MEMORANDUM

To: Professor Marchesseault

From: Stephenie Tuntland
Date: October 17, 2019
Subject: My Professional Brand Narrative Analysis
____________________________________________________________________________

The memorandum will provide a summarization and analysis of my Leadership Communication

Evaluation results that I will use to develop my personal brand and Professional Digital Profile.
The information included will highlight an analysis of my personal and perceived PeopleStyle,
differences among my Culture Map scores, as well as common themes in my core values and
outside perceptions. From this assignment, I learned that there are ways I am perceived in a
professional setting that align with how I perceive myself and ways I can further develop my
personal brand.

PeopleStyle Analysis
Personal PeopleStyle
When I took the Leadership Communication Evaluation at the beginning of the semester, I self-
identified as an Analytical PeopleStyle. This was determined by my low scores on composite
assertiveness and composite responsiveness, both which were -3.00. Initially, I was surprised that
I scored low on composite responsiveness because I enjoy being social both in and out of the
workplace. I thought I had a strong understanding on my PeopleStyle, but majority of my
evaluators perceived me as a different PeopleStyle.

Perceived PeopleStyle
Surprisingly, I received a variety of PeopleStyle responses from my evaluators. Three of my
evaluators identified myself as a Driver PeopleStyle, in addition to one Expressive and one
Analytical PeopleStyle. Out of my results, my average composite assertiveness score was a 3.00
and my average composite responsiveness scale remained a -3.00. The difference in my personal
PeopleStyle and my perceived PeopleStyle can be accounted for by the audience I distributed
this evaluation to. I asked both past and current supervisors to evaluate my behavior and their
responses reflect how I am perceived strictly in a work setting, while I was considering my
overall personality. It is evident from this that how I am perceived inside of a work environment
differs from how I see myself in a social and work environment. This is even more apparent
through my cultural map differences.

Cultural Map Differences

The Cultural Map scores obtained from my evaluators are fairly similar to my self-evaluation
scores, except for trusting and disagreeing. My evaluators rated myself a 1.8 for trusting and a 3
for disagreeing while I rated myself a relative 3.33 and 1.33. I am perceived as building trust
with others through completing tasks together and am likely to avoid confrontation. The
disconnect between my received scores and my personal scores likely stems from how I act in a
work environment, versus a casual environment.
Common Themes
Core Values
The perceived core values I received can be grouped into two categories- compassion and
integrity. I received responses such as kindness, caring, and passion, as well as honesty, integrity,
and respect. These align very closely with my personal core values- passion, drive, and
philanthropy. One of my evaluators responded that I demonstrate these values through my
willingness to complete any tasks, no matter what it takes. I am extremely pleased that this is
how I am perceived by my respondents and will definitely integrate these values with my own in
my Professional Digital Profile. Other perceptions of myself from my evaluators also contain
common themes.

Outside Perceptions
I am perceived by my evaluators as kind, hardworking, and driven. My evaluators say that I
contribute to a positive work environment and contribute valuable innovation and critical
thinking. An improvement that I could make to how others perceive me is exuding more self-
confidence. This is definitely something I have been working on and will continue to incorporate
self-confidence into my interactions with others, both professionally and personally. In addition
to my evaluators noticing my lack of self-confidence, it was surprising to learn what other trends
they identified.

Surprising Responses
Some of the responses I received on the individual PeopleStyle questions surprised me. I scored
4/5 on less likely to use infliction in voice, a 3/5 in less apt to show feelings, and a 5/5 for less
likely to engage in small-talk or tell anecdotes. All of these responses contribute to both the
Analytical and Driver PeopleStyle that I most identify with. I consider myself a personable
person, however with these three scores, I don’t show that I enjoy connecting with others. I will
use these responses moving forward to gain a better understanding of the difference in how
others are perceiving me and how I feel I am being perceived.

Synthesis and Conclusion

Through analyzing this information against my self-assessment results, I am able to gain a better
understanding of my communication style and further develop my personal brand. Although I
perceive myself as a Analytical PeopleStyle, it has come to my attention that I am mostly
perceived as a Driver PeopleStyle. The difference in how my evaluators responded and how I
analyzed myself can be attributed to their strictly professional view and my overall analysis of
my personality. Despite the difference in PeopleStyles, my core values and other perceptions are
accurately portrayed through my personal brand. The outside perception this assignment
provides me with will be utilized in modifying my personal brand.

This memorandum summarized my findings from parts one through three of the Professional
Brand Narrative Assignment and provided me with insight for creating my Professional Digital
Profile. After analyzing my PeopleStyle, Cultural Map differences, and common themes among
my responses, I am better equipped to accurately portray my personal brand. Please contact me
at sjtuntland@email.arizona.edu should you have any further questions about my analysis.