M2 A1

INSTRUCTIONS ARE ATTACHED IN FILES

Change language: English Deutsch Español Nederlands

Your Results
Closed-Minded Open to New Experiences

Disorganized Conscientious
Introverted Extraverted

Disagreeable Agreeable
Calm / Relaxed Nervous / High-Strung

What aspects of personality does this tell me about?

There has been much research on how people describe others, and five major
dimensions of human personality have been found. They are often referred to
as the OCEAN model of personality, because of the acronym from the names
of the five dimensions. Here are your results:

Open-Mindedness

High scorers tend to be original, creative, curious, complex; Low scorers tend to beconventional, down to earth, narrow interests, uncreative.

You typically don’t seek out newexperiences.

(Your percentile: 43)

Conscientiousness

High scorers tend to be reliable, well-organized, self-disciplined, careful; Lowscorers tend to be disorganized, undependable, negligent.

You are very well-organized, and can berelied upon.

(Your percentile: 89)

Extraversion

High scorers tend to be sociable, friendly, fun loving, talkative; Low scorers tend tobe introverted, reserved, inhibited, quiet.

You are relatively social and enjoy thecompany of others.

(Your percentile: 65)

Agreeableness

High scorers tend to be good natured, sympathetic, forgiving, courteous; Lowscorers tend to be critical, rude, harsh, callous.

https://www.outofservice.com/

http://de.outofservice.com/bigfive/results/?o=69,63,56&c=75,88,88&e=69,63,63&a=88,94,88&n=6,13,25&y=1950&g=f&srclang=en

http://es.outofservice.com/bigfive/results/?o=69,63,56&c=75,88,88&e=69,63,63&a=88,94,88&n=6,13,25&y=1950&g=f&srclang=en

http://nl.outofservice.com/bigfive/results/?o=69,63,56&c=75,88,88&e=69,63,63&a=88,94,88&n=6,13,25&y=1950&g=f&srclang=en

https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/

You are good-natured, courteous, and
supportive.

(Your percentile: 92)

Negative Emotionality

High scorers tend to be nervous, high-strung, insecure, worrying; Low scorers tendto be calm, relaxed, secure, hardy.

You probably remain calm, even in tensesituations.

(Your percentile: 4)

Results Feedback

How useful did you find your results?
Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very Useful

What is the “Big Five”?

Personality psychologists are interested in what differentiates one person
from another and why we behave the way that we do. Personality research,
like any science, relies on quantifiable concrete data which can be used to
examine what people are like. This is where the Big Five plays an important
role.

The Big Five was originally derived in the 1970’s by two independent
research teams — Paul Costa and Robert McCrae (at the National Institutes of
Health), and Warren Norman (at the University of Michigan)/Lewis Goldberg
(at the University of Oregon) — who took slightly different routes at arriving
at the same results: most human personality traits can be boiled down to five
broad dimensions of personality, regardless of language or culture. These five
dimensions were derived by asking thousands of people hundreds of
questions and then analyzing the data with a statistical procedure known as
factor analysis. It is important to realize that the researchers did not set out to
find five dimensions, but that five dimensions emerged from their analyses of
the data. In scientific circles, the Big Five is now the most widely accepted
and used model of personality (though of course many other systems are used
in pop psychology and work contexts; e.g., the MBTI).

What do the scores tell me?

In order to provide you with a meaningful comparison, the scores you
received have been converted to “percentile scores.” This means that your
personality score can be directly compared to another group of people who
have also taken this personality test. The percentile scores show you where
you score on each personality dimension relative to other people, taking into
account normal differences in gender and age.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factor_analysis

For example, your Extraversion percentile score is 65, which means that
about 65 percent of the people in the comparison sample are less extraverted
than you. In other words, you are rather extroverted as compared to them.
Keep in mind that these percentile scores are relative to our particular sample
of people. Thus, your percentile scores may differ if you were compared to
another sample (e.g., elderly British people).

