Enterprise Week

The name of one of the events that I attended during Enterprise Week was "Transmitting Information is easier than creating understanding". The date of the event was 17/11/2009. The duration of the event was 1 hour 30 minutes (2.00pm - 3.30pm) but the event went slightly over the time scheduled by approximately 5 minutes. The location of the event was GLT (Gateway Lecture Theatre). The description of the event from the Enterprise Festival leaflet is "Advertising and Marketing Communications Industry Panel Discussion and debate on: Post credit crunch: the same or different?". The event involved a panel of six experts from various different advertising organisations discussing and debating on the subject of Marketing and Advertising during the current recession and in the future. It was therefore a verbal driven event. Students from the audience asked several different questions regarding the topic and the experts answered and debated amongst themselves on what each of them personally felt the answer to each question was. Some of the questions that were asked and answered in the event were:

What is the definition of 'Advertising'?

What is a brand?

What makes the brand of a business?

Who makes the brand of a business?

How do consumers consume advertising?

What do consumers think advertising should be?

What do advertisers want?

What challenges does the industry face?

The event was interesting because for most of the questions asked, the experts had different answers. As a result, the event consisted more of subjective opinions than objective opinions. This made the event more fascinating because the panellists weren't simply stating and explaining facts and figures but trying to make the audience think and understand that their are many different answers to a particular question and many of them may be just as valid as another if explained correctly.

The event has influenced my career aspirations because it has made me understand the importance of Advertising and Marketing in the world of Business. Since Accounting and Finance is a degree which has close links with Business, it has made me realise that if I ever work in the Marketing department of an organisation, the advertising and promotion of a product and service need to be extremely effective in attracting customers to buy a certain product or service. This is especially true at the moment with the recession as consumers have less disposable income to spend money on products that may not be necessary because a lot of people are currently unemployed.

In addition, the event has influenced my career aspirations because it has made me more aware of just how imperative being able to communicate effectively is in the world of work. Despite the fact that communication wasn't the topic of the event, I noticed how well each of the panellists were communicating with the audience during the event. This is something that has influenced my career aspirations because it has made me realise that being able to communicate well can be the difference between a good employee and a great employee in certain job roles bearing in mind that Accounting and Finance has strong links with Business. As a result, the event has motivated me into learning how to communicate effectively.

Furthermore, the event has influenced my career aspirations because the panellists have encouraged me into learning how to answer questions on the spot. This is because during the event, people from the audience were asking random questions relating to the topic which the panellists answered on the spot. This has encouraged my career aspirations because it has improved my ability to concentrate and focus on a certain topic which will improve my work performance in the future when dealing with spontaneous tasks.

Reference list:

Panellist image - http://www.moodiereport.com/images/IIAC_panellists_2008.jpg, [Accessed 17 November 2009].

Personality

The nature approach to personality is the idea that people inherit personality attributes from their parents. The nurture approach to personality however is the idea that the environment creates the individual e.g past experiences and environmental circumstances make the individual. An example that shows the difference between the nature and nurture approach to personality would be in an individuals behaviour. If someone has a bad temper, the nature approach would be that the person inherited this bad temper from one or both of their parents. The nurture approach on the other hand would be that the environment created this bad temper in this individual e.g. the friends of the individual may have influenced the temper of the individual.

Rollinson, D (2008, p.78) states that theories adopting the nomothetic approach "seek to identify regular, measurable aspects of personality and relate them to human behaviour". The nomothetic approach is that a person's personality is fixed and cannot be changed. For example, if a person is very sociable, that person's personality isn't subject to change and he/she will be sociable for the rest of his/her life. This is different from the idiographic approach that believes that an individual’s personality can change and is adaptable. For example, the very same sociable person that was mentioned as an example for the nomothetic approach can become unsociable if the environment causes him/her to become unsociable e.g. if he/she spends a large amount of time with unsociable people. The nomothetic and idiographic approaches are therefore completely opposite in terms of a person's personality being fixed/adaptable.

