Week 6:  Theories in Action: Five factor personality trait model (FFM)

       This week we carried out another investigative request, and in the completion of it I observed the application of another leadership model–the Five Factor Personality Trait Model (FFM). FFM is a model that  a vast number of leadership scholars and researchers have utilized with the intent of formulating a set of traits that are most closely related to both a leader’s efficacy as well as emergence. The five core traits being analyzed in this particular model are openness to experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism. 

      Per this investigative request we were asked to locate potential witnesses as well as speak with the alleged victim in the case. However, this request was extremely complicated due to the fact that we were only provided with nicknames by the client which required us to do some extra digging in order to not only figure out the actual names, but their numbers and/or place of residence. After attempting to locate this information from a number of databases, most of the results were inconclusive, primarily because in order to retrieve information these systems require a legal name. Thus, it became clear that this information would need to be gathered from talking to people on or near the scene who may be familiar with the parties involved. Given this, it was critical that the lead investigator incorporated a number of personality traits that would facilitate this process. 

      One of the traits that was both applied and effective in the investigator’s approach is his openness to experience. The location by which the incident occurred is one that is heavily populated with spanish-speaking immigrants as well as relatively impoverished. Even further, given the socioeconomic status of the area, it is also heavily crime-filled and has many people in the area who suffer from substance abuse. With all of this in mind, it becomes imperative that the investigator, whose upbringing differs from theirs substantially, enters the situation with an ability to be open to their experiences. This is critical due to the fact that if he had entered the scene closed off and unreceptive to the struggles that these people face, then he would be unable to properly communicate with them. Given the uniqueness of each and every human being, it is not uncommon that people with two different upbringings and paths may need or want to communicate with each other. Yet, their differences only entice a disconnection when they are overlooked as if they do not exist or when they fuel intolerance. However, with the capacity to be open to different experiences this can be resolved, and the investigator actions adhere to this. By speaking to each and every person without judgement and with an open mind, he was able to gather not only the names of the individuals but to do so from civilians that were very different from himself. Further in that regard, it was also crucial that the investigator was able to exude extraversion. As stated the lives of the people being interviewed, whom are critical to the case, were very different than that of the investigator. Thus, in order to assist with the tension between them it was most effective that he be openly communicating which is demonstrated when being overtly expressive and vocal as is an extroverted person. In doing this he invites conversation between himself and the witness in a way that may not have been possible had the investigator been closed off or reserved. 

          Another trait that I observed and found to be useful in conducting this investigative request is conscientiousness. This refers to how thorough an individual is in completing their work which the investigator demonstrated to be in this case. As mentioned, there was not a lot of information provided in the investigative request which required the investigator to tie together strings to figure out situations. One of the ways in which this thoroughness was exhibited is by sitting at one of the local stores by which one of the witnesses is said to spend time. Although the investigator could have merely continued to look for the witness’s contact information, the investigator took it upon himself to attempt to physically locate him. Further, when the witness did not arrive at the scene for a period of time the investigator began to talk to individuals who were there that potentially knew either the witness or client. Again, demonstrating a dedication to identifying and locating the witness. 

       As for agreeableness and neuroticism, these were two traits that were not necessarily apparent in the completion of this request. Neuroticism refers to the tendency of individuals towards anxiety, depression, self-doubt, and other negative feelings. Throughout the duration of the investigation none of these attributes, and the trait overall, was not exhibited. This is more than likely due to the fact that the exhibition of such behavior could have been off putting to the witnesses, making them less willing to cooperate, given his appearance of lack of expertise. 

       Additionally, according to the FFM agreeableness tends to be highly correlated with being caring and gentle. While this is at times appropriate when investigating, such as if talking to an alleged victim, this was not necessary in conducting this investigation though it could be helpful, its absence was not harmful.