flexing) in order to more effectively meet their needs and desires?

Ways that I have started working with this individual is to reinforce the importance of objectivity. Reinforcing to him that I appreciate his passion for ensuring that personnel are doing things correctly and that no one is receiving his feedback because it comes off as confrontational. Explaining to him that we (the staff) see these drills every day and have the opportunity to make a difference in their operations if we take a moment and allow the watch team to explain their train of thought. Covey (1991) discusses this as one of the habits in his book.

Straight Talk is an effective means to provide feedback to the team. Aronson (2019, pg.449) discusses that when criticizing we fail to give the benefit of the doubt. I believe that it is crucial that when you are providing feedback you should be candid but also be tactful. The example I will use is we recently had a boat conducting a training set. The boat first started using the trainer in November and their performance was atrocious. However, I was able to observe a training set this past week and there was a marked improvement in their performance. I provided feedback to the leadership when the junior sailors were not present to let them know that my initial impression was that they were poorly trained. I then told them that it was obvious they were working hard to improve and it was readily apparent.

Pratfall Effect– Working around intelligent people may seem ideal but, in my experience, pride is not far behind. As the leader of these personnel, I will be viewed as the smartest person in the room, even though that is not accurate. Cialdini (2005) discusses how a person’s position has the power to command respect. The way that I use the Pratfall Effect is to share an example of how I have made mistakes I made when I was a junior sailor. Another way I use it to my benefit is during training. We conduct pretty technical training and the material can be difficult. The trainer will ask if anyone has any questions but no one raises their hand. I will make it a point to ask a question that I may (or may not) know the answer. It provides the catalyst for other sailors to ask questions.

Adapting to Emerging Threats or Opportunities– As a leader it is important to keep sight of the big picture. Proper planning and development of contingencies ensures that there is a path forward for your team in the event of adverse conditions. Adapting also requires you to capitalize on opportunities that can be advantageous to the team. However, it requires constant engagement by the leadership and buy-in from the team to be flexible.

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

My result for the Big 5 personality Test is as follow:

Extraversion 11

Emotional Stability 30

Agreeableness 67

Conscientiousness 41

Openness to Experience 46

This assessment shows that I am sociable and emotionally stable, which helps me navigate social interactions with ease. My conscientiousness and intellect/Imagination suggest that I can manage tasks efficiently while embracing creativity. In the workplace, my extraversion makes me comfortable leading meetings and collaborating with others. My high conscientiousness ensures that I complete projects on time with great attention to detail, while my intellect/Imagination allows me to innovate and bring fresh ideas to team discussions.

Based on my Big 5 results, my strengths as a leader come from my ability to connect with others, stay composed under pressure, stay organized, and think outside the box. I enjoy engaging with teams and keeping people motivated, and I tend to stay level-headed even in stressful situations. Being detail-oriented helps me manage tasks efficiently, while my curiosity pushes me to embrace new ideas and encourage innovation. To make the most of these strengths, I can take on leadership roles that require teamwork and motivation, handle challenges with a calm and strategic mindset, and create an open, creative environment where new ideas can thrive. By staying organized and structured, I can also help improve team efficiency and overall effectiveness, aligning with insights from the article by Kraus (2010).

Based on my Big 5 traits, there are a few behaviors I should be mindful of as a leader. Since I’m naturally outgoing, I need to make sure my enthusiasm doesn’t unintentionally overshadow quieter team members. That means practicing active listening and making space for everyone’s input. My conscientiousness helps me stay organized and focused, but I have to be careful not to become too rigid or perfectionistic allowing for flexibility can lead to better results. While I love exploring new ideas, I also need to ensure they’re practical and aligned with project goals. To improve, I can reflect or journal to stay aware of my tendencies, ask for feedback from colleagues to catch any blind spots, and use mindfulness techniques to find a balance between high standards and adaptability.

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

Since my dad shares some of my personality traits, he likely enjoys social interactions but prefers meaningful conversations over small talk. He stays calm under pressure and handles stress well, making him a steady presence in any situation. His conscientious nature means he values structure, discipline, and efficiency, ensuring that things are done the right way. He is kind and cooperative, though he isn’t afraid to stand his ground when needed. While he enjoys learning and exploring new ideas, he also appreciates the comfort of familiar routines. In both family and work settings, he often takes charge with confidence, leading with a balance of warmth and firmness. His strong sense of organization and responsibility makes him someone people can rely on.

Discussion Prompt 2B: How can you work most effectively with this person? What can you do just a little differently (style flexing) in order to more effectively meet their needs and desires?

