(Mt) – SEU Organizational Behavior Mattel Case Study

FIND A SOLUTION AT Academic Writers Bay

266 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values PERSONALITY AND CULTURAL VALUES 9.1 What is personality? What are cultural values? As the opening illustrates, a company can gain from paying close attention to the personality of its employees when making decisions about hiring and development. Personality refers to the structures and propensities inside people that explain their characteristic patterns of thought, emotion, and behavior.1 Personality creates people’s social reputations—the way they are perceived by friends, family, coworkers, and supervisors.2 In this way, personality captures what people are like. That’s in contrast to ability, the subject of Chapter 10, which captures what people can do. Although we sometimes describe people as having “a good personality,” personality is actually a collection of multiple traits. Traits are defined as recurring regularities or trends in people’s responses to their environment.3 Adjectives such as “responsible,” “easygoing,” “polite,” and “reserved” are examples of traits that can be used to summarize someone’s personality. As we’ll describe later, personality traits are a function of both your genes and your environment. One important piece of the environmental part of that equation is the culture in which you were raised. Cultural values are defined as shared beliefs about desirable end states or modes of conduct in a given culture.4 You can think of cultural values as capturing what cultures are like. Adjectives such as “traditional,” “informal,” “risk averse,” or “assertive” are all examples of values that can be used to summarize a nation’s culture. Cultural values can influence the development of people’s personality traits, as well as how those traits are expressed in daily life. In this way, a responsible person in the United States may act somewhat differently than a responsible person in China, just as an easygoing person in France may act somewhat differently than an easygoing person in Indonesia. HOW CAN WE DESCRIBE WHAT EMPLOYE E S ARE LIKE? We can use personality traits and cultural values to describe what employees are like. For example, how would you describe your first college roommate to one of your classmates? You’d start off using certain adjectives—maybe the roommate was funny and outgoing or maybe frugal and organized. Of course, it would take more than a few adjectives to describe your roommate fully. You could probably go on listing traits for several minutes, maybe even coming up with 100 traits or more. Although 100 traits may sound like a lot, personality researchers note that the third edition of Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary contained 1,710 adjectives that can be used to describe someone’s traits!5 Was your roommate abrasive, adulterous, agitable, alarmable, antisocial, arbitrative, arrogant, asocial, audacious, aweless, and awkward? We hope not! THE BIG FIVE TAXONOMY 9.2 What are the “Big Five”? With 1,710 adjectives, you might be worrying about the length of this chapter (or the difficulty of your next exam!). Fortunately, it turns out that most adjectives are variations of five broad dimensions or “factors” that can be used to summarize our personalities.6 Those five personality dimensions include conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion. Collectively, these dimensions have been dubbed the Big Five.7 Figure 9-1 lists the traits that can be found within each of the Big Five dimensions. We acknowledge that it can be hard to remember the particular labels for the Big Five dimensions, and we wish there was some acronym that could make the process easier. . . . Would you like to see what your Big Five profile looks like? Our OB Assessments feature will show you where you stand on each of the five dimensions. After you’ve gotten a feel for your personality profile, you might be wondering about some of the following questions: How does personality develop? Why do people have the traits that they possess? Will those traits change C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values FIGURE 9-1 267 Trait Adjectives Associated with the Big Five C A N O E Conscientiousness Agreeableness Neuroticism Openness Extraversion • Dependable • Organized • Reliable • Ambitious • Hardworking • Persevering • Kind • Cooperative • Sympathetic • Helpful • Courteous • Warm NOT • Careless • Sloppy • Inefficient • Negligent • Lazy • Irresponsible NOT • Critical • Antagonistic • Callous • Selfish • Rude • Cold • Nervous • Moody • Emotional • Insecure • Jealous • Unstable NOT • Calm • Steady • Relaxed • At ease • Secure • Contented • Curious • Imaginative • Creative • Complex • Refined • Sophisticated NOT • Uninquisitive • Conventional • Conforming • Simple • Unartistic • Traditional • Talkative • Sociable • Passionate • Assertive • Bold • Dominant NOT • Quiet • Shy • Inhibited • Bashful • Reserved • Submissive Sources: G. Saucier, “Mini-Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg’s Unipolar Big-Five Markers,” Journal of Personality Assessment 63 (1994), pp. 506–16; L.R. Goldberg, “The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure,” Psychological Assessment 4 (1992), pp. 26–42; R.R. McCrae and P.T. Costa Jr., “Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality across Instruments and Observers,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (1987), pp. 81–90; and C.M. Gill and G.P. Hodgkinson, “Development and Validation of the Five-Factor Model Questionnaire (FFMQ): An AdjectivalBased Personality Inventory for Use in Occupational Settings,” Personnel Psychology 60 (2007), pp. 731–66. over time? All of these questions are variations on the “nature vs. nurture” debate: Is personality a function of our genes, or is it something that we develop as a function of our experiences and environment? As you might guess, it’s sometimes difficult to tease apart the impact of nature and nurture on personality. Let’s assume for a moment that you’re especially extraverted and so are your parents. Does this mean you’ve inherited their “extraversion gene”? Or does it mean that you observed and copied their extraverted behavior during your childhood (and were rewarded with praise for doing so)? It’s impossible to know, because the effects of nature and nurture are acting in combination in this example. One method of separating nature and nurture effects is to study identical twins who’ve been adopted by different sets of parents at birth. For example, the University of Minnesota has been conducting studies of pairs of identical twins reared apart for several decades.8 Such studies find, for example, that extraversion scores tend to be significantly correlated across pairs of identical twins.9 Such findings can clearly be attributed to “nature,” because identical twins share 100 percent of their genetic material, but cannot be explained by “nurture,” because the twins were raised in different environments. A review of several different twin studies concludes that genes have a significant impact on people’s Big Five profile. More specifically, 49 percent of the variation in extraversion is accounted for by genetic differences.10 The genetic impact is somewhat smaller for the rest of the Big Five: 45 percent for openness, 41 percent for neuroticism, 38 percent for conscientiousness, and 35 percent for agreeableness. Another method of examining the genetic basis of personality is to examine changes in personality traits over time. Longitudinal studies require participants to complete personality assessments at multiple time periods, often separated by several years. If personality has a strong genetic component, then people’s Big Five profiles at, say, age 21 should be very similar to their profiles at 9.3 Is personality driven by nature or by nurture? 268 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values OB ASSESSMENTS THE BIG FIVE What does your personality profile look like? This assessment is designed to measure the five major dimensions of personality: conscientiousness (C), agreeableness (A), neuroticism (N), openness to experience (O), and extraversion (E). Listed below are phrases describing people’s behaviors. Please write a number next to each statement that indicates the extent to which it accurately describes you. Answer each question using the response scale provided. Then subtract your answers to the boldfaced questions from 6, with the difference being your new answer for those questions. For example, if your original answer for question 6 was “2,” your new answer is “4” (6–2). (Instructors: Assessments on locus of control, collectivism, and power distance can be found in the PowerPoints in the Connect Library’s Instructor Resources and in the Connect assignments for this chapter.) 1 VERY INACCURATE 2 MODERATELY INACCURATE 3 NEITHER INACCURATE NOR ACCURATE 4 MODERATELY ACCURATE 5 VERY ACCURATE 1. I am the life of the party.        2. I sympathize with others’ feelings.        3. I get chores done right away.        4. I have frequent mood swings.        5. I have a vivid imagination.        6. I don’t talk a lot.        7. I am not interested in other people’s problems.        8. I often forget to put things back in their proper place.        9. I am relaxed most of the time.        10. I am not interested in abstract ideas.        11. I talk to a lot of different people at parties.        12. I feel others’ emotions.        13. I like order.        14. I get upset easily.        15. I have difficulty understanding abstract ideas.        16. I keep in the background.        17. I am not really interested in others.        18. I make a mess of things.        19. I seldom feel blue.        20. I do not have a good imagination.        C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values SCORING AND INTERPRETATION Conscientiousness: Sum up items 3, 8, 13, and 18. _______ Agreeableness: Sum up items 2, 7, 12, and 17. _______ Neuroticism: Sum up items 4, 9, 14, and 19._______ Openness to Experience: Sum up items 5, 10, 15, and 20. _______ Extraversion: Sum up items 1, 6, 11, and 16. _______ Now chart your scores in the figure below to see whether you are above or below the norm for each dimension. C 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 A N O E Norms Source: M.B. Donnellan, F.L. Oswald, B.M. Baird, and R.E. Lucas, “The Mini-IPIP Scales: Tiny-YetEffective Measures of the Big Five Factors of Personality,” Psychological Assessment 18 (2006), pp. 192– 203. American Psychological Association. age 50. Figure 9-2 summarizes the results of 92 studies that assessed personality changes in more than 50,000 people.11 The figure notes personality changes across seven time periods, including teenage years (age 10–18), college years (18–22), and people’s 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. The y-axis expresses changes in personality in standard deviation terms, ranging from +1 (one standard deviation increase on a given dimension) to −1 (one standard deviation decrease on a given dimension). In standard deviation terms, a change of .20 is generally considered small, a change of .50 is generally considered medium, and a change of .80 is generally considered large.12 Figure 9-2 reveals that extraversion typically remains quite stable throughout a person’s life. Openness to experience also remains stable, after a sharp increase from the teenage years to college age. The stability of those two dimensions makes sense because extraversion and openness are most dependent on genes.13 The other three dimensions, however, change quite significantly over a person’s life span. For example, Figure 9-2 shows that people get more conscientious as they grow older.14 In addition, people become more agreeable and less neurotic over time. Although those changes may be encouraging if you dislike your own personal Big Five profile, it’s important to realize that any changes in personality are very gradual. Consider this question: Can you detect any personality changes in your closest friends? Chances are you can’t, unless you’ve known those friends for a period of several years. That long-term lens is needed to spot gradual fluctuations in Big Five levels. The sections that follow provide more detail about each of the Big Five dimensions. 