Running head: Unit 1: Self-Assessments 1

Unit 1: Self-Assessments

Cody M. Summers

Arizona State University

OGL482: Organizational Leadership Pro-Seminar II

Dr. Janice Lawhorn

October 15, 2023

Unit 1: Self-Assessments

Throughout the book “Career Management & Work-Life Integration” Brad Harrington

and Douglas Hall emphasize the changing landscape of careers from employees viewing

themselves within the organizational context to a more self-directed approach. The authors

defined this shift as the Protean career, where employees value freedom and growth instead of

positional advancement and seek work satisfaction over organizational commitment. With this

ideology, the worker pursues career aspirations and creates a more stable work-life balance. The

first step in fulfilling their career goals is the self-assessment process, where individuals undergo

several exercises to ascertain their strengths and weaknesses, how they best operate when

working, and what values are essential to their core identity. Upon obtaining this knowledge,

they can better manage their career and work-life balance by furthering their self-awareness and

attaining a clear sense of identity (Harrington & Hall, 2007).

During this paper, I focus on the self-assessments completed throughout my

Organizational Leadership coursework to understand my strengths, performance tendencies, and

core values to determine my suitable leadership style and career path. By comparing the results

from the Kuder Career Interests Assessment (KCIA), Kuder Skills Confidence Assessment

(KSCA), Super’s Work Values Inventory (SWVI), and other previously completed assessments, I

hope to craft a clear idea of my identity as a leader. In the below segments, I will highlight the

“aha moments” I had when working through the assessments, what results stuck out to me, and

how these assessments can support my career and life going forward.

Section #1: Kuder Career Interests Assessment

The Kuder Career Interests Assessment (KCIA) is one of three assessment models
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 3

distributed by Kuder Journey and asked graded questions regarding how I felt about doing

various jobs or tasks on a scale from strongly dislike to strongly like. With those answers, it then

calculates a code based on the Holland personality types: Realistic (R), Investigative (I), Artistic

(A), Social (S), Enterprising (E), and Conventional (C). According to the assessment results, my

Holland score was ECS, consisting of Enterprising, Conventional, and Social interests (Kuder

Inc., 2023a).

First, the enterprising personality type contains interests in achieving personal or

organizational goals. During my brief career, I have attempted to emulate goal-setting by

planning what I want to accomplish in the future and accounting for potential obstacles. This

forecasting process helps to illuminate what I wish to achieve and the steps necessary to realize

those milestones. In doing so, I can better predict the future landscape of my career and the

organization.

Next, the conventional personality type covered interests in maintaining records and

abiding by the established guidelines. In my professional tenure, these two details have been

critical in acclimating within my company. Although it feels tedious to keep detailed records of

my work history, this has helped reduce the number of task errors and understand the progress of

an assigned project. Then, while I might prefer an alternative method of approaching a task, the

conventional way of following procedures has illustrated the pitfalls of falling out of alignment.

Because of this, I am careful to verify that I adhere to protocols and reach out through the proper

channels when concerns arise.

Lastly, the social personality type involves an interest in informing and developing

others. By informing others and maintaining constant communication with the team, I can keep

them apprised of the current situation and improve our team’s rapport. This skill has helped me
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 4

understand the tendencies of group members to predict the timeline when completing a task. The

second function of the social personality type is developing team members and supporting their

growth. While I might succeed in my task, that is ultimately meaningless if others fail to follow

suit. Due to this potential consequence, I must ensure teammates grasp the assignment and

support them when roadblocks arise.

Based on the Holland personality type results, it recommended that I pursue a career as a

Medical and Health Services Manager or an Education Administrator. While management and

administration roles interest me, neither one of them aligns with my desired career in the Human

Resources industry. Moreover, my biggest “aha moment” through this assessment was my

Education Administrator designation. Despite only considering my career through the corporate

landscape, I have enjoyed developing and tutoring others throughout my life. There is no better

opportunity to fulfill those desires than in the education occupation, where I can impact my

subordinates and the next generation. These findings relate to Peter Drucker’s ideology on

“Managing Oneself” as I found that I belong in roles that support the development of others

(Drucker, 2005). While I might not pursue a career in the education industry, this assessment’s

results have helped me reflect on what I wish to accomplish and the job opportunities supporting

those desires.