Where can I learn more?

If you’d like to learn more about personality psychology, take a look at these
links to other personality sites on the web. Take a look at our homepage for
more tests!

How do I save my results? How can I share them?

You can bookmark or share the link to this page. The URL for this page
contains only the data needed to show your results and none of your private
responses. Save this URL now, as you won’t be able to get back to this
page after closing it: https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/results/?
o=69,63,56&c=75,88,88&e=69,63,63&a=88,94,88&n=6,13,25&y=1950&g=f

For classroom activities: sometimes educators ask students to use this site
for classroom projects and need the “raw” scores. Your raw scores,
normalized 0 to 1: o: 0.63, c: 0.84, e: 0.65, a: 0.90, n: 0.15

https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/info/

https://www.outofservice.com/

https://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/results/?o=69,63,56&c=75,88,88&e=69,63,63&a=88,94,88&n=6,13,25&y=1950&g=f

Conflict Management Style Orientation Scale
To calculate your score, we grouped the questions according to 5 conflict management
styles and totalled the numerical values of your answers. Higher scores indicate that
you are stronger in that particular style. Within a given style, 15 is the maximum
possible score and 3 is the minimum.

Statements Totalled
Score

Competing 1, 9, 12 8

Accommodating 2, 7, 11 7

Compromising 3, 6, 15 10

Avoiding 4, 8, 14 4

Collaboration 5, 10, 13 14

Close this window

javascript:self.close();

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ASSIGNMENT 4

Case Scenario I:

Read what transpires and then identify a strategy to handle the issue:

· Identify and describe the crux of the issue. What elements of an interpersonal conflict are present?

· Using your self-assessment information from Module 2, describe what you would do or attempt to do in this situation. (Your values, personality, conflict style, and emotional intelligence will play a role in this scenario.)

Case Scenario II:

For this case scenario, carefully read the scenario and address the following in the discussion post:

· Identify and describe the crux of the issue. Identify the elements of group-to-group conflict that are present.

· Using your self-assessment information from Module 2, describe what you would do or attempt to do as a strategy toward resolution of this conflict. Address your assumptions, the contingencies, and how your self-assessment information will influence the strategy.

M4:Assignment 1

Case Scenario Analysis

Conflict Management
Page 1 of 4

©Argosy University – Online Division

Case Study 2

A-tech, an electronic manufacturing firm, has been in business 15 years. The
company started with venture capital and soon grew to two hundred million
dollars in annual sales. The average growth in sales the past three years has
been 25%, due mainly to the engineering innovations in its five major product
families.

The CEO and his executive committee have historically viewed the American
electronics industry as one of the best in the world. Criteria for best were directed
by high product quality standards and meeting performance expectations.

Recently a sixth product line was designed and is about to be launched. The
product, a multichip high performance information processor, requires specific
new engineering on a number of the components. Two components would be
designed to manufacturing specifications in-house. However, the third
component, selected by the manufacturing product feasibility team, would require
a high investment by A-tech in engineering and capital equipment.

The component, called an R-stabilizer, is nearly identical to an existing
component having similar specifications and performance, previously designed
by a firm in India. The existing component could be re-engineered to meet A-
tech’s specific requirements. The India firm, RAH, would assume and amortize
the engineering and capital equipment investment. Because of the differentials in
labor costs and inner-country transportation costs, the savings to A-tech would
be about 6% per part.

The manufacturing new product team (MNPT) has requested approval from A-
Tech’s executive committee to sign a five year agreement with the India firm.
This would be the first product outsourcing agreement by the A-tech Corporation.

The CEO asked for a presentation to be given to the executive committee in
order to start the decision process. The MNPT gave a PowerPoint presentation
reviewing the components required for the R-stabilizer, status of the new
components (particularly the problems with building the third component in-
house), cost analysis, and project specifications from startup to new product
ready for marketing and sales.