269 270 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values FIGURE 9-2 Changes in Big Five Dimensions over the Life Span Standardized Mean Changes in Personality 1 Conscientiousness Agreeableness 0 Neuroticism Openness Extraversion −1 10-18 18-22 22-30 30-40 40-50 Age Ranges 50-60 60-70 Source: Adapted from B.W. Roberts, K.E. Walton, and W. Viechtbauer, “Patterns of Mean-Level Change in Personality Traits across the Life Course: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies,” Psychological Bulletin 132 (2006), pp. 1–25. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS As shown in Figure 9-1, conscientious people are dependable, organized, reliable, ambitious, hardworking, and persevering.15 It’s difficult, if not impossible, to envision a job in which those traits will not be beneficial.16 That’s not a claim we make about all of the Big Five because some jobs require high levels of agreeableness, extraversion, or openness, while others demand low levels of those same traits. We don’t want to spoil the “how important is personality?” discussion that concludes this chapter, but suffice it to say that conscientiousness has the biggest influence on job performance of any of the Big Five. Of course, the key question therefore becomes: Why is conscientiousness so valuable? One reason can be found in the general goals that people prioritize in their working life. Conscientious employees prioritize accomplishment striving, which reflects a strong desire to accomplish task-related goals as a means of expressing personality.17 People who are “accomplishment strivers” have a built-in desire to finish work tasks, channel a high proportion of their efforts toward those tasks, and work harder and longer on task assignments. As evidence of their accomplishment-striving nature, one research study showed that conscientious salespeople set higher sales goals for themselves than unconscientious salespeople and were more committed to meeting those goals.18 Another study of salespeople showed that conscientious salespeople’s organizational skills were particularly valuable during their first year of employment, and their ambitious nature became more critical as they gained tenure and experience.19 A third research study provides particularly compelling evidence regarding the benefits of conscientiousness.20 The study used data from the University of California–Berkeley’s Intergenerational Studies Center, which collected data about a set of children in the late 1920s and early 1930s. Those researchers gathered personality data using interviews and assessments of the children by trained psychologists. Follow-up studies collected data on the same sample as they reached early adulthood, middle age, and late adulthood. This last time period included assessments of career success, which included ratings of annual income and occupational prestige. The results C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values of the study showed that childhood conscientiousness was strongly correlated with ratings of career success five decades later! In fact, those conscientiousness effects were roughly twice as strong as the effects of the other Big Five dimensions. Such findings show that it pays to be conscientious; other research even suggests that conscientiousness is good for your health. For example, one study gathered data about the conscientiousness of 1,528 children in the ©Ingram Publishing/Getty Images early 1920s.21 Data on health-relevant behaviors were then gathered in 1950 for 1,215 of the original participants. By 1986, 419 of the participants had died and 796 were still living. The results of the study revealed that childhood conscientiousness was negatively related to mortality, including death from injuries, death from cardiovascular disease, and death from cancer. Why did conscientious participants live longer? The study also showed that conscientiousness was negatively related to alcohol consumption and smoking during adulthood. Other research has shown that conscientious people are less likely to abuse drugs, more likely to take preventive steps to remain healthy, and less likely to perform risky behaviors as a driver or pedestrian.22 AGREEABLENESS Agreeable people are warm, kind, cooperative, sympathetic, helpful, and courteous. Agreeable people prioritize communion striving, which reflects a strong desire to obtain acceptance in personal relationships as a means of expressing personality. Put differently, agreeable people focus on “getting along,” not necessarily “getting ahead.”23 Unlike conscientiousness, agreeableness is not related to performance across all jobs or occupations.24 Why not? The biggest reason is that communion striving is beneficial in some positions but detrimental in others. For example, managers often need to prioritize the effectiveness of the unit over a desire to gain acceptance. In such cases, effective job performance may demand being disagreeable in the face of unreasonable requests or demands. Of course, there are some jobs in which agreeableness can be beneficial. The most obvious example is service jobs—jobs in which the employee has direct, face-to-face, or verbal contact with a customer. How many times have you encountered a customer service person who is cold, rude, or antagonistic? Did you tend to buy the company’s product after such experiences? Research suggests that agreeable employees have stronger customer service skills.25 One reason for their effectiveness in customer service environments is that they’re reluctant to react to conflict with criticism, threats, or manipulation.26 Instead, they tend to react to conflict by walking away, adopting a “wait-and-see” attitude, or giving in to the other person. One study provides unique insights into the effects of agreeableness. The study used a variation of “lived day analysis,” where a portion of a participant’s daily routine is recorded and analyzed.27 Ninety-six undergraduates completed assessments of the Big Five personality dimensions before being fitted with a digital recorder and an electronic microphone that could be clipped to their shirt collar. The microphone recorded 30 seconds of footage at 12-minute intervals over the course of two weekdays, with participants unable to track when footage was actually being recorded. Trained coders then rated the sounds and conversations recorded on the microphone. The results of the study revealed a number of interesting expressions of agreeableness. Agreeable participants were significantly less likely to be at home in their apartment during recordings; instead, they spent more time in public places. They were also less likely to use swear words and more likely to use words that conveyed personal rapport during conversations. For more on agreeableness (along with some other Big Five dimensions), see our OB on Screen feature. EXTRAVERSION Extraverted people are talkative, sociable, passionate, assertive, bold, and dominant (in contrast to introverts, who are quiet, shy, and reserved). Of the Big Five, extraversion is the easiest to judge in zero acquaintance situations—situations in which two people have only just met. Consider times when you’ve been around a stranger in a doctor’s office, in line at 271 Research suggests that conscientious individuals actually live longer. One potential reason is that conscientiousness is associated with less risky driving behavior. 272 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values OB ON SCREEN LA LA LAND Sebastian: I hear what you’re saying, but I don’t think you’re saying what you mean. Bill: Yeah, I don’t think you hear what I’m saying. You’re fired. With those words, a young piano player gets fired from his restaurant gig in La La Land (Dir. Damien Chazelle, Summit Entertainment, 2016). Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) is a man with a singular passion: he wants to play jazz on the piano in his own jazz club in Los Angeles. Currently, however, he’s living in a studio apartment and taking any piano gigs he can get—all of which seem beneath him artistically. His only companions in the apartment are his jazz records, unpacked boxes, and a stack of unpaid bills. ©Moviestore collection Ltd/Alamy This is not Sebastian’s first time playing in this particular restaurant, and there’s some tension when Bill, the manager (J.K. Simmons), first greets him. Sebastian diffuses it initially, telling Bill, “I want you to know you’re looking at a new man . . . a man that’s happy to be here . . . and very easy to work with.” But they quickly begin to argue about what Sebastian will play. Bill wants a standard set of Christmas tunes given the holiday season—not any of Sebastian’s signature jazz stylings. Sebastian tries to negotiate before relenting (and noting that none of the customers care what he plays anyway). Sebastian gets fired when he lapses from his assigned playlist to a soulful composition of his own creation—one that’s obviously touched a woman named Mia (Emma Stone) who has just walked in the door. The sequence illustrates the core of Sebastian’s personality. On the one hand, he’s high in openness, as many artists are. He finds a set playlist constraining—he longs to express himself and grow musically. On the other hand, he’s both disagreeable and unconscientious. He’s argumentative and cynical with Bill, and ultimately disregards the instructions of the one person providing his paycheck. That disagreeable and unconscientious nature even impacts Mia, literally, as he brushes past her to exit the restaurant. Source: La La Land (Dir. Damien Chazelle, Summit Entertainment, 2016) a grocery store, or in an airport terminal. It takes only about 5 minutes to figure out whether that stranger is extraverted or introverted.28 Extraversion is also the Big Five dimension that you knew your standing on, even before taking our self-assessment. People rarely consider how open they are to new experiences or how agreeable they are, but almost everyone already self-identifies as an “extravert” or “introvert.” C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values Like agreeableness, extraversion is not necessarily