Personality and job performance: the Big Five revisited

Prior meta-analyses investigating the relation between the Big 5 personality dimensions and job performance have all contained a threat to construct validity, in that much of the data included within these analyses was not derived from actual Big 5 measures. In addition, these reviews did not address the relations between the Big 5 and contextual performance. Therefore, the present study sought to provide a meta-analytic estimate of the criterion-related validity of explicit Big 5 measures for predicting job performance and contextual performance. The results for job performance closely paralleled 2 of the previous meta-analyses, whereas analyses with contextual performance showed more complex relations among the Big 5 and performance. A more critical interpretation of the Big 5-performance relationship is presented, and suggestions for future research aimed at enhancing the validity of personality predictors are provided.     

Incremental validity of person-organization fit over the Big Five personality measures

Few studies have provided the validity evidence of a measure of objective person-organization fit (P-O fit) as a selection tool. The present study used a concurrent validation design to examine the criterion-related validity and the incremental validity of a P-O fit measure beyond the validity of the Big Five personality test for predicting job performance (task performance and organizational citizenship behavior) and employee commitment (organizational commitment and supervisory commitment) for a group of high-tech professional employees in Taiwan. Results showed that P-O fit predicted the contextual component of overall job performance and was significantly related to two types of employee commitment. Moreover, P-O fit had an incremental validity beyond that of the personality measures for predicting some of our outcome variables.     

A large sample investigation of the presence of nonlinear personality-job performance relationships

We examine 123 data sets from validation studies of a single five-factor model-based occupational personality measure for evidence of curvilinear relationships with job performance. Research has produced discrepant findings about whether and when to expect curvilinear relationships between normal range personality measures and job performance. Previous studies have relied on small and unsystematic sampling, a variety of noncomparable performance criteria, the use of personality inventories for which construct validity evidence is not immediately available, and a focus on only one or two of the Big Five personality factors. We report minimal evidence of curvilinearity, suggesting that these effects are unlikely to undermine typical uses of personality test scores in decision making. Any expected declines in performance at high ends of the predictor range were very small on average and would be highly unlikely to produce scenarios in which those passing a realistic cut score would underperform those screened out. Indices of job complexity and the importance of the personality trait did not moderate the forms of each personality–performance relationship. The results are useful for evaluating whether curvilinearity is likely to be an issue when self-report personality assessments are used to make decisions with tangible employment consequences.     

IMPLICATIONS OF THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL NATURE OF JOB PERFORMANCE FOR THE VALIDITY OF SELECTION TESTS: MULTIVARIATE FRAMEWORKS FOR STUDYING TEST VALIDITY

Although most studies of criterion-related validity focus on univariate relationships, the complex and multidimensional nature of the performance construct and the widespread use of multiple selection devices argue in favor of multivariate frameworks for evaluating validity. Using a Monte Carlo simulation we estimated the validity of general cognitive ability tests and personality tests in predicting "job performance," where performance is conceptualized as a composite of multiple performance measures (i.e., individual job task performance and organizational citizenship behaviors). The validity of a selection battery varies substantially as a function of the relative weight given to both predictors and criteria; the 95% confidence interval for validities ranged from .20 to .78. The effective weights given to performance dimensions accounted for 34% of the variance in selection battery validities; depending on precisely how "performance" is defined, the same test battery can have relatively high or relatively low levels of validity. Our model suggests that the way an organization defines job performance is a source of true and important variability in validities, and that the validity of selection tests for predicting complex performance criteria may show considerably less generalizability that current metaanalysis of univariate validities would suggest.     

The use of person-organization fit in employment decision making: an assessment of its criterion-related validity

Because measures of person-organization (P-O) fit are accountable to the same psychometric and legal standards used for other employment tests when they are used for personnel decision making, the authors assessed the criterion-related validity of P-O fit as a predictor of job performance and turnover. Meta-analyses resulted in estimated true criterion-related validities of .15 (k = 36, N = 5,377) for P-O fit as a predictor of job performance and .24 (k = 8, N = 2,476) as a predictor of turnover, compared with a stronger effect of .31 (k = 109, N = 108,328) for the more commonly studied relation between P-O fit and work attitudes. In contrast to the relations between P-O fit and work attitudes, the lower 95% credibility values for the job performance and turnover relations included zero. In addition, P-O fit's relations with job performance and turnover were partially mediated by work attitudes. Potential concerns pertaining to the use of P-O fit in employment decision making are discussed in light of these results.     

