The Big Five factors and their constituent traits can be summarized as follows:

Openness (inventive / curious vs. consistent / cautious). Appreciation for art,

emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, curiosity, and variety of experience.
Conscientiousness (efficient / organized vs. easy-going / careless). A
tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement;
planned rather than spontaneous behavior.
Extraversion (outgoing / energetic vs. shy / reserved). Energy, positive
emotions, surgency, and the tendency to seek stimulation in the company of
others.
Agreeableness (friendly / compassionate vs. competitive / outspoken). A
tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and
antagonistic towards others.
Neuroticism (sensitive / nervous vs. secure / confident). A tendency to
experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, or
vulnerability.

The Big Five model is a comprehensive, empirical, data-driven research finding.

Identifying the traits and structure of human personality has been one of the most
fundamental goals in all of psychology. The five broad factors were discovered and
defined by several independent sets of researchers (Digman, 1990).[1] These
researchers began by studying known personality traits and then factor-analyzing
hundreds of measures of these traits (in self-report and questionnaire data, peer
ratings, and objective measures from experimental settings) in order to find the
underlying factors of personality.
The initial model was advanced by Ernest Tupes and Raymond Cristal[2], but failed to
reach an academic audience until the 1980s. In 1990, J.M. Digman advanced his five
factor model of personality, which Goldberg extended to the highest level of
organization (Goldberg, 1993).[3] These five over-arching domains have been found to
contain and subsume most known personality traits and are assumed to represent the
basic structure behind all personality traits. These five factors provide a rich
conceptual framework for integrating all the research findings and theory in
personality psychology. The Big Five traits are also referred to as the "Five Factor
Model" or FFM (Costa & McCrae, 1992),[4] and as the Global Factors of personality
(Russell & Karol, 1994).[5]
At least four sets of researchers have worked independently for decades on this
problem and have identified generally the same Big Five factors: Tupes & Cristal
were first, followed by Goldberg at the Oregon Research Institute,[6][7][8][9][10] Cattell at
the University of Illinois,[11][12][13][14] and Costa and McCrae at the National Institutes of
Health.[15][16][17][18] These four sets of researchers used somewhat different methods in
finding the five traits, and thus each set of five factors has somewhat different names
and definitions. However, all have been found to be highly inter-correlated and factoranalytically aligned.[19][20][21][22][23]
Because the Big Five traits are broad and comprehensive, they are not nearly as
powerful in predicting and explaining actual behavior as are the more numerous
lower-level traits. Many studies have confirmed that in predicting actual behavior the

more numerous facet or primary level traits are far more effective (e.g. Mershon &
Gorsuch, 1988[24]; Paunonon & Ashton, 2001[25])
When scored for individual feedback, these traits are frequently presented as
percentile scores. For example, a Conscientiousness rating in the 80th percentile
indicates a relatively strong sense of responsibility and orderliness, whereas an
Extraversion rating in the 5th percentile indicates an exceptional need for solitude and
quiet. Although these trait clusters are statistical aggregates, exceptions may exist on
individual personality profiles. On average, people who register high in Openness are
intellectually curious, open to emotion, interested in art, and willing to try new things.
A particular individual, however, may have a high overall Openness score and be
interested in learning and exploring new cultures but have no great interest in art or
poetry.
The most frequently used measures of the Big Five comprise either items that are selfdescriptive sentences[26] or, in the case of lexical measures, items that are single
adjectives.[27] Due to the length of sentence-based and some lexical measures, short
forms have been developed and validated for use in applied research settings where
questionnaire space and respondent time are limited, such as the 40-item balanced
International English Big-Five Mini-Markers[28] or a very brief (10 item) measure of
the Big Five domains.[29]

[edit] Openness to experience

Main article: Openness to experience
Openness is a general appreciation for art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas,
imagination, curiosity, and variety of experience. The trait distinguishes imaginative
people from down-to-earth, conventional people. People who are open to experience
are intellectually curious, appreciative of art, and sensitive to beauty. They tend to be,
compared to closed people, more creative and more aware of their feelings. They are
more likely to hold unconventional beliefs.
People with low scores on openness tend to have more conventional, traditional
interests. They prefer the plain, straightforward, and obvious over the complex,
ambiguous, and subtle. They may regard the arts and sciences with suspicion or even
view these endeavors as uninteresting.
[edit] Sample openness items

I have a rich vocabulary.

I have a vivid imagination.
I have excellent ideas.
I spend time reflecting on things.
I use difficult words.
I am not interested in abstractions. (reversed)
I do not have a good imagination. (reversed)
I have difficulty understanding abstract ideas. (reversed)[30]

[edit] Conscientiousness
Main article: Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness is a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for
achievement. The trait shows a preference for planned rather than spontaneous
behavior. It influences the way in which we control, regulate, and direct our impulses.
Conscientiousness includes the factor known as Need for Achievement (NAch).
[edit] Sample conscientiousness items

I am always prepared.
I am exacting in my work.
I follow a schedule.
I get chores done right away.
I like order.
I pay attention to details.
I leave my belongings around. (reversed)
I make a mess of things. (reversed)
I often forget to put things back in their proper place. (reversed)
I shirk my duties. (reversed)[30]

[edit] Extraversion
Main article: Extraversion and introversion
Extraversion is characterized by positive emotions, surgency, and the tendency to
seek out stimulation and the company of others. The trait is marked by pronounced
engagement with the external world. Extraverts enjoy being with people, and are often
perceived as full of energy. They tend to be enthusiastic, action-oriented individuals
who are likely to say "Yes!" or "Let's go!" to opportunities for excitement. In groups
they like to talk, assert themselves, and draw attention to themselves.
Introverts lack the social exuberance and activity levels of extraverts. They tend to
seem quiet, low-key, deliberate, and less involved in the social world. Their lack of
social involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression. Introverts
simply need less stimulation than extraverts and more time alone. They may be very
active and energetic, simply not socially.
[edit] Sample extraversion items

I am the life of the party.

I don't mind being the center of attention.
I feel comfortable around people.
I start conversations.
I talk to a lot of different people at parties.
I am quiet around strangers. (reversed)
I don't like to draw attention to myself. (reversed)
I don't talk a lot. (reversed)

I have little to say. (reversed)[30]

[edit] Agreeableness
Main article: Agreeableness
Agreeableness is a tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than
suspicious and antagonistic towards others. The trait reflects individual differences in
general concern for social harmony. Agreeable individuals value getting along with
others. They are generally considerate, friendly, generous, helpful, and willing to
compromise their interests with others. Agreeable people also have an optimistic view
of human nature. They believe people are basically honest, decent, and trustworthy.
Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. They are
generally unconcerned with others well-being, and are less likely to extend
themselves for other people. Sometimes their skepticism about others motives causes
them to be suspicious, unfriendly, and uncooperative.
[edit] Sample agreeableness items

I am interested in people.
I feel others' feelings.
I have a soft heart.
I make people feel at ease.
I sympathize with others feelings.
I take time out for others.
I am not interested in other peoples problems. (reversed)
I am not really interested in others. (reversed)
I feel little concern for others. (reversed)
I insult people. (reversed)[30]
I like being isolated. (reversed)

[edit] Neuroticism
Main article: Neuroticism
Neuroticism is the tendency to experience negative emotions, such as anger, anxiety,
or depression. It is sometimes called emotional instability. Those who score high in
neuroticism are emotionally reactive and vulnerable to stress. They are more likely to
interpret ordinary situations as threatening, and minor frustrations as hopelessly
difficult. Their negative emotional reactions tend to persist for unusually long periods
of time, which means they are often in a bad mood. These problems in emotional
regulation can diminish the ability of a person scoring high on neuroticism to think
clearly, make decisions, and cope effectively with stress.
At the other end of the scale, individuals who score low in neuroticism are less easily
upset and are less emotionally reactive. They tend to be calm, emotionally stable, and
free from persistent negative feelings. Freedom from negative feelings does not mean
that low scorers experience a lot of positive feelings.

[edit] Sample neuroticism items

I am easily disturbed.
I change my mood a lot.
I get irritated easily.
I get stressed out easily.
I get upset easily.
I have frequent mood swings.
I often feel blue.
I worry about things.
I am relaxed most of the time. (reversed)
I seldom feel blue. (reversed

E. Major Personality Attributes Influencing OB

1. Locus of control

A persons perception of the source of his/her fate is termed locus of control.

