IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iim/iimawp/8442.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding the "Business Type": A Comparitive Analysis of Management Students and Business Executives

Author

Listed:
  • Desai Tejas A
  • Sharda, Kirti

Abstract

Study of personality type has contributed a lot to our understanding and prediction of human behaviour, especially in organizational contexts. A great deal of interest is especially focused on what types of people are most effective in different management environments. This study aimed to identify differences in psychological types of management students and business executives using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). It investigated two research objectives (a) to identify the psychological types of management students and business executives (b) to compare the average psychological types of management students and business executives for differences on four MBTI dimensions . extraversion-introversion (EI), sensing-intuition (SN), thinking-feeling (TF), and judging-perceiving (JP), Empirical analysis of data collected from 119 respondents (management students and business executives) revealed that the average .psychological type. of management students was INTJ while that of business executives was ISTJ. While there was no significant difference between the two groups on extraversion/introversion and thinking/feeling dimensions, business executives appeared to be to more sensing and judging types on an average than management students. The implications of these findings for both management practice and education are discussed in the paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Desai Tejas A & Sharda, Kirti, 2009. "Understanding the "Business Type": A Comparitive Analysis of Management Students and Business Executives," IIMA Working Papers WP2009-11-03, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:iim:iimawp:8442
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iima.ac.in/sites/default/files/rnpfiles/2009-11-03Desai.pdf
    File Function: English Version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mary O. Borg & Stephen L. Shapiro, 1996. "Personality Type and Student Performance in Principles of Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 3-25, January.
    2. Davis, Donald L & Elnicki, Richard A, 1984. "User cognitive types for decision support systems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 601-614.
    3. Paul C. Nutt, 1990. "Strategic Decisions Made By Top Executives And Middle Managers With Data And Process Dominant Styles," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 173-194, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matteo Cristofaro, 2016. "Cognitive styles in dynamic decision making: a laboratory experiment," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(1), pages 53-82.
    2. Stephen Hickson, 2016. "Maybe the Boys Just Like Economics More - The Gender Gap and the Role of Personality Type in Economics Education," Working Papers in Economics 16/07, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    3. Erlane K. Ghani & Kamaruzzaman Muhammad, 2016. "The Effect of Freemind on Students’ Performance in an Advanced Financial Accounting Course," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 6(7), pages 262-275, July.
    4. Semeijn,J. & Velden,R.,Van der, 1999. "Aspects of learning style and labour market entry an explorative study," ROA Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    5. L A Franco & M Meadows, 2007. "Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(12), pages 1621-1629, December.
    6. Erlane K Ghani & Jamaliah Said & Kamaruzzaman Muhammad, 2012. "The Effect of Teaching Format, Students¡¯ Ability and Cognitive Effort on Accounting Students¡¯ Performance," International Journal of Learning and Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 2(3), pages 81-98, June.
    7. Oskar Harmon & William Alpert & Joseph Histen, 2014. "Online Discussion and Learning Outcomes," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 20(1), pages 33-44, February.
    8. Ambrose & Cheryl A. Kier, 2017. "On Students’ Perception of a Multi-Scheme Assessment Method," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 17(1), pages 40-52, Spring.
    9. Taran Patel, 2006. "Comparing the Usefulness of Conventional and Recent Personality Assessment Tools," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 7(2), pages 195-218, August.
    10. Roger B. Butters & Carlos J. Asarta & Tammie J. Fischer, 2011. "Human Capital in The Classroom: The Role of Teacher Knowledge in Economic Literacy," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(2), pages 47-57, November.
    11. Charles H. Breeden & Noreen Lephardt, 2005. "Changes in Student Attitudes toward the Market System and the Introductory Microeconomics Course," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 21(Fall 2005), pages 164-179.
    12. Hart Hodges & Yvonne Durham & Steve Henson, 2018. "Economic Education Production Functions for the Principles of Macroeconomics and the Principles of Microeconomics: Is There a Difference?," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 18(2), pages 22-41, Fall.
    13. Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.
    14. Yvonne Durham & Thomas Mckinnon & Craig Schulman, 2007. "Classroom Experiments: Not Just Fun And Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(1), pages 162-178, January.
    15. Sebastian Kruse & David Bendig & Malte Brettel, 2023. "How Does CEO Decision Style Influence Firm Performance? The Mediating Role of Speed and Innovativeness in New Product Development," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1205-1235, July.
    16. John Kane & Larry Spizman, 1999. "Determinants of Student Retention of Microeconomic Concepts," Departmental Working Papers 199901, Department of Economics, SUNY-Oswego, revised 18 Mar 1999.
    17. Anthony Barilla & Darrell Parker & Chris Paul, 2005. "An Educational Note on Locus of Control and Personality Type in the Formation of Students' Attitudes Toward Economic Institutions," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 20(Spring 20), pages 192-202.
    18. Ann L. Owen, 2011. "Student Characteristics, Behavior, and Performance in Economics Classes," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Steven Dickey & Robert Houston Jr., 2009. "Disaggregating Education Production," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(2), pages 135-144, June.
    20. András István Kun & Marietta Kiss & Anna Kapitány, 2015. "The Effect Of Personality On Academic Performance: Evidence From Two University Majors," Business Education and Accreditation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 7(1), pages 13-24.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iim:iimawp:8442. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eciimin.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.