Another difference between the nomothetic and idiographic approaches is in terms of an individual's personality type / uniqueness. For example, the nomothetic approach is that everyone falls under a certain personality type. An example would be that a person has a lot of energy, speaks more than listens, is enthusiastic and outgoing, and prefers to be around many people. According to the nomothetic approach, this person would be a Extravert. They therefore fall under a certain personality type. However, according to the nomothetic approach this person wouldn't fall under any personality type and is simply an individual with a set of unique personality attributes that can't be distinctly categorised. The nomothetic and idiographic approaches are therefore completely opposite in terms of personality categorisation.

Additionally, a further difference between the nomothetic and idiographic approaches is in terms of what an individual inherits and the influence that the environment has on an individual. For example, the nomothetic approach is that an individuals personality is linked with genetics in the sense that you inherit your personality from your parents. An example would be that a certain individual is quite shy. The nomothetic approach is that this individual inherited his/her shyness from his/her parents. However, the idiographic approach is that the environment influences a person's personality. For example, under the idiographic approach, the same shy person is shy because the environment has influenced him/her to become shy e.g. he/she associates with shy people at University causing him/her to become shy. The nomothetic and idiographic approaches are therefore completely different in terms of what is inherited and what the environment influences.

In addition, another difference between the nomothetic and idiographic approaches is in terms of what an individual is predicted to have and what the environment influences an individual into becoming. For example, the nomothetic approach is that individuals are predicted to have the personality attributes of their parents. An example would be that someone who just got pregnant is expected to have a child with similar attributes to her or the father of the child e.g. if both the mother and father are very sociable and outgoing, the child is expected to be very sociable and outgoing. The idiographic approach on the other hand is that the environment makes the individual so you can't predict what the personality of an individual is going to be like. An example would be that an unsociable individual becomes friends with several sociable people. After a certain period of time, the unsociable person may become sociable because his friends are influencing his personality into becoming more sociable. The difference between the two approaches is therefore that the nomothetic approach is that individuals can be predicted to have certain personality attributes, while the idiographic approach is that individuals can't be predicted to have specific personality attributes because the environment influences the individual so the personality of someone can change depending on the environment.

I think that nurture is a more dominant influence than nature because the environment is much greater and much more influential than the set of personality characteristics that someone inherits. For example, an extreme change in the environment can alter the personality attributes of an individual over time regardless of what attributes they have inherited. The opposite cannot be said however, or at least not to the same extent. For example, the set of personality attributes that an individual is born with is unlikely to change or influence the environment and even if it does, it is not likely to have a big influence on the environment. For example, one individual that has inherited the characteristic of being sociable is unlikely to influence another individual that is unsociable into becoming more sociable just by himself/herself. The whole environment would need to be taken into account for the unsociable individual to become sociable. This is why I think that nurture is a more dominant influence than nature.

Useful articles:

http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fiXyT5MkCLMC&oi=fnd&pg=PA289&dq=nomothetic+personality&ots=Bk3ACfyA8I&sig=vGxGss1yubUr0Mw14WiHgIGpqf8#v=onepage&q=nomothetic&f=false

Test 1 - www.haleonline.com/psychtest

Question 1 - Choice B

"The first preference has to do with how you're ENERGIZED. But the key is, "what are you more COMFORTABLE doing?"

Avoid crowds and seek quiet.

Listen more than talk.

Keep enthusiasm to self.

Concentrate well.

Proceed cautiously in meeting people & participate in selected activities.

Think carefully before speaking.

Time alone to recharges batteries.

Would prefer to socialize in small groups or just do job "by myself."

Content being on the sidelines.

Question 2 - Choice A

These preferences have to do with how you GATHER information...or what you pay attention to.

Learn new things by imitation and observation.

Value solid, recognizable methods achieved in step-by-step manner.

Focus on actual experience

Tend to be specific and literal; give detailed descriptions.

Behave practically.

Rely on past experiences.

Likes predictable relationships.

Appreciates standard ways to solve problems.

Methodical.

Value realism and common sense.

Question 3 - Choice A

This category deals with how we make decisions and reach conclusions...