related to performance across all jobs or occupations. However, extraverted people prioritize status striving, which reflects a strong desire to obtain power and influence within a social structure as a means of expressing personality.29 Extraverts care a lot about being successful and influential and direct their work efforts toward “moving up” and developing a strong reputation. Indeed, research suggests that extraverts are more likely to emerge as leaders in social and task-related groups.30 They also tend to be rated as more effective in a leadership role by the people who are following them.31 One potential reason for these findings is that people tend to view extraverts, who are more energetic and outgoing, as more “leaderlike” than introverts. In addition to being related to leadership emergence and effectiveness, research suggests that extraverts tend to be happier with their jobs. You may recall from Chapter 4 on job satisfaction that people’s day-to-day moods can be categorized along two dimensions: pleasantness and activation. As illustrated in Figure 9-3, extraverted employees tend to be high in what’s called positive affectivity—a dispositional tendency to experience pleasant, engaging moods such as enthusiasm, excitement, and elation.32 That tendency to experience positive moods across situations explains why extraverts tend to be more satisfied with their jobs.33 Research now acknowledges that employees’ genes have a significant impact on their job satisfaction and that much of that genetic influence is due to extraversion (and neuroticism, as discussed next). For example, one study of identical twins reared apart showed that twins’ job satisfaction levels were significantly correlated, even when the twins held jobs that were quite different in terms of their duties, their complexity, FIGURE 9-3 Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Typical Moods Activated Neuroticism as “Negative Affectivity” Enthusiastic Excited Elated Hostile Nervous Annoyed Unpleasant Extraversion as “Positive Affectivity” Surprised Astonished Aroused Grouchy Sad Blue Happy Cheerful Pleased Serene Calm Content Bored Sluggish Drowsy Quiet Still Inactive Deactivated Pleasant 273 274 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values and their working conditions.34 In fact, this study suggested that around 30 percent of the variation in job satisfaction is due to genetic factors such as personality. Other research suggests that extraverts have more to be happy about than just their jobs. Specifically, research suggests that extraversion is positively related to more general life satisfaction.35 To shed light on that finding, one study asked students to complete a “life event checklist” by indicating whether various events had happened to them in the preceding four years.36 The results showed that extraversion was associated with more positive events, such as joining a club or athletic team, going on vacation with friends, getting a raise at work, receiving an award for nonacademic reasons, and getting married or engaged. Other studies have linked extraversion to the number of same-sex peers, number of dating partners, frequency of alcohol consumption, and frequency of attending parties.37 However, extraverts spend so much time doing those things that they wind up having less frequent interactions with their family.38 Even parents of extraverts enjoy a phone call home now and again! NEUROTICISM Neurotic people are nervous, moody, emotional, insecure, and jealous. Occasionally you may see this Big Five dimension called by its flip side: “Emotional Stability” or “Emotional Adjustment.” If conscientiousness is the most important of the Big Five from the perspective of job performance, neuroticism is the second most important.39 There are few jobs for which the traits associated with neuroticism are beneficial to on-the-job behaviors. Instead, most jobs benefit from employees who are calm, steady, and secure. Whereas extraversion is synonymous with positive affectivity, neuroticism is synonymous with negative affectivity—a dispositional tendency to experience unpleasant moods such as hostility, nervousness, and annoyance (see Figure 9-3).40 That tendency to experience negative moods explains why neurotic employees often experience lower levels of job satisfaction than their less neurotic counterparts.41 Along with extraversion, neuroticism explains much of the impact of genetic factors on job satisfaction. Research suggests that the negative affectivity associated with neuroticism also influences life satisfaction, with neurotic people tending to be less happy with their lives in general.42 In fact, one method of assessing neuroticism (or negative affectivity) is to determine how unhappy people are with everyday objects and things. This “gripe index” is shown in Table 9-1. If you find yourself dissatisfied with several of the objects in that table, then you probably experience negative moods quite frequently. Neuroticism also influences the way that people deal with stressful situations. Specifically, neuroticism is associated with a differential exposure to stressors, meaning that neurotic people are more likely to appraise day-to-day situations as stressful (and therefore feel like they are exposed to stressors more frequently).43 Neuroticism is also associated with a differential reactivity to stressors, meaning that neurotic people are less likely to believe they can cope with the stressors that they experience.44 Neuroticism is largely responsible for the Type A Behavior Pattern that has been shown to affect employees’ health and ability to manage stressful environments.45 That is, neurotic people are much more likely to be “Type As,” whereas less neurotic individuals are much more likely to be “Type Bs” (see Chapter 5 on stress for more discussion of such issues). Neuroticism is also strongly related to locus of control, which reflects whether people attribute the causes of events to themselves or to the external environment.46 Neurotic people tend to hold an external locus of control, meaning that they often believe that the events that occur around them are driven by luck, chance, or fate. Less neurotic people tend to hold an internal locus of control, meaning that they believe that their own behavior dictates events. Table 9-2 provides more detail about the external versus internal distinction. The table includes a number of beliefs that are representative of an external or internal viewpoint, including beliefs about life in general, work, school, politics, and relationships. If you tend to agree more strongly with the beliefs in the left column, then you have a more external locus of control. If you tend to agree more with the right column, your locus is more internal. How important is locus of control? One meta-analysis of 135 different research studies showed that an internal locus of control was associated with higher levels of job satisfaction and job performance.47 A second meta-analysis of 222 different research studies showed that people with an internal locus of control enjoyed better health, including higher self-reported mental well-being, C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values TABLE 9-1 The Neutral Objects Questionnaire (aka The “Gripe Index”) Instructions: The following questions ask about your degree of satisfaction with several items. Consider each item carefully. Circle the numbered response that best represents your feelings about the corresponding item. Then sum up your score. DISSATISFIED NEUTRAL SATISFIED Your telephone number 1 2 3 8 1/2 × 11 paper 1 2 3 Popular music 1 2 3 Modern art 1 2 3 Your first name 1 2 3 Restaurant food 1 2 3 Public transportation 1 2 3 Telephone service 1 2 3 The way you were raised 1 2 3 Advertising 1 2 3 The way people drive 1 2 3 Local speed limits 1 2 3 Television programs 1 2 3 The people you know 1 2 3 Yourself 1 2 3 Your relaxation time 1 2 3 Local newspapers 1 2 3 Today’s cars 1 2 3 The quality of food you buy 1 2 3 The movies being produced today 1 2 3 The climate where you live 1 2 3 The high school you attended 1 2 3 The neighbors you have 1 2 3 The residence where you live 1 2 3 The city in which you live 1 2 3 Interpretation: If you scored below a 50, you tend to be less satisfied with everyday objects than the typical respondent. Such a score may indicate negative affectivity, a tendency to feel negative emotional states frequently. (Or perhaps you should change your phone number!) Source: Adapted from T.A. Judge, “Does Affective Disposition Moderate the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Voluntary Turnover?” Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (1993), pp. 395–401; and J. Weitz, “A Neglected Concept in the Study of Job Satisfaction,” Personnel Psychology 5 (1952), pp. 201–05. 275 276 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values TABLE 9-2 External and Internal Locus of Control PEOPLE WITH AN EXTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL TEND TO BELIEVE: PEOPLE WITH AN INTERNAL LOCUS OF CONTROL TEND TO BELIEVE: Many of the unhappy things in people’s lives are partly due to bad luck. People’s misfortunes result from the mistakes they make. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the right time. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work; luck has little or nothing to do with it. Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work that studying is really useless. In the case of the well-prepared student, there is rarely if ever such a thing as an unfair test. This world is run by the few people in power, and there is not much the little guy can do about it. The average citizen can have an influence in government decisions. There’s not much use in trying too hard to please people; if they like you, they like you. People are lonely because they don’t try to be friendly. Source: Adapted from J.B. Rotter, “Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement,” Psychological Monographs 80 (1966), pp. 1–28. fewer self-reported physical symptoms, lower blood pressure, and lower stress hormone secretion.48 Internals also enjoyed more social support at work than externals and sensed that they had a stronger relationship with their supervisors. They viewed their jobs as having more beneficial characteristics, such as autonomy and significance, and fewer negative characteristics, such as conflict and ambiguity. In addition, those with an internal locus of control earned a higher salary than those with an external locus. People who are open to new experiences tend to do well in situations that offer frequent opportunities to learn new things, such as teaching. OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE The final dimension of the Big Five is openness to experience. Open people are curious, imaginative, creative, complex, refined, and sophisticated. Of all the Big Five, openness to experience has the most alternative labels. Sometimes it’s called “Inquisitiveness” or “Intellectualness” or even “Culture” (not in the national culture sense—rather, in the “high culture” sense of knowing fine wine, art, and classical music). Much like agreeableness and extraversion, the traits associated with openness are beneficial