In attendance at this “focus meeting” is the CEO, VP for finance, VP for research
and development, MNPT members, VP for manufacturing, and VP for marketing.
These participants are identified as:

M4: Assignment 1
Case Scenario Analysis

Conflict Management
Page 2 of 4

©Argosy University – Online Division

CEO–Chet VP for manufacturing–Wally

VP for finance–Richard VP for research and development–Kelly

VP for marketing–Paul MNPT chairperson–Alice

CEO: “Thank you, Wally, for this excellent presentation. I open up this
discussion as a way for everyone to share perceptions and opinions.
I would first say that this proposal is the first such foray into the
outsourcing business, and as such, demands careful analysis.”

Richard: “I agree, Chet. The presentation illustrated the dollar advantage by
going to RAH for this component. How is it that you (looking at Wally)
have been in touch with RAH and this is the first time we are aware
of what is happening?”

Wally: “We thought it would be better to do the preliminary work, get some
numbers, before we took everyone’s time.”

Kelly: “Alice did contact me and explained the idea. Since we are behind
nearly nine months, I encouraged Alice to proceed.”

Richard: “To proceed?! Does that mean you obtain confidentiality agreements
and so forth?” (Slightly emotional)

Alice: “Yes, we did everything according to the book.”

Richard: (interrupts) “Not my book!”

Alice: “Richard, at the time we were doing this, you were in New York
looking at investments for A-tech, and I believe looking at expanding
our credit line.” (Obviously trying to be patient)

Chet: “Okay, guys. We have strayed a little here. By the way, I did approve
the trip for the manufacturing group to visit RAH last autumn.”

Paul: “Do you have an agenda for this meeting Alice or Wally?”

Wally: “An e-mail was sent on the 21st to everyone here. I asked for
confirmation, knowing this would be an uphill climb.”

Richard: “What’s that supposed to mean, Wally?”

Wally: (hesitates) “Actually, we knew there would be some resistance
because this is a new direction.”

M4: Assignment 1
Case Scenario Analysis

Conflict Management
Page 3 of 4

©Argosy University – Online Division

Chet: “We all have tumbled through the ups and downs of change. I don’t
think we are hurting too badly. But!! Let’s get back to it. Alice please
make some additional copies of the agenda. We’ll take a short
break.”

(Meeting resumes)

Chet: “Just a reminder before we start. For a decision meeting such as this,
I appreciate everyone confirming the meeting and agenda. And, just
in case one of us has been out of town, we need copies of the
agenda anyway. Go ahead, Alice”. (tone indicates CEO is losing
patience).

Alice: (by now is becoming more uncomfortable) “This was supposed to be
a two hour meeting; we have only an hour left. I am not sure we can
cover everything in an hour.” (slight hint at the problems in the
communication process; waits for everyone to respond)

Paul: “Looking at the financials again, we show a 24% profit per part, which
includes the RAH component. This looks pretty optimistic. We are not
really sure of a number of things.”

Wally: “And those would be…”

Paul: (interrupts) “Well, let’s rattle off a few. One, we have no “G-2” on our
competition; two, conditions in India are becoming more destabilized
because of potential terrorist threats; three, we don’t know the
problems in communication and ways of doing business on an
outsourcing basis; four, we have no control over their process; five,
there are the legal issues; six, we could have shipping problems, and
then there’s the quality control issue.” (Paul stops, realizing he has
provided many topics for debate—then continues) “It will take a great
deal of time to get information on all these items.”

Alice: (raising her hand, looks at the CEO, but she is not acknowledged)

CEO: (addresses Kelly) “You’ve been through all this at Lintel. What does it
take to gather all this information?”

Kelly: “Actually, I’ll defer back to Alice, but I do want to say my people have
been working closely with Alice’s team and they have already
covered much of that ground.” (Alice starts to respond, but is
interrupted by Richard): “So, Alice, do you have all the answers to
these questions?” (voiced tinged with sarcasm)

Alice: (even more uncomfortable) “Not in the strictest sense. I do have a lot
of information, which is found in the R-stabilizer Feasibility Study. I
wanted to review this today.”

