What Is Your Conflict-Handling Style?
1. The purpose is to help me determine how I prefer to handle conflict.
2. Yielding: 11, Compromising: 14, Forcing: 17, Problem Solving: 20, Avoiding: 11
3. These results mean that in the way that I perceive myself I tend to take the problem-solving route of handling conflict. I also like to compromise, but I will be firm in making sure that I still get what I want. These results might be different, however, if other people assessed how they have experienced me handling conflict.
4. By using the results from this assessment, I can see how I am able to combine my different approaches to best adapt to the various situations I come across at my workplace. Since I am a taekwondo student instructor, I work with my students a lot, and a lot of moments of conflict can come up when having to work with kids of all ages, especially when they have to interact with each other. My personal conflict handling style that I have developed works vary well in the interactive classroom setting of a taekwondo studio because it falls mainly in the Problem-Solving category. Problem-Solving consists of a mixture of high motivation to satisfy ones own interests and high motivation to satisfy the interests of others (McShane & Von Glinow, 2008, p. 312). This is beneficial to the classroom setting because every student has a unique learning style that needs to be recognized and met, but at the same time, if you completely bend to the will of the student, they will never learn all that they need to learn and be able to reach their fullest potential. Even my next two highest results back up this style of teaching. The next two that I prefer are forcing and compromising which, when combined, form a style that is very close to that of the problem-solving style since together they encompass the two stipulations of satisfying your own interests as well as the interests of others.
Do Leaders Make A Difference?
1. The purpose is to help estimate how much trust I put in leaderships capabilities.
3. I scored in the Above Average category. This means that I have a tendency to have a romantic view of leadership. The romantic view of leadership thinks that leaders are the main cause of what happens in an organization instead of the external environment.
4. By looking at these results, I can make myself a more efficient leader by finding a way to fix my views while still keeping them in line with my natural tendencies. I tend to romanticize leadership more than other people do, which can be dangerous for several reasons. One of the problems with those who romanticize leadership that our textbook mentions is that they believe that life events are generated more by people than by uncontrollable natural forces (McShane & Von Glinow, 2008, p. 350). This is a problem because if you incorrectly identify the cause of something, then later on you are likely to act on those false assumptions, which can lead to a lot of mistakes. To be more efficient as a leader, I need to be more aware of how the external environment can change things in comparison to the leaders.
My natural tendencies of initially trusting leaderships ability to accomplish things can be of a benefit, however, if I can train myself to not blindly believe in their abilities. Instead, I need to change it to logical optimism used to encourage my coworkers in the areas where I know they can make a difference. For example, at Taekwondo it can be easy to get down on yourself as an instructor if a student is being troublesome. I can use my logical optimism to encourage my coworkers that if they give their best, they can make a difference in the students life if the student decides to change their attitude. This encourages my coworker as well as accurately and realistically assessing the situation.
What Organizational Structure Do You Prefer?
1. The purpose is to help figure out what type of organizational structure I prefer.
2. Tall Hierarchy: 8, Formalization: 5, Centralization: 5, Total: 18
3. I got an Average Preference for tall hierarchies and a Low Preference for formalization and centralization. My total score was Low Preference which means that I general prefer organic structures over mechanistic structures.
4. From looking at these results, I can see how my preferences match very well with the teaching environment. Even though Taekwondo can be seen as mechanistic because every belt rank has a specific set of moves to be learned in a specific order, it is most definitely organic because it is a classroom setting. Classrooms can be unpredictable because students can be a wide a variety of personalities and ages. Specifically at the studio I work at I can be working with people anywhere from four to fifty years old. Our textbook says that organic structures are best used in rapidly changing environments (McShane & Von Glinow, 2008, p. 370). Preferring organic structures definitely helps me to be more effective and efficient at my studio. We have an open classroom setting where students pay a certain amount of money per month and can go or not go to any appropriately ranked class during that month. That means that my environment is constantly changing. In one class I could be working one on one with a student on the minute details of their form and then in the next class I could be simultaneously working with ten people of various belt ranks who are everywhere from knowing their entire form to knowing none of it. Preferring organic structures means that I work very well in this kind of environment, thinking on my feet and adapting to the ever-changing situations in order to best meet the needs of my students.