in some jobs but not others. As a result, openness is not related to job performance across all occupations. What jobs benefit from high levels of openness? Generally speaking, jobs that are very fluid and dynamic, with rapid changes in job demands. Research shows that open employees excel in learning and training environments, because their curiosity gives them a built-in desire to learn new things.49 They also tend to be more adaptable and quick to identify when the “old way of doing things” is no longer effective, excelling at the search for a new and better approach.50 In fact, conscientious employees are sometimes less effective than open employees in such environments because their persevering nature sometimes prevents them from abandoning “tried-and-true” task strategies. Openness to experience is also more likely to be valuable in jobs that require high levels of creative perfor©Fuse/Getty Images mance, where job holders need to be able to generate C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values FIGURE 9-4 Openness to Experience and Creativity Cognitive Ability Creative Thought Creative Performance Openness to Experience novel and useful ideas and solutions.51 The relationship between openness and creative performance can be seen in Figure 9-4. Together with cognitive ability, openness to experience is a key driver of creative thought, as smart and open people excel at the style of thinking demanded by creativity (see Chapter 10 on ability for more discussion of such issues). How good are you at creative thinking? See Figure 9-5 to find out. Creative thought results in creative performance FIGURE 9-5 Tests of Creative Thinking Instructions: Do you consider yourself to be a creative thinker? See if you can solve the problems below. If you need help, the answers can be found in the Takeaways section of this chapter. 1. What gets wetter as it dries? 2. A woman had two sons who were born on the same hour of the same day of the same year. But they were not twins. How could this be so? 3. What occurs once in June, once in July, and twice in August? 4. Make this mathematical expression true by drawing only a single noncurving line: 5+5+5 = 550 5. Join all nine of the dots below using only four (or fewer) noncurving lines, without lifting your pen from the paper and without retracing the lines. 277 278 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values BMW’s Leipzig facility, where the assembly line moves above work spaces to give employees a feel for the rhythm of the plant. ©View Pictures Ltd/Dennis Gilbert/Alamy when people come up with new ideas, create fresh approaches to problems, or suggest new innovations that can help improve the workplace.52 The creativity benefits of openness likely explain why highly open individuals are more likely to migrate into artistic and scientific fields, in which novel and original products are so critical.53 Dragonfly, a New York–based web video–networking company, goes to unusual lengths to foster creative thought.54 The company pays $10,000 to $20,000 to put employees through six hours of hypnotism. The idea is that the relaxation, meditation, and visualization used in hypnosis can unlock the imagination of employees, even if they’re lower in openness. BMW, the German automaker, seems to understand the importance of the Big Five dimensions of personality. BMW has worked hard to create a culture of innovation in which there is never a penalty for proposing new and outlandish ways of improving its cars.55 Those proposed improvements include a “smart card” that can be taken out of your own BMW and plugged into a rented one, passing along your music, podcast, and comfort settings to the new vehicle. Openness is needed to foster such creative thought, but agreeableness is also key to BMW’s culture. Stefan Krause, BMW’s chief financial officer, summarizes how to push a creative idea successfully: “You can go into fighting mode or you can ask permission and get everyone to support you. If you do it without building ties, you will be blocked.” BMW employees also draw on their conscientiousness in those critical times when a new technology is introduced or production volume is expanded. During those time periods, employees from other factories may move into temporary housing far from home to put in extra hours on another plant’s line. Why are employees so devoted? For one thing, no one at BMW can remember a layoff—something that is incredibly unique in the auto industry. That’s part of the reason BMW’s human resources group receives more than 200,000 applications annually. Those fortunate enough to make it to the interview stage participate in elaborate, day-long drills in teams to make sure that their personalities provide a good match for the company. C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values OTHER TAXONOMIES OF PERSONALITY Although the Big Five is the dominant lens for examining personality, it’s not the only framework with which you might be familiar. One of the most widely administered personality measures in organizations is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).56 This instrument was originally created to test a theory of psychological types advanced by the noted psychologist Carl Jung.57 The MBTI evaluates individuals on the basis of four types of preferences:58 • Extraversion (being energized by people and social interactions) versus Introversion (being energized by private time and reflection). • Sensing (preferring clear and concrete facts and data) versus Intuition (preferring hunches and speculations based on theory and imagination). • Thinking (approaching decisions with logic and critical analysis) versus Feeling (approaching decisions with an emphasis on others’ needs and feelings). • Judging (approaching tasks by planning and setting goals) versus Perceiving (preferring to have flexibility and spontaneity when performing tasks). The MBTI categorizes people into one of 16 different types on the basis of their preferences. For example, an “ISTJ” has a preference for Introversion, Sensing, Thinking, and Judging. Research on the MBTI suggests that managers are more likely to be “TJs” than the general population.59 Moreover, the different personality types seem to approach decision-making tasks with differing emphases on facts, logic, and plans. That said, there is little evidence that the MBTI is a useful tool for predicting the job satisfaction, motivation, performance, or commitment of employees across jobs.60 Indeed, one of the reasons the MBTI is so widely used is that there really isn’t a “bad type”—no one who gets their profile is receiving negative news. As a result, the most appropriate use of the MBTI is in a team-building context, to help different members understand their varying approaches to accomplishing tasks. Using the MBTI as any kind of hiring or selection tool does not appear to be warranted, based on existing research. A second alternative to the Big Five is offered by research on vocational interests.61 Interests are expressions of personality that influence behavior through preferences for certain environments and activities.62 Interests reflect stable and enduring likes and dislikes that can explain why people are drawn toward some careers and away from others.63 Holland’s RIASEC model suggests that interests can be summarized by six different personality types:64 • Realistic: Enjoys practical, hands-on, real-world tasks. Tends to be frank, practical, determined, and rugged. • Investigative: Enjoys abstract, analytical, theory-oriented tasks. Tends to be analytical, intellectual, reserved, and scholarly. • Artistic: Enjoys entertaining and fascinating others using imagination. Tends to be original, independent, impulsive, and creative. • Social: Enjoys helping, serving, or assisting others. Tends to be helpful, inspiring, informative, and empathic. • Enterprising: Enjoys persuading, leading, or outperforming others. Tends to be energetic, sociable, ambitious, and risk-taking. • Conventional: Enjoys organizing, counting, or regulating people or things. Tends to be careful, conservative, self-controlled, and structured. As shown in Figure 9-6, the RIASEC model further suggests that the personality types can be classified along two dimensions: the degree to which employees prefer to work with data versus ideas and the degree to which they prefer to work with people versus things. For example, those with a Realistic personality prefer to work with things and data more than people and ideas. The model arranges the personality types in a hexagonal fashion, with types adjacent to one another being more similar than types that are more distant. The central premise of the RIASEC model is that employees will have more career satisfaction, job knowledge, and longevity in occupations that match their personality type.65 For example, Realistic people 279 9.4 What taxonomies can be used to describe personality, other than the Big Five? 280 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values FIGURE 9-6 Holland’s RIASEC Model WORKING WITH DATA Conventional Realistic Enterprising WORKING WITH THINGS WORKING WITH PEOPLE Investigative Social Artistic WORKING WITH IDEAS Source: Adapted from J.L. Holland, Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Careers (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1973). should be happier and more effective as craftspeople than as counselors because a craftspersons’ duties provide a good match to their personality. One of the most common applications of the RIASEC model is interest inventories, which provide people their scores on relevant personality dimensions, along with a list of occupations that could provide a good match for that profile.66 CULTURAL VALUES As noted previously, our personalities are influenced by both our genes and our environment. One significant aspect of that environment is the society in which we were raised. Societies can be described in a number of ways, including their climate and habitat, their sovereignty and political system, their language and religion, their education and technology levels, and their economic development.67 However, one of the most important aspects of societies is culture. Culture is defined as the shared values, beliefs, motives, identities, and interpretations that result from common experiences of members of a society and are transmitted across generations.68 Culture has been described as patterns resulting from societal traditions and as the collective programming of the mind that separates one society from another.69 The shared values, societal traditions, and collective programming that underlies culture influence the development of our personalities while also shaping the way our traits are expressed.70 In this way, explaining “what we’re like” requires an awareness of “where we’re from.” To some extent, cultures provide societies with their own distinct personalities.71 One study on the Big Five profiles of 51 different cultures showed that some societies tend to value certain personality traits more than other societies.72 For example, people from India tend to be more conscientious than people from Belgium. People from the Czech Republic tend to be more agreeable