Internals: People who believe that they are masters of their own fate.

Externals: People who believe they are pawns of fate.

Individuals who rate high in externality are less satisfied with their jobs, have higher absenteeism rates, are
more alienated from the work setting, and are less involved on their jobs than are internals.

Internals, facing the same situation, attribute organizational outcomes to their own actions. Internals believe
that health is substantially under their own control through proper habits; their incidences of sickness and,
hence, of absenteeism, are lower.

2. There is not a clear relationship between locus of control and turnover because there are opposing forces at
work.
3. Internals generally perform better on their jobs, but one should consider differences in jobs.

Internals search more actively for information before making a decision, are more motivated to achieve, and
make a greater attempt to control their environment, therefore, internals do well on sophisticated tasks.

Internals are more suited to jobs that require initiative and independence of action.

Externals are more compliant and willing to follow directions, and do well on jobs that are well structured and
routine and in which success depends heavily on complying with the direction of others.

4. Machiavellianism

Named after Niccolo Machiavelli, who wrote in the sixteenth century on how to gain and use power.

An individual high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes that ends can
justify means.

High Machs manipulate more, win more, are persuaded less, and persuade others more.

High Mach outcomes are moderated by situational factors and flourish when they interact face to face with
others, rather than indirectly, and when the situation has a minimum number of rules and regulations, thus
allowing latitude for improvisation.

High Machs make good employees in jobs that require bargaining skills or that offer substantial rewards for
winning.

5. Self-esteem

Self-esteemthe degree to which people like or dislike themselves.

(SE) is directly related to expectations for success.

Individuals with high self-esteem will take more risks in job selection and are more likely to choose
unconventional jobs than people with low self-esteem.

E. Major Personality Attributes Influencing OB (cont.)

The most generalizable finding is that low SEs are more susceptible to external influence than are high SEs.
Low SEs are dependent on the receipt of positive evaluations from others.

In managerial positions, low SEs will tend to be concerned with pleasing others.

High SEs are more satisfied with their jobs than are low SEs.

6. Self-monitoring

It refers to an individuals ability to adjust his or her behavior to external, situational factors.

Individuals high in self-monitoring show considerable adaptability. They are highly sensitive to external cues,
can behave differently in different situations, and are capable of presenting striking contradictions between their
public persona and their private self.

Low self-monitors cannot disguise themselves in that way. They tend to display their true dispositions and
attitudes in every situation resulting in a high behavioral consistency between who they are and what they do.

The research on self-monitoring is in its infancy, so predictions must be guarded. Preliminary evidence
suggests:

a. High self-monitors tend to pay closer attention to the behavior of others.

b. High self-monitoring managers tend to be more mobile in their careers and receive more promotions.
c. High self-monitor is capable of putting on different faces for different audiences.
7. Risk taking

The propensity to assume or avoid risk has been shown to have an impact on how long it takes managers to
make a decision and how much information they require before making their choice.

High risk-taking managers made more rapid decisions and used less information in making their choices.

While managers in organizations are generally risk-aversive, there are still individual differences on this
dimension. As a result, it makes sense to recognize these differences and even to consider aligning risk-taking
propensity with specific job demands.

8. Type A

A Type A personality is aggressively involved in a chronic, incessant struggle to achieve more and more in less
and less time, and, if required to do so, against the opposing efforts of other things or other persons.

They are always moving, walking, and eating rapidly, are impatient with the rate at which most events take
place, are doing do two or more things at once and cannot cope with leisure time. They are obsessed with
numbers, measuring their success in terms of how many or how much of everything they acquire.

F. Major Personality Attributes Influencing OB (cont.)

9. Type B

Type Bs never suffer from a sense of time urgency with its accompanying impatience and feel no need to display
or discuss either their achievements or accomplishments unless such exposure is demanded by the situation.

Play for fun and relaxation, rather than to exhibit their superiority at any cost and can relax without guilt.

10. Type As operate under moderate to high levels of stress.

They subject themselves to continuous time pressure, are fast workers, quantity over quality, work long hours,
and are also rarely creative.

Their behavior is easier to predict than that of Type Bs.

11. Are Type As or Type Bs more successful?

Type Bs are the ones who appear to make it to the top.

Great salespersons are usually Type As; senior executives are usually Type Bs.

Understanding the Theory: Hollands Codes

In the 1970s John Holland developed a popular theory of interest development based
around these six personality types:
1. Realistic (R):
These are people who like well-ordered activities, or enjoy working with objects,
tools, and machines.
Realistic people:

See themselves as mechanically or athletically talented, but may not be good

with people.
Value concrete and tangible things like - money, power, and status.
Avoid "social" activities, those that need interaction with other people.

Common traits:

Hard-headed, inflexible, persistent, materialistic, practical, and genuine.

2. Investigative (I):
Investigative people like activities that involve creative investigation of the world or
nature.
Investigative people:

See themselves as highly intelligent, but often lack leadership skills.

Value scientific endeavors.
Avoid activities that seem mundane, commercial or "enterprising".

Common traits:

Analytical, curious, pessimistic, intellectual, precise, and reserved.

3. Artistic (A):
Artistic people like unstructured activities, and enjoy using materials to create art.
Artistic people:

See themselves as talented artists.

Value aesthetics.
Avoid "conventional" occupations or situations.

Common traits:

Idealistic, complicated , introspective, sensitive, impractical and

nonconformist.

4. Social (S):
Social people enjoy informing, training, developing, curing and enlightening others.
Social people:

Perceive themselves as helpful, understanding and able to teach others.

Value social activities.
Avoid activities demanded by "realistic" occupations and situations.

Common traits:

Generous, patient, emphatic, tactful, persuasive, and cooperative.

5. Enterprising (E):
These people enjoy reaching organizational goals or achieving economic gain.
Enterprising people:

See themselves as aggressive, popular, great leaders and speakers, but may
lack scientific ability.
Value political and economic achievement.
Avoid activities demanded by "investigative" occupations and situations.

Common traits:

Extroverted, adventurous, optimistic, ambitious, sociable, and exhibitionistic.

6. Conventional (C):
Conventional people enjoy manipulating data, record keeping, filing, reproducing
materials, and organizing written or numerical data.
Conventional people

See themselves as having clerical and numerical ability.

Value business and economic achievement.
Avoid unstructured or "artistic" activities.

Common traits:

Efficient, practical, conscientious, inflexible, defensive, and methodical.

The Model
Holland then arranged these six personality types into a hexagon (see figure 1, below)
organized according to people's preference for working with different stimuli at work:
people, data, things, and ideas. Holland's theory is that people with different
personality types prefer working with different work stimuli, and that the distance
between work personalities indicates the degree of difference in interests between
them. For example Artistic people are least like Conventional people and most like
Social and Investigative people.

Holland's conclusion was that for any personality type, the career most aligned with
that type is most likely to be enjoyable and satisfying. For example, a Realistic person
would be best suited for a Technical job and least suited for Social job. Jobs with
Conventional or Operational characteristics would be the next best choices.
The way that this works in practice is that people use a personality test to identify
their three top personality types. This gives their Holland's code (for example, ESA).

This is then matched against the Holland's codes of people typically found within
particular careers.

Person Perception
Our perceptions of people differ from the perceptions of inanimate
objects like tables, chairs, books, pencil, etc. mainly because we are
prone to make inferences regarding the intentions of people and thus
form judgment about them. The perceptions and judgments regarding
a persons actions are often significantly influenced by the assumptions
we make about the persons internal state. Attribution theory refers
to the ways in which we judge people differently, depending on what
meaning we attribute to a given behaviour. Whenever we observe the
behaviour of an individual, we attempt to determine whether it was
internally or externally caused. Internally caused behaviours are those
that are believed to be under the personal control of the individual or
have been done deliberately by him. Externally caused behaviour is
seen as resulting from outside causes, that is the person is seen as
having been compelled to behave in a particular way by the force of
the situation, and not because of his own choice. When after repeated
requests your friend failed to turn up at the special old school boys
meet you might ascribe his absence as a deliberate move on his part,
and you will feel hurt since it appeared that he is quite unconcerned
and careless about your feeling. But if someone now points out about
his

recent increased responsibilities in the business after his fathers

untimely death and acute time shortage, you tend to condone him as
you are now ascribing his absence to the external factors.
The determination of internally or externally caused behaviour depends
chiefly on the following three factors :
Distinctiveness which refers to whether an individual displays
different behaviour at different situations. If the behaviour (say
being late in the class on a particular day) is unusual, we tend to
give the behaviour an external attribution; and if it usual, the
reverse.
Consensus refers to the uniformity of the behaviour shown by all
the concerned people. If every one reports late on a particular
morning, it is easily assumed that there must be a severe traffic
disruption in the city and thus the behaviour is externally attributed.
But if the consensus is low, it is internally attributed.
Consistency is the reverse of distinctiveness. Thus in judging the
behaviour of an individual, the person looks at his past record. If the
present behaviour is consistently found to occur in the past as well
(that is being late at least three times a week), it is attributed as
internally caused. In other words, the more consistent the
behaviour, the more the observer is inclined to attribute it to
external causes.

