Platinum Rule Assessment

Behavior happens to be a very vital component in an individual’s life in as far as good image of one’s personality is concerned. Though it does not necessary portray the real picture of one; as it is dynamic. Different individuals behave differently in different situations. This by and large depends with the set rules and expectations of any particular setting. According to the Disc Platinum Rule Behavioral Assessment there are four basic styles of behaviors; Dominance style, Interactive style, Steadiness style and Cautious style. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 28)The biggest challenge is how one can cope with all these different styles with little or no difficulty. Everyone is expected to at least formulate his/ her own mechanism that puts him/her in a better position to comfortably accommodate and bring negotiations with all the behavioral style. This ability to amicably relate with people with different personality according to DPRA has been compared to Intelligence Quotient since it positions people to stand high chance of interacting smoothly and as a consequence they add up a taste in their lives. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 6)The social scientists have renamed this ability as social Intelligence from adaptability since everyone strives to meet his /her different needs through interaction. They have argued out that social Intelligence has gained a great deal of importance to an extent that it is at times considered more essential than the natural Intelligence Quotient. This is because social intelligent people have that tendency to draw a line between their personality and their behaviors with reference to their actions after being triggered by different situations. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 6)In a group of individuals these different behavior styles are portrayed. Like for instance in this youth group that was formed to minimize abject poverty among the youth, most of the members had Dominance and Steadiness styles of behavior. The ones with the Dominance beh avioral style had uncontrollable zeal to be the key office bearers and by chance almost all of them were the ones who occupied the key positions within the group and beside that they were the ones who speeded up the decision making processes following their desires to achieve great things within short periods.On the other hand, those with Steadiness style of behavior were so fond of working with several rest periods incorporated in between, enjoyed delegating and making follow ups on group’s activities. Much of the long term planning was being handled by them. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 5) The ones with the dominance behavioral style were risk takers and they took great pleasure to experiment new things and being the ones in charge of every group’s activity.They seemed to be fascinated by the fact that they were hard working especially after realizing that they were being driven by their strong desire to achieve greater things without impediments on the way. The ones with t he Steadiness style of behavior were quite proactive and they enjoyed working in communal with full anticipation that the entire group will benefit from their efforts. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 6) The dominance behavioral stylists were very impatient when things went at a slow pace. They were naturally fast-paced and enjoyed doing things in great speed.Their counterparts, the Steadiness stylists, took things slowly and with great care. The dominance behavioral stylists were product-oriented and innovators. They loved seeing their efforts give rise to fruits as quick as they exerted and without taking precautions, they enjoyed trying new ideas. The Steadiness behavioral stylists on the other hand, were slow but sure. They were not that much concerned about the quick feedbacks in terms of result since they were quite patient and usually took the back seat and gave a keen look as things rolled out. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 31)The dominance behavioral stylists were quite self-centered in that they concentrated all their efforts on a particular activity with the ultimate intension of satisfying their ego. The Steadiness behavioral stylists worked extra hard and found great pleasure in things that worked best for the good of all. The dominance behavioral stylists had a â€Å"don’t care† attitude. They did things deliberately and with less concern about other people’s feelings. They were willing to provoke and make others mad with the mentality that their offended will without hesitation find it easy to forgive them.They believed in apologizing rather than seeking for permission to do things. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 14) The dominance behavioral stylists believed in being good at multitasking thus they went for several activities with a greedy anticipation that they would all be achieved within a stipulated duration. The Steadiness behavioral stylists enjoyed doing their things one after the other at ago. They seemed not to worry so much about time so long as what they intended to do came to be realized or implemented finally. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 15)The dominance behavior stylists were quite bold and took up new challenges with full authority and tackled problems as they emerged. The Steadiness stylists were a bit reluctant when faced by challenges following their strong belief in team work. For matters to be solved in short time, the entire group had to be assigned the duty to deliberate over it and come up with a tangible solution. The dominance behavioral stylists were never contented by the status quo opportunities. They liked dramatic changes and new exposures. Thus they were adventurous.The Steadiness behavioral stylists on the other hand had no problem with the status quo though at times they raised their eye brows when they felt the status quo tended to be an impediment for the group’s growth and development. