It is always difficult to provide an objective justification of oneself because one examines one’s actions and beliefs in a biased way. In the majority of cases, an individual suggests that their position is the only correct alternative and may interpret various conflicts and complex situations to their advantage.  Also, you can read a sample interview paper. It can be helpful for you in presenting yourself. However, I will try to present the key qualities of my personality in an objective way as well as provide the corresponding justifications for my claims and positions. 

I suggest that the following three characteristics describe my personality in an optimal way. First, I believe that I am a self-critical person. Second, I almost always try to find the solutions that are beneficial for all people involved. Thus, I am sensitive to the needs of other people. Third, I try to find the optimal balance between my theoretical knowledge and practical experience. I think that it is reasonable to balance correct theories with the corresponding empirical information. In this way, sustainable social development can be promoted. 

It is necessary to explain all my characteristics as well as provide relevant practical examples that prove their correctness. I claim that I am a self-critical person. It means that I realize that I can make mistakes, and some of my decisions are not optimal. In order to determine the optimal degree of self-criticism, I try to evaluate the current level of my expertise in a particular field. If I consider myself to be an expert is a specific area of knowledge, I tend to assign a higher degree of significance and reliability to my claims and statements. Otherwise, I pay attention to positions of other people. In any case, I try to use logic and reason to arrive at the most plausible conclusions about the analyzed facts, events, or processes.

The following example of my self-critical attitude can be provided. I have participated in a discussion about the sources and potential solutions to the growing inequality in the world. Both other people and I agreed that the levels of the global disparity tended to increase dramatically. My initial position was that the major source of inequality was the difference in availability of technology in developed and developing countries. I believed that developed countries possessed unique knowledge and technologies. Therefore, they could invest funds and maximize their wealth. Correspondingly, developing countries did not possess such knowledge and resources; thus, they had to rely on the non-optimal methods of production.

However, one of my opponents stated that the availability of knowledge was not the key problem in this context, because many experts and business people from developing countries possessed the necessary knowledge from different sources including direct observation of the most effective companies in the developed countries. However, they lacked capital and financial resources for implementing these innovations. In general, I agreed with this position as many developing countries with low standards of living had comparatively high educational levels.

We also had some disagreements regarding the optimal strategies that should be pursued for diminishing the existing inequality in the world. I believed that national governments should play a more important role and collect higher taxes from people with high incomes and redistribute them among developing countries. However, my opponent provided reliable statistical information that demonstrated that governments had low efficiency of utilizing scarce financial and economic resources. Therefore, he proposed to allocate additional resources to NGOs and other international organizations that had the necessary experience in this field and proved their efficiency. I examined the available data and agreed with him.

In the analyzed situation, I reconsidered my initial position twice, both regarding the major factors contributing to inequality and the potential response strategies. Therefore, it seems that my claims of being a self-critical person are justified. It does not mean that I change my opinion about various facts and events very often. It means that I am open to reconsidering my initial position if I face considerable facts and arguments supporting the opposite point of view.

Another characteristic feature is the desire to find mutually beneficial solutions in all possible cases. I try to understand the needs and desires of other people and integrate them into my course of actions. In order to prove this claim, I will use a recent example of participating in an online competitions. There was a large number of competing teams and each team had to develop a project regarding desired community interventions. There were several parts of the project, and I as a team leader proposed each team member to concentrate on a specific stage of the project. I suggested that they could be integrated into a whole later.

However, I noticed that one of my team members was unsatisfied with this situation. Although she did not express her attitude directly, it was evident that she had different expectations. I decided to find out the source of the problem associated with the existing perception of the situation with a given team member. I had found out that she always specialized in economic and similar calculations. Therefore, she wanted to work only with calculating the expected positive effect of our proposed interventions. Instead, according to my distribution of functions, she had to perform a large number of other tasks that were difficult and uninteresting to her.

