SELF REFLECTIVE NOTE

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

By Saiyam Ahuja

(1923657, 3FIBB)
Table of Contents
REFLECTION NOTE ........................................................................................................... 1

Self-Esteem ....................................................................................................................... 1

Locus of Control ............................................................................................................... 1

Introversion and Extroversion ........................................................................................... 1

Self-Efficacy ..................................................................................................................... 2

Self-Monitoring................................................................................................................. 2

Positive and Negative Effect.............................................................................................. 2

Machiavellianism .............................................................................................................. 3
REFLECTION NOTE
As said 7 different tests were taken so as to analyse oneself in different ways including self-
esteem, self-efficacy, locus of control, self-monitoring, negative or positive effect, introversion
or extroversion and Machiavellianism. The results are as follows,

Self-Esteem: The tool used to measure self esteem is The Rosenberg Self-Esteem scale. The
overall score scored was 22 out of 40 which is considered to be normal, which means not a
high level of self esteem is seen in the candidate, it was read in the reference of the test that a
very high self-esteem scores shows exaggeration of one’s success and good traits.

However seeing an average score it is interpreted that the candidate is not god in depicting the
good work to the people but however as the results are not low, he is always in need of basic
acknowledgements for his work.

Locus of Control: The test attempted to measure Locus of Control is based on J.B. Rotter
(1966) Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement,
Psychological Monographs, 80, (1, Whole No. 609). The result was 7/13 which depicts a
moderate need of control over the things performed. As per the choices mad the candidates
need the control on the things in which he is better and always take responsibilities for it no
matter what the problem might be. This shows leadership qualities however not a boss’s quality
of not only controlling but also forcing things.

Introversion and Extroversion: The tool used to know whether the candidate is an introvert
or an extrovert is by Adam Grant which is available on ideas.ted.com . The results obtained are
something in the middle of an introvert and an extrovert which specifies that the candidate is
an ambivert. So, ambivert is someone who is suitable with both leadership as well as supportive
roles. Few problems faced by ambiverts is that people don’t understand their perspective very
easily and people are not able to connect to them very easily.

Few benefits seen are that they can easily understand and connect to new and strange people
and the other party never tend to do so. Also the friends they make turn out to be true friend
which always try understanding them. Ambiverts are more inclined to listen to customers’
interests and less vulnerable to appearing too excited or overconfident, tendencies that can also

Page | 1
make them highly effective in leadership roles. And because ambiverts naturally engage in a
flexible pattern of talking and listening, they’re likely to express sufficient assertiveness and
enthusiasm needed to close a sale.

Self-Efficacy: The one’s belief of being able to overcome problems and succeed. The tool
used is SPARQtools by Stanford University, in which the results obtained was 31 i.e. average
of 3.875. Which means that the candidate is positive in nature for the success in life. He is
someone who will not be stopping seeing the hurdles in front of him. As per his options, he is
not someone who thinks he is best in the room but is someone who can do the task once he has
planned for it. When completing and achieving something he doesn’t compares it with someone
other but with what he planned for. He never leaves everything on luck or an external body but
believes in self hard work and dedication.

Self-Monitoring: The tool used to test Self-Monitoring is by M. Snyder which is available in

the textbook of the subject Organizational Behaviour. The results obtained was 7 out of 18. As
mentioned if the scores were more than 11 it would be understood that the candidate can easily
control and monitor what he depicts of himself.

However the result obtained turned out to be negative in that context. However my
interpretation is that it can be two reasons behind the low scores, that is the candidate never try
to depicts what he is not and always without giving thought to it says what he thinks and depicts
what he is. The other being that the candidate never understands and keeps a record f what he
says and thus is not able to control and monitor it in future. However on the basis of the answers
it seems that the former is the case with the candidate.

Positive and Negative Effect: The tool used o measure the negative and positive effects of a
situation on the candidate is PANAS-SF by the Ohio State University. The results seen was
that there were more positive effects rather than the negative effects.

This shows that the candidate tries to stay positive and motivated no matter what the situation
is, However there was a bit of negative effects also seen like Irritable and afraid. However these
traits are directly related to the specific situations which one might face rarely. Explaining the

Page | 2
traits the candidate might be in a lot of stress of additional work it would lead him to is irritable
mental state, where no matter how positive and lively one is nut still gets furious very easily.

Machiavellianism: The tool used to test Machiavellianism is MACH-IV by Richard Christie

and Florence L. Geis. As specified a higher score of Machiavellianism is seen which means
that the candidate likes to work in dark and never tries to share his future plan to others. Also
he believes in presence of politics in daily life, however tries not to jump into it and works
parallel to what goes in the circle. This shows that the candidate is clearly and opportunist and
sometimes as per the situation might turn into a cunning person and sometimes would by
normal i.e. what he is.

Page | 3