I took a personality test for a job interview, and found it surprising how rating 64 words could come out with such a long description of me. Some of it I like, some of it I don’t, and the bit about me being uncomfortable around people that bend the truth and therefore avoiding a job in law or politics is priceless.
Anyway here it is:
Rosemary is an optimistic and capable individual who is normally able to cope with change in a flexible
manner. She has a tendency to be creative and likes the challenge of new ideas. Such people are generally
much sought after in today’s rapidly changing world of work, in which reorganisation is both necessary and
inevitable as a result of the increasingly competitive market. She is likely to be the type of person who is
able to act decisively when putting new ideas into practice. Both her enthusiasm and persuasive manner
should have the effect of motivating others.
• Rosemary is not easily discouraged and focuses on success rather than failure which means that she should
be particularly hardy and able to cope with stress at work. However, while her influence will generally be
beneficial, it will usually require active support from her supervisors if it is to result in success. Her optimism
should inspire confidence, but her capacity to achieve results would be much enhanced in the presence of
colleagues of a similar underlying disposition. Many organisations have learnt to their peril that the forces
of inertia can be overwhelming, and that managing change requires the introduction of change agents at
several levels of management.
• Rosemary tends to be a trustworthy person, and to believe in the value of honesty and integrity in her
dealings with others. She usually has little time for manipulation or deceit as a means of achieving her ends
and can feel uncomfortable if expected or tempted to tell deliberate lies in order to further her objectives.
Rosemary will generally show concern and be considerate towards colleagues, being fair in her dealings
with them. Her natural inclination is to be helpful and to do her best to understand their problems in an
unselfish way. In a supervisory position, her caring nature would be expected to lead her to exercise
authority in a charitable and sympathetic manner.
• Rosemary’s ability to put others before herself means that colleagues may benefit from her supportive
nature in the work environment. She is not generally comfortable in the company of those whose careers
depends on twisting the truth, and can become confused when confronted with the contradictions inherent
in their position. She is probably not suited to a career in some occupations within sales, politics or the law
that depend on seeing things from several points of view.
• Rosemary appears to be a little more easy going than average in her attitude to work. She tends to value
both her work environment and her social life at home and outside her employment. She is reasonably
tolerant concerning other people’s styles of working, although she has a preference for those who do not
take matters too seriously, liking people who share her own balanced view. Like most people, she is less
content when the work environment becomes difficult or when the pressure to perform becomes excessive.
She is able to work unsupervised so long as she has been given adequate instructions. Similarly she works
best with clear guidelines concerning allowances and time off, and will attempt to keep to these.
• Rosemary’s critical skills appear to be in the high average range for the working population. She tends to be
quite independent and usually prefers to make up her own mind rather than have it made for her. On the
other hand, she can be expected to be loyal to organisational values when she agrees with them. She will
normally thrive in an atmosphere in which her own ideas and those of the company coincide. She is usually
able to act on her own initiative and will take pride in her position, especially if her supervisors have been
able to show that they have confidence in her. She may sometimes be inclined to question the justification
for certain aspects of policy, but this will normally be done constructively.
Those that know me, what do you think?
