To: mkmandel@email.arizona.

edu
From: imyers@email.arizona.edu
Date: March 27, 2020

This document includes an analysis of how my self-assessment of character compares with the
responses from the Outside Leadership Communication Evaluation. The purpose is to help
identify the misalignment of perceptions between my assessment and that of my respondents.
This information will help the reader recognize what I need to do to improve my professional
credibility. Specifically, the document will cover similarities, differences, and the necessary
improvements to align my internal and external narratives.

The majority of the five survey respondents identified me as an Analytic. This is concurrent
with my self-assessment, and I believe they were correct because the respondents I chose have
known me in professional and casual settings for most of my life. On the PeopleStyle graph,
the coordinates from my respondents of responsiveness and assertiveness were very close to
the coordinates of my self-assessment. One respondent hit my mark exactly at (-1, -5).

For the remaining two respondents, one classified me as an Amiable at (-3,1), and the other
believed I was a Driver at (1, -3). On the graph, both coordinates hang close to the Analytical
quadrant. I believe this is because I can venture out to a Driver or Amiable given the situation,
but I prefer to listen and create inferences on what others have to say. Rarely am I quick to
jump to conclusions, and this was shown by my respondent's low score on the y-axis of
responsiveness.

Six out of eight of the responses from the Cultural Map varied by a point or more from my
response. After review, I have realized that most of my respondent's scores are indeed more
accurate than my own. I scored myself high on Communicating while the respondent's
average was 0.8. I prefer to be concise in response which also ties into Scheduling. The only
category my respondents and I were concurrent on because I want objectives to be clearly
communicated with established deadlines. The Disagreeing element was the only element I
disagreed with my respondents. I am comfortable with confrontation.

I scored a 1 in Deciding while my respondents scored a 2.8. I realized that I do believe

hierarchal decision making is necessary; especially on matters I strongly believe in. My
respondents averaged a score of 3 in Persuading while I scored myself a 1. I truly do not
understand why I scored so low in my response as I completely agree with my respondents
that I would first establish tangible examples.

The common themes that my respondents used to describe my character were hard-working,
ethical, integrity, responsible, mature, and relationship-oriented. These responses were
strikingly similar to my self-assessment of my core values which I described as integrity, hard
work, and responsibility. Aside from these three, I see the ethicality and relationships that my
respondents described as equally important to the values I listed.

The responses of my respondents told me that being myself is successfully achieving how I
want to be perceived by others. I particularly enjoyed that I was portrayed as being mature for
my age because I often feel so immature and inexperienced in professional settings. The
improvements suggested to be confident, ask more questions, and to fully engage in the task
at hand. I needed to hear this because in reality I do have the experience and I can behave
professionally, but it can be difficult for me to be confident and express how I am truly
feeling.

A start to adjusting my professional brand will be to ask more questions. I suffer from a loss
of motivation if I am not completely engaged. Particularly, ask questions I am genuinely
interested in; not courtesy questions.

The only response that stuck out as surprising was that people may underestimate my abilities.
I thought this was interesting because people that underestimate me, particularly in a
professional setting, could have negative or positive implications on my career depending on
how hard I work. Given that hard work was one of my three core values, I do not want to be
underestimated and stand corrected.

The most important lesson that I have learned from this assignment was that although I may
be an Analytical, I have no reason to change. I feel I already had a good sense of my identity,
and after hearing the respondents speak positively of my character I am more confident in my
professional abilities moving forward. Most importantly, I need to use people who
underestimate me to my advantage.

This document covered similarities, differences, and the necessary improvements to align my
internal and external narratives. The reader should now have a better understanding of how
these narratives will come together. Thank you for your time, if you have any questions,
comments, or concerns please contact imyers@email.arizona.edu .