DISC assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

DISC is a group of psychological inventories developed by John Geier and based on the 1928 work
of psychologist William Moulton Marston.

Contents
 1 History
 2 Method
 3 See also

 4 References

[edit] History
DISC is the four quadrant behavioral model based on the work of William Moulton Marston Ph.D.
(1893 - 1947) to examine the behavior of individuals in their environment or within a specific
situation. DISC looks at behavioral styles and behavioral preferences.

Marston completed doctoral studies at Harvard in the newly developing field of Psychology. In the
early 1920's Marston first studied the concepts of will and power and their effect on personality and
human behavior.[1] These findings contributed greatly to the field of psychology.

Marston published Emotions of Normal People in 1928.[2] In this book he first formally presented
his findings, though he had written about DISC four years earlier. Marston published a second book
on DISC, Integrative Psychology, in 1931. Marston really wanted to develop a unit of measurement
of 'mental energy'. He did not develop the DISC test or assessment. In fact, he never used it as an
assessment at all. However, in 1930, a friend did use it as an assessment in a book on success and it
was published as one of the first in the newly emerging field of Self-Help publications.

[edit] Method
The assessments classify four aspects of behavior by testing a person's preferences in word
associations (compare with Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). DISC is an acronym for:

 Dominance - relating to control, power and assertiveness

 Influence - relating to social situations and communication
 Steadiness (submission in Marston's time)- relating to patience, persistence, and
thoughtfulness
 Conscientiousness (or caution, compliance in Marston's time) - relating to structure and
organization

These four dimensions can be grouped in a grid with D and I sharing the top row and representing
extroverted aspects of the personality, and C and S below representing introverted aspects. D and C
then share the left column and represent task-focused aspects, and I and S share the right column
and represent social aspects. In this matrix, the vertical dimension represents a factor of
"Assertive" or "Passive", while the horizontal represents "Open" vs. "Guarded". [3]

 Dominance: People who score high in the intensity of the 'D' styles factor are very active in
dealing with problems and challenges, while low D scores are people who want to do more
research before committing to a decision. High "D" people are described as demanding,
forceful, egocentric, strong willed, driving, determined, ambitious, aggressive, and
pioneering. Low D scores describe those who are conservative, low keyed, cooperative,
calculating, undemanding, cautious, mild, agreeable, modest and peaceful.
 Influence: People with High I scores influence others through talking and activity and tend
to be emotional. They are described as convincing, magnetic, political, enthusiastic,
persuasive, warm, demonstrative, trusting, and optimistic. Those with Low I scores
influence more by data and facts, and not with feelings. They are described as reflective,
factual, calculating, skeptical, logical, suspicious, matter of fact, pessimistic, and critical.
 Steadiness:(Submission in Marston's time): People with High S styles scores want a steady
pace, security, and don't like sudden change. Low S intensity scores are those who like
change and variety. High S persons are calm, relaxed, patient, possessive, predictable,
deliberate, stable, consistent, and tend to be unemotional and poker faced. People with Low
S scores are described as restless, demonstrative, impatient, eager, or even impulsive.
 Conscientious: (Compliance in Marston's time): Persons with High C styles adhere to rules,
regulations, and structure. They like to do quality work and do it right the first time. High C
people are careful, cautious, exacting, neat, systematic, diplomatic, accurate, tactful. Those
with Low C scores challenge the rules and want independence and are described as self-
willed, stubborn, opinionated, unsystematic, arbitrary, and careless with details.

Situational leadership theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article or section is missing citations or needs footnotes.
Using inline citations helps guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies. (July 2008)

Situational leadership theories in organizational studies are a type of leadership theory, leadership
style, and leadership model that presumes that different leadership styles are better in different
situations, and that leaders must be flexible enough to adapt their style to the situation they are in.

A good situational leader is one who can quickly change leadership styles as the situation changes.
Most of us attempt to do this in our dealings with people: we try not to get angry with a new
employee, and we remind forgetful people. The model doesn't apply only to people in leadership or
management positions; all people lead others at work, at play, and at home.

Contents
 1 The Hersey and Blanchard model
o 1.1 Leadership styles
o 1.2 Development levels
o 1.3 Leadership/development matching
o 1.4 SL II
  2 See also

 3 Resources

[edit] The Hersey and Blanchard model

As a leadership model, the best known example was developed by Paul Hersey, a professor who
wrote a well known book "Situational Leader" and Ken Blanchard, the management guru who later
became famous for his "One Minute Manager" series. They created a model of situational
leadership in the late 1960s in their work Management of Organizational Behavior (now in its 9th
edition) that allows one to analyze the needs of the situation, then adopt the most appropriate
leadership style. It has been proven popular with managers over the years because it is simple to
understand, and it works in most environments for most people.

The model rests on two fundamental concepts; leadership style, and development level.