C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values than people from Hong Kong. People from Brazil tend to be more neurotic than people from China. People from Australia tend to be more extraverted than people from Russia. People from Denmark tend to be more open than people from Argentina. For their part, people in the United States trend toward the high end of the 51-culture sample on extraversion and openness, staying near the middle for the other Big Five dimensions. Of ©Plush Studios/Bill Reitzel/Getty Images course, that doesn’t mean that all of the members of these societies have exactly the same personality. Instead, those results merely convey that certain cultures tend to place a higher value on certain traits. Although it’s possible to contrast nations using the Big Five, as we just did, cross-cultural research focuses more attention on the shared values aspect of culture. The values that are salient in a given culture influence how people select and justify courses of action and how they evaluate themselves and other people.73 To some extent, cultural values come to reflect the way things should be done in a given society.74 Acting in a manner that’s consistent with those values helps people to fit in, and going against those values causes people to stand out. Just as there are a number of traits that can be used to describe personality, there are a number of values that can be used to describe cultures. Given the sheer complexity of culture, it’s not surprising that different studies have arrived at different taxonomies that can be used to summarize cultural values. The most well-known taxonomy of cultural values was derived from a landmark study in the late 1960s and early 1970s by Geert Hofstede, who analyzed data from 88,000 IBM employees from 72 countries in 20 languages.75 His research showed that employees working in different countries tended to prioritize different values, and those values clustered into several distinct dimensions. Those dimensions are summarized in Table 9-3 and include individualism– collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity–femininity. A subsequent study added a fifth dimension to the taxonomy: short-term vs. long-term orientation.76 Hofstede’s research introduced scores on each of the dimensions for various cultures, providing researchers with a quantitative tool to summarize and compare and contrast the cultures of different societies. Table 9-3 includes some of the countries that have high or low scores on Hofstede’s dimensions. Although Hofstede’s dimensions have formed the foundation for much of the research on cross-cultural management, more recent studies have painted a more nuanced picture of cultural values. Project GLOBE (Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness) is a collection of 170 researchers from 62 cultures who have studied 17,300 managers in 951 organizations since 1991.77 The main purpose of Project GLOBE is to examine the impact of culture on the effectiveness of various leader attributes, behaviors, and practices (see Chapter 14 on leadership styles and behaviors for more discussion of such issues). In pursuing that goal, project researchers asked managers to rate the values held within their organizations and within their societies. That research identified nine different dimensions that are used to summarize cultures within Project GLOBE. Some of those dimensions can be viewed as replications of Hofstede’s work. For example, Project GLOBE identified both power distance and uncertainty avoidance as key dimensions of cultural values. The project also identified collectivism, though it was differentiated into institutional collectivism (where formalized practices encourage collective action and collective distribution of resources) and ingroup collectivism (where individuals express pride and loyalty to specific ingroups). 281 Research on cultural values categorizes China as a highly collective culture, meaning that its citizens tend to prioritize taking care of ingroup members, and staying loyal to them. 9.5 What taxonomies can be used to describe cultural values? 282 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values TABLE 9-3 Hofstede’s Dimensions of Cultural Values INDIVIDUALISM–COLLECTIVISM INDIVIDUALISTIC COLLECTIVISTIC The culture is a loosely knit social framework in which people take care of themselves and their immediate family. The culture is a tight social framework in which people take care of the members of a broader ingroup and act loyal to it. United States, the Netherlands, France Indonesia, China, West Africa POWER DISTANCE LOW HIGH The culture prefers that power be distributed uniformly where possible, in a more egalitarian fashion. The culture accepts the fact that power is usually distributed unequally within organizations. United States, Germany, the Netherlands Russia, China, Indonesia UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE LOW HIGH The culture tolerates uncertain and ambiguous situations and values unusual ideas and behaviors. The culture feels threatened by uncertain and ambiguous situations and relies on formal rules to create stability. United States, Indonesia, the Netherlands Japan, Russia, France MASCULINITY–FEMININITY MASCULINE FEMININE The culture values stereotypically male traits such as assertiveness and the acquisition of money and things. The culture values stereotypically female traits such as caring for others and caring about quality of life. United States, Japan, Germany The Netherlands, Russia, France SHORT-TERM VS. LONG–TERM ORIENTATION SHORT–TERM ORIENTED LONG–TERM ORIENTED The culture stresses values that are more past- and present-oriented, such as respect for tradition and fulfilling obligations. The culture stresses values that are more future-oriented, such as persistence, prudence, and thrift. United States, Russia, West Africa China, Japan, the Netherlands Sources: G. Hofstede, Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001); G. Hofstede, “Cultural Constraints in Management Theories,” Academy of Management Executive 7 (1993), pp. 81–94; and G. Hofstede and M.H. Bond, “The Confucius Connection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth,” Organizational Dynamics 16 (1988), pp. 5–21. Other dimensions bear some similarity to Hofstede’s work but are conceptually distinct. Those dimensions are listed below, along with some information on the cultures that score at the higher and lower ends on a given value. Note that Project GLOBE groups cultures into “country clusters.” Those clusters include Anglo (United States, Canada, Australia, England), Latin America C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values (Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela), Latin Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Israel), Germanic Europe (Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Switzerland), Nordic Europe (Denmark, Finland, Sweden), Eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary, Russia, Greece), Middle East (Turkey, Egypt, Kuwait, Morocco), Southern Asia (India, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia), Confucian Asia (China, South Korea, Japan, Singapore), and Sub-Saharan Africa (Zimbabwe, Namibia, Nigeria). The following descriptions note some of the country clusters that earn high and low scores on a given cultural value. Note that the Anglo group, which includes the United States, scores in the middle on most of the cultural values. • Gender Egalitarianism. The culture promotes gender equality and minimizes role differences between men and women. High: Nordic Europe, Eastern Europe. Low: Middle East. • Assertiveness. The culture values assertiveness, confrontation, and aggressiveness in social relationships. High: Germanic Europe, Eastern Europe. Low: Nordic Europe. • Future Orientation. The culture engages in planning and investment in the future while delaying individual or collective gratification. High: Germanic Europe, Nordic Europe. Low: Middle East, Latin America, Eastern Europe. • Performance Orientation. The culture encourages and rewards members for excellence and performance improvements. High: Anglo, Confucian Asia, Germanic Europe. Low: Latin America, Eastern Europe. • Humane Orientation. The culture encourages and rewards members for being generous, caring, kind, fair, and altruistic. High: Southern Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa. Low: Latin Europe, Germanic Europe. Taken together, Hofstede’s work and the Project GLOBE studies have identified between five and nine cultural value dimensions. However, the lion’s share of cross-cultural research focuses on individualism–collectivism, perhaps the most fundamental means of differentiating cultures.78 The individualism–collectivism distinction is relevant to various topics within organizational behavior.79 For example, collectivists exhibit higher levels of task performance and citizenship behaviors in work team settings, and also exhibit lower levels of counterproductive and withdrawal behaviors.80 They are also more likely to feel affectively and normatively committed to their employers than are individualists.81 Research also suggests that collectivists tend to prefer rewards that are allocated equally on a group-wide basis as opposed to rewards tied solely to individual achievement.82 Regardless of the particular value of focus, research on cultural values illustrates the potential differences between the attitudes and beliefs of U.S. employees and the attitudes and beliefs of employees in other societies. Awareness of such cultural variations is critical, given that those differences can influence reactions to change, conflict management styles, negotiation approaches, and reward preferences, just to name a few.83 Failing to understand those differences can compromise the effectiveness of multinational groups and organizations. Such problems are particularly likely if employees are high in ethnocentrism, defined as a propensity to view one’s own cultural values as “right” and those of other cultures as “wrong.”84 For more discussion of this issue, see our OB Internationally feature. SUMMARY: HOW CAN WE DESCRIBE WHAT EMPLOYEES ARE LIKE? So how can we explain what employees are like? As shown in Figure 9-7, many of the thousands of adjectives we use to describe people can be boiled down into the Big Five dimensions of personality. Conscientiousness reflects the reliability, perseverance, and ambition of employees. Agreeableness captures their tendency to cooperate with others in a warm and sympathetic fashion. Neuroticism reflects the tendency to experience negative moods and emotions frequently on a day-to-day basis. Individuals who are high on openness to experience are creative, imaginative, and curious. Finally, extraverts are talkative, sociable, and assertive and typically 283 284 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values OB INTERNATIONALLY Research suggests that ethnocentrism hinders the effectiveness of expatriates, who are employees working full-time in other countries. Ethnocentrism makes expatriates less likely to adjust to a new culture, less likely to fulfill the duties required of their international assignment, and more likely to