The Five-Factor model of personality and work behaviour in Greece

This study explores the validity of the five-factor model of personality (FFM) in occupational settings in Greece, examining its relationship to employees' overall job performance, job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behaviour, and generic work competencies. Two hundred and twenty-seven employees from various Greek SMEs participated in the study completing a personality and a job satisfaction measure. Their supervisors completed three questionnaires assessing their performance and their work competencies. Some of the most significant results of this study were the strong links identified between personality and job satisfaction and the moderating effect of job type on the criterion-related validity of some personality dimensions. These results are discussed in terms of the FFM literature taking into consideration the strong effect of Greek culture. The theoretical and practical implications for research and practice in Greece are also discussed.     

Exploring the Capacity of NEO PI‐R Facets to Predict Job Performance in Two French‐Canadian Samples

The capacity of personality facets to predict contextual performance (i.e., interpersonal facilitation and job dedication), task performance, and global performance was explored by means of two predictive validity field studies. In a preliminary way, Study 1 demonstrated that four personality facets – Self‐Consciousness, Excitement Seeking, Trust, and Competence – were related to at least one job performance dimension in a well‐structured occupation sample. Study 2 revealed that eight personality facets were linked to specific job performance dimensions in a professional occupation sample. Results indicate that a combination of facets is useful for predicting job performance.     

The Effects of Social Desirability and Faking on Personality and Integrity Assessment for Personnel Selection

A review of the extant literature and new empirical research suggests that social desirability is not much of a concern in personality and integrity testing for personnel selection. In particular, based on meta-analytically derived evidence, it appears that social desirability influences do not destroy the convergent and discriminant validity of the Big Five dimensions of personality (Emotional Stability, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness). We also present new empirical evidence regarding gender and age differences in socially desirable re- sponding. Although social desirability predicts a number of important work variables such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and supervisor ratings of training success, social desirability does not seem to be a predictor of overall job performance and is only very weakly related to specific dimensions of job performance such as technical proficiency (r = -.07) and personal discipline ( r = .05). Large sample investigations of the moderating influences of social desirability in actual work settings indicate that social desirability does not moderate the criterion-related validities of personality variables or integrity tests. The criterion-related validity of integrity tests for overall job performance with applicant samples in predictive studies is .41. Controlling for social desirability in integrity or personality test scores leaves the operational validities intact, thereby suggesting that social desirability functions neither as a mediator nor as a suppressor variable in personality-performance.     

SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT TESTS: CONSTRUCTS ASSESSED AND A META-ANALYSIS OF THEIR CRITERION-RELATED VALIDITIES

Situational judgment tests (SJTs) are a measurement method that may be designed to assess a variety of constructs. Nevertheless, many studies fail to report the constructs measured by the situational judgment tests in the extant literature. Consequently, a construct-level focus in the situational judgment test literature is lacking, and researchers and practitioners know little about the specific constructs typically measured. Our objective was to extend the efforts of previous researchers (e.g., McDaniel, Hartman, Whetzel, & Grubb, 2007 ; McDaniel & Ngyuen, 2001 ; Schmitt & Chan, 2006 ) by highlighting the need for a construct focus in situational judgment test research. We identified and classified the construct domains assessed by situational judgment tests in the literature into a content-based typology. We then conducted a meta-analysis to determine the criterion-related validity of each construct domain and to test for moderators. We found that situational judgment tests most often assess leadership and interpersonal skills and those situational judgment tests measuring teamwork skills and leadership have relatively high validities for overall job performance. Although based on a small number of studies, we found evidence that (a) matching the predictor constructs with criterion facets improved criterion-related validity; and (b) video-based situational judgment tests tended to have stronger criterion-related validity than pencil-and-paper situational judgment tests, holding constructs constant. Implications for practice and research are discussed.     