ERRORS IN ATTRIBUTION THEORY

SELF-SERVING BIAS
A self-serving bias occurs when people attribute their successes to internal or
personal factors but attribute their failures to situational factors beyond their control.
The self-serving bias can be seen in the common human tendency to take credit for
success but to deny responsibility for failure.[1] It may also manifest itself as a
tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way that is beneficial to
their interests. Self-serving bias may be associated with the better-than-average effect,
in which the individual is biased to believe that he or she typically performs better
than the average person in areas important to their self-esteem. This effect, also called
"illusory superiority" has been found when people rate their own driving skill, social
sensitivity, leadership ability and many other attributes.[2][3][4]

[edit] Use and purpose

The term "self-serving bias" is most often used to describe a pattern of biased causal
inference, in which praise or blame depend on whether success or failure was
achieved. For example, a student who gets a good grade on an exam might say, "I got
an A because I am intelligent and I studied hard!" whereas a student who does poorly
on an exam might say, "The teacher gave me an F because he does not like me!"
When someone strategically strives to facilitate external causes for their poor
performance (so that they will subsequently have a means to avoid blaming
themselves for failure), it may be labeled self-handicapping.[5]

[edit] Examples
Another example of self-serving bias can be found in the workplace. Victims of
serious occupational accidents tend to attribute their accidents to external factors,
whereas their coworkers and management tend to attribute the accidents to the
victims' own actions.[6]

FUNDAMENTAL

ATTRIBUTION BIAS

In psychology, an attributional bias is a cognitive bias that affects the way we

determine who or what was responsible for an event or action (attribution).
Attributional biases typically take the form of actor/observer differences: people
involved in an action (actors) view things differently from people not involved
(observers). These discrepancies are often caused by asymmetries in availability
(frequently called "salience" in this context). For example, the behavior of an actor is
easier to remember (and therefore more available for later consideration) than the
setting in which he found himself; and a person's own inner turmoil is more available
to himself than it is to someone else. As a result, our judgments of attribution are often
distorted along those lines.
In some experiments, for example, subjects were shown only one side of a
conversation or were able to see the face of only one of the conversational
participants. Whomever the subjects had a better view of were judged by them as
being more important and more influential, and as having had a greater role in the
conversation.
Perhaps the best known attributional bias is the fundamental attribution error, which
describes the tendency to over-value dispositional or personality-based explanations
for the observed behaviors of others while under-valuing situational explanations for
those behaviors.[1]
, the fundamental attribution error (also known as correspondence bias or
attribution effect) describes the tendency to over-value dispositional or personalitybased explanations for the observed behaviors of others while under-valuing
situational explanations for those behaviors. The fundamental attribution error is most
visible when people explain the behavior of others. It does not explain interpretations
of one's own behaviorwhere situational factors are often taken into consideration.
This discrepancy is called the actor-observer bias.
The term was coined by Lee Ross[1] some years after a now-classic experiment by
Edward E. Jones and Victor Harris (1967).[2] Ross argued in a popular paper that the
fundamental attribution error forms the conceptual bedrock for the field of social
psychology.
The fundamental attribution error is commonly used interchangeably with
"correspondence bias" (sometimes called "correspondence inference", although this

term refers to a natural judgment that does not necessarily constitute a bias, whereas
bias arises when the inference drawn is incorrect, e.g., dispositional inference when
the actual cause is situational).

Factors influencing hereditary or

environment on personality
1. An early argument centered on whether or not personality was the result of heredity or of environment.

Personality appears to be a result of both influences.

Today, we recognize a third factorthe situation.

2. Heredity

Heredity refers to those factors that were determined at conception.

The heredity approach argues that the ultimate explanation of an individuals personality is the molecular
structure of the genes, located in the chromosomes.

Three different streams of research lend some credibility to the heredity argument:
a. The genetic underpinnings of human behavior and temperament among young children. Evidence
demonstrates that traits such as shyness, fear, and distress are most likely caused by inherited genetic
characteristics.
b. The study of twins who were separated at birth. Genetics accounts for about 50 percent of the variation in
personality differences and over 30 percent of occupational and leisure interest variation.
c. The consistency in job satisfaction over time and across situations. Individual job satisfaction is remarkably
stable over time. This is indicates that satisfaction is determined by something inherent in the person.

Personality characteristics are not completely dictated by heredity. If they were, they would be fixed at birth and
no amount of experience could alter them.

3. Environment

Factors that exert pressures on our personality formation:

a.
b.
c.
d.

The culture in which we are raised

Early conditioning
Norms among our family
Friends and social groups

The environment we are exposed to plays a substantial role in shaping our personalities.

Culture establishes the norms, attitudes, and values passed from one generation to the next and creates
consistencies over time.

The arguments for heredity or environment as the primary determinant of personality are both important.

Heredity sets the parameters or outer limits, but an individuals full potential will be determined by how well he
or she adjusts to the demands and requirements of the environment.

4. Situation

Influences the effects of heredity and environment on personality

The different demands of different situations call forth different aspects of ones personality.

There is no classification scheme that tells the impact of various types of situations.

Situations seem to differ substantially in the constraints they impose on behavior.

ERRORS IN PERCEPTION
We use a number of shortcuts when we judge others. An understanding of these
shortcuts can be helpful toward recognizing when they can result in significant
distortions.

1. Selective Perception

Any characteristic that makes a person, object, or event stand out will increase
the probability that it will be perceived.

It is impossible for us to assimilate everything we seeonly certain stimuli can

be taken in.

A classic example:
a.

Dearborn and Simon performed a perceptual study in which 23 business

executives read a comprehensive case describing the organization and
activities of a steel company.

b.

The results along with other results of the study, led the researchers to
conclude that the participants perceived aspects of a situation that were
specifically related to the activities and goals of the unit to which they
were attached.

c.

A groups perception of organizational activities is selectively altered to

align with the vested interests they represent.

d.

Selectivity works as a shortcut in judging other people by allowing us to

speed-read others, but not without the risk of drawing an inaccurate
picture. Because we see what we want to see, we can draw unwarranted
conclusions from an ambiguous situation.

3. Halo Effect
a. The halo effect occurs when we draw a general impression on the basis
of a single characteristic:
a. This phenomenon frequently occurs when students appraise their
classroom instructor.
b. Students may give prominence to a single trait such as enthusiasm and
allow their entire evaluation to be tainted by how they judge the
instructor on that one trait.

The reality of the halo effect was confirmed in a classic study.

a) Subjects were given a list of traits such as intelligent, skillful, practical,

industrious, determined, and warm, and were asked to evaluate the person to
whom those traits applied. When the word warm was substituted with
cold the subjects changed their evaluation of the person.
b) The experiment showed that subjects were allowing a single trait to influence
their overall impression of the person being judged.
c) Research suggests that it is likely to be most extreme when the traits to be
perceived are ambiguous in behavioral terms, when the traits have moral
overtones, and when the perceiver is judging traits with which he or she has
had limited experience.

4. Contrast Effects

We do not evaluate a person in isolation. Our reaction to one person is

influenced by other persons we have recently encountered.

For example, an interview situation in which one sees a pool of job applicants
can distort perception. Distortions in any given candidates evaluation can
occur as a result of his or her place in the interview schedule.

5. Projection

This tendency to attribute ones own characteristics to other peoplewhich is

called projectioncan distort perceptions made about others.

When managers engage in projection, they compromise their ability to

respond to individual differences. They tend to see people as more
homogeneous than they really are.