Have truth as an objective.

Decide more with my head.

Question others' findings, 'cause they might be wrong.

Notice ineffective reasoning.

Choose truthfulness over tactfulness.

Deal with people firmly, as needed

Expect world to run on logical principles.

Notice pros & cons of each option.

See others' flaws... critical.

Feelings valid if they're logical.

Tolerate occasional queries as to my emotional state in rel'ships.

Question 4 -A

This one has to do with the LIFESTYLE you adopt.

Prefer my life to be decisive, imposing my will on it

Prefer knowing what they're getting themselves into

Feel better after making decisions

Enjoy finishing things.

Work for a settled life, with my plans in order.

Dislike surprises & want advance warnings.

See time as a finite resource, and take deadlines seriously.

Like checking off "to do" list.

Feel better with things planned.

Settled. Organized.

You're an ISTJ

ISTJ

You're systematic, thorough, painstaking, and hardworking...You get the job done and complete it on time...you are serious and sincere in whatever you do..you work well within a structure...follow the hierarchy...and are particularly strong and careful in keeping track of facts and details...

Cautious...generally seeking to maintain the status quo...you are at your best getting things to the right place at the right time....

Serious, responsible and sensible stalwarts of society...trustworthy and honor your commitments...your word is your solemn vow. Practical and realisitic, you have great powers of concentration....hard to distract once you have embarked what you believe is the best course of action.... ..

You like to apply past experience to present decisions...you can cite accurate evidence to support your views...you're down to earth and seek to do the right thing at the appropriate time...you find it hard to understand people who start an education but don't finish it...

You are diligent and persevering in your efforts...whether it be school, or work, or love...A half-finished job is not a job well done...you probably believe in "Say what you mean and mean what you say." Private by nature, you appear calm in moments of crisis...

You believe in work before pleasure...(gee, like posting before playing the online games on Storm Palace?)..while you don't SEEK leadership positions, you might find yourself in one...you build a reputation for reliable, stable and consistent performance...

You like to schedule....even your LEISURE time! It helps to you if it has a purpose, even if that purpose is sociability...to you, love means bigtime commitment, steadiness and consistency...you behave appropriately for what the situation demands (for example, romantic in the beginning, and so on)..

When you give your word and are ready to settle down, you follow-through... you expect your partners to act in a similar manner...you may stay in a poor relationship because of a sense of duty...you might have strong but unspoken reactions under that cool facade...

Logical and analytical...quick to point out flaws in other people...when you feel scorned in a relationship, you may not let your partner know it..when it's obvious that the relationship is really over, ending it is just the practical thing to do...

Things to look out for: you could immerse yourself in details...you could become rigid in your ways and be thought of as inflexible... don't forget to compliment people and be so concerned with getting the job done....you might overlook the long-range implications of your actions today...don't get stuck in a rut...recognize your emotions, and the values they represent... others might see you as insensitive...

Also, you're skeptical of new ideas you don't see immediate and practical applications for...you may impose judgments on others...expect others to be the way YOU'd be...become more tolerant of difference between people."

ISTJ: "I Save Things Judiciously"

Test 2 - http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jTypes2.asp

"1. You are almost never late for your appointments

YES

2. You like to be engaged in an active and fast-paced job

NO

3. You enjoy having a wide circle of acquaintances

YES

4. You feel involved when watching TV soaps.

YES

5. You are usually the first to react to a sudden event:

the telephone ringing or unexpected question

NO

6. You are more interested in a general idea than in the details of its realization

NO

7. You tend to be unbiased even if this might endanger

your good relations with people

YES

8. Strict observance of the established rules is likely to prevent a good outcome

NO

9. It's difficult to get you excited

NO

10. It is in your nature to assume responsibility.

YES

11. You often think about humankind and its destiny

NO

12. You believe the best decision is one that can be easily changed

NO

13. Objective criticism is always useful in any activity.

YES

14. You prefer to act immediately rather than speculate

about various options

NO

15. You trust reason rather than feelings

YES

16. You are inclined to rely more on improvisation
than on careful planning

NO

17. You spend your leisure time actively socializing

with a group of people, attending parties, shopping, etc.