The Meaning and Measurement of Work Ethic: Construction and Initial Validation of a Multidimensional Inventory

This monograph presents a brief historical and conceptual review of the work ethic construct, suggests a general conceptual definition of work ethic, and reports a series of empirical studies to construct and evaluate a new multidimensional measure of work ethic. The Multidimensional Work Ethic Profile (MWEP) is a 65-item inventory that measures seven conceptually and empirically distinct facets of the work ethic construct. A series of six studies, using both student and nonstudent samples, examined the psychometric properties of the MWEP. The first study replicates previous research demonstrating the multidimensionality of the work ethic construct. The second study describes the construction and initial psychometric evaluation of the MWEP. The third study examines relations between the MWEP subscales as well as relations with measures of general cognitive ability, personality, and manifest needs. The fourth study examines the generalizability of the MWEP from a student sample to a nonstudent working sample. The fifth study provides further evidence about the generalizability of the MWEP to an organizational sample and examines the relations of the MWEP subscales to other organizationally relevant attitudinal variables (i.e., job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job involvement). Finally, the sixth study examines the criterion-related validity of the MWEP scales in an organizational context. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

PERSONALITY TESTS AT THE CROSSROADS: A RESPONSE TO MORGESON, CAMPION, DIPBOYE, HOLLENBECK, MURPHY, AND SCHMITT (2007)

Despite widespread and growing acceptance that published personality tests are valid predictors of job performance, Morgeson et al. (2007) propose they be abandoned in personnel selection because average validity estimates are low. Our review of the literature shows that Morgeson et al.'s skepticism is unfounded. Meta-analyses have demonstrated that published personality tests, in fact, yield useful validity estimates when validation is based on confirmatory research using job analysis and taking into account the bidirectionality of trait–performance linkages. Further gains are likely by use of narrow over broad measures, multivariate prediction, and theory attuned to the complexities of trait expression and evaluation at work. Morgeson et al. also suggest that faking has little, if any, impact on personality test validity and that it may even contribute positively to job performance. Job applicant research suggests that faking under true hiring conditions attenuates personality test validity but that validity is still sufficiently strong to warrant personality test use in hiring. Contrary to Morgeson et al., we argue that the full value of published personality tests in organizations has yet to be realized, calling for programmatic theory-driven research.     

Introduction to the Special Issue: Personality and the Prediction of Job Performance: More Than the Big Five

The effects of motivated distortion on forced-choice (FC) and normative inventories were examined in three studies. Study 1 examined the effects of distortion on the construct validity of the two item formats in terms of convergent and discriminant validity. The results showed that both types of measures were susceptible to motivated distortion, however the FC items were better indicators of personality and less related to socially desirable responding when participants were asked to respond as if applying for a job. Study 2 considered the criterion-related validity of the inventories in terms of predicting supervisors' ratings of job performance, finding that distortion had a more deleterious effect on the validity of the normative inventory with some enhancement of the validity of the FC inventory being observed. Study 3 investigated whether additional constructs are introduced into the measurement process when motivated respondents attempt to increase scores on FC items. Results of Study 3 indicated that individuals higher in cognitive ability tend to have more accurate theories about which traits are job-related and therefore are more successful at improving scores on FC inventories. Implications for using personality inventories in personnel selection are discussed.     

Personality at Work: Raising Awareness and Correcting Misconceptions

Personality variables have always predicted important behaviors and outcomes in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. In this commentary, we first review empirically supported structural models of personality that show the following: (a) Personality traits are hierarchically organized, (b) the Big Five are not orthogonal, (c) abnormal personality measures assess the same continuum of traits as normal adult personality measures, and (d) there are compound personality traits that are especially useful in the prediction of organizational behaviors. Second, we provide a brief overview of meta-analyses of compound personality variables. The highest operational validities of single scales (.40s) are associated with personality measures assessing broad, compound personality characteristics, such as integrity, violence potential, customer service orientation, and managerial potential, that incorporate aspects from multiple dimensions of the Big Five. Third, we also review meta-analytic evidence that has linked personality attributes to other important organizational attitudes and behaviors, such as job satisfaction, motivation, and leadership, with multiple correlations for the Big Five in the .40 to .50 range. Fourth, we discuss the important role that meta-analysis has had in establishing the predictive and explanatory value of personality variables. We conclude with some caveats and directions for future research.     