6. Stereotyping

Stereotypingjudging someone on the basis of our perception of the group to

which he or she belongs

Generalization is not without advantages. It ius a means of simplifying a

complex world, and it permits us to maintain consistency. The problem, of
course, is when we inaccurately stereotype.

In organizations, we frequently hear comments that represent stereotypes

based on gender, age, race, ethnicity, and even weight.

From a perceptual standpoint, if people expect to see these stereotypes, that is

what they will perceive, whether or not they are accurate.

THURSTON THEORY OF INTELLIGENCE

While intelligence is one of the most talked about subjects within psychology, there is
no standard definition of what exactly constitutes 'intelligence.' Some researchers
have suggested that intelligence is a single, general ability, while other believe that
intelligence encompasses a range of aptitudes, skills and talents.
The following are some of the major theories of intelligence that have emerged during
the last 100 years.

Charles Spearman - General Intelligence:

British psychologist Charles Spearman (1863-1945) described a concept he referred to
as general intelligence, or the g factor. After using a technique known as factor
analysis to to examine a number of mental aptitude tests, Spearman concluded that
scores on these tests were remarkably similar. People who performed well on one
cognitive test tended to perform well on other tests, while those who scored badly on
one test tended to score badly on other. He concluded that intelligence is general
cognitive ability that could be measured and numerically expressed (Spearman, 1904).

Louis L. Thurstone - Primary Mental Abilities:

Psychologist Louis L. Thurstone (1887-1955) offered a differing theory of
intelligence. Instead of viewing intelligence as a single, general ability, Thurstone's
theory focused on seven different "primary mental abilities" (Thurstone, 1938). The
abilities that he described were:

Verbal comprehension
Reasoning
Perceptual speed
Numerical ability
Word fluency
Associative memory
Spatial visualization

Howard Gardner - Multiple Intelligences:

One of the more recent ideas to emerge is Howard Gardner's theory of multiple
intelligences. Instead of focusing on the analysis of test scores, Gardner proposed that
numerical expressions of human intelligence are not a full and accurate depiction of
people's abilities. His theory describes eight distinct intelligences that are based on
skills and abilities that are valued within different cultures.
The eight intelligences Gardner described are:

Visual-spatial Intelligence
Verbal-linguistic Intelligence
Bodily-kinesthetic Intelligence
Logical-mathematical Intelligence

Interpersonal Intelligence
Musical Intelligence
Intra personal Intelligence
Naturalistic Intelligence

Robert Sternberg - Triarchic Theory of Intelligence:

Psychologist Robert Sternberg defined intelligence as "mental activity directed toward
purposive adaptation to, selection and shaping of, real-world environments relevant to
ones life" (Sternberg, 1985, p. 45). While he agreed with Gardner that intelligence is
much broader than a single, general ability, he instead suggested some of Gardner's
intelligences are better viewed as individual talents. Sternberg proposed what he
refers to as 'successful intelligence,' which is comprised of three different factors:

Analytical intelligence: This component refers to problem-solving abilities.

Creative intelligence: This aspect of intelligence involves the ability to deal
with new situations using past experiences and current skills.
Practical intelligence: This element refers to the ability to adapt to a changing
environment.

While there has been considerable debate over the exact nature of intelligence, no
definitive conceptualization has emerged. Today, psychologists often account for the
many different theoretical viewpoints when discussing intelligence and acknowledge
that this debate is ongoing.
Emotional intelligence

Daniel Goleman and several other researchers have developed the concept of
emotional intelligence and claim it is at least as "important" as traditionally proposed
components of intelligence. These theories grew from observations of human
development and of brain injury victims who demonstrate an acute loss of a particular
cognitive function e.g. the ability to think numerically, or the ability to understand
written language without showing any loss in other cognitive areas.
Many researchers[who?] believe that emotional intelligence is a composite of general
intelligence and agreeableness, one of the five dimensions of personality in the fivefactor model of personality. In this model, an emotionally intelligent person would
score higher than average in both dimensions, and vice versa. Moreover, an
emotionally intelligent person cannot score high on only one of the two traits.[citation
needed]
For example, an individual with low general mental ability and high
agreeableness would be impaired in his ability to produce emotionally intelligent
behavior despite his intentions, while an individual with high general mental ability
and low agreeableness would be perfectly capable of being emotionally intelligent,
but not inclined to do so.

Linguistic Intelligence
Linguistic Intelligence is basically (as the name suggests) the intelligence of language
and communication. This includes the ability to speak, articulate, and express, and
convey one's thoughts and feelings to the outside would.
Language, in its most basic principle, is a set of tools and materials used to build up
and express thoughts and feelings of one to another. As in building a structure, there is
a certain method, a way of arranging the steps of what you should do first, and this is
commonly known as grammar. But although the same principles are used for building
any sort of structure, the end products are usually very vastly varied, ranging from the
boring, squarish shape, to great feats of architecture like the Sydney Opera house.
Likewise, those who are gifted in linguistic intelligence are able to communicate their
viewpoints in a clear, beautiful, and refined manner. Take poets for example. Poets
have already reached such a high state of linguistic ability that they are able to convert
the expression of language as an art, attempting to use language to describe an
abstract idea and concept in a few words.

Spatial Intelligence
Spatial Intelligence is the ability to visualize things. It is probably the most commonly
known and recognized intelligence by the common man, because of the fact that this
is the most commonly recognizable intelligence found in IQ tests. One would
immediately bring to mind the flat specifically-shaped cardboards to be folded into
geometric 3-D figures, a common one would be the test to see which would be able to
be folded into a 6-sided die.
Spatial intelligence can be used in all aspects of life. To represent a problem, some
mathematicians would rather express it in a mathematical model like a graph, and to
illustrate social structures, diagrams are commonly used, 2 common manifestations of
spatial intelligence. An individual who is gifted in this intelligence would generally be
able to learn concepts much faster, as they would be able to represent and store a
complicated concept or theory in a simple diagram in their memory. They would love
the practical side of learning because they would find it easier to understand and
commit to memory. For example, they would benefit more from a practical science
class than a theoretical science class.

Theory of Multiple Intelligences -gardners

Dr. Howard Gardner a professor of education and coordinator of project Zero at
Harvard University, challenged the traditional notion that intelligence is a single
capacity possessed by every individual to a greater or lesser extent. Armed with
research evidence, Gardner presents the idea of existence of a number of intelligences

that result in a unique cognitive profile for each individual. This extraordinary
conception of individual competence is changing the face of education today. Many
educators and researchers have explored the practical implications of Multiple
Intelligence theory- the powerful notion that there are separate human capacities.
According to this theory, human cognitive competence is better described in terms
of a set of abilities, talents or mental skills called intelligences. All normal individuals
possess each of these skills to some extent; individuals differ in the degree of skill and
in the nature of their combination. Dr Gardner is of the view that such a theory has
important educational implications including ones for curriculum development.
While empirical evidence backs Multiple Intelligence Theory, it has not been
targeted to severe experimental tests within psychology. But the application of the
theory in various fields of education is currently being examined. Gardner and his
team opine that their leads will have to be revised repeatedly in light of actual
classroom experience. Yet they believe there are positive reasons for considering the
theory of Multiple Intelligence and its implications for education. To start with it is
clear that many talents if not intelligences are neglected these days. Secondly,
individuals of such talents are victims of single minded or single focused approach to
the mind. Lastly, this world is troubled with many problems. Any opportunity to solve
them can be made by making the best use of intelligences we possess. Therefore,
recognizing the plurality of intelligences and the manifold ways in which human
individual may exhibit them is an important step.
This opinion of the theory prompted the author to take up this concept and apply it
to the evaluation of resources at the primary level. Since school library plays a crucial
role in a childs reading development, the librarian becomes the promoter who guides

the children as well as parents and collaborates with the teachers to take up various
activities contained in each and every resource by stimulating these intelligences.
To become familiar with this theory, a brief introduction of each intelligence is
given below.

Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence

The gift of language is universal and its development in children is constant across
cultures. A special area of the brain is responsible for the production of grammatical
sentences. Some characteristics of this intelligence can be identified by an
individuals choice to process information through language. Sensitiveness to
meaning, order, sound of words is noticed. They like to explain, persuade and also
enjoy listening to or reading stories etc. they also have good memory recall for names
and dates.