M4: Assignment 1
Case Scenario Analysis

Conflict Management
Page 4 of 4

©Argosy University – Online Division

Richard: (a little loudly): “That’s a 100-page document and it doesn’t have an
executive summary.”

Alice: “It does not contain an executive summary, but is does contain a
specifications cost analysis.”

Paul: But that doesn’t really answer my questions. Like G-2.”

Alice: “I assumed you marketing people would start looking the R-stabilizer
as soon as we informed them of that…”

Paul: “That was a bad assumption, Alice. We don’t or can’t do that until we
have performance specifications and costs for production…”

M4: Assignment 1
Case Scenario Analysis

Conflict Management
Page 1 of 2

©Argosy University – Online Division

Case Study 1
The following is an event between a customer and you (an employee of
ADVANCE, a larger electronics store) regarding a new cell phone purchase prior
to this interaction. The following is what transpired:
The young lady (early 20’s) came into the store shortly after lunch. You were on
duty with one other sales person. During the lunch and dinner hours, when there
is limited staff on hand, the employee with the most longevity is basically in
charge and handles any customer complaints. In this case, that person is you.
Customer (Cust) enters the store, and approaches the sales clerk (SC)

SC: “Yes, may I help you?” (Notes the customer is not smiling)
Cust: “I bought a Blackberry from you people two weeks ago. I bought this

thing so I could e-mail, and I can get it to work only once in awhile.”
SC: “Can you wait a moment; I’ll get the floor manager.” (Customer places

both hands on counter and hangs her head. SC walks to other side of
the store, and finds you, the acting floor manager (FM).

SC: “I have a lady up front with a new I-44 she claims isn’t working right. Can
you talk to her?”

FM: Approaches customer. “Hello, I’m Marko. How may I help you?”
Cust: “Ya. You can help me by giving me a new phone. One that works! I’ve

gone over the instructions. I’ve done everything right. For $200 it’s a
piece of junk!” (Customer has become louder and her facial tone has
reddened). “I want my money back. Now!” (She plunks the phone on the
counter).

FM: “I need you to give me some information, and may I see your receipt?”
Cust: “I knew it! I knew it! The old run around. I left my receipt in the car”

(Customer is even more agitated).
FM: “I will need to see the receipt before I can be of much help.”
The customer stomps out of the store. She returns a few minutes later with a
receipt in her hand.
Cust: “It’s a good thing I kept this. I probably wouldn’t get any help.”
FM: Picks up the receipt from the counter and looks at it. “I see you bought

this over a month ago.”
Cust: “So? They told me I have a year warranty, so I want a replacement…

today!”
FM: “Let me explain how the warranty works.”
Cust: (interrupting): “You’re not telling me my warranty is no good!”

M4: Assignment 1
Case Scenario Analysis

Conflict Management
Page 2 of 2

©Argosy University – Online Division

FM: “It’s not that. If you had brought it in within the first month we could
have…”

Cust: “What’s with the first month business. I was told it had a year’s warranty.
FM: “It does. But after the first 30 days we need to send it back to the

manufacturer for an examination.”
Cust: “I won’t have a cell phone… how long does it take?”

FM: “We can usually have the phone back in two weeks.”
Cust: “Give me the number of the manufacturer. I want to call them or

somebody about this (very agitated). I can’t believe you can stay in
business. Why don’t you check these out better?.. (pauses). I want a
replacement phone today!” (Very demanding)

FM: “We have no way of doing that. I’m very sorry…”
Cust: “Sorry! Sorry! OK! I want a refund. I’ll buy a different phone… someplace

else!”
FM: “If you will leave your phone I will personally get it sent UPS – that will

hurry it along.”
Cust: “Just forget it!” (stomps out)