Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
There is a rule known as The Golden rule, which states that “Do to people what you would like them to do unto you.” For individuals are different in both their likes and dislikes and also their desires, then this proclamation would appear not to be complete.” This is deeply precise with the DISK platinum rule that takes the differences into account, stating that one should do to others what they would like done to them (Alessandra, 1996).
Different experiments were done with the desire to get to understand different personal behaviors and how these behaviors may affect others; a researcher invited 8 observers who were business associates and school associates to help in creating a composite report by effecting a 360 degrees assessment which showed the observer’s standpoint on the actual behavior of the researcher (DISC, 2003).
The experiment meant to examine the researcher’s reaction towards other people helped in exploiting personal strength, assist in maintaining a positive approach on oneself and others, and also adapting individual behaviors so as to create acceptable outcomes in certain situations.
Assessment Findings
Following the comparison in the self-assessment experiment with the precise composite evaluation by the observers, it was observed that there are extra similarities in the previous behavioral evaluation and personality and that of the observers than that of the results of the self-assessment. Five School associates examined that the researcher as having great dominance-Interactive technique, whereas three business associates observed a greater Interactive-Dominance technique.
Dominance behavior style revealed by the researcher could have possibly resulted in being perceived by the school associates as overbearing, pressuring, and uncompromising. These observations are understandable because the “dominance” style is meant to look for expedience and not scared of turning the rules and are even more willing to take authority, acknowledging challenges and thrust headfirst in solving problems (Disc, 2003).
The “Interactive” style actions revealed by the researcher could result in being seen by the business observers as impatient, excitable, and manipulative. However, this is explicable as the “Interactive” style is possessed strengths in “charm, enthusiasm, warmth, and persuasiveness.” Persons who are strong in the “Interactive” style are “gifted in great influencers, skills, optimists with a lot of charisma, and are dreamers and idea-people who do extremely well at getting others thrilled about their idea in order to build agreements to achieve their goals” (Alessandra, 1996).
Different from external views and findings, the independently administered behavioral evaluation performed by the researcher gave quite conflicting and perplexing outcomes. The self-assessment outcome showed the researcher as having mainly an “Interactive” style and proposes the “Steadiness” style as a derived set of behaviors revealed on a regular basis. The next individual report shows that the researcher’s behavioral mode may show weakness in performances is “careless.”
This has not been explained enough for the researcher to make an intellectual comment, though the fact that the researcher prioritizes all actions and centers upon chores of meaning leads the researcher to recognize this area of possible weakness to be insignificant as well. The other individual report shows that the researcher’s behavioral style may show a fault in “exaggeration.” Whereas this argument could have been expounded in both directions, the researcher would argue that the soaring level of detail which goes into the resolution-making process would be proof of avoiding overstatement by trying to be realistic in everything(Alessandra, 1996).
Last but not least, the report shows that the researcher’s behavioral style may exhibit weakness in “poor follow-through.” The born of contention here would be the capability to deliver on all pledges and meet all targets, which is humanly impractical; the researcher prides himself on having the time to elucidate commitments and anticipations of others and to limit theories.
References
Alessandra, T. Dr. (1996). “The Platinum Rule”.
DISC Insights. (2003). The Personality System. The Institute of Motivational Living, Inc. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.