MGT 514 Module 1 Self-Understanding at Work Example

Better at Dispatch Than at Listening: What Six Coworkers' Ratings Taught a New Night Supervisor About Self-Assessment

Student Name

Master of Business Administration, Aspen University

MGT 514: Human Relations Management

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

Better at Dispatch Than at Listening: What Six Coworkers' Ratings Taught a New Night Supervisor About Self-Assessment

For five years, I dispatched tow trucks and roadside service on the night shift at Green Country Towing, a composite company in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that handles police-ordered tows, accident recoveries and roadside calls for an auto club. Last month I became night supervisor, responsible for four dispatchers and nine drivers through the twelve overnight hours. The promotion came because nobody on the floor moved calls faster or with fewer errors than I did. I knew that supervising would require different skills, so before starting I rated myself on eight skills and asked six coworkers, three dispatchers and three drivers, to rate me anonymously on the same scale.

What the Ratings Showed

Why Self-Assessment Misleads

Dunning et al. (2004) reviewed research on self-assessment in health, education and the workplace and concluded that people's views of their own skills and character are only modestly related to their actual performance. People tend to see themselves as above average, overlook information that would correct them and judge themselves by intentions while others judge them by behavior. My coworkers did not see my intention to be helpful; they saw me interrupting callers and finishing new dispatchers' sentences.

The Least Skilled Know Least

Kruger and Dunning (1999) found in several studies that people who performed worst on tests of logic, grammar and humor overestimated their performance most. The skills needed to do well are often the same skills needed to recognize doing well. My largest gaps came in listening and patience, skills I had little reason to practice as a fast dispatcher working alone. The research suggests I may not have been able to see these gaps without others' ratings.

Confidence Is Not the Enemy

Judge and Bono (2001) combined studies of four core self-evaluation traits, self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, internal locus of control and emotional stability, and found each related positively to job satisfaction and job performance. Confidence helped me on the dispatch floor, and coworkers rated my calm in emergencies higher than I did. The lesson is not to doubt myself in everything but to match confidence to evidence, keeping it where it is earned and testing it where it is not.

Why Supervising Feels Different

Dispatching rewarded speed. A good dispatcher hears a location, a vehicle type and a problem, and has a truck rolling in under a minute. I was good at it because I cut conversations short and acted. Supervising rewards different behavior: drawing out what a new dispatcher does not understand, hearing a driver who is frustrated after a dangerous roadside call and explaining decisions so people accept them. The habits that earned my promotion are the same habits my coworkers flagged. Seeing this helped me understand the ratings as a change in what the job needs rather than a judgment of my character.

Where I Was Too Hard on Myself

The ratings were not all bad news. Coworkers rated my calm in emergencies and my willingness to admit mistakes higher than I did. I had remembered the nights I got flustered and forgotten the many I did not. Dunning and colleagues note that self-assessments can err in both directions, and mine did: too generous on listening, too harsh on composure.

What the Gaps Mean for My Relationships

New dispatchers learn by asking questions, and my habit of answering before they finish tells them their questions are a burden. Drivers who call with problems on the road need to be heard before they are directed. One driver wrote that I "solve the call but not the person." Fairness ratings suggest drivers believe I give easier calls to dispatchers and drivers I like. Whether or not that is true, the belief affects how the crew works with me.

Patterns Behind the Scores

Looking at the written comments beside the scores, I noticed a pattern. Nearly every low rating mentioned the first thirty seconds of a conversation: I answer before the question ends, I start typing while a driver is still describing a problem, I say "got it" too early. The fix may be smaller than the scores suggest, a habit of waiting and repeating back, rather than a change in who I am.

How I Felt Reading the Ratings

My first reaction was defensive. I wanted to explain each low score: the new dispatchers ask the same question five times, the drivers call at the worst moments. After a day, I reread the comments and noticed that several came from people I respect most. Ashamed is too strong a word, but I was surprised, and the surprise itself was the lesson: I had been confident about something I had never checked.

A Plan for Continuing Feedback

I will meet each dispatcher and driver monthly for ten minutes and ask one question: what should I do differently? I will practice letting new dispatchers finish their questions and repeating back what I heard before answering. I will post the call assignment rules so fairness can be checked. And I will repeat the anonymous ratings in six months to see whether the gaps have narrowed.

What I Asked My Manager For

I shared the ratings with the operations manager and asked for two things: a monthly conversation focused on my supervising, not on call volumes, and permission to spend part of each shift sitting beside new dispatchers rather than at my own console. She agreed to both and suggested I shadow the day supervisor, who coworkers describe as an excellent listener, for two shifts.

Conclusion

My coworkers' ratings showed what research on self-assessment predicts: I judged myself by my intentions and my strongest skills, while others judged me by my behavior in areas I had rarely practiced. Dunning, Heath and Suls and Kruger and Dunning explain why the gaps were invisible to me, and Judge and Bono remind me that confidence, matched to evidence, is an asset. Regular feedback will keep my self-understanding honest.

References

Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits, self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability, with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.80

Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121