Section #2: Kuder Skills Confidence Assessment & Super’s Work Values Inventory

The last two assessments in Kuder Journey are the Kuder Skills Confidence Assessment

(KSCA) and Super’s Work Values Inventory (SWVI). KSCA followed a similar five-point scale

to the Kuder Career Interests Assessment (KCIA) but used numbers 1-5 instead of like vs.

dislike. In this assessment, Kuder asked users about their confidence when fulfilling job or task

roles. Upon completion, they receive a corresponding Holland code based on those answers
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 5

representing their personality type. Based on the KSCA results, I had a Holland score of SCE

with Social (S), Conventional (C), and Enterprising (E) interests. Although it contained the same

core three personality types as the KCIA, the KSCA reversed that order (Kuder Inc., 2023b).

With my scores most closely aligned with the social personality type, this meant that I

had confidence in developing and growing interoffice relationships. This personality type is

closely related to the team dynamics and collaboration core competency chosen for my

e-portfolio. Similarly, this competency highlighted the importance of managing the behavioral

relationships of a team to augment their collaboration process. Like the personality type, leaders

prioritizing interpersonal communication can improve team cohesion and effectiveness.

However, with the addition of collaboration, this competency differentiates itself from the social

personality type by focusing on how those relationships will support organizational processes.

That distinction recognizes the importance of those connections but highlights the relevance of

that for the organization and teams instead of the individual. By centering the approach around

applying that development, I help foster highly productive team members and streamline

organizational procedures.

The second personality type is conventional, underlining my confidence in clerical and

business system skills. These skills align with the decision-making and problem-solving

competency chosen for my e-portfolio. With this competency, I gather the necessary information

for a choice by evaluating prior history, making decisions, and assuming accountability for that

outcome. The conventional personality type follows a similar ordered approach, as leaders within

this demographic must compile detailed information and adhere to established procedures. The

problem-solving competency evaluates that information according to the organization’s

guidelines to find the root of a system failure. Due to ordering data and keeping records, a leader
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 6

is better equipped to pinpoint the source of a problem and develop potential solutions. In contrast

to the conventional personality type compiling the records, this competency focuses on utilizing

those records and procedures to impact the trajectory of an organization.

Finally, the enterprising personality type highlights my confidence in leadership and

persuasion skills. This personality type closely aligns with the strategic planning core

competency that I chose for my e-portfolio. With this competency, a leader must define the

organization’s purpose and strategize the best method to achieve it. That competency relates to

the enterprising personality type by understanding what they and the organization wish to

accomplish and the potential timeline to realize their success. In doing so, I can account for

future obstacles and weave long-term plans to fulfill my and the organization’s aspirations.

However, despite the similarities, the two differ in the timetable of those actions. Where the

enterprising personality type does not establish a timescale, strategic planning is associated with

a long-term viewpoint. That distinction emphasizes the importance of actively working as a

leader to set the groundwork for future success.

According to the SCE personality code for this assessment, it recommended that I pursue

a career as a teaching assistant or an arbitrator, mediator, and conciliator. Despite taking a

different assessment, the KSCA still advocated for me to pursue a career in education. While I

have more desire to stay within the corporate space, it was enlightening to see how much my

career interests and skills confidence align with that field. Then, upon further reflection, my

biggest “aha moment” was how my interests and confidence aligned but in reverse order.

Although my interests favored the enterprising personality type, it was interesting to learn that I

am currently most confident in the social aspect. Despite considering myself a logic-based

leader, the assessment interpreted me to be more adept in interpersonal dynamics. With this
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 7

knowledge, I intend to focus on building relationships within my organization to support the

growth of myself and my team members.

On the other hand, the Super’s Work Values Inventory (SWVI) uses a similar scale as

KSCA, and asks users about the importance they place on a specific job aspect. Later, the

assessment uses those answers to create a hierarchy of work values with high to low ratings in

career compatibility. Based on those results, my top three work values were security, workplace,

and challenge (Kuder Inc., 2023c).

The security work value emphasized the importance that I place on stability within an

organization. With this work value, I seek opportunities within companies with a low turnover

and consistent growth. By feeling secure in my role, I can focus on my responsibilities and

support the organization without worrying about whether I will be there next year. Then, the

workplace work value centered itself on the cleanliness and safety of an occupation’s

environment. Similar to security, this work value emphasized the value I place on physical job

safety. Like security, having a comfortable work environment helps me focus on my assigned

tasks with fewer in-office distractions. Lastly, the challenge work value underlined the worth of

staying mentally sharp in my occupation. While menial tasks might be necessary, I often need

diverse situations to keep my brain active when working. With this value, I can further utilize the

skills that I have trained and develop my competency in other areas. As a result, this helps me

feel a greater sense of purpose in my role and supports my overall growth.