withdraw from that assignment. How can organizations identify employees with the right personalities to serve as expatriates? One useful tool is the multicultural personality questionnaire, which assesses five personality dimensions that can maximize the performance and commitment of expatriates. Those dimensions are listed below, along with some sample items. Cultural Empathy. A tendency to empathize with the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors of individuals with different cultural values. • I understand other people’s feelings. • I take other people’s habits into consideration. Open-mindedness. A tendency to have an open and unprejudiced attitude toward other cultural values and norms. • I get involved in other cultures. • I find other religions interesting. Emotional Stability. A tendency to remain calm in the kinds of stressful situations that can be encountered in foreign environments. • I can put setbacks in perspective. • I take it for granted that things will turn out right. Social Initiative. A tendency to be proactive when approaching social situations, which aids in building connections. • I easily approach other people. • I am often the driving force behind things. Flexibility. A tendency to regard new situations as a challenge and to adjust behaviors to meet that challenge. • I could start a new life easily. • I feel comfortable in different cultures. Research has linked these five personality traits to a number of expatriate success factors. For example, individuals with a “multicultural personality” are more likely to aspire to international positions, more likely to gain international experience, more likely to adjust to new assignments, and more likely to be happy with their lives during those assignments. Sources: K.I. Van der Zee and U. Brinkmann, “Construct Validity Evidence for the Intercultural Readiness Check against the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire,” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 12 (2004), pp. 285–90; K.I. Van der Zee and J.P. Van Oudenhoven, “The Multicultural Personality Questionnaire: Reliability and Validity of Self and Other Ratings of Multicultural Effectiveness,” Journal of Research in Personality 35 (2001), pp. 278–88; J.P. Van Oudenhoven and K.I. Van der Zee, “Predicting Multicultural Effectiveness of International Students: The Multicultural Personality Questionnaire,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 26 (2002), pp. 679–94; and J.P. Van Oudenhoven S. Mol; and K.I. Van der Zee, “Study of the Adjustment of Western Expatriates in Taiwan ROC with the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire,” Asian Journal of Social Psychology 6 (2003), pp. 159–70. experience positive moods and emotions. Other personality taxonomies, like the MBTI or the RIASEC model, can also capture many employee traits. Beyond personality, however, what employees are like also depends on the culture in which they were raised. Cultural values like individualism–collectivism, power distance, and so forth also influence employees’ thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values FIGURE 9-7 285 How Can We Describe What Employees Are Like? The Big Five • Conscientiousness • Agreeableness • Neuroticism • Openness to Experience • Extraversion Personality Other Taxonomies • Myers-Briggs • RIASEC Model What employees are like Culture Taxonomies • Hofstede Dimensions • Project GLOBE Dimensions Cultural Values HOW IMPORTANT AR E PERSONALITY AND CU LTURAL VALUES? We’ve already described a number of reasons why the Big Five should be important considerations, particularly in the case of conscientiousness. What if we focus specifically on the two outcomes in our integrative model of OB, performance and commitment? Figure 9-8 summarizes the research evidence linking conscientiousness to those two outcomes. The figure reveals that conscientiousness affects job performance. Of the Big Five, conscientiousness has the strongest effect on task performance,85 partly because conscientious employees have higher levels of motivation than other employees.86 They are more self-confident, perceive a clearer linkage between their effort and their performance, and are more likely to set goals and commit to them. For these reasons, conscientiousness is a key driver of what’s referred to as typical performance, which reflects performance in the routine conditions that surround daily job tasks.87 An employee’s ability, in contrast, is a key driver of maximum performance, which reflects performance in brief, special circumstances that demand a person’s best effort. Conscientious employees are also more likely to engage in citizenship behaviors.88 Why? One reason is that conscientious employees are so punctual and have such good work attendance that they are simply more available to offer “extra mile” sorts of contributions. Another reason is that they engage in so much more work-related effort that they have more energy to devote to citizenship behaviors.89 A third reason is that they tend to have higher levels of job satisfaction,90 and positive feelings tend to foster spontaneous instances of citizenship. Finally, conscientious employees 9.6 How does personality affect job performance and organizational commitment? 286 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values FIGURE 9-8 Effects of Personality on Performance and Commitment Conscientiousness Job Performance Conscientiousness has a moderate positive effect on Performance. Conscientious employees have higher levels of Task Performance. They are also more likely to engage in Citizenship Behavior and less likely to engage in Counterproductive Behavior. Conscientiousness Organizational Commitment Conscientiousness has a moderate positive effect on Commitment. Conscientious employees have higher levels of Affective Commitment and higher levels of Normative Commitment. Conscientiousness has no effect on Continuance Commitment. Represents a strong correlation (around .50 in magnitude). Represents a moderate correlation (around .30 in magnitude). Represents a weak correlation (around .10 in magnitude). Sources: M.R. Barrick, M.K. Mount, and T.A. Judge, “Personality and Performance at the Beginning of the New Millennium: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go Next?” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 9 (2001), pp. 9–30; C.M. Berry, D.S. Ones, and P.R. Sackett, “Interpersonal Deviance, Organizational Deviance, and Their Common Correlates: A Review and Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92 (2007), pp. 410–24; A. Cooper-Hakim and C. Viswesvaran, “The Construct of Work Commitment: Testing an Integrative Framework,” Psychological Bulletin 131 (2005), pp. 241–59; L.M. Hough and A. Furnham, “Use of Personality Variables in Work Settings,” in Handbook of Psychology, Vol. 12, ed. W.C. Borman, D.R. Ilgen, and R.J. Klimoski (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2003), pp. 131–69; J.E. Mathieu and D.M. Zajac, “A Review and Meta-Analysis of the Antecedents, Correlates, and Consequences of Organizational Commitment,” Psychological Bulletin 108 (1990), pp. 171–94; and J.F. Salgado, “The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Counterproductive Behaviors,” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 10 (2002), pp. 117–25. are less likely to engage in counterproductive behaviors,91 for two major reasons. First, their higher job satisfaction levels make it less likely that they’ll feel a need to retaliate against their organization. Second, even if they do perceive some slight or injustice, their dependable and reliable nature should prevent them from violating organizational norms by engaging in negative actions.92 Figure 9-8 also reveals that conscientious employees tend to be more committed to their organization.93 They’re less likely to engage in day-to-day psychological and physical withdrawal behaviors because such actions go against their work habits. They’re also significantly less likely to voluntarily leave the organization.94 Why? One reason is that the persevering nature of conscientious employees prompts them to persist in a given course of action for long periods of time. That persistence can be seen in their daily work effort, but it extends to a sense of commitment to the organization as well.95 Another reason is that conscientious employees are better at managing stress, perceiving lower levels of key stressors, and being less affected by them at work.96 In some respects, Figure 9-8 understates the importance of conscientiousness (and personality, more generally). Why? Because personality becomes more important in some contexts than in others. The principle of situational strength suggests that “strong situations” have clear behavioral expectations, incentives, or instructions that make differences between individuals less important, whereas “weak situations” lack those cues.97 Personality variables tend to be more significant drivers of behavior in weak situations than in strong situations.98 Similarly, the principle of trait activation suggests that some situations provide cues that trigger the expression of a given trait.99 For example, a cry for help provides a cue that can trigger the expression of empathy. Personality variables tend to be more significant drivers C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values OB AT THE BOOKSTORE GRIT by Angela Duckworth (New York: Scribner, 2016). In sum, no matter the domain, the highly successful had a kind of ferocious determination that played out in two ways. First, these exemplars were unusually resilient and hardworking. Second, they knew in a very, very deep way what it was they wanted . . . It was this combination of passion and perseverance that made high achievers special. In a word, they had grit. With those words, Angela Duckworth lays out her thesis about the core of achievement. Duckworth argues that achievement can be understood with two equations: talent x effort = skill, and skill x effort = achievement. The key insight from that pair of equations? That effort counts twice. Those who are most determined and most resilient gain from those qualities in two ways, by building more skills and by getting more out of those skills. Duckworth summarizes those qualities as “grit”—a combination of high passion and high perseverance. In her research, Duckworth measures grit with a number of survey items, answered on a scale ranging from 1 = “Not at all like me” to 5 = “Very much like me.” They include “Setbacks don’t discourage me. I don’t give up easily,” “I am a hard worker,” and “I finish whatever I begin.” Duckworth’s research has linked grit to commitment and achievement in a wide range of pursuits. For example, ©Roberts Publishing Services grit explains who survives the most intense phase of West Point’s training better than anything the academy uses for screening. Although Duckworth does not explicitly make this connection, it’s clear that grit has much in common with conscientiousness. Conscientious individuals are hardworking, persevering, dependable, and reliable—and they are known for the effort they put in. Does the fact that grit is a personality trait make it impossible to get “grittier”? As Duckworth