Personality type: “The Protagonist” (ENFJ-A)
Individual traits: Extraverted – 85%, Intuitive – 69%, Feeling – 57%, Judging – 58%, Assertive – 72%
Role: Diplomat
Strategy: People Mastery
Overall Leadership Style
The ENFJ-A personality type is said to be of natural leaders. They demonstrate passion, charisma and are well articulated with their leadership roles. My overall leadership style is a people-oriented approach, instilling motivation and a personal and organizational vision among those I lead. It is an approach that is centrally focused on empowering others and making them realize their growth potentials and a long-term self and organizational fulfillment. As a leader, I find it easy to inspire, coach and develop others while instilling a futuristic mentality to them. Leadership is more of relationship building with the aim of creating a holistically functional team that will seamlessly achieve the organization’s goals. I keep in mind that teamwork is not only about physical participation in the delegated team roles, but also high spirit and emotional connection among the team members. Working towards the goal also involves making sure that the goals and ideas to be achieved are well envisioned in the subject’s minds. Realization of the goals and ideas require a plan to be followed, with each step to be executed well organized and elaborated. The implication of this leadership style is that as a leader, I connect to others more, thereby creating an ambient atmosphere of sincerity and passion among those I lead. This somehow helps to keep the team motivated, enhancing productivity and efficiency. There is a downside of this leadership style, e.g., difficulty in making tough decisions when need be and the failure to consider the limitations of resources when making decisions and developing plans (Psychometrics, 2016).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Strengths
Tolerance – I accommodate all opinions and views, even from those I least revere or those whose opinions or arguments contradict mine. I believe that I do not have all the answers, and a subordinate’s opinion may provide just the solution I needed. This makes those who report to me frank and open when giving their opinions, suggestions or comments about an issue.
Reliability – My perfectionist nature and focus on others makes me try as much as I can to achieve the goal or fulfill the promise made to the subordinates. I work to ensure that I do not let anyone down. This creates and strengthens the subordinates’ trust in me.
Charisma – Charm, and popularity are important in keeping the interest and motivation of others alive. Defining the prevailing mood and reading the tone of the subjects or occasion and instinctively customizing responses and actions to suit the mood make the subordinates receptive and excited about me as their leader.
Altruistic – Selflessness and the instinct to do good to individuals and the community at large is another key strength of my personality. The desire to create a better society by bringing people together is received warmly and appreciated by the subordinates. The subordinates reciprocate by promoting cohesiveness, mutual help, and understanding among themselves. This has a ripple effect resulting in an overall effect of selflessness and compassion for colleagues in the organization.
Taking initiative – It is my strong belief that a leader should walk the talk and lead from the front. In whatever circumstance, I ensure that I am ahead of the situation. This involves setting examples on a certain new strategy that is to be adopted by the team, as well as being at the forefront of the organization’s goals. This creates the picture of a fearless leader among the subordinates, as well as encouraging them to fall in line and follow suit.
Weaknesses
Too selfless – The quest to solve the problems of others sometimes becomes burdensome and unbearable. However, I may fail to recognize that I have over-exerted myself in solving other’s problems. This over-exertion and strain take a toll on those I lead, as I may fail to notice an organizational problem that requires my attention because I am following up on a ‘more pressing’ matter.
Too sensitive – Despite being able to put up with an array of criticism, I may sometimes take things too personally. They may be subtle and unimportant issues, but I will indulge in trying to solve them. This may be repulsive to my subjects because they might refrain from bringing up some topics, either personal or formal, for fear that I will take the issue too seriously.
Fluctuating Self-esteem – My self-esteem and feeling of self-satisfaction is dependent on the fulfillment of the ideals, standards, and goals I have set up. Failure to meet the goal or insufficiency in the attainment of a certain process will translate to low self-esteem and vice versa. To keep my self-esteem high, those who report to me will strive that they attain the goals set for them in the organization. However, the low self-esteem may result from an unmet goal external to the organization. Just like mood swings, low self-esteem may get in the way of my communication and interaction with the subordinates, while high self-esteem does the reverse.
Not dealing with conflict – Conflict arises in various forms among the subordinates or between the subordinates and their leader. The value of teamwork may sometimes be however obscure the process of conflict resolution. This might be as a result of the fear that delving into the conflict might do more harm than good, widening the rift between the arguing parties. Also, it is sometimes a result of the fear that I might not have a concrete solution to the conflict. Instead of resolving the conflict, there is the tendency to offer a superficial way forward or a temporary truce. This, in the long run, culminates in a build-up of unresolved conflicts, whose eruption might be detrimental to the cohesion and unity the team. Also, the team I lead may see no use in forwarding conflicts among themselves to me when they realize that I have little to offer regarding offering solutions to the conflict.
Struggle to make tough decisions – It sometimes proves difficult to make decisions that impact on the achievement of the team’s goals, especially if the decision to be made seem to infringe on my principle s of humanity. For example, making a decision on whether or not to fire a loyal yet underperforming subordinate, or deciding whether to cut down wages due to overall plummeting productivity and increased costs of operations. Knowing that the victim is of a poor background and that the entire family looks up to them complicates the decision. The subordinates may take advantage of this weakness, bearing in mind that the chances of an action being taken against them are dismal. The overall implication of this to the entire team is reduced productivity as a result of the presence of a member(s) whose productivity is subpar.
What surprised me most about my results is that I use intuition more than observation to make decisions and analysis of situations. It is very uncommon to find such a trait among the world’s population, as most people rely on observation. Intuitions can be misleading or biased in some instances, resulting in false conclusions and consequently misguide decisions. I was however surprised that intuition is a trait of natural leaders. The overall results of the personality test resonate with me. Just as an example of the accuracy of the results, I have been involved with numerous charity and humanitarian organizations in an effort to reach out to an as large population as I can and share in the suffering of different population subgroups (Balmas, 2018).
References
Psychometrics. (2016). Personality Type and Leadership. Execution, Influence, Strategic Thinking, and Relationship Building. Retrieved from https://www.psychometrics.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/UPDATED-Personality-Type-and-Leadership-Report-WEB_16-08-28_Final.pdf
Balmas, M. (2018). Tell me who is your leader, and I will tell you who you are: Foreign leaders’ perceived personality and public attitudes toward their countries and citizenry. American Journal of Political Science , 62 (2), 499-514.