Logico-Mathematical Intelligence

Along with the skill of language, logical-mathematical reasoning provides the main
foundation for IQ tests. Certain areas of the brain are more prominent in mathematical
calculation than others. A solution to a problem can be constructed before it is
articulated. Analyzing, grouping, categorizing, recognizing relationships, creating
order out of chaos, reasoning, predicting, etc. are the main characteristics of this
intelligence.

Musical Intelligence

Music is a universal faculty. Studies of infant development suggest that there is a raw
computational ability in early childhood. Certain parts of the brain play important
roles in perception and production of music. These areas are characteristically located

in the right hemisphere. Features of this intelligence indicate that learning takes place
through sound, rhythm and musical metaphor. The individuals have well developed
auditory sense and are able to distinguish pitch, tone, rhythmic patterns.

Visual/Spatial Intelligence

Spatial problem solving is bought to bear in visualizing an object, seen from a

different angle and in playing chess. The visual arts also employ this intelligence in
the use of space. Evidence from the brain research is clear and persuasive. Just as the
left hemisphere has over the course of evaluation, been selected as the site of
linguistic processing in right handed persons, the right hemisphere proves to be the
site most crucial for spatial processing. Distinct characteristics of this intelligence are
a sense of direction, thinking and planning in three dimensions. Individuals can create
complex mental images and are able to see physical world accurately and translate
into new forms. They are able to see things in relationship to others.

Body/Kinesthetic Intelligence

Control of bodily movement is localized in the motor cortex, with each hemisphere
dominant or controlling bodily movements in the contra-lateral side. The evolution of

specialized body movements is of obvious advantage to the species and in human this
adaptation is extended through the use of tools. Body movement undergoes a clearly
defined developmental schedule in children. The ability to use ones body to express
an emotion, to play a game or to create a new product is an evidence of the cognitive
features of body usage. Specific characteristics of this intelligence develops fine and
gross motor skills experiences strong body-mind connection, expands awareness
through body, etc.

Interpersonal Intelligence

Interpersonal intelligence builds on a core capacity to notice distinction among others.

In particular contrast in their moods and temperaments, motivations and intentions.
This intelligence also permits a skilled adult to read the intentions and desires of
others even when these have been hidden. In this intelligence, processing of
information is done through relatedness to others. An ability to notice peoples
moods, temperaments, ability to understand intentions, behaviour and perspective,
ability to respond to verbal and non verbal facial clues and to negotiate and handle
conflict resolutions is noticed. Individuals work well with diverse group of people and
have good communication skills.

Intrapersonal Intelligence

It is the knowledge of the internal aspects of a person : access to ones own feeling,
life, ones range of emotions, the capacity to effect discriminations among these
emotions and eventually to level them and to draw upon them as a means of

understanding and guiding ones own behaviour. A person with good intrapersonal
intelligence has a viable and effective model of himself or herself. Interpersonal
intelligence allows one to understand and work with others, intrapersonal intelligence
allows one to understand and work with one self. Main characteristics is that, the
individuals have very strong senses of themselves, their wants and needs. They are
self reflective and in touch with themselves, excellent self planners & good at goal
setting. They have good understanding of strengths and weaknesses and enjoy self
discovery.

Naturalistic Intelligence
Finding Patters and Relationships to Nature
Naturalistic is the most recent addition to Gardners theory 5 and has been met with
more resistance than his original seven intelligences. According to Gardner,
individuals who are high in this type of intelligence are more in tune with nature and
are often interesting in nurturing, exploring the environment and learning about other
species. These individuals are said to be highly aware of even subtle changes to their
environments.

Interested in subjects such as botany, biology and zoology

Good at categorizing and cataloguing information easily
May enjoy camping, gardening, hiking and exploring the outdoors
Doesnt enjoy learning unfamiliar topics that have no connection to nature

The Theory of Primary Mental Abilities

Thurstone (1938) proposed a theory of primary mental abilities. Although this theory
is not widely used today, the theory forms the basis of many contemporary theories,
including two contemporary theories discussed later, those of Gardner (1983) and
Carroll (1993). It is also the basis for many contemporary group tests of intelligence.
Thurstone (1938) analyzed the data from 56 different tests of mental abilities and
concluded that to the extent that there is a general factor of intelligence, it is
unimportant and possibly epiphenomenal. From this point of view there are seven
primary mental abilities:
Verbal comprehension. This factor involves a persons ability to understand verbal
material. It is measured by tests such as vocabulary and reading comprehension.

 Verbal fluency. This ability is involved in rapidly producing words, sentences, and
other verbal material. It is measured by tests such as one that requires the examinee to
produce as many words as possible beginning with a particular letter in a short
amount of time.
Number. This ability is involved in rapid arithmetic computation and in solving
simple arithmetic word problems.
Perceptual speed. This ability is involved in proofreading and in rapid recognition
of letters and numbers. It is measured by tests such as those requiring the crossing out
of As in a long string of letters or in tests requiring recognition of which of several
pictures at the right is identical to the picture at the left.

Associative memory may refer to:

A type of memory closely associated with neural networks

o Bidirectional Associative Memory
o Autoassociative memory
o Hopfield net

Inductive reasoning. This ability requires generalizationreasoning from the

specific to the general. It is measured by tests, such as letter series, number series, and
word classifications, in which the examinee must indicate which of several words
does not belong with the others.
Spatial visualization. This ability is involved in visualizing shapes, rotations of
objects, and how pieces of a puzzle fit together. An example of a test would be the
presentation of a geometric form followed by several other geometric forms. Each of
the forms that follows the first is either the same rotated by some rigid transformation
or the mirror image of the first form in rotation. The examinee has to indicate which
of the forms at the right is a rotated version of the form at the left, rather than a mirror
image.
Today, Thurstones theory is not used as often in its original form, but it has served as
a basis for many subsequent theories of intelligence, including hierarchical theories
and modern theories such as Gardners (1983). Thus, to the extent that a theory is
judged by its heuristic value, Thurstones has been one of the most important in the
field.
Thurstone, theory of primary mental abilities, intelligence, seven primary mental
abilities

Interpersonal Skills
Interpersonal Skills are the skills we use to interact or deal with others. Theyre to do
with building confidence and relationships. They play a huge part in the success of
our business and private lives.
Theyre skills we all possess. Weve been learning them all of our lives. For instance,
we learn how other people behave in certain situations, how we behave in those
situations ourselves, how people around us react to what we do and say, how the
things we do and say make us and other people feel.
People with honed interpersonal skills have learnt to identify the best ways of
interacting with others in any given situation.

1]Communication Skills
The fact, is that apart from the basic necessities, one needs to be equipped with habits
for good communication skills, as this is what will make them a happy and successful
social being.
In order to develop these habits, one needs to first acknowledge the fact that they need
to improve communication skills from time to time. They need to take stock of the
way they interact and the direction in which their work and personal relations are
going. The only constant in life is change, and the more one accepts one's strengths
and works towards dealing with their shortcomings, especially in the area of
communication skills, the better will be their interactions and the more their social
popularity.

2]Communication styles:
It is natural for people to communicate well with people who have the same
communication styles as they do. You can also learn to improve your communication
with people who use styles different from yours, however, and this can enhance your
effectiveness in many different situations. The first step is recognizing the basic
parameters of communication style.
The model includes four basic types: the driver, the analytic, the amiable, and the
expressive. Most people have some elements of several types, with one more
prominent than the others. People tend get along well with others of their own type
and one or two compatible types, whereas some combinations clash. Being able to

identify the types allows you to use appropriate methods to minimize

Analytical - Analytical people are known for being systematic, well organized and
deliberate. These individuals appreciate facts and information presented in a logical
manner as documentation of truth. They enjoy organization and completion of
detailed tasks. Others may see him at times as being too cautious, overly structured,
someone who does things too much 'by the book'.

controlled
orderly
precise
disciplined
deliberate
cautious
diplomatic
systematic
logical
conventional

Driver - They thrive on the thrill of the challenge and the internal motivation to
succeed. Drivers are practical folks who focus on getting results. They can do a lot in
a very short time. They usually talk fast, direct and to the point. Often viewed as
decisive, direct and pragmatic.

action-orientated
decisive
problem solver
direct
assertive
demanding
risk taker
forceful
competitive
independent
determined
results-orientated