acknowledges, personality is only partially genetic—it can change slowly but surely over the course of time. So how does one become “grittier”? Duckworth provides a number of suggestions, including working in areas of deep interest and focusing more on the quality of practice than the quantity of practice. of behaviors in situations that provide relevant cues than in situations in which those cues are lacking. For more on the benefits of conscientiousness, see our OB at the Bookstore feature. A PPLICATION: PER SONALITY TESTS Given how important personality traits can be to job performance and organizational commitment, it’s not surprising that many organizations try to gauge the personality of job applicants. What’s the best way to do that? Well, many organizations try to gauge personality through interviews by looking for cues that an applicant is conscientious or agreeable or has high levels of some other relevant personality dimension. Can you see a potential problem with this approach? Here’s a hint: When was the last time you went into an interview and acted careless, sloppy, moody, or insecure? It’s probably been awhile. People engage in a number of impression management and 287 288 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values 9.7 Are personality tests useful tools for organizational hiring? self-presentation tactics when interviewing, sometimes to appear to possess traits that they don’t really have.100 In fact, most interview preparation courses and books train applicants to exhibit the very personality traits that most employers are looking for! To examine whether interviewers can gauge the Big Five, one study asked 26 interviewers, all of whom were human resources practitioners with more than 12 years of hiring experience, to assess the personalities of undergraduate business students who were on the job market.101 The interviewers met with an average of three students for 30 minutes and were instructed to follow the interview protocols used in their own organizations. Once the interviews had concluded, the study gathered multiple ratings of the Big Five, including ratings from the interviewer, the student, and a close friend of the student. The results of the study showed that the interviewers’ ratings of extraversion, agreeableness, and openness were fairly consistent with the students’ own ratings, as well as their friends’ ratings. In contrast, interviewers’ ratings of conscientiousness and neuroticism were only weakly related to the students’ and friends’ ratings. This study therefore shows that interviewers are unable to gauge the two Big Five dimensions that are most highly related to job performance. Rather than using interviews to assess personality, more and more companies are relying on paper-and-pencil “personality tests” like the kind shown in our OB Assessments. A recent survey of Fortune 1000 firms suggests that around a third of those organizations rely on, or plan to implement, some form of personality testing.102 If you’ve ever applied for an hourly position at Best Buy, Target, Toys “R” Us, Marriott, Universal Studios, Sports Authority, CVS Pharmacy, Albertsons, or Fresh Market, you may have been asked to take a personality test at a computer kiosk as part of your application.103 That test was designed by Kronos, a workforce management software and services provider headquartered in Chelmsford, Massachusetts.104 Kronos’s test includes 50 questions, many of which are clearly tapping the Big Five: • You do things carefully so you don’t make mistakes.105 (high conscientiousness) • You can easily cheer up and forget a problem.106 (low neuroticism) • You don’t act polite when you don’t want to.107 (low agreeableness) • You’d rather blend into the crowd than stand out.108 (low extraversion) Ten minutes after an applicant completes the personality test at the kiosk, the hiring manager receives a report that identifies the applicant with a “green light,” “yellow light,” or “red light.”109 Green lights earn an automatic follow-up interview, yellow lights require some managerial discretion, and red lights are excused from the hiring process. The report also includes some recommended interview questions to follow-up on any concerns that might have arisen based on personality responses. Kronos has built a database of 370,000 employee personality profiles, together with the actual job results for those employees, allowing them to look for profiles of effective and committed employees. Kronos also encourages employers to save the data from the personality tests for several years, to verify that responses correlate with performance evaluations and turnover over time. Of course, personality testing is not without controversy. Privacy advocates worry about the security of the personality profiles that are stored in large databases.110 There’s also no guarantee that the personality tests used by a company are actually valid assessments because few of them have been subject to scientific investigation.111 For example, we’re not aware of any scientific studies in peer-reviewed journals that have comprehensively validated Kronos’s personality test. Because the personality testing industry is not regulated, the best bet for companies that are thinking about using personality tests is to start with tests that have been validated in scientific journals. Table 9-4 provides a list of some of the most well-validated measures of the Big Five personality dimensions. The vendors that own these measures typically offer software and services for scoring the instruments, interpreting the data against relevant population norms, and creating feedback sheets. One particular subset of personality tests is particularly controversial. Integrity tests, sometimes also called “honesty tests,” are personality tests that focus specifically on a predisposition to engage in theft and other counterproductive behaviors.112 Integrity tests were created, in part, as a reaction to Congress’s decision to make polygraph (or “lie detector”) tests illegal as a tool for organizational hiring. Integrity tests typically come in two general varieties. Clear purpose tests ask applicants about their attitudes toward dishonesty, beliefs about the frequency of dishonesty, endorsements of common rationalizations for dishonesty, desire to punish dishonesty, and confessions of past dishonesty.113 Veiled purpose tests do not reference dishonesty explicitly but instead C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values TABLE 9-4 A Sampling of Well-Validated Measures of the Big Five NAME OF INSTRUMENT VENDOR TIME REQUIRED NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Sigma Assessment Systems 15 minutes Personal Characteristics Inventory (PCI) Wonderlic 20 minutes Personality Research Form (PRF) Sigma Assessment Systems 45 minutes Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI) Hogan Assessment Systems 15 minutes Big Five Inventory (BFI) TestMaster 10 minutes assess more general personality traits that are associated with dishonest acts. Table 9-5 provides sample items for both types of integrity tests. You might notice that the veiled purpose items resemble some of the items in our OB Assessments for the Big Five. Most integrity tests actually assess, in large part, a combination of high conscientiousness, high agreeableness, and low neuroticism,114 along with an honesty or humility factor that may lie beyond the Big Five.115 Do integrity tests actually work? One study examined the effectiveness of integrity tests in a sample of convenience store clerks.116 The chain had been struggling with inventory “shrinkage” due to theft and began using a clear purpose integrity test to combat that trend. The study compared the integrity test scores for employees who were fired for theft-related reasons (e.g., taking merchandise, mishandling cash, having frequent cash register shortages) with a sample of demographically similar employees who remained in good standing. The results of the study revealed that employees who were terminated for theft had scored significantly lower on the integrity test when they were hired than employees who were not terminated. These sorts of results are not unusual; a meta-analysis of 443 studies including more than 500,000 employees has shown that integrity test scores have a moderately strong, negative correlation with counterproductive behaviors such as theft.117 In fact, integrity test scores are actually more strongly related to job performance than conscientiousness scores, largely because integrity tests sample a blend of multiple Big Five dimensions.118 You might find it surprising that integrity tests (or personality tests in general) can be effective. After all, don’t applicants just lie on the test? Before we answer that question, consider what you would do if you applied for a job and had to answer a set of questions on a 1 (“Strongly Disagree”) to 5 (“Strongly Agree”) scale that were obviously measuring integrity. If a response of 5 indicated TABLE 9-5 TYPE OF TEST Sample Integrity Test Items SAMPLE ITEMS Clear Purpose • Would you say that most people lie on their résumé? • Have you ever taken something home from work without saying anything about it? • If a cashier gave you too much change, do you think you’d point out the error? • At what dollar value would theft from work become a fireable offense? Veiled Purpose • I rarely do things impulsively. • I try to avoid hurting people’s feelings. • There are people out there I’d like to get back at. • I’m someone who follows the rules. Source: Adapted from J.E. Wanek, P.R. Sackett, and D.S. Ones, “Towards an Understanding of Integrity Test Similarities and Differences: An Item-Level Analysis of Seven Tests,” Personnel Psychology 56 (2003), pp. 873–94. 