Conscientiousness,Its Facets,and the Prediction of Job Performance Ratings: Evidence against the narrow measures

This study empirically tested the predictions of the three basic perspectives on the bandwidth debate about the relationship between personality and job performance, regarding the validity of conscientiousness and its facets. The sample consisted of 226 police officers. Conscientiousness and three facets (order, industriousness, and self‐control) were correlated with three performance criteria (overall job performance, task performance, and orderliness). A Schmid–Leiman transformation made it possible to residualize the variance of the facets and to isolate their unique contribution to the prediction of performance measures. The results showed that conscientiousness predicted the three criteria (true validities of.25,.28 and.37, respectively) and that the facets neither predicted job performance nor showed incremental validity over conscientiousness. Finally, the implications of the findings for theory and practice are commented on, and future research is suggested.     

Citizenship and Counterproductive Behavior: Clarifying Relations Between the Two Domains

Competing viewpoints exist as to whether organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB) are best viewed as behaviors located on a single continuum or as distinct constructs. Reliable and established measures of OCB, CWB, and the Big Five were administered to a large and diverse employee sample. Confirmatory factor analysis supports differentiating between facets of OCB and CWB. In addition, OCB and CWB were moderately negatively correlated and had a number of different personality correlates. This lends support to OCB and CWB representing two distinct constructs instead of a single continuum.     

On the validity and utility of discriminating among impulsivity-like traits

The ability to make precise distinctions among related personality constructs helps clarify theory and increases the utility of clinical assessment. In three studies, the authors evaluated the validity of distinctions among four impulsivity-like traits: sensation seeking, lack of planning, lack of persistence, and urgency (acting rashly when distressed). Factor analyses indicated that lack of planning and lack of persistence are two distinct facets of one broader trait, whereas urgency and sensation seeking are both very modestly related to each other and to the planning/persistence measures. The authors developed interview assessments of each, and multitrait, multimethod matrix results indicated clear convergent and discriminant validity among the constructs. The distinctions among them were useful: The traits accounted for different aspects of risky behaviors. Sensation seeking appeared to relate to the frequency of engaging in risky behaviors, and urgency appeared to relate to problem levels of involvement in those behaviors.     

Predicting Adaptive Performance: Further Tests of a Model of Adaptability

This research further investigates an 8-dimension taxonomy of adaptive performance developed by Pulakos, Arad, Donovan, and Plamondon (2000) and the usefulness of past experience, interest, and self-efficacy predictors developed to measure these same 8 dimensions for predicting adaptive job performance. Participants in the concurrent, criterion-related validation study included 739 military personnel. They completed the 3 adaptability measures as well as more traditional cognitive and noncognitive predictors. Supervisors of the study participants rated their adaptive job performance. Results showed support for the 8-dimension model of adaptability. In addition, cognitive ability, personality, and the new adaptability predictors were shown to predict adaptive performance, with some past experience items adding incremental validity beyond the more traditional cognitive ability and personality measures. Results are discussed.     

Personality facets and RIASEC interests: An integrated model

Research examining links between personality and interest have typically focused on links between measures of the five factor model and Holland’s RIASEC types. However, the five factor model of personality can be divided in to a larger set of narrow domain personality scales measuring facets of the ‘big five’ traits. Research in a number of fields indicates that facet scales are effective for clarifying the relationship between personality and other broad constructs, including academic achievement, job performance, stress and coping, and achievement motivation. In the present study links between personality facets and the RIASEC model were examined using property vector fitting. Obtained results are consistent with previous research suggesting that the use of facet-level personality measures can clarify relations between personality and other constructs, and provides new information linking personality facets and interests. The use of facet-level measures of personality expands the range of personality concepts that can be presented to individuals who are exploring career options.