I evaluated her reasons and concerns and decided that it was reasonable to change the current distribution of functions and responsibilities among the team members. I consulted other individuals to specify their preferences. As a result, I redistributed the functions in another way. According to the new version, all team members had to concentrate not on different parts of the project, but on various functions. For example, some of them examined a major community’s needs; others tried to design several potential interventions; still others proposed complementary services. After this redistribution of functions, the initially unsatisfied team member was able to concentrate on economic analysis.

As a result, everyone was focused on the functions that they could perform in an optimal way. The performance of all team members improved due to these changes, and we were able to meet all initial deadlines and present our project to the larger audience. In fact, this case proves that I always try to orient to the needs and preferences of all people involved. Even if a single individual is unsatisfied with the existing situation, I try to address they needs if it does not create additional problems for other people. I believe that it is possible to balance the interests of all individuals in the vast majority of cases. I realize that the same initial objectives can be achieved with different methods and combinations of various important factors. Therefore, when I determine the source of the problem or dissatisfaction, I try to change my initial strategy accordingly.

The third important characteristic of mine is the belief that an optimal balance between my theoretical knowledge and practical experience can be found. I realize that deep knowledge and theoretical understanding of various events and processes allows for more reasonable and well-grounded decisions. For this reason, I try to deepen my knowledge in various fields and subjects. In this way, I can specify the relationships between the key causes and effects. Correspondingly, I can design proper interventions as well as make reliable forecasts and prognoses of future dynamics.

Moreover, the deep theoretical knowledge is necessary for excluding the options that contain explicit or implicit internal contradictions. If they exist, then it is reasonable to search for other alternatives or eliminate them. In general, proper theoretical understanding of subjects and processes is especially helpful at the stage of the preliminary analysis of various projects. It allows to allocate resources rationally.

Although adequate theoretical knowledge is crucial for modern professionals, I realize that considerable practical experience may also be helpful. The reason is that it is impossible to receive a perfectly correct perception of reality relying exclusively on theoretical considerations. For example, the knowledge regarding other people’s preferences and needs cannot be obtained from a priori reasoning. It should always include an empirical investigation of them, their responses, etc. I try to evaluate other people’s actions and make proper conclusions.

To support my claims, I want to present my experience of communicating with one individual with the help of social media. In the beginning, we could not understand each other. All my statements and proposals caused negative reactions. Although we could not arrive at an understanding on the majority of issues, I believed that I could clarify the source of the problem and improve the situation. During a conversation, I had found out that this individual was interested in yoga and Hinduism. I had a broad understanding of yoga and Hinduism but decided to deepen my knowledge through corresponding research.

Then, I began using relevant yoga terms to explain my position. For example, instead of stressing the importance of respecting other people’s rights, I could appeal to ahimsa (non-aggression). When I used this strategy, we began understanding each other. Our discussions became productive and mutually beneficial. We were able to achieve the desired agreement in the vast majority of cases. I simply transformed my usual way of presenting ideas into one more consistent with the views of this person.

I believe that this example proves that I always try to find a proper balance between theoretical and empirical knowledge. First, I determined that our communication was problematic. It was an empirical observation. Second, I decided that if I could determine the cause of the problem, I could improve the existing situation. It was my theoretical assumption. Third, I determined through empirical observation that he was interested in yoga and Hinduism. Fourth, I improved my theoretical knowledge of these subjects. Finally, I transformed my behavior and arrived at the mutually successful way of communication. Thus, the strategy of combining both theoretical and empirical elements contributed to the effective resolution of this situation.

In conclusion, I suggest that the presented three characteristics describe my personality in a correct way. They demonstrate that I am open to reconsidering my initial views if I face well-developed logical arguments. In addition, I consider the needs and desires of other people. I believe that it is possible to create such modes of interpersonal cooperation that are beneficial for all people involved. Finally, I try to balance my theoretical knowledge with corresponding empirical information I can obtain from my interactions with other people. I think that the provided examples and explanations have proved that these characteristics are typical for me. I will try to develop them further as well as work on improving my other skills.  

Contributor
Comments to: Purpose of Life