To communicate better with my dad, I need to be mindful of his leadership style and make sure I’m clear and direct when we talk, especially if he prefers structure. Since we share similar traits, I can connect with him through our common values like discipline, responsibility, and enthusiasm. It’s also important to find a balance between speaking up and listening because while he values open conversations, he also wants to feel heard. And since he’s someone who enjoys new ideas but also appreciates stability, I can introduce changes gradually and explain them in a way that makes sense to him.

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

I want to try making these small adjustments in real-life situations and see how they affect my interactions. If I’m working with an introverted colleague, I’ll send an agenda before a meeting so they have time to prepare. If I’m managing someone who prefers structure, I’ll make sure to give clear, step-by-step instructions to keep things organized. And if I’m dealing with a skeptical teammate, I’ll focus on facts and logic rather than emotions when presenting new ideas. I think these changes could make conversations smoother, reduce misunderstandings, and improve teamwork. Being flexible in how I communicate can help me build stronger relationships and work more efficiently with others.

Thinking back on Module 4, with respect to building your leadership expertise, the three concept I picked is Liking and Influence, Gain-Loss Theory of Attraction, and Straight Talk & Effective Communication.

Liking and Influence (Aronson – PowerPoint Ch 8, Cialdini – PowerPoint Ch 5)

People naturally respond better to those they like, so building genuine connections with my team can make a big difference. I can do this by finding common ground, whether through shared interests, experiences, or goals. Giving sincere compliments and recognizing people’s efforts helps create a positive and supportive environment, while fostering teamwork builds trust and cooperation. If I’m leading a project, I’ll take the time to personally connect with my team. Whether that means acknowledging their hard work or bonding over something we have in common. These small but meaningful actions can strengthen relationships and keep everyone motivated.

Gain-Loss Theory of Attraction (Aronson – PowerPoint Ch 8)

People appreciate genuine growth in relationships more than constant approval, so trust and influence take time to build. Rather than trying to win people over instantly, I can focus on gradually earning their confidence. If I’m working with someone who’s initially resistant, I’ll be patient and offer support in a way that feels natural, giving thoughtful feedback and recognizing their progress without overdoing it. Excessive praise can feel insincere, but steady encouragement makes a real impact. For example, if a team member is skeptical of my leadership, I won’t force a connection. Instead, I’ll acknowledge their strengths and improvement over time, so when I do offer praise, it actually means something.

Straight Talk & Effective Communication Influence (Aronson – PowerPoint Ch 8)

Being honest and direct in communication without blaming or judging makes a huge difference in building strong relationships and leading effectively. I’ve learned that giving clear, constructive feedback is much more impactful when it doesn’t feel like a personal attack. Creating a space where people feel comfortable sharing their concerns also helps build trust. One simple way to do this is by using I statements instead of YOU statements, which keeps conversations from feeling accusatory. For example, instead of saying, You’re not meeting expectations, I could say, I noticed some challenges in your recent work. Let’s talk about how I can support You. This keeps the focus on finding solutions rather than making someone feel defensive. By being intentional about how I communicate, I can strengthen relationships, foster trust, and become a more effective leader.

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

Extroversion 50

Emotional Stability 30

Agreeableness 17

Conscientiousness 15

Intellect/Imagination 8

Factor I: “Individuals who score low on extraversion are more introverted and reserved” (Open-Source Psychometrics Project).

I agree I can go either way for Factor I. If needed at work I can be more extroverted as this is required to create working relationships. When I get home though, it’s just me, my wife, and dogs and that is good enough. No need to talk with other people.

Factor II: “Individuals who score low on emotional stability tend to be more prone to negative emotions, such as anxiety, depression, and anger” ((Open-Source Psychometrics Project).

In a fairly stressful work environment, it can be very easy to become more negative and harder to find positivity in everyday work life. I do agree with this statement, and this is not a new revelation unfortunately.

Factor III “They may be less motivated to maintain social harmony and may be more likely to express their opinions forcefully, even if they may conflict with others” (Open-Source Psychometrics Project).

I am not actually that competitive at work or home, I would also like to think I am agreeable…unless something clearly does not make sense. I will make my recommendations and provide thoughts in the appropriate setting. Good dialog is always encouraged but I know once a decision is made that is the direction I will go.

Factor IV: “Impulsive and disorganized” (Open-Source Psychometrics Project).

I am all of the above, impulsive and disorganized; this is not to the detriment of my quality of work or life. I would say I do not have issues setting or achieving goals or I would not be where I am today.