[edit] Leadership styles

Blanchard and Hersey characterized leadership style in terms of the amount of direction and support
that the leader provides to their followers. They categorized all leadership styles into four behavior
types, which they named S1 to S4:

 S1: Directing/Telling Leaders define the roles and tasks of the 'follower', and supervise
them closely. Decisions are made by the leader and announced, so communication is largely
one-way.

 S2: Coaching/Selling Leaders still define roles and tasks, but seek ideas and suggestions
from the follower. Decisions remain the leader's prerogative, but communication is much
more two-way.

 S3: Supporting/Participating Leaders pass day-to-day decisions, such as task allocation

and processes, to the follower. The leader facilitates and takes part in decisions, but control
is with the follower.

 S4: Delegating Leaders are still involved in decisions and problem-solving, but control is
with the follower. The follower decides when and how the leader will be involved.

Of these, no one style is considered optimal or desired for all leaders to possess. Effective leaders
need to be flexible, and must adapt themselves according to the situation. However, each leader
tends to have a natural style, and in applying Situational Leadership he must know his intrinsic
style.

[edit] Development levels

The right leadership style will depend on the person being led - the follower. Blanchard and Hersey
extended their model to include the Development Level of the follower. They stated that the leader's
chosen style should be based on the competence and commitment of her followers. They
categorized the possible development of followers into four levels, which they named D1 to D4:

 D1: Low Competence, High Commitment - They generally lack the specific skills
required for the job in hand. However, they are eager to learn and willing to take direction.
  D2: Some Competence, Low Commitment - They may have some relevant skills, but
won't be able to do the job without help. The task or the situation may be new to them.

 D3: High Competence, Variable Commitment - They are experienced and capable, but
may lack the confidence to go it alone, or the motivation to do it well or quickly.

 D4: High Competence, High Commitment - They are experienced at the job, and
comfortable with their own ability to do it well. They may even be more skilled than the
leader.

Development Levels are also situational. I might be generally skilled, confident and motivated in
my job, but would still drop into Level D1 when faced, say, with a task requiring skills they don't
possess. For example, many managers are D4 when dealing with the day-to-day running of their
department, but move to D1 or D2 when dealing with a sensitive employee "issue"

The development level is now called the performance readiness level (Hersey, Blanchard, &
Johnson, 2008). It is based on the Development levels and adapted from Hersey's Situational
Selling and Ron Campbell of the Center for Leadership Studies has expanded the continuum of
follower performance to include behavioral indicators of each readiness level.

 R1: Unable and Insecure or Unwilling - Follower is unable and insecure and lacks
confidence or the follower lacks commitment and motivation to complete tasks.

 R2: Unable but Confident or Willing - Follower is unable to complete tasks but has the
confidence as long as the leader provides guidance or the follower lacks the ability but is
motivated and making an effort.

 R3: Able but Insecure or Unwilling - Follower has the ability to complete tasks but is
apprehensive about doing it alone or the follower is not willing to use that ability.

 R4: Able and Confident and Willing - Follower has the ability to perform and is confident
about doing so and is committed.

[edit] Leadership/development matching

Blanchard and Hersey said that the leadership style (S1 - S4) of the leader must correspond to the
development level (D1 - D4) of the follower. Furthermore it is the leader who must adapt, not the
follower. To get the most of situational leadership, a leader should be trained in how to operate
effectively in various leadership styles, and how to determine the development level of others.

For an example of a mismatch, imagine the following scenario. A new person joins your team and
you're asked to help him through the first few days. You sit him in front of a PC, show him a pile of
invoices that need to be processed today and then excuse yourself to a meeting. He is at level D1,
and you've adopted S4, an obvious mismatch. Everyone loses because the new person feels helpless
and demotivated and you don't get the invoices processed.

For another example of a mismatch, imagine you're handing over your duties to an experienced
colleague before you leave for a holiday. You've listed all the tasks that need to be done and given
him a detailed set of instructions on how to carry out each one. He is at level D4, and you've
adopted S1. The work will probably get done, but your colleague will despise you for treating him
like an idiot.
But leave detailed instructions and a checklist for the new person, and they'll thank you for it. Give
your colleague a quick chat and a few notes before you go on holiday, and everything will be fine.
By adopting the right style to suit the follower's development level, work gets done, relationships
are built, and most importantly, the follower's development level will rise, to everyone's benefit.

[edit] SL II

In 1979 Ken Blanchard and wife, Marjorie Blanchard formed a separate company now called The
Ken Blanchard Companies where they and a group of founding associates continue to work on
further refinements to the original Situational Leadership Model. The development of Situational
Leadership® II has been the collaborative work of Blanchard associates over the years (Ken
Blanchard, Margie Blanchard, Don Carew, Eunice Parisi-Carew, Fred Finch, Laurie Hawkins, Drea
Zigarmi, and Patricia Zigarmi).

