High Conscientiousness, Low Extraversion and a New Title: What a Big Five Self-Assessment Means for a First-Time Assistant Manager at a Home Improvement Store
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
MGT/312: Organizational Behavior for Managers
Week 1 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The manager, store and assessment results are a composite written for a model paper.
After eleven years in the lumber and building materials department of a composite home improvement store, the last four as department supervisor, I was promoted to assistant store manager in charge of operations: receiving, inventory, freight crews and the overnight stocking team, about 45 people. The store's district manager asked every new assistant manager to complete a Big Five personality assessment and discuss the results with a mentor. I expected the results to confirm what I already knew about myself. They did, mostly; what surprised me was how clearly they predicted the problems I was already having in my first month. This paper reports my results, explains what they mean and sets goals for my development.
The Results
The assessment reported my scores as percentiles compared with a large sample of working adults. My conscientiousness was high, at the 88th percentile. Emotional stability was also high, at the 76th. Agreeableness was moderate, at the 58th. Openness to experience was moderate, at the 45th. Extraversion was low, at the 24th percentile.
What the Traits Predict
Barrick and Mount (1991), in a meta-analysis of studies relating the Big Five to job performance, found that conscientiousness was the most consistent predictor of performance across occupations, while the other traits predicted performance in some jobs but not others. Extraversion, for example, predicted performance in management and sales, jobs that involve influencing others.
For leadership specifically, Judge et al. (2002) found that extraversion was the trait most strongly related to leadership, both to emerging as a leader and to being seen as effective, followed by conscientiousness and openness, while emotional stability also had a positive relationship.
Together, these findings suggest that my high conscientiousness and emotional stability are assets in almost any job, but that my low extraversion is a potential weakness in a role that requires leading and influencing a large team.
Testing the Results Against My Work
Conscientiousness
My record in lumber supports the high score. I kept the department's inventory accuracy above 98% for three years, I built a checklist for special-order lumber that cut customer complaints and I rarely miss a deadline. In my new role, conscientiousness helps with the operational side: the overnight team's freight is now worked on schedule, and I have already found and fixed two receiving errors that had been costing the store money.
But conscientiousness has a downside for a manager. In my first month, I found myself redoing tasks that my freight supervisors had completed because they were not done exactly my way. One supervisor told me, politely, that she felt I did not trust her. The same trait that made me a good department supervisor was leading me to micromanage.
Extraversion
The low score matches my experience. I am comfortable with people I know but find large group meetings draining, and I prefer to work through problems alone before discussing them. In lumber, with a team of eight, this was rarely a problem. As assistant manager, I lead a morning huddle for 20 to 30 people, and I have been keeping it short and focused on tasks. Two weeks in, the store manager told me that associates described me as "all business" and that some did not know whether I was satisfied with their work.
Low extraversion does not mean I cannot lead. It means I need to do deliberately what more extraverted managers do naturally: recognize people publicly, talk informally with associates and communicate my expectations more often.
Emotional stability
The high score fits. I stay calm when freight trucks arrive late or when the store is short-staffed, and that calm seems to steady the team. It is a strength to build on.
Agreeableness and openness
My moderate agreeableness means I can be cooperative but will also push back when needed. My moderate openness suggests that I prefer proven methods, which serves operations well but may make me slower to accept new ideas from my team. The overnight team lead suggested a different way to sequence freight, and my first reaction was to say no; after testing it for a week, it saved about an hour a night.
Limits of the Assessment
A personality assessment describes tendencies, not destiny, and situations shape how strongly traits show up in behavior (Robbins & Judge, 2022). Traits predict behavior on average, and the relationships in research are moderate, not strong. My scores are also self-reported, and the picture people hold of themselves is not always the one her coworkers hold. To check this, I asked two freight supervisors and my former department manager for feedback. Their views broadly agreed with my results, but they rated my approachability higher than I expected, which suggests my low extraversion may be less visible to people who work with me every day than to those who see me only in meetings.
Development Goals
Based on the results and the feedback, I set three goals for the next 90 days.
First, delegate without redoing. I will agree on standards with each freight supervisor at the start of the week and check results against those standards rather than checking their methods. I will track the number of tasks I redo and aim for none by the end of the period.
Second, communicate recognition. In each morning huddle, I will recognize at least one person or team by name for specific work, and I will spend 20 minutes each shift walking the floor and talking with associates. My mentor will ask a sample of associates in 90 days whether they know how I view their work.
Third, test ideas before rejecting them. When an associate suggests a change, I will agree to a short trial before deciding, as I did with the freight sequencing idea.
Conclusion
My Big Five results show a conscientious, emotionally stable person with low extraversion, and research suggests that combination supports good performance but may limit my effectiveness as a leader of a large team. Testing the results against my first month as assistant manager confirmed both the strengths and the risks: reliable operations, but also micromanagement and a reserved style that left associates unsure where they stood. The development goals turn those insights into specific behaviors I can practice and measure.
References
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.765
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2022). Organizational behavior (19th ed.). Pearson.
How this MGT 312 Week 1 example is structured
The MGT/312 shelf page describes Week 1 as opening with a self-assessment and a short paper on what the results mean. The paper reports scores briefly and spends most of its length interpreting them, because a self-assessment is only useful when its results are connected to behavior and research. Each trait is tested against examples from the writer's own work, and the development goals follow from where the results and the job demands do not match. Students search this week as MGT 312 Week 1, MGT312 Wk 1 or MGT/312 Wk 1; all three are the same assignment.
MGT/312 Week 1 questions, answered
What does MGT/312 Week 1 usually ask for?
The MGT/312 shelf describes Week 1 as a self-assessment followed by a short paper on what the results mean. Many sections ask students to complete one or more personality or skills assessments and reflect on how the results apply to their work and management.
What are the Big Five personality traits?
Openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and emotional stability, sometimes described by its opposite, neuroticism. They are widely used in organizational research because they are stable over time and predict aspects of job performance and leadership.
How should I write about my assessment results?
Report the results briefly, then explain what research says the traits predict, test the results against specific examples from your own work and identify what you will do differently. A good paper neither accepts the results uncritically nor dismisses them.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.