Amiable - They are dependable, loyal and easygoing. They like things that are nonthreatening and friendly. They hate dealing with impersonal details and cold hard
facts. They are usually quick to reach a decision. Often described as a warm person
and sensitive to the feelings of others but at the same time wishy-washy.

patient
loyal
sympathetic
team person
relaxed
mature
supportive
stable
considerate
empathetic
persevering
trusting
congenial

Expressive - Very outgoing and enthusiastic, with a high energy level. They are also
great idea generators, but usually do not have the ability to see the idea through to
completion. They enjoy helping others and are particularly fond of socializing. They
are usually slow to reach a decision. Often thought of as a talker, overly dramatic,
impulsive, and manipulative.

verbal
motivating
enthusiastic
convincing
impulsive
influential
charming
confident
dramatic
optimistic
animated

3]listening skills
Listening is one of the most important skills you can have. How well you listen has a
major impact on your job effectiveness, and on the quality of your relationships with
others.
We listen to obtain information.
We listen to understand.
We listen for enjoyment.
We listen to learn.
Did you know that we devote about 40 to 45 percent of our working hours to
listening? And did you know that, if you have not taken steps to improve this skill,
you listen at only 25 percent efficiency? Putting these thoughts together, do you
feel comfortable knowing that you earn 40 percent or more of your pay while
listening at 25 percent efficiency? If not, perhaps acting on the information
imparted in this chapter will improve your listening skills to above the average in
listening efficiency. Tests have shown that we can significantly raise the level of
our listening performance by a small amount of study and practice.

4]attending skills
Bolton, in his book People Skills (1979), describes attending as giving all
of your physical attention to another person. The process of attending,
whether you realize it or not, has a considerable impact on the quality of
communication that goes on between two people. For example, by
attending you are saying to the other person "I am intersted in what you
have to say", however, a lack of good attending communicates that "I
really don't care about what you have to say."
S - face the client squarly
O- have an open posture
L- lean into the conversation
E- eye contact
R- be relaxed

5]assertiveness
Assertiveness is a behavioral skill taught by many personal development experts and
behavior therapists as well as cognitive behavior therapists. It is linked to self-esteem
and considered an important communication skill. It was originally explored by
Joseph Wolpe in his book on treating neurosis. It is commonly employed as an
intervention in behavior therapy.[1] The belief was that a person could not be both
assertive and anxious at the same time and thus being assertive would inhibit anxiety.

As a communication style and strategy, assertiveness is distinguished from aggression

and passivity. How people deal with personal boundaries, their own and those of other
people, helps to distinguish between these three concepts. Passive communicators do
not defend their own personal boundaries and thus allow aggressive people to abuse
or manipulate them through fear. Passive communicators are also typically not likely
to risk trying to influence anyone else. Aggressive people do not respect the personal
boundaries of others and thus are liable to harm others while trying to influence them.
A person communicates assertively by overcoming fear to speak his or her mind or
trying to influence others, but doing so in a way that respects the personal boundaries
of others. Assertive people are also willing to defend themselves against aggressive
people.

6]networking
Business networking is the process of establishing a mutually beneficial relationship
with other business people and potential clients and/or customers. building contacts
with important people and maintaining it.

7]leadership
Leadership has been described as the "process of social influence in which one
person can enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common
task."[1] Definitions more inclusive of followers have also emerged. Alan Keith stated
that, "Leadership is ultimately about creating a way for people to contribute to making
something extraordinary happen."[2] Tom DeMarco says that leadership needs to be
distinguished from posturing. Leadership have produced theories involving traits,[4]
situational interaction, function, behavior, power, vision and values,[5] charisma, and
intelligence among others.

8]team work
Teamwork is work performed by a team. The quality of teamwork may be measured
by analysing the effectiveness of the collaboration in the following ways:[1]
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

[[communication]]
coordination
balance of contributions
mutual support
effort
cohesion

9]conflict resolving skills

Conflict is a normal, and even healthy, part of relationships. After all, two people
cant be expected to agree on everything at all times. Since relationship conflicts are
inevitable, learning to deal with them in a healthy way is crucial. When conflict is
mismanaged, it can harm the relationship. But when handled in a respectful and
positive way, conflict provides an opportunity for growth, ultimately strengthening the
bond between two people. By learning the skills you need for successful conflict

resolution, you can keep your personal and professional relationships strong and
growing.

Conflict outcomes-Simplifying, there are 4 possible outcomes:

1.
2.
3.
4.

one wins, the other loses;

both win;
both lose;
one lose other win

Frequently, who is in conflict thinks that one party will win and the other will lose, or
the parties will find a compromise. Here the parties perceive the conflict as a zerosum situation, i.e. a situation where the gain of one part corresponds to the loss of the
other. In other words, the outcome is seen as a fixed pie: the more I get of it the less
youll get; if I get it all youll get none. In compromise we split the pie.
Nonetheless, experience tells us that very often in violent conflicts both parties lose.
Frequently, if no party can impose herself over the other(s) and they cannot
compromise, the costs of fighting of each party will be so high that - no matter what
the gain is - costs are higher. In other words, frequently parties in conflict lose more
than they gain.
Win-win outcomes occur when each side of a dispute feels they have won. Since both
sides benefit from such a scenario, any resolutions to the conflict are likely to be
accepted voluntarily. The process of integrative bargaining aims to achieve, through
cooperation, win-win outcomes.
Win-lose situations result when only one side perceives the outcome as positive.
Thus, win-lose outcomes are less likely to be accepted voluntarily. Distributive
bargaining processes, based on a principle of competition between participants, tend
to end in win-lose outcomes.
Lose-win opposite of win-lose
Lose-lose means that all parties end up being worse off. An example of this would be
a budget-cutting negotiation in which all parties lose money. In some lose-lose
situations, all parties understand that losses are unavoidable and that they will be
evenly distributed. In such situations, lose-lose outcomes can be preferable to winlose outcomes because the distribution is at least considered to be fair.[1]

Conflict strategies-Collaborating
I win, you win
Fundamental premise: Teamwork and cooperation help everyone achieve their
goals while also maintaining relationships
Strategic philosophy: The process of working through differences will lead to
creative solutions that will satisfy both parties' concerns
When to use:
When there is a high level of trust
When you don't want to have full responsibility

When you want others to also have "ownership" of solutions

When the people involved are willing to change their thinking as more
information is found and new options are suggested
When you need to work through animosity and hard feelings

Drawbacks:
The process takes lots of time and energy
Some may take advantage of other people's trust and openness
Compromising
You bend, I bend
Fundamental premise: Winning something while losing a little is OK
Strategic philosophy: Both ends are placed against the middle in an attempt to
serve the "common good" while ensuring each person can maintain something
of their original position
When to use:
When people of equal status are equally committed to goals
When time can be saved by reaching intermediate settlements on
individual parts of complex issues
When goals are moderately important
Drawbacks:
Important values and long-term objectives can be derailed in the
process
May not work if initial demands are too great
Can spawn cynicism, especially if there's no commitment to honor the
compromise solutions
Accommodating
I lose, you win
Fundamental premise: Working toward a common purpose is more important than any
of the peripheral concerns; the trauma of confronting differences may damage fragile
relationships
Strategic philosophy: Appease others by downplaying conflict, thus protecting
the relationship
When to use:
When an issue is not as important to you as it is to the other person
When you realize you are wrong
When you are willing to let others learn by mistake
When you know you cannot win
When it is not the right time and you would prefer to simply build
credit for the future
When harmony is extremely important
When what the parties have in common is a good deal more important
than their differences
Drawbacks:
One's own ideas don't get attention
Credibility and influence can be lost

Competing
I win, you lose
Fundamental premise: Associates "winning" a conflict with competition
Strategic philosophy: When goals are extremely important, one must
sometimes use power to win
When to use:
When you know you are right
When time is short and a quick decision is needed
When a strong personality is trying to steamroller you and you don't
want to be taken advantage of
When you need to stand up for your rights
Drawbacks:
Can escalate conflict
Losers may retaliate
Avoiding
No winners, no losers
Fundamental premise: This isn't the right time or place to address this issue
Strategic philosophy: Avoids conflict by withdrawing, sidestepping, or
postponing
When to use:
When the conflict is small and relationships are at stake
When you're counting to ten to cool off
When more important issues are pressing and you feel you don't have
time to deal with this particular one
When you have no power and you see no chance of getting your
concerns met
When you are too emotionally involved and others around you can
solve the conflict more successfully
When more information is needed
Drawbacks:
Important decisions may be made by default
Postponing may make matters worse.