NO

18. You usually plan your actions in advance

YES

19. Your actions are frequently influenced by emotions

NO

20. You are a person somewhat reserved and distant in communication

YES

21. You know how to put every minute of your
time to good purpose

NO

22. You readily help people while asking nothing in return

YES

23. You often contemplate about the complexity of life

NO

24. After prolonged socializing you feel you need
to get away and be alone

YES

25. You often do jobs in a hurry

NO

26. You easily see the general principle behind
specific occurrences

YES

27. You frequently and easily express your feelings and emotions

NO

28. You find it difficult to speak loudly

YES

29. You get bored if you have to read theoretical books

YES

30. You tend to sympathize with other people

YES

31. You value justice higher than mercy

YES

32. You rapidly get involved in social life
at a new workplace

NO

33. The more people with whom you speak, the better you feel

NO

34. You tend to rely on your experience rather than
on theoretical alternatives

YES

35. You like to keep a check on how things
are progressing

YES

36. You easily empathize with the concerns of other people

NO

37. Often you prefer to read a book than go to a party

YES

38. You enjoy being at the center of events in which
other people are directly involved

NO

39. You are more inclined to experiment than
to follow familiar approaches

NO

40. You avoid being bound by obligations

NO

41. You are strongly touched by the stories about people's troubles

NO

42. Deadlines seem to you to be of relative, rather than absolute, importance

NO

43. You prefer to isolate yourself from outside noises

NO

44. It's essential for you to try things with your own hands

NO

45. You think that almost everything can be analyzed

YES

46. You do your best to complete a task on time

YES

47. You take pleasure in putting things in order

NO

48. You feel at ease in a crowd

NO

49. You have good control over your desires and temptations

YES

50. You easily understand new theoretical principles

YES

51. The process of searching for solution is more

important to you than the solution itself

NO

52. You usually place yourself nearer to the side

than in the center of the room

YES

53. When solving a problem you would rather follow
a familiar approach than seek a new one

YES

54. You try to stand firmly by your principles.

YES

55. A thirst for adventure is close to your heart

NO

56. You prefer meeting in small groups to interaction
with lots of people

NO

57. When considering a situation you pay more attention to
the current situation and less to a possible sequence of events

NO

58. You consider the scientific approach to be the best

NO

59. You find it difficult to talk about your feelings

NO

60. You often spend time thinking of how things

could be improved

YES

61. Your decisions are based more on the feelings
of a moment than on the careful planning

NO

62. You prefer to spend your leisure time alone
or relaxing in a tranquil family atmosphere

YES

63. You feel more comfortable sticking to
conventional ways

NO

64. You are easily affected by strong emotions

NO

65. You are always looking for opportunities

YES

66. Your desk, workbench etc. is usually neat and orderly

YES

67. As a rule, current preoccupations worry
you more than your future plans

YES

68. You get pleasure from solitary walks

YES

69. It is easy for you to communicate in social situations

YES

70. You are consistent in your habits

YES

71. You willingly involve yourself in matters
which engage your sympathies

NO

72. You easily perceive various ways
in which events could develop

YES"

"HUMANMETRICS

Jung Typology Test

STRENGTH OF THE PREFERENCES %

Your type is INTJ

Introverted: 56%

Intuitive: 12%

Thinking: 25%

Judging: 67%

Qualitative analysis of your type formula

You are:

• moderately expressed introvert
  
• slightly expressed intuitive personality
  
• moderately expressed thinking personality
  
• distinctively expressed judging personality"

http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes3.asp

From the personality tests, I have found out that my personality type is: INTJ. This is an abbreviation of "I save things Judiciously". This means that I am a mixture of four different personality types. These personality types are Introvert, Intuitive, Thinking and Judging. Both personality tests state that I have a personality type of INTJ. From Personality Test 2, I have found out that I am 56% Introverted, 12% Intuitive, 25% Thinking and 67% Judging. As a result, from the results I have found out that I am more of an Introvert and Judgemental person than I am a Intuitive and Thinking person. This doesn't mean that I'm not an Intuitive and Thinking person to some extent, however according to the Personality Tests.

