Individual differences are caused by socioeconomic status and

Individual differences are caused by socioeconomic status andpeople being brought up differently resulting in different personalities, physicalabilities and skills.

When individuals with varying personalities meet, thiscan result in great cooperation or conflict. Using McCrae and Costa’s big fivepersonality scale (1990 and 1996) Philip may be described as being open toexperience and extravert. This is because Phillip describes his spinning classas ‘bored and un-inspired’ suggesting that he is open to try new things andteach different classes.

This results in him feeling restricted and thusdissatisfied with his work. Extraversion is another trait of Philip. He ‘enjoysteaching and working with others’ and referring to the closure of the breakoutroom, he thought it ‘massively affected the amount of social interaction’. Thisreflects Philip’s extraverted personality as extraverted people tend to beoutgoing and gregarious and delight in the company of others. Their personalityalso generally results in them being leaders such as how Philip led the groupmeeting, however this may be a negative aspect of Philip’s personality as he isvery dominant and this personality may only fit in certain occupations.

Forexample, in a test using a military unit, only 11.5% of senior managers had anextravert personality (Salimi, Karaminia and Esmaeili, 2011), therefore Philip’spersonality would most likely be unfavourable in this line of work. On theother hand, Nick’s personality is very different to Philip; Nick has the traitsof conscientiousness and some traits of introversion. Nick is presented as agood, orderly and diligent worker. It states that he feels ‘generallysatisfied’ with the work, however even when he realises that he may be beingtaken advantage of over shifts he doesn’t speak up about it until Kate askedhim, he continues with the work as he knows that there’s a larger objective forthe business and quarrelling about shifts would just cause unnecessary conflict.Furthermore, during the meeting Nick spoke up once but was ignored resulting inhim not contributing further this suggests some introversion in Nick’spersonality. The traits of conscientiousness and introversion mean that Nick isa good worker and perform well within his job and the tasks that he’s given,however he struggles in the social aspect of his work. This may cause work tobe difficult for Nick as Cain (2012) argues that ‘the contemporary workplacetends to favour the extravert personality more’.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,80
Delivery
4,90
Support
4,70
Price
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
4,70
Writers Experience
4,70
Delivery
4,60
Support
4,60
Price
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
4,80
Writers Experience
4,50
Delivery
4,40
Support
4,10
Price
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

Lastly, Jane showscharacteristics of open to experience and agreeableness. Jane was the ‘maincontributor in the group meeting’, she gave suggestions that would ‘benefit theother trainers’, and she ‘actively tried to come up with creative solutions’.Jane is one that doesn’t like to be held back with strict schedules and plans,she enjoys trying new things and helping others which is generally good in mostsituations (such as during the meeting), however with the current type of jobthat she’s doing, which is filled with set schedules and procedures, this mayhold her back so she doesn’t perform to the best of her ability. For example,when she wasn’t allowed to change some of the exercises, she felt ‘stagnated’thus reducing her motivation and lowering her performance. Moving on from theBig five personality scale, an ideographic approach to personality may beconsidered when analysing the trainers, this is an approach which seespersonality as complex, unique to each individual and dynamic. It suggests thatpersonality is not static, but rather it’s developed and moulded through socialinteraction (Freud, 1927). This implies that for each of the trainers analysed,their personalities could be easily changed through interaction with eachother, this could potentially help them to perform better or have the oppositeeffect.