Just who is Bill Duncan?
The university I graduated from in the 1950s recently asked me to participate in a student study called a personal characteristics survey. It seemed like a worthwhile project so I answer a detailed questionnaire. The university assured me that my privacy would be protected and my identity unknown, since I was but a number.
So number 646012 participated. I now have the results and like many of these blind studies one can take the results as right on the mark, or dismiss them as just another waste of time. I haven’t decided on all the conclusions, but most of the conclusions had me pegged.
For example, under the questions to determine if I was serious or cheerful, I scored right in the middle, but a survey comment said that "I had a slight edge toward the cheerful end." Under the question was I reserved or sociable, the report said I was "in the upper average range toward the sociable end." I don’t know that I agree with that, but the report did say I was "cautious and reserved about new situations" and preferred to work alone.
Under the terms reticent or persuasive, I was in the lower average range and slightly toward the reticent end, which indicated I was more inclined to be reserved, quiet, or silent when it comes to a group discussion or a group decision. Those who know me would have never guessed that personality quirk.
Under the routine Vs flexible trait, I had mixed scores toward both a preference of routine, but concluded that I tended to demand an independence in my daily life. I scored on the quiet type on questions about on-the-go activities.
As to the question of being consistent or changeable, I was deemed consistent, level-headed, calm, relaxed and even tempered, but then the report had to go and say "older people tend to have scores more toward the consistent." If this is a blind study, how did they know my age?
On the question of comparing me to be an attentive, versus a distractible person, my score was much more toward the attentive end. It said I was above average in being able to concentrate on what I am doing even in a chaotic environment. Obvious these people never worked in a newsroom for a daily newspaper.
Under leadership I had a very high score, with the report saying I was capable of leading people, being responsible for making major decisions and being an authority in my field. The report scored me high in philosophical curiosity and said I was keen on my cultural heritage, reading books about the meaning of life, and being creative in my daily endeavors.
The results of the study gave me a high score on stick-to-it-ness and said I was happy in my work situation and always knew exactly what is expected of me. I am likely to feel a sense of accomplishment after having completed a task. The study also gave me a very high score on working independently and said I liked being my own boss, setting my own schedule for doing tasks, having the freedom to come and go as I pleased, being able to decide what parts of a job should be given priority and to generally get the job done.
The final report said my answers were compared with people in the general population and said my answers described me as more adventurous than most people in the general population. It found that I scored high in being adventurous, talented, considerate, orderly (good thing this was a blind survey and the scorekeepers didn’t get a peek at my office clutter) and being forceful.
The spoiler to this feel good survey came with a note that there are no good or bad scores. The scores only tell the individual how they compare to other people.
And here I thought I was unique.
(Bill Duncan can be reached by writing to P.O. Box 812, Roseburg, OR 97470)