Factor V: “They may have a preference for familiar and predictable experiences, and may be less likely to seek out novel experiences” (Open-Source Psychometrics Project).

To an extent I would consider myself conservative but by no means traditional. I enjoy new experiences at work and personal life but once I have done something once I rarely feel the need to do something else.

Contrary to what the Big 5 test says, I would say my agreeableness is my strength and it can go both ways. Expressing thoughts and opinions about bad decisions is essential to not causing undue hardship to subordinate or project failure. People get things wrong, “often humans’ base decisions on rules of thumb and not on rational analysis” (Kraus, pg. 10). Understandably this may cause conflict but creating an environment where everyone is entitled to their opinion is important. As I am free to express my opinion, so are others. Improved didactic interactions between the members of a team will improve the quality of decisions…” (pg. 10). Ultimately the understanding is once the decision is made, then that is the order to be executed.

100% I need to have better emotional stability. As a leader, how I express my feelings and emotions may influence motivation and how others feel about a project. Normally I try not to be too negative about certain things, but I also believe there is no need to sugarcoat in a bad situation. To get after this improvement I need to be more self-aware of the effects of my emotions, the use of feedback tools to which I can measure satisfaction of project teams can help indicate possibilities of my negativity creeping in on others motivation (Kraus, pg. 11).

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

What behaviors are most often observed in this person? Based on your interactions with this person, what might be some of their more obvious Big 5 personality characteristics? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. Click HERELinks to an external site.Links to an external site..)

I am currently working on a project with an individual that I have had the opportunity to get to know better this week. In general, I would say that he would score high in conscientiousness, “individuals who score high on conscientiousness are characterized as being reliable, hardworking and efficient” (Open-Source Psychometrics Project). Just this week he has put many long hours into planning and building ranges which require meticulous attention to details. This endeavor also requires a high degree of organizational skill. On multiple occasions he has been the last one to leave the office. On the low side of characteristics, I would say he is low on emotional stability, low scores in this dimension may find it difficult to cope with challenging situations (Open-Source Psychometrics Projects). Any changes to his plans will lead him to catastrophize situations that do not warrant such a response. On multiple occasions I have had to talk him through changes; things that are out of our span of control.

Discussion Prompt 2B: How can you work most effectively with this person? What can you do just a little differently (style flexing) in order to more effectively meet their needs and desires? (Hint: You might review the characteristics of people who are high/low on each of the Big 5 dimensions. Click HERELinks to an external site.Links to an external site..)

I believe the best way to work with this individual is to provide him with guidance and not to micromanage him. He is an expert at his job (school certified) and has done many similar projects before. The difference between his past experiences and now is the overall scale of the project. Up to this point things have gone well except for some situational changes. I honestly do not see myself changing how we work together at this point, I will continue to provide him with guidance (more specifically the better) and see what he produces. I only provide input if he specifically requests it or my boss asks for something specific. I need to continue to provide individualized consideration; recognize his needs and provide systematic support Kraus, (pg. 8).

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

Working with multiple different project teams takes multiple different approaches. With team A as I discussed earlier, I provided guidance and left my team mate alone; only inserting myself when asked. The expertise and experience he brings to the table minimizes the need for constant communication. For team B though I found myself using a more direct/hands-on approach. I did not micromanage them but provided more feedback and consistent communication throughout the week. Historically I have been more hands off I am with team B, but admittedly a lot of things were overlooked or postponed. This is not to say that things did not get done, but that I did not emphasize the importance of certain tasks. The more extroverted I am with team B the better communication becomes and a better shared understanding across the team.

Adaptive leadership: Involves changing behaviors in appropriate ways as the situation changes (Yukl, Mahsud, pg. 1). Whether it is project management or my current job, the situation is always changing. As a leader the value in being able to act appropriately in each situation is key. It seems that no situation is ever the same, different people involved, different problems present. With each new position it seems that this is a skill that continues to develop; adding to the complexity similar jobs are unique in their own ways. It is not enough to be to change behaviors though, the change needs to be appropriate for the situation (pg. 2). I acknowledge this can be difficult to learn and I still find myself being surprised with each new situation.