7cs of communication1. Correct:To be correct in communication the following principles should be borne in mind.

1. Use the correct level of language

2. Include only facts words and figures
3. Maintain acceptable writing mechanics

4. Apply the following qualities

5. There should be proper grammar punctuation spelling and paragraphing

2. Concise:Business exectives are dead-busy. They dont have time to go through

unnecessarily lengthy messages. The writer is also a loser if he writes
wordy messages because it involves more time and money to type and
read. Conciseness makes the message more understandable and
comprehensible

1. Eliminate wordy Expressions.

2. Include only relevant material.
3. Avoided unnecessary Repetition.

3. Clear:Clear demands that the business message should be correct concise complete concrete
and with consideration

1. Use the right level of language

2. Proper punctuation make the writing clear
3. Check Accurey of fact figure & Words

4. Complete:The message should be complete to bring desirable results. It should include

everything the reader needs for the reaction you desire. You must know what
information our reader wants or needs You should be able to know the readers
background viewpoint needs attitudes and emotions.

1. Provide all necessary information.

2. Answer all questions asked.
3. Give something Extra, when Desirable.

5. Concrete:The business writing should be specific definite unambiguous and vivid rather
than vague and general The following guidelines lead to concreateness.

1. Use specific facts and figures

2. Put action in your verb
3. Choose vivid image building words.

6. Cohelent:Cohelent refers to you attitude sympathy the human touch and understanding of
human nature. Cohelent means the message with the receiver in mind. You should try
to visualize your readers their desires problems emotions circumstances and possible
reaction to your request.

1. Focus on you instead I & We

2. Show reader benefit or interest in reader
3. Emphasize

7. Courteous:Courtesy is more important and advantageous in business writing than it is in face to

face communication or conversation. Courteous message strengthen present
relations and make new friends. It is a goodwill building.

1. Answer your mail promptly

2. Be sincerely tactful thoughtful and appreciative

3. Use expressions that show respect

TYPES OF LEADERSHIP
Charismatic leadership
A charismatic leadership style can seem similar to transformational leadership,
because these leaders inspire lots of enthusiasm in their teams and are very energetic
in driving others forward. However, charismatic leaders can tend to believe more in
themselves than in their teams, and this creates a risk that a project, or even an entire
organization, might collapse if the leader leaves. In the eyes of the followers, success
is directly connected to the presence of the charismatic leader. As such, charismatic
leadership carries great responsibility, and it needs a long-term commitment from the
leader.
Transactional leadership
This style of leadership starts with the idea that team members agree to obey their
leader totally when they accept a job. The "transaction" is usually the organization
paying the team members in return for their effort and compliance. The leader has a
right to "punish" team members if their work doesn't meet the pre-determined
standard.
Team members can do little to improve their job satisfaction under transactional
leadership. The leader could give team members some control of their income/reward
by using incentives that encourage even higher standards or greater productivity.
Alternatively, a transactional leader could practice "management by exception"
rather than rewarding better work, the leader could take corrective action if the
required standards are not met.
Transactional leadership is really a type of management, not a true leadership style,
because the focus is on short-term tasks. It has serious limitations for knowledgebased or creative work.
Transformational leadership
As we discussed earlier, people with this leadership style are true leaders who inspire
their teams constantly with a shared vision of the future. While this leader's
enthusiasm is often passed onto the team, he or she can need to be supported by
"detail people." That's why, in many organizations, both transactional and
transformational leadership are needed. The transactional leaders (or managers)
ensure that routine work is done reliably, while the transformational leaders look after
initiatives that add value.

5 STAGE OF GROUP DEVELOPMENT

According to the Five-Stage Model of group development, groups go through five

distinct stages
during the process of its development. These are as follows:
Five-Stage Model

Forming is the initial stage of group development when the group members first
come in
contact with others and get acquainted with each other. This stage is characterized
predominantly by a feeling of uncertainty among the group members as they now try
to
establish ground rules and pattern of relationship among themselves.

Storming is the next stage that is characterized by a high degree of conflict among
the
members. Members often show hostility towards each other and resist the leaders
control. If these conflicts are not adequately resolved, the group may even be
disbanded.
But, usually the group eventually comes in terms with each other and accepts the
leadership role at the end of this stage.

Norming is the third stage of the group development process during which the
group
members become closer to each other and the group starts functioning as a cohesive
unit.
The group members now identify themselves with the group and share responsibility
for
achieving the desired level of performance of the group. Norming stage is complete
when
the group members can set a common target and agree on the way of achieving this.

Performing is the fourth stage when the group is finally ready to start working. As
the
group is now fully formed after resolving their internal conflicts of acceptance and
sharing responsibility, they can now devote energy to achieve its objectives.

Adjourning is the final stage when the group, after achieving the objectives for
which it
was created, starts to gradually dissolve itself.

Many interpreters of the five-stage model have assumed that a group becomes more
effective as it
progresses through the first four stages. While this assumption may be generally true,
what makes
a group effective is more complex than this model acknowledges. Under some
conditions, high

levels of conflict are conducive to high group performance. So we might expect to

find situations
in which groups in Stage II outperform those in Stages III or IV. Similarly, groups do
not always
proceed clearly from one stage to the next. Sometimes, in fact, several stages go on
simultaneously, as when groups are storming and performing at the same time.
Groups even
occasionally regress to previous stages. Therefore, even the strongest proponents of
this model do
not assume that all groups follow its five-stage process precisely or that Stage IV is
always the
most preferable.
Another problem with the five-stage model, in terms of understanding work- related
behavior, is
that it ignores organizational context.4 For instance, a study of a cockpit crew in an
airliner found
that, within 10 minutes, three strangers as- signed to fly together for the first time had
become a
high-performing group. What allowed for this speedy group development was the
strong
organizational context surrounding th~ tasks of the cockpit crew. This context
provided the rules,
task definitions, information, and resources needed for the group to per- form. They
didn't need to
develop plans, assign roles, determine and allocate re- sources, resolve conflicts, and
set norms
the way the five-stage model predicts.

sternbergs triarchic intelligence theory (fhs1) - February 12th, 2005

Sternberg's Theory of Triarchic Intelligence
Sternberg's view of intelligence has been closely linked to Aristotle's ancient premise
that intelligence is composed of three aspects theoretical, practical, and productive
intelligence. In Sternberg's view intelligence revolves around the interchange of
analytical, practical and creative aspects of the mind.
Professor Robert Sternberg of Yale University developed a concept of intelligence that
equates to combinations of individual preferences from three levels of mental selfmanagement. These three areas correspond with:
1. Functions of governments of the mind,
2. Stylistic preferences, and
3. Forms of mental self-government.
Examples: As a combination a person might prefer legislative functions, internal
variables and hierarchic habits of mental self-government; while another individual
might prefer executive functions; external variables and anarchic habits of mental
self-government, and so forth.
I. Functions of governments of the mind are:

 Legislative - creating, planning, imagining, and formulating.

Executive - implementing and doing.
Judicial - judging, evaluating, and comparing.
II. Scope - stylistic variables:
Internal - by themselves
External - collaboration
III. Forms of mental self-government:
Monarchic people perform best when goals are singular. They deal best with one
goal or need at a time.
Hierarchic people can focus on multiple goals at once and recognize that all goals
cannot be fulfilled equally. These people can prioritize goals easily.
Oligarchic people deal with goals that are of equal weight well, but they have
difficulty prioritizing goals of different weight.
Anarchic people depart from form and precedent. Often they don't like or
understand the need for rules and regulations. These people operate without rules or
structure, creating their own problem-solving techniques with insights that often
easily breaks the existing mindsets.
Think about it:
On the surface many of Sternberg's descriptions appear to equate to some of the
aspects of personality type theory. For instance, it may be apparent to those who have
studied some of Carl Jung's work on personality preferences that Sternberg's "scope
variables" of internal and external might equate to preferences for either introversion
or extraversion in Jungian typology. In this context, preferences for internal
(introversion) or external (extraversion) mental operations might be accurately
calculated on popular personality tests like the Myers-Briggs or Kiersey-Bates.
Looking at Sternberg's other descriptors in the areas of "forms" and "functions",
see if you can find any other parallels between his descriptors and aspects of
traditional personality typologies.
Also, in varied combinations (3 [functions] x 2 [scopes] x 3 [forms] = 18)
Sternberg's Triarchic Model would yield 18 different combinations for mental
preferences. Within Sternberg's patterns, see if you can categorize and profile your
own mental preferences and those of others you know well.
There are five basic types of questions:
Factual; Convergent; Divergent; Evaluative; and Combination
The art of asking questions is one of the basic skills of good teaching. Socrates
believed that knowledge and awareness were an intrinsic part of each learner. Thus, in
exercising the craft of good teaching an educator must reach into the learner's hidden
levels of knowing and awareness in order to help the learner reach new levels of
thinking.
Through the art of thoughtful questioning teachers can extract not only factual
information, but aid learners in: connecting concepts, making inferences, increasing
awareness, encouraging creative and imaginative thought, aiding critical thinking
processes, and generally helping learners explore deeper levels of knowing, thinking,
and understanding.
As you examine the categories below, reflect on your own educational experiences
and see if you can ascertain which types of questions were used most often by
different teachers. Hone your questioning skills by practicing asking different types of