Overall, the two assessments illustrated the skills I am currently confident in displaying

within an organization and the values I prioritize for those opportunities. The findings of these

assessments relate to value clarification, where I assess the relative importance of my values and

if they are compatible with the organizational identity. When describing this concept, Brad
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 8

Harrington and Douglas Hall caution against overemphasizing one value to avoid a misaligned

career decision (Harrington & Hall, 2007). With this information, I can better understand my

leadership capabilities and expand my considerations when pursuing new job opportunities.

Section #3: Motivation and Career Anchors Assessment

The Motivation and Career Anchors Assessment asked about factors commonly

associated with job opportunities. When answering these questions, I had to rank my responses

on a ten-point scale from if they are not important to very important in my work life. After

accounting for those responses, my primary career anchor was security, stability, organizational

identity, and my secondary anchor was managerial competence.

The security, stability, organizational identity career anchor contained two categories:

individuals with careers tied to the organization’s stability and those tied to a geographical

location. Where the former embodied loyalty to a company, the latter prioritized their current

community. I fall somewhere in between the two. While I wish to remain with an organization,

there are limits to that loyalty as I won’t take significantly less money compared to market value

or relocate to an undesirable location. Then, despite preferring my current community to others, I

am willing to move elsewhere depending on the place and opportunity available. My current

organization represents both components as they reside solely in Arizona and have had many

workers remain with the company decades later. In closing, the security, stability, organizational

identity career anchor is critical in my career choice as I seek reliable job opportunities that

support a healthy work-life balance.

The managerial competence career anchor is separated into three areas of management.

These areas are the analytical competence to identify and solve problems, the interpersonal

competence to influence and support the development of team members, and the emotional
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 9

competence to remain positive and focused regardless of organizational turmoil. With this career

anchor, I pursue advancement in the corporate ladder and the increased responsibility that comes

with it. Although it requires more liability, the managerial competence career anchor supports

my goal of impacting others within the organization. By assuming accountability and training

myself in these three competencies, I can foster organizational growth and adequately support

team members when problems arise. At my current job, this trait has been embodied by my

manager as he supports team members while empowering them to fulfill their responsibilities.

Ultimately, this career anchor is integral in establishing myself as a reliable leader.

On the contrary, my lowest-graded career anchor was entrepreneurial creativity. With this

career anchor, individuals want to create and own a business, product, or service to make

substantial money. Although I wish to earn money, I do not envy their risks, and I have more

interests than monetary gains. Instead, I want to support the development of individuals and the

organization. Where many in this career anchor abandon their occupations for financial

opportunities, I value the stability in those roles. Therefore, despite seeing the merit in this

approach, entrepreneurial creativity is an aspect that doesn’t align with my desired career.

Overall, the Motivation and Career Anchors Assessment supported me in understanding

how important the various career factors were to my work-life balance. Through this assessment,

I determined what was non-negotiable when pursuing my career and what I was willing to budge

on when advancing within my industry. Similar to Peter Drucker’s mirror test, this assessment

has helped me reflect on the person I wish to become and determine if my current occupation

and organization are compatible with my established value system (Drucker, 2005). Where the

Kuder assessments analyzed the applicability of my skills to a potential career, this assessment

focused on the broad factors present within most job opportunities.

Section #4: Additional Assessments Taken During Organizational Leadership Courses

At the beginning of my Organizational Leadership coursework, I took many

self-assessments during OGL220: Behavioral Dynamics in Organizations. Through these

assessments, I could better understand my leadership and personality traits, and how those details

may shape my potential career. Among these evaluations were a cultural dimensions worksheet,

several personality tests, and the Indigo/DISC assessment. By undergoing these assessments, I

could better understand my leadership tendencies and pinpoint the experiences that helped to

formulate those traits. Ultimately, I gained self-awareness of which areas need improvement and

my leadership strengths.

In the OGL220 Module 1 Cultural Dimensions Self-Assessment Worksheet, the

assessment scored me on four areas: individualism vs. collectivism, low vs. high power distance,

low vs. high uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity vs. femininity. Among these scores, I placed

closest to individualism, low power distance, high uncertainty avoidance, and femininity. These

categories signified my self-reliance when completing tasks, my advocacy for equal treatment in

the organization regardless of rank, my wish to control the variables of an assignment, and my

care for sustaining office relationships over monetary gains.

