To: Professor Mandel

From: Helena Benedetto

Date: October 29th, 2019
Subject: Personal Evaluation Summary

In this memorandum I will evaluate the results from my People Styles and Culture Map tests and
compare them to the same evaluations from peers I’ve worked with. The People Style test
assesses my responsiveness and assertiveness, while the Culture Map test assesses my
communicating, evaluating, persuading, leading, deciding, trusting, disagreeing, and scheduling
skills.

My People Styles self-assessment identified me as an amiable, meaning I am less assertive and

more responsive. On the other hand, four of my survey respondents thought I was an expressive,
two thought I was an analytical, and one thought a driver. I personally believe that I fit best with
my own results as an amiable because I view myself as a better listener and less as one who takes
strong control.

An expressive exerts high responsiveness and assertiveness, which I could understand in specific
situations. Within my Eller group I tend to take control when working on BCOM assignments,
which explains why my peers can view me as expressive. Additionally, there are times within
my internship where I feel it’s necessary to assign other interns tasks within our projects, which
could come off as assertive.

An analytical shows low responsiveness and low assertiveness, while a drive shows low
responsiveness and high assertiveness. I was extremely shocked to see that anyone evaluated me
in those ways because I feel that I don’t identify with either of those characteristics. One of my
strengths is listening, which goes hand-in-hand with responsiveness and I was surprised that
some of my peers didn’t agree.

On the eight Cultural Map scales, approximately half were similar and half were significantly
different between my self assessment and peer evaluation. The scales that were similar include
leading, deciding, trusting, and disagreeing. Because of this, I definitely show more definitive
signs of these scales.

My leading skills are hierarchical, emphasizing that I prefer leadership structure based on rank.
My deciding skills are consensual, meaning that I prefer deciding through consensus. My
trusting skills are in the middle of the scale, which means I lie between building trust through
working together and through sharing down time together. My disagreeing skills are also in the
middle, emphasizing that I am in between preferring airing grievances in public and preferring
keeping disagreements private or ignoring disagreements altogether. After reviewing all of these
scales, I find them extremely accurate.

The scales that were different include communicating, evaluating, persuading, and scheduling.
My self assessment in communicating stated that I communicate using sophisticated, nuanced,
and layered messages, while others viewed my communication as more precise, simple, and
clear. I was surprised on my self assessment and actually feel that I agree with my peers. When it
comes to evaluating, I was in the middle of the scale under my self assessment but peers stated
that I give negative feedback in a way that minimizes hurt feelings. In this scenario I agree with
my peers again and feel that I am extremely cautious when it comes to delivering negative news.

My persuading skills were leaning towards providing theoretical basis on my self assessment,
while my peers thought that I lean towards relevant examples first. I feel these differ because I
tend to do both and could be perfectly in the middle. My scheduling skills were more flexible on
my self assessment, which I strongly disagree with. My peers were more correct when they
stated that I prefer structured schedules and explicit deadlines. Reading over these differences
made me realize that I lie in the middle for most of these scales, which might be why my the
scores between the tests were unalike.

The responses regarding words that described me aligned with the core values that I chose for
myself. Some common themes include being extremely passionate and being genuinely kind to
those around me. I was very pleased to see that the way I express my core values allows others to
understand what the are. One of my biggest goals in life is to always show kindness towards
other and I am glad that my peers notice this.

One major theme in my how my respondents perceive me is that I need to be more confident in
myself. I tend to apologize too much and take on others’ tasks, which can get tiring at times.
They suggest that I stick up for myself more and delegate tasks more efficiently. In order to
improve my professional brand, I will speak up more to exert more confidence. Additionally, I
will not take on more than I can handle, and instead, will assign certain tasks to others that I
work with. By sounding even more passionate and strong when I talk, it will also add to my
overall credibility.

One response that specific surprised me states, “I could see you take better initiative on your
passions in the future. Sometimes I’m not sure what you are passionate about because you don’t
necessarily pursue it right away”. This contradicted many of the responses under my core values.
I feel that I am clear when I express my passions and take actions that align with them. For
example, I am determined to work within the sports industry, so I hold an executive board
position in the Sports Management Association, as well as an internship within Arizona
Athletics.

The most important lesson I learned from this assignment is that it’s evident when I don’t appear
confident in myself. I have always struggled with this, so it was not surprising. Unfortunately I
was unaware of how much it affect my peer’s views of me. In the future I want to make sure that
I combat this and prove to everyone that I can be confident by speaking up in group settings
more.

All in all, these two assessments allowed me to get a better grasp on how I work in a professional
manner. Learning how my peers view me has encouraged me to grow in various ways moving
forward.