questions, and try to monitor your teaching so that you include varied levels of
questioning skills. Specifically in the area of Socratic questioning techniques, there
are a number of sites on the Web which might prove helpful, simply use Socraticquestioning as a descriptor. Don't forget to hyphenate the term.
1. Factual - Soliciting reasonably simple, straight forward answers based on obvious
facts or awareness. These are usually at the lowest level of cognitive or affective
processes and answers are frequently either right or wrong.
Example: Name the Shakespeare play about the Prince of Denmark?
2. Convergent - Answers to these types of questions are usually within a very finite
range of acceptable accuracy. These may be at several different levels of cognition -comprehension, application, analysis, or ones where the answerer makes inferences or
conjectures based on personal awareness, or on material read, presented or known.
Example: On reflecting over the entirety of the play Hamlet, what were the main
reasons why Ophelia went mad? ( This is not specifically stated in one direct
statement in the text of Hamlet. Here the reader must make simple inferences as to
why she committed suicide.)
3. Divergent - These questions allow students to explore different avenues and create
many different variations and alternative answers or scenarios. Correctness may be
based on logical projections, may be contextual, or arrived at through basic
knowledge, conjecture, inference, projection, creation, intuition, or imagination.
These types of questions often require students to analyze, synthesize or evaluate a
knowledge base and then project or predict different outcomes. Answering these types
of questions may be aided by higher levels of affective functions. Answers to these
types of questions generally fall into a wide array of acceptability. Often correctness is
determined subjectively based on the possibility or probability. Often the intent of
these types of questions is to stimulate imaginative and creative thought, or
investigate cause and effect relationships.
Example: In the love relationship of Hamlet and Ophelia, what might have happened
to their relationship and their lives if Hamlet had not been so obsessed with the
revenge of his father's death? 4. Evaluative - These types of questions usually require sophisticated levels of
cognitive and/or emotional judgment. In attempting to answer these types of
questions, students may be combining multiple cognitive and/or affective processes,
levels frequently in comparative frameworks. Often an answer is analyzed at multiple
levels and from different perspectives before the answerer arrives at newly
synthesized information or conclusions. Example:
a. Compare and contrast the death of Ophelia with that of Juliet?
b. What are the similarities and differences between Roman gladiatorial games and
modern football?
c. Why and how might the concept of Piagetian schema be related to the concepts
presented in Jungian personality theory, and why might this be important to consider
in teaching and learning?
5. Combinations - These are questions that blend any combination of the above.

theory x and theory y of motivation( fhs1) - February 12th, 2005

Theory X is the traditional view of direction and control, based on these assumptions:
1. The average person inherently dislikes work and will avoid it if at all possible.
2. As a result, most people have to be coerced, controlled and threatened if they are to
put in enough effort to achieve the organizations goals.
3. In fact the average person prefers to be directed, avoids responsibility, isn't
ambitious and simply seeks security.
Theory Y, based on the integration of individual and organizational goals, assumes:
1. The physical and mental effort of work is as natural as play or rest, so the average
person doesn't inherently dislike work.
2. We are capable of self-direction and self-control, so those factors don't necessarily
have to come from elsewhere.
3. Our commitment to an objective is a function of the rewards for its achievement.
4. The average person learns not only to accept but to seek responsibility.
5. Most people have a capacity for imagination, ingenuity and creativity.
6 The intellectual potential of most people is under-used in modern industrial life.
Theory Y is not a soft option. In fact it can take as much management effort as Theory
X, but the effects of a Theory Y approach will last longer. The Theory X manager is a
dying breed (although it has to be said he's not yet extinct), and Theory Y lies behind
most modern approaches to motivation. Nowadays the terminology is used as a polite
way of referring to the old command-and-control approach to management: the
trouble is the diehard Theory X manager won't pick up the subtle criticism!

herzberg motivation theory of hygiene(fhs1) - February 12th, 2005

HERZBERG'S MOTIVATION - HYGIENE THEORY
Frederick Herzberg studied and practiced clinical psychology in Pittsburgh, where he
researched the work-related motivations of thousands of employees. His findings
were published in "The Motivation to Work" in 1959. He concluded that there were
two types of motivation:
Hygiene Factors that can demotivate if they are not present - such as supervision,
interpersonal relations, physical working conditions, and salary. Hygiene Factors
affect the level of dissatisfaction, but are rarely quoted as creators of job satisfaction.
Motivation Factors that will motivate if they are present - such as achievement,
advancement, recognition and responsibility. Dissatisfaction isn't normally blamed on
Motivation Factors, but they are cited as the cause of job satisfaction.

So, once you've satisfied the Hygiene factors, providing more of them won't generate
much more motivation, but lack of the Motivation Factors won't of themselves
demotivate. There are clear relationships to Maslow here, but Herzberg's ideas really
shaped modern thinking about reward and recognition in major companies.

James MacGregor Burns writing in his book Leadership was the first to put forward the
concept of
transforming leadership.
To Burns transforming leadership is a relationship of mutual stimulation and elevation that
converts
followers into leaders and may convert leaders into moral agents. Burns went on to also
further define
it by suggesting that:
[Transforming leadership] occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a
way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and
morality
Transactional leadership has been the traditional model of leadership with its roots from an
organisational or business perspective in the bottom line. Stephen Covey writing in
Principle-Centred
Leadership suggests that transformational leadership focuses on the top line and offers
contrast
between the two (a selection being):

Transactional Leadership
Builds on mans need to get a job done and
make a living
Is preoccupied with power and position,
politics and perks
Is mired in daily affairs
Is short-term and hard data orientated
Focuses on tactical issues
Relies on human relations to lubricate human
interactions
Follows and fulfils role expectations by
striving to work effectively within current
systems
Supports structures and systems that
reinforce the bottom line, maximise efficiency,
and guarantee short-term profits.
Transformational Leadership
Builds on a mans need for meaning
Is preoccupied with purposes and values,
morals, and ethics
Transcends daily affairs
Is orientated toward long-term goals without
compromising human values and principles
Focuses more on missions and strategies
Releases human potential identifying and
developing new talent
Designs and redesigns jobs to make them
meaningful and challenging

 Aligns internal structures and systems to

reinforce overarching values and goals
Transformational leadership is a process in which the leaders take actions to try to increase
their
associates' awareness of what is right and important, to raise their associates' motivational
maturity
and to move their associates to go beyond the associates' own self-interests for the good of
the group,
the organization, or society. Such leaders provide their associates with a sense of purpose
that goes
beyond a simple exchange of rewards for effort provided.
The transformational leaders are proactive in many different and unique ways. These leaders
attempt
to optimize development, not just performance. Development encompasses the maturation of
ability,
motivation, attitudes, and values. Such leaders want to elevate the maturity level of the needs
of their
associates (from security needs to needs for achievement and self-development). They
convince their
associates to strive for a higher level of achievement as well as higher levels of moral and
ethical
standards. Through the development of their associates, they optimize the development of
their
organization as well. High performing associates build high performing organizations.
Comparison of Transactional and Transformational Leadership (Covey, 1992)
Both kinds of leadership are necessary. Transactional leadership has remained the
organisational
model for many people and organisations who have not moved into or encouraged the
transformational role needed to meet the challenges of our changing times.