The work of Drs. Don Carew and Eunice Parisi-Carew with Group Development theory was the
initial impetus to change the original model. In particular, the Carews cited the extensive research of
Lacousiere, who found there is a sequence to the stages of development that groups and teams go
through over time. The initial stage is orientation (Stage 1), when group members first come
together and are eager to participate, but are unsure of how to work together. Next comes the
seemingly inevitable occurrence of dissatisfaction (Stage 2), as working together turns out to be
more difficult than anticipated. If the group is able to work through this dissatisfaction, it moves
into resolution or integration (Stage 3), where members learn how to work together. If interactions
continue to improve, the group reaches the final stage of production (Stage 4). The Carews were
able to show that the leadership styles needed to move a group through these stages correspond to
the flow of the four leadership styles of Situational Leadership® II.

Style 1, Directing, is appropriate for orientation, where goals have to be made clear and roles
defined. Style 2, Coaching, is necessary to move through the dissatisfaction stage, since the group
still needs direction but now also needs support, encouragement, and listening behaviors. Once a
group gets to the resolution or integration stage, the leader’s role could change to Style 3,
Supporting, as a facilitator is needed. Now direction is provided by the group. Finally, in the
production stage, an outside observer would not be able to determine the designated leader. Here,
Style 4, Delegating, is appropriate.

The research influenced changes in the original model. The belief being that it is preferred to hire
either winners—people who are experienced and already developed in a particular job and can
operate effectively with an S3 or S4 style—or else potential winners who need to be trained.
Potential winners, are often low in competence (knowledge and skills), but are high on commitment
because of their initial motivation and eagerness to learn this particular job and their confidence in
their learning capacity. Thus the second level of development/maturity should be “unable and
unwilling” (some to low competence/low commitment) to correspond with the dissatisfaction stage
of group development.

Again, consistent with the stages of group development. When people take on a new task where
they are inexperienced, after awhile disillusionment sets in. They are often frustrated and
overwhelmed—the task is much harder than they thought it would be because they need more time
and energy to gain competence than they had anticipated. When that occurs, while they have some
competence (more than they had in the beginning) their motivation and confidence drops.The new
thinking required reconstructing the representation of the stages of development in order to depict
individual growth that moved from an enthusiastic beginner to a disillusioned learner, on to a
capable but cautious performer, and finally to a self-directed achiever. The result was a continuum
from “developing” to “developed.”
RAJAWALI
PT. RNI's successful accomplishment in the past, particularly in
trade, agro industry and health product sectors, has lead the
company into another success in form of business
diversification such as; oil palm, rubber, and tea. Whereas it
also enhanced the growth in property sector

In later development, in view of the characteristics of human

resources in our country , and without over looking the roles
of our manufacturing industries and properties, there is as save
of paradigm implemented by PT RNI in developing its
business.

With this companies transformation into an investment

holding company, PT RNI would be more focused on 3 (three)
lines of business namely agro industry, pharmaceutical and
health product as well as trade. By the reaffirming the
direction of the company's development, namely; to set the
priority to agro industry sector as the core base and the trade
sector as the forefront in order to enable the company to
successfully secure its market for the product of such other
business fields.

In addition PT RNI has created various innovations in respect

of the utilization of all waste elements, so called "zero waste
concept" as well as it has changed a mind set in that PT RNI is
not a sugar industry and on the contrary, in undertakes its
sugar cane industry and business. Therefore, there will be
transfer pricing for sugar as the main final product, which
consequently will minimize sugar product basis prices. The
high price of fuel oil certainly have affected sugar product
basis prices and as a consequence, we are currently developing
bio diesel made of castor plants a substitute of carbon fuel oil.
 Lying a had of as, there are a number of business opportunities
that made to be accomplished, particularly those related to the
processing industry bought downstream and other by product
alike. Nonetheless, in order to accomplish such target, a
number of consolidation steps are required in order to create
sound, healthy, and autonomous management climate. The
company's growing development is connected with the role of
the employees whose quality is always improved trough
several systematical education and training programs.

After taking a parts actively in agro industry, pharmaceutical

industry, and trade sectors, PT RNI as one of the Indonesian
State Owned Enterprises (SOE), is now ready to perform more
autonomously, productively and highly competitive.

VISION
To be the best enterprise in agro industry, pharmaceutical, and trading; ready to face challenges and
be successful in competing locally and globally with its own capability.

MISSION
To become an enterprise with the best work performance in agro industry, pharmaceutical, and
trading that is managed professionally and innovatively with product quality and excellent customer
service oriented produced by the finest human resources who are capable to grow and to fulfill
stakeholders’ expectation.

Company Name : PT Jaya Mandiri Sukses Industry : Agricultural /

Plantation / Poultry / Fisheries Type of Company :Public
Limited Company, Local Based CompanyLocation :Menara
Duta Building 6th floor JL.HR Rasuna Said Kav-B9 Kuningan
12910*The company prefers to receive online application for speedier processing.