An Introvert is someone that "seeks time to spend in quiet, cerebral pursuits" (Wier. 2009, p. 19). According to Lieberman, M and Rosenthal, R (2001, [n.k.]) "introverts are less able to multitask and thus are poorer at nonverbal decoding, but only when it is a secondary task". A intuitive individual puts "forth big picture ideas and possibilities" ([Anon.] [n.d.]). A thinking type pushes for decisions "driven only by logical considerations, thus appearing insensitive to feeling types who focus primarily on people issues" ([Anon.] [n.d.]). A judging type pushes "hard to make decisions and get quick closure before the data has been analysed" ([Anon.] [n.d.]).

To a some extent, I agree with the overall findings of the tests. This is because I genuinely feel that I have a personality type of INTJ more than the other personality types. This is because I feel that I have been an Introvert for most of my life therefore this is a finding that isn't surprising to me. For example, I consider myself to be quiet and someone that generally chooses not to participate in social activities. This is an attribute of the INTJ personality type. Both of the personality tests consider me to be a Introvert, so as a result I agree with both of the personality tests in this regard. In addition, both tests state that I am a Introvert to a large extent (56%) which I also agree with. For example, I don't consider myself to be an Introvert to a small extent. Rather, I consider myself to be an Introvert to a large extent which both tests show. I therefore also agree with both tests on the extent of how much I am an Introvert.

In addition, both tests state that I am a intuitive individual. This is also something that I agree with because in my opinion I am someone that likes to look at each of the possible outcomes of each decision in order to make the best decision possible before making a final decision. I therefore agree with both tests to some extent. Having said that, I feel that I am more of an intuitive individual than what both tests state I am. For example, both tests state that I am an Intuitive individual of 12%. This is a small percentage of my personality so I personally feel that I am more of an Intuitive individual than the 12% that the tests believe I am. To some extent, I therefore don't agree with both of the test results.

Also, both tests state that I am a thinking type. This is something that I agree with because I personally feel that I am someone that makes decisions based on logic rather than emotion. I therefore agree with both tests to a large extent in this regard. Furthermore, both tests think that I am a thinker of 25% which is something I also agree with. This is because I feel that I am thinker to some extent but not to the point where it is a personality attribute that is the most dominant of mine. I think that the 25% amount reflects this very accurately which is why I agree with both tests to a large extent I am both a thinker and a thinker of 25%.

Additionally, both tests state that I am a judging individual. This is something that I strongly disagree with because I feel I always analyse data and information before making a decision. I therefore disagree with both tests to a large extent in this case. In addition, both tests think that I am a judging individual of 67% which is something I disagree strongly with. This is because not only do I think I am not a judging individual, I certainly don't think I'm a judging individual by 67%, which is a huge amount. I therefore think that the 67% amount reflects my personality very inaccurately which is why I disagree with the results of both tests to a great extent in this regard.

Overall, I feel that I agree with the findings of both tests to some extent. This is because both tests show that I am a Introvert to a large extent (56%) which I fully agree with and that I am a thinking individual to some extent (25%) which I also agree with. Having said that, both tests state that I am a intuitive individual of 12% which I agree to some extent with because I feel I am an intuitive individual although I personally think that I am a intuitive individual of more than 12%. This is why I disagree with both tests to some degree. In addition, both tests state that I am a judging individual of 67% which I feel doesn't reflect my personality because not only do I think I'm not a judging individual, I certainly don't think I'm a judging individual to such a large extent (67%). This is why I disagree with both tests in this regard to a large degree.

I wouldn't be happy for Personality Tests to be used as a selection tool because in my opinion, personality tests don't always bring out the best in an individual. For example, if a highly skilled candidate applies for a job, the results from the personality test may not perceive the individual in a positive light from the employers point of view. This would be a shame because it is clear that the candidate can do the job and do it very well. This is one reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool.