For the OGL220 Module 1 Personality Self-Assessment Tools Worksheet, I completed

three behavioral assessments and analyzed their results. Among them were the Humanmetrics

Jung Typology Test, the Keirsey Personality Test, and the Big 5 Personality Test. The

Humanmetrics Jung Typology Test graded the answers based on four criteria: extraversion vs.

intraversion, intuition vs. sensing, thinking vs. feeling, and judging vs. perceiving. Among the

options, I placed closer to extraversion, intuition, thinking, and judging. Because of these results,

it gave me an ENTJ score that signified that I was a natural leader and utilized exemplary
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 11

analytical and planning skills. The Keirsey Personality Test used a questionnaire to determine my

temperament based on four types: Artist, Guardian, Idealist, and Rational. After grading my

responses, the criteria identified me as a Guardian with an emphasis on the supervisor quadrant.

These results signified that I am a hard-working employee who is outspoken about how I believe

things should be done. Finally, the Big 5 Personality Test scored the answers to questions based

on their percentile of Extroversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and

Intellect/Imagination. According to my results, I most closely aligned with Intellect/Imagination

after scoring in the 91st percentile. This classification meant that I am an insightful leader who

can accurately understand organizational situations and quickly formulate new strategies for

improvement. In conclusion, the three personality tests determined me to be an analytical and

proactive leader who can shape an organization through my precise and consistent efforts.

In the Module 4 Indigo / DISC Assessment Activity Items Worksheet, I answered

questionnaires to determine my strengths, core skills, what motivates me, and my DISC style.

According to the results, my top strengths included being influential in creating effective results

and making accurate decisions based on factual evidence. This analysis aligned with my current

strengths because I am methodical in my deliberations to ensure that I pursue all avenues and

that everyone remains on the page throughout the project. Then, some of my core skills were

teamwork and goal orientation. These skills work with the previously defined strengths to center

the organizational processes on a central purpose and work with team members to progressively

approach their defined milestones. Finally, the DISC style evaluated my answers based on low to

high scores for dominance, influencing, steadiness, and compliance. Among these, I scored high

in influencing and compliance, then low in dominance and steadiness. These results signified

that I am an enthusiastic and detail-oriented person. Ultimately, this coincides with the other two
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 12

Indigo assessments, as I pay close attention to information and bring sufficient enthusiasm when

approaching team assignments.

While each of the OGL220 self-assessments provided early insights into my current

leadership capabilities and the suggested use cases that can maximize my potential, the

Indigo/DISC assessment provided a more comprehensive and useful review. Through this

assessment, I could ascertain my strengths, what motivates me, and the behavioral tendencies

that shape my leadership style. Although my career experience has grown since, much of the

identified behavior and skills analysis in those assessments remains true. That analysis then

relates to Brad Harrington and Douglas Hall's description of identity as personal aspects unique

to me and the social aspects that derive from belonging to a group (Harrington & Hall, 2007).

This description relates to my “aha moment” from this assessment as I could then realize the type

of environment I need to have a meaningful career. By understanding the work tendencies tied to

my cultural dimensions, how my behavior type can influence decision-making, and my current

leadership capabilities, these self-assessments help me visualize my potential contributions to an

organization.

Conclusion

In closing, the various assessments provided comprehensive insight into my preferences

and tendencies when pursuing an acceptable work-life balance. Through this process, I could

learn about my strengths and weaknesses as an employee, what I wish to achieve through my

career, and the potential occupations available to realize those aspirations. This paper depicts my

progression as a leader through my Organizational Leadership coursework. Where the Kuder,

Super’s Work Inventory, and Career Anchors assessments outlined my traits and their potential

transferable occupational outcomes, the assessments from OGL220 displayed the cultural and
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 13

personality tendencies when working in organizations. However, through each, I reflected on the

corresponding experiences that represent those traits and understood the path that has shaped me

as a leader. As Harrington and Hall highlighted the importance of self-awareness and

self-knowledge as a leader, I must continuously reflect on the reasons behind my decisions to

maximize my potential to uplift others within an organization (Harrington & Hall, 2007).
Unit 1: Self-Assessments 14

References

Drucker, P. F. (2005, January). Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review.

Harrington, B. & Hall, D.T. (2007). Career management and work-life integration: Using

self-assessment to navigate contemporary careers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Kuder Career Interests Assessment Results. (2023a). Kuder Inc. Retrieved October 8, 2023,
from
https://journey.kuder.com/my-assessments/career-interests-assessment-results?ID=29403
147
Kuder Skills Confidence Assessment Results. (2023b). Kuder Inc. Retrieved October 8, 2023,
from
https://journey.kuder.com/my-assessments/skills-confidence-assessment-results?ID=2940
3154
Super’s Work Values Inventory-revised Results. (2023c). Kuder Inc. Retrieved October 8,
2023, from
https://journey.kuder.com/my-assessments/work-values-assessment-results?ID=29403159