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 14) The dominance behavior stylists and the Steadiness behavior stylists were both goal oriented. They were both driven by the innate force to have things done with an overall intension of improving the situation of the group. Both the dominance behavioral stylists and the steadiness behavioral stylists took up responsibilities differently.Thus the combination of their efforts and fortitude made the group achieve greater and greater set goals since everyone’s contributions counted. The tasks handled by both stylists formed a strong basis upon which goals and aspirations concerning the growth of the group were realized. . (Alessandra, 2008, p. 5) Both the dominance behavioral stylists and the steadiness behavioral stylists were quite optimistic in that they constantly indulged themselves in activities with a broader picture of bringing considerable benefit for the group.Both the dominance behavioral stylists and the steadiness behavioral stylists were receptive to challenges and acted upon them differently. They were positive on taking up challenges thus they we re not easily brought down or distorted from what they were doing for the group. Both the dominance behavioral stylists and the steadiness behavioral stylists took up active roles in conducting the group’s activities. Every one had certain expectations when it came about performing their duties for the group and with that the work load was shared equally among the members.Both the dominance behavioral stylists and the steadiness stylists planned before they took action though the time frames differed. . (Alessandra, 2008, p. 14) The benefit of having these two behavioral styles being predominant in the youth group was that most of the members were exposed to learn the skills of coping well with the different personalities. This was especially during the conduct of tasks where after being assigned different duties different members were expected to deliver their best for the betterment of the good.Therefore, through cooperation among and within the members all came to be reali zed. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 34) Having the two behavioral styles in the group enabled every member to have an inner cognition and appreciation of the nature and ability in terms of performance that different individuals had without underrating and despising one another. The group members came into terms with the fact that constant earlier experienced group’s dynamics were problematic and mostly were the cause of underperformance that the group experienced.The problem was discovered to be promoted by the misinterpretation that initially most of the members had over others, and thus the idea of keenly understanding one another much deeper helped a lot to minimize the wrangles. (Alessandra, 2008, p. 6) The skills of multitasking by the dominance behavioral stylists was disseminated to the Steadiness behavioral stylists and others thus the group faced little difficulties in terms of implementing activities that require bigger man power. The members could take up tasks that initial ly they thought were meant to be for the best of the best individuals.Leadership positions kept on rotating from one individual to another since everyone was deemed a potential leader. With this the group kept on doing quite well as new and new ideas on how to better the group were brought forward by the different leaders. Encouragement and motivational comments were also given out to every member so as to boost their self esteem. The fact that these two behavioral styles happened to be predominant in the group gave a room for social learning where at least every was made to discover his/ her strength and weaknesses in as far as good behavior is concerned.(Alessandra, 2008, p. 6) CONCLUSION The Disc Platinum Rule of Behavioral Style is a form of gauging tool that tries to give a clear picture of the personality composition that different individuals have. The major behavioral styles that have been highlightened above show the differences associated with different personalities. Ever y individual is therefore expected to force him/her self to accommodate and relate comfortably with people who happen to have different behavioral style.The best way recommended by DPRA for proper interaction is for individuals to treat others fairly well the same way they expect others to treat them. With this tension will be minimized and as a result unity and harmony will prevail among a group of people, besides the rapport among them being strong. The different behavioral styles to some extent form a strong basis upon which individuals can be categorized with reference to their temperaments. The behavioral styles make a clear resemblance of the different temperaments though in an indirect version.The behavioral styles by and large march with the four major temperaments. Thus it is worth noting that there is a strong connection between an individual’s behavior and his/her temperament despite the slight differences that might be noticed. REFERENCE Alessandra, T. , (2008) Pl atinum Rule Behavioral Style Assessment. Custom edition from The University of Phoenix. Available at http://UOP. BlanchardAssessments. com Accessed on July 17, 2008. Alessandra, T. & O’Connor, M, J. (1996) The Platinum Rule: Discover the Four BasicBusiness Personalities. -And How They Can Lead You to Success. Available at www. amazon. com/ The Platinum Rule: Discover the Four Basic Business Personalities. Accessed on July 17, 2008. Alessandra, T. , O’Connor, M, J. & Dyke, J, V. People Smarts – Bending the Golden Rule to Give Others What They Want. Available at www. amazon. com/People-Smarts-Bending-Golden-Others. . Accessed on July 17, 2008. Bonnstetter, J. & Suiter, R. (2001). The Universal Language DISC, Skills Training Manual for Treating behaviour.. Available at www. dropbears.com/b/broughsbooks/health/psychology_personality. htm . Accessed on July 17, 2008. Ritchey, T. & Koehler, B. (1998) I’m Stuck, You’re Stuck. The Power of 360 Feedback. Gu lf Publishers. Straw, J. & Koehler, B, (2002) The 4-Dimensional Manager. Disc strategies for managing Different people in the best ways. Available at www. amazon. com/Dimensional-Manager-Strategies-Managing-Different. Accessed on July 17, 2008 Hersey, P. , Blanchard, K, H,(1993),Management of Organizational Behavior, A guide to utilizing human resource. Prentice Hall.