Reflective Writing: CVF Analysis and Managerial Competencies, MKT01097

This reflective writing assignment analyzes a student's self-assessment using the Competing Values Framework (CVF). The assignment compares two "spiderweb" profiles, highlighting changes in perceived managerial competencies across eight roles: director, broker, mentor, monitor, producer, innovator, facilitator, and coordinator. The student reflects on factors influencing these changes, including work, learning, and personal experiences. The analysis identifies strengths and weaknesses in leadership skills, particularly in facilitation and monitoring. The student concludes with an above-average self-assessment of their managerial competencies and provides a reference to Quinn et al., 2015, illustrating the application of CVF theory. The assignment demonstrates the student's ability to reflect on their development and apply theoretical frameworks to their personal growth.

REFLECTIVE WRITING-Competing Values Framework
Student’s Name
Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Date

Managerial competence is largely dependent on the ability of manager to effectively
between different competing roles. The Competing values framework identifies eight competing
roles that a manager must perform effectively in order to function effectively. These roles
include director, broker, mentor, monitor, producer, innovator, and facilitator and coordinator
(Quinn et al., 2015). As shown on my first spider web, Monitor producer and facilitator roles
were the notable areas in which I had the requisite skills.
By comparing the two attempts it is clearly visible that I have experienced areas of
notable changes between the first and second CVF spider webs. In particular, while in my first
CVF spider web I had three roles with an equal score of 6.0, broker role emerged as the most
competent area in the second CVF spider web. There was a notable improvement to this role
from the initial 5.5 to 6.5.A similar trend was also witnessed in the mentor role which improved
from 5.5 to 5.7, innovator role from 4.7 to 5.5 and coordinator role whose score improved from
5.8 to 6.0. On the contrary also, major reversal changes were also witnessed between the two
CVF Spider webs. For example the score for the monitor role declined from 6.0 recorded in the
first web to 5.2.Similarly, the scores recorded for producer and facilitator role declined to 5.2
down from 6.0 achieved in the first test. Finally, while the initial spider web identified the
innovator role as my weakest area, this was not the case in the second attempt. Based on these
results it is evident that areas of significant changes were experienced between the First and the
second spider web.
The changes witnessed in the two tests were precipitated by several factors which
can be categorized as work, learning and personal factors. Particularly, some of the notable
positive changes recorded in the second spider web were made possible by my unending desire

to learn. This was also made possible by the actual performance of work related functions and
interaction with other skilled professionals.
The interaction with the community had an impact on the results achieved in the second
survey. For example the interaction with management team learners reinforced my views on
mentor and innovator roles. The improvement in the scores for these two value leadership roles
can be attributed to this fact.
Taking part in the two surveys has greatly helped me to identify my leadership strengths
and weaknesses. Based on the results, I believe that the areas of facilitation and monitoring
require some improvement. My reason is based on the fact the scores for these specific was not
impressive as it ought to have been.
I am much aware of y competencies after taking part in the two surveys than I was
before. Therefore, if I were asked to describe my master management competencies, I would
gladly state that my management competencies are above average.

References
Quinn, R.E., Bright, D., Faerman, S.R., Thompson, M.P. and McGrath, M.R., 2015. Becoming a master
manager: A competing values approach. John Wiley & Sons.