Ilm 3 Analysis of Development Needs and Learning Styles
Analysis of development needs and learning styles
Development needs analysis:
Firstly, in order to understand both my own and selected member of my team’s development needs I first had to understand our personality traits such as temperament, preference, psychological and emotional competencies to accurately decide where both personal and business development would be most effective as a result of the type of person/employee we were.
To ascertain our personality types I utilised the ‘Keirsey Temperament Sorter’, a 70 question personality instrument the results of which enabled me to gain criteria of both myself and my team member based on 4 preferences: 1. Energy 2. Information 3. Decision Making 4. Life Orientation.
Learning styles:
In addition to understanding and discovering our personality types I also had to have the appreciation as to what our learning styles were in order to later best decide how to continue with the development. Using ‘Honey & Mumford’s’ self development tool (The learning styles questionnaire) again, both myself and team member answered the series of yes/no questions in order to give us results of where our answers matched four learning styles found within Honey & Mumford’s cycle (Activist, Reflector, Theorist & Pragmatist). Based on how our answers matched each style a graph was drawn to plot our learning style profile that when matched with a preference table we could easily match where our preferences leaned towards.
Recording outcomes and techniques used:
From the results of the Keirsey sorter I personally displayed the INFJ (Introvert, Intuitive, Feeling & Judging) profile whereas my colleague resulted in the ESFJ (Extraversion, Sensing, Feeling & Judging) profile. From the Honey & Mumford learning style tool I displayed the following preferences: Activist (5 - Low), Theorist (16 - Very strong), Reflector (14 - Moderate) & Pragmatist (15 - Strong), whereas my team members displayed the
Development needs analysis:
Firstly, in order to understand both my own and selected member of my team’s development needs I first had to understand our personality traits such as temperament, preference, psychological and emotional competencies to accurately decide where both personal and business development would be most effective as a result of the type of person/employee we were.
To ascertain our personality types I utilised the ‘Keirsey Temperament Sorter’, a 70 question personality instrument the results of which enabled me to gain criteria of both myself and my team member based on 4 preferences: 1. Energy 2. Information 3. Decision Making 4. Life Orientation.
Learning styles:
In addition to understanding and discovering our personality types I also had to have the appreciation as to what our learning styles were in order to later best decide how to continue with the development. Using ‘Honey & Mumford’s’ self development tool (The learning styles questionnaire) again, both myself and team member answered the series of yes/no questions in order to give us results of where our answers matched four learning styles found within Honey & Mumford’s cycle (Activist, Reflector, Theorist & Pragmatist). Based on how our answers matched each style a graph was drawn to plot our learning style profile that when matched with a preference table we could easily match where our preferences leaned towards.
Recording outcomes and techniques used:
From the results of the Keirsey sorter I personally displayed the INFJ (Introvert, Intuitive, Feeling & Judging) profile whereas my colleague resulted in the ESFJ (Extraversion, Sensing, Feeling & Judging) profile. From the Honey & Mumford learning style tool I displayed the following preferences: Activist (5 - Low), Theorist (16 - Very strong), Reflector (14 - Moderate) & Pragmatist (15 - Strong), whereas my team members displayed the