Another reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool is because a Personality Test assumes that an individuals personality can't adapt or change to a different work environment. I feel that is bad because many people can change their personality depending on where they work so using a Personality Test wouldn't give people that deserve a chance to be employed, a fair chance.

In addition, a further reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool is because Personality Tests may not always be valid because their is a lack of evidence supporting the results. I think that this is bad because Personality Tests may not always be accurate so if their is a slight doubt that the Personality Tests aren't fully accurate, they shouldn't be used as a selection tool. This is why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool.

Furthermore, another reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool is because collecting, measuring and interpreting the results may be costly from the employers point of view. I think that this is bad because it would cost a business lots of money that would raise costs that could otherwise be avoided if Personality Tests weren't used as a selection tool. Raising costs reduces the overall profits of an organisation so this is why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool.

Additionally, another reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool is because if individuals with a certain type of Personality are the only type of people that are employed, their might be a lack of diversity in the workplace. This would be bad because it may result in a workforce that has a lack of diverse skills which may cause inefficiency. Inefficiency in a business would mean that the business isn't meeting it's full potential which wouldn't satisfy the managers and board of directors of an organisation. This is why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool.

Moreover, an additional reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool is because a candidate's experience or training may have a bigger effect on job performance than a candidate's personality. For example, if a candidate's personality is the same as the general personality of the job populace, it would most likely mean that he/she would be able to work well with the people that are currently working in the organisation, but it wouldn't necessarily mean that it would effect the job performance more than a candidate that has been trained / has experience. This is because people that have been trained / have experience may work more efficiently / productively than people who have a certain personality. This is why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool.

Also, another reason why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool is because certain personality attributes may be difficult to measure. This is bad because their may be certain Personality traits that may be useful for a certain job that the Personality Test doesn't detect. This would mean that job candidates may be unfairly turned down from employers because of the Personality Test's limitations. This is why I wouldn't be happy for a Personality Test to be used as a selection tool.

In conclusion, the main finding that I got from this topic is learning about what the nomothetic and idiographic approaches are. Before I read up on this topic, I didn't realise what the nomothetic and idiographic approaches were, but after reading up on the topic and carrying out the activities of this blog, I learnt what the nomothetic and idiographic approaches are. In addition, I also found out that my personality type is INTJ from using the two personality tests. This is something that I didn't know before as I had never taken a Personality Test previous to learning about this topic. I also found out that Personality Tests have disadvantages e.g. can be costly which is something that I didn't realise before researching this topic as previous to learning about this topic, I always thought that Personality Tests were just advantageous.

Additionally, I also found out that Personality Tests vary in their questioning. For example, before I had taken this topic I had always assumed that all Personality Tests were the same with the same questions in each. However, having done two different personality tests I have learnt that different questions are asked in different Personality Tests. Taking into account all of this information that I've learnt from this topic, I feel that I have learnt a lot from this topic overall. I feel that I have enjoyed this topic because I have felt it very interesting. This is because this is a topic that I am not familiar with despite having took Business Studies for one of my A Level's and as one of my GCSE's. I therefore feel that I've learnt a lot from this topic. As a result, I have enjoyed this topic greatly.

References:

[Anon.] (2004) The Loop: Inside Info from The Graziadio School [online]. [n.k.] [s.n.] Available from: http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/003/loop/ [Accessed 16 November 2009].

Liebermann, M and Rosenthal, R. (2001) Why introverts can't always tell who likes them: Multitasking and nonverbal decoding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 80 (2), 294-310.

Personality image - http://www.hessmarketingblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/personality1.bmp [Accessed 13 November 2009].

Rollinson, D. (2008) Organisational Behaviour and Analysis: An Integrated Approach. 4th edition.

Harlow: Pearson Education Limited

Wier, M. (2009) Confessions of an Introvert: The Shy Girl's Guide to Career, Networking, and Getting the Most Out of Life. 1st Edition. Naperville: Sphinx Publishing.