Straight Talk: This skill has relevance in both my personal and professional life. Straight talk is making a clear statement of his or her feelings, and concerns without accusing, blaming, judging, or ridiculing the other person (Aronson, pg. 342). Too many times, I find myself either beating around the bush or making blanket statements. The need for straight talk can provide constructive growth for everyone involved and maintain healthy relationships. Feedback (good/bad) can help people discover something about themselves (pg. 344). More people to include myself need to be better at straight talk, it can be difficult to have these types of conversations as they make us uncomfortable. Sometimes its better to rip the band aid off before a problem or concerns becomes bigger than it needs to be.Keeping the Project Team Together: Commitment to a project can make or break it. “The development of commitment depends on the characteristics of work, on leadership behavior, the respective staff member’s characteristics as well as framework conditions offered by the enterprise” (Kraus, pg 12). As a leader we must gain and maintain commitment from the team. This is obviously easier said than done; to gain commitment takes all aspects of leadership and ability to work with others. In the Army it can be difficult to get commitment from others, especially in difficult times. As a leader I aspire to be able to gain such commitment from those around me.

Module 4: Module 4: Discussion (Ogl-520)

Instructions:

In each module, you will have the opportunity to participate in an online discussion forum.

This week, there are two multi-part prompts (as well as the usual application prompt) up for discussion.

NOTE: Some of these prompts will require some advance planning.

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

Behavioral Style “Flexing” and Relationship Development Ideas:

Discussion Prompt 2A: Consider someone who you want to communicate more effectively with:

Discussion Prompt 2C: Experiment with style flexing in your personal or professional life, and report on your results.

Examples:

The Big 5 Personality Assessment:

Discussion Prompt 1A: What were your results on the Big 5 personality test?

My Big 5 personality results are as follows:

- Extroversion: 16th percentile
- Emotional Stability: 34th percentile
- Agreeableness: 87th percentile
- Conscientiousness: 72nd percentile
- Intellect/Imagination (Openness to Experience): 93rd percentile

These results suggest that I am highly open to new experiences and learning, highly agreeable, and conscientious, but more introverted and moderately lower in emotional stability.

My high agreeableness (87th percentile) indicates that I prioritize collaboration, empathy, and maintaining positive team relationships. This makes me an effective team player and helps me resolve conflicts diplomatically. However, research suggests that highly agreeable individuals may sometimes struggle with assertiveness (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 143), which is something I must be mindful of when making firm leadership decisions.
My lower extroversion (16th percentile) means I tend to prefer structured, one-on-one interactions over large group discussions or spontaneous networking. While this helps in deep, meaningful conversations, it can also limit opportunities for professional visibility.
Finally, my lower emotional stability (34th percentile) suggests that I may be more sensitive to stress and external pressures, which means I need to focus on managing workplace challenges without becoming overwhelmed (Aronson, Ch. 8, p. 231).

Encourage innovation and creative problem-solving: My high openness allows me to embrace diverse perspectives, making me well-suited for leading adaptive teams (Adaptive Leadership Article, p. 5). I can use this to drive creative solutions and motivate employees to think outside the box.
Leverage conscientiousness for strategic planning: With a 72nd percentile conscientiousness score, I can maintain organizational structure and accountability while ensuring projects stay on track. This aligns with best practices in adaptive leadership, where planning and flexibility must coexist (Adaptive Leadership Article, p. 3).
Use agreeableness for team cohesion: My high agreeableness makes me effective at diplomatic conflict resolution and trust-building. To maximize this, I should maintain a balance between empathy and assertiveness, ensuring decisions are both people-centered and firm (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 144).
By leveraging these strengths, I can lead with both strategic insight and emotional intelligence, creating a work environment that fosters both efficiency and collaboration.

Despite my strengths, there are areas I need to monitor and adjust.

Managing stress and resilience: My lower emotional stability means I may be more reactive to workplace pressures. Research in The Social Animal (Aronson, Ch. 8, p. 233) suggests that emotionally reactive individuals may experience greater interpersonal strain. To mitigate this, I can develop coping mechanisms such as structured debriefing, mindfulness techniques, or delegation to prevent burnout.
Improving assertiveness in decision-making: With high agreeableness, I sometimes prioritize harmony over hard decisions. While fostering positive relationships is a strength, it is crucial to avoid over-accommodating others at the expense of strategic goals (Kraus, 2010). Implementing structured decision-making frameworks can help ensure that objectivity takes precedence over personal preference.
Enhancing extroverted behaviors when needed: While my low extroversion aligns with deep thinking and structured work styles, it can limit leadership visibility. Research in Influence (Cialdini, Ch. 5, p. 146) suggests that leaders who actively engage in visible networking tend to foster stronger professional influence. I can actively schedule networking opportunities and practice engaging in larger group settings to develop this skill.