289 290 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values high integrity, how would you answer? You probably wouldn’t answer all 5s because it would be clear that you were faking—exaggerating your responses to a personality test in a socially desirable fashion. You might worry that the computers that score the test have some ability to “flag” faked responses (indeed, the scoring procedures for many personality tests do flag applicants with an unusual pattern of responses).119 So how would you answer? Chances are, you’d allow your answers to have “a grain of truth”— you’d just exaggerate that true response a bit to make yourself look better. Figure 9-9 summarizes FIGURE 9-9 The Effects of Faking on Correlations with Integrity Tests Score with Faking Amount of Faking INFREQUENT Supervisor Ratings of Counterproductive Behavior FREQUENT Score without Faking DISHONEST HONEST Applicant Scores on Integrity Test Below Average Score Correlation without faking = -.35 (picture only the faded circles) Above Average Score Correlation with faking = -.30 (picture only the unfaded circles) C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values what this sort of faking might look like, with red circles representing below-average scores on an integrity test and green circles representing above-average scores. Research on personality testing suggests that virtually everyone fakes their responses to some degree, as evidenced in the difference between the faded circles (which represent the “true” responses) and the unfaded circles (which represent the exaggerated responses).120 Do dishonest people fake more? To some degree. Figure 9-9 reveals that applicants who scored below average on the test faked a bit more than applicants who scored above average on the test. But the disparity in the amount of faking is not large, likely because dishonest people tend to view their behavior as perfectly normal—they believe everyone feels and acts just like they do. The figure reveals that it could be dangerous to set some artificial cutoff score for making hiring decisions, because it’s possible for people to “fake their way” across that cutoff (note that two of the individuals in the figure went from a below-average score to an above-average score by faking). With that caution in mind, here’s the critical point illustrated by Figure 9-9: Because everyone fakes to some degree, correlations with outcomes like theft or other counterproductive behaviors are relatively unaffected.121 Picture the scatterplot in the figure with just the faded circles—what does the correlation between integrity test scores and supervisor ratings of counterproductive behavior look like? Now picture the scatterplot with just the unfaded circles—what does that correlation look like? About the same, right? The tendency to fake doesn’t really alter the rank order in scores from most dishonest to most honest, so the test is still useful as a tool for predicting counterproductive behavior. In fact, experts on personnel selection agree that personality and integrity tests are among the most useful tools for hiring122—more useful even than the typical version of the employment interview.123 One of the only tools that’s more useful than a personality test is an ability test—as noted in our next chapter.124 TA K EAWAYS 9.1 Personality refers to the structures and propensities inside people that explain their charac- teristic patterns of thought, emotion, and behavior. It also refers to people’s social reputations—the way they are perceived by others. In this way, personality captures what people are like (unlike ability, which reflects what people can do). Cultural values are shared beliefs about desirable end states or modes of conduct in a given culture that influence the development and expression of traits. 9.2 The “Big Five” include conscientiousness (e.g., dependable, organized, reliable), agreeable- ness (e.g., warm, kind, cooperative), neuroticism (e.g., nervous, moody, emotional), openness to experience (e.g., curious, imaginative, creative), and extraversion (e.g., talkative, sociable, passionate). 9.3 Although both nature and nurture are important, personality is affected significantly by genetic factors. Studies of identical twins reared apart and studies of personality stability over time suggest that between 35 and 45 percent of the variation in personality is genetic. Personality can be changed, but such changes are apparent only over the course of several years. 9.4 The Big Five is the dominant taxonomy of personality; other taxonomies include the Myers- Briggs Type Inventory and Holland’s RIASEC model. 9.5 Hofstede’s taxonomy of cultural values includes individualism–collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity–femininity, and short-term vs. long-term orientation. More recent research by Project GLOBE has replicated many of those dimensions and added five other means to distinguish among cultures: gender egalitarianism, assertiveness, future orientation, performance orientation, and humane orientation. 291 292 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values 9.6 Conscientiousness has a moderate positive relationship with job performance and a moder- ate positive relationship with organizational commitment. It has stronger effects on these outcomes than the rest of the Big Five. 9.7 Personality tests are useful tools for organizational hiring. Research suggests that applicants do “fake” to some degree on the tests, but faking does not significantly lower the correlation between test scores and the relevant outcomes. Here are the answers to the tests of creative thinking in Figure 9-5: (1) A towel. (2) They were triplets. (3) The letter U. (4) Draw a line to turn the + into a 4. (5) Solving this puzzle literally requires you to “think outside the box” (yes, that’s where it comes from!). Nowhere in the instructions did it state that you needed to keep the lines inside the square formed by the dots. Connect the dots using the four lines shown below: K EY TERMS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Personality Traits Cultural values Conscientiousness Agreeableness Neuroticism Openness to experience Extraversion Big Five Accomplishment striving Communion striving Zero acquaintance Status striving Positive affectivity Negative affectivity Differential exposure Differential reactivity Locus of control Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 266 p. 270 p. 271 p. 271 p. 273 p. 273 p. 274 p. 274 p. 274 p. 274 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Interests RIASEC model Culture Individualism–collectivism Power distance Uncertainty avoidance Masculinity–femininity Short-term vs. long-term orientation Project GLOBE Ethnocentrism Typical performance Maximum performance Situational strength Trait activation Integrity tests Clear purpose tests Veiled purpose tests Faking p. 279 p. 279 p. 280 p. 281 p. 281 p. 281 p. 281 p. 281 p. 281 p. 283 p. 285 p. 285 p. 286 p. 286 p. 288 p. 288 p. 288 p. 290 p. 279 DI SC US SION QUE STION S 9.1 Assume that you applied for a job and were asked to take a personality test, like the one offered by Kronos. How would you react? Would you view the organization with which you were applying in a more or less favorable light? Why? 9.2 Research on genetic influences on personality suggests that more than half of the varia- tion in personality is due to nurture—to life experiences. What life experiences could make C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values someone more conscientious? More agreeable? More neurotic? More extraverted? More open to new experiences? 9.3 Consider the personality dimensions included in the Myers-Briggs Type Inventory and the RIASEC model. If you had to “slot” those dimensions into the Big Five, would you be able to do so? Which dimensions don’t seem to fit? 9.4 Consider the profile of the United States on Hofstede’s cultural values, as shown in Table 9-3. Do you personally feel like you fit the U.S. profile, or do your values differ in some respects? If you served as an expatriate, meaning you were working in another country, which cultural value differences would be most difficult for you to deal with? 9.5 If you owned your own business and had a problem with employee theft, would you use an integrity test? Why or why not? CASE: C HICAGO CUB S How exactly has Epstein prioritized personality in shaping the Cubs? One way is by instructing his scouts to get to know prospects as people. Scouts are instructed to list three examples of times when players have overcome adversity on the field, and three examples of times they’ve done so off the field. Scouts are also instructed to ask anyone they can about the prospect’s traits and qualities, from guidance counselors to girlfriends to family members. How does the prospect treat others when no one is looking? Is the prospect motivated by money and fame or competition and winning? Short scouting reports with boxes to be checked were quickly replaced by detailed summaries several pages long. Speaking of Kyle Schwarber, one of the team’s better hitters, Epstein recalled, “Scouts loved the bat. We all loved the bat. Our statistical model loved the bat. And makeup was huge. Stan Zielinski, the area scout, did a great job getting to know Kyle inside and out . . . he’s the perfect player to have as a franchise player because he can be one of your best players who everybody else wants to follow because of his character.” Another way is by prioritizing everyday positional players over pitchers who only start once every five games. Noted Epstein, “And there were a lot of good arms available so the debate in the draft room really crystallized. It was like, ‘We can choose a pitcher who is going to move quickly and can help us win every fifth day, but pitchers have a really hard time leading. They can lead the starting rotation after they get established a little bit, but it’s hard for them to lead the team. . . . We are going to define our identity . . . we want players who are invested in their teammates . . . we want players we trust can respond to adversity. We want players other players like being around.” By focusing on players who are on the field every day, Epstein wound up creating a culture—not just a collection of personality traits. Epstein feels vindication for his personality focus by comparing the 2016 team to some of the other Cubs teams that had made the playoffs a decade earlier. “What was the personality of those Cubs teams?” he asked. “They had been to the playoffs in ’07, ’08, but what was the personality? Who were the leaders?” The 2016 team had those leaders, and that was by design. 9.1 When Epstein talks about “character,” “makeup,” and “ethos,” what personality traits does he seem to be prioritizing? 9.2 Do you think professional baseball scouts can get an accurate read of a prospect’s personal- ity from observing him and talking to those who know him? Would it be wise for the Cubs to use personality tests for that purpose? 9.3 Do the personality traits needed to be a successful baseball player differ from the traits needed to be a successful president of baseball operations? In what way? Source: T. Verducci, The Cubs Way: The Zen of Building the Best Team in Baseball and Breaking the Curse. New York: Crown Archetype, 2017. 293 294 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values EXERCISE: GUESSING PERSONALITY PROFILES The purpose of this exercise is to explore how noticeable the Big Five personality dimensions are among classmates. This exercise uses groups, so your instructor will either assign you to a group or ask you to create your own group. The exercise has the following steps: 9.1 Individually, complete the Big Five measure found in the OB Assessments box in the chapter. 9.2 Write your scores on a small white piece of paper, in the following format: C =, A =, N =, O =, E =. Try to disguise your handwriting to make it as plain and generic as possible. Fold your piece of paper so that others cannot see your scores. 9.3 In your group, mix up the pieces of paper. Begin by having one group member choose a piece of paper, reading the CANOE scores aloud. The group should then try to come to consensus on which member the scores belong to, given the norms for the various dimensions (C = 14, A = 16, N = 10, O = 15, E = 13). Keep in mind that group members may wind up reading their own pieces of paper aloud in some cases. Once the group guesses which member the paper belongs to, they should place the paper in front of that member. 9.4 Moving clockwise, the next group member should choose one of the remaining pieces of paper, continuing as before. The process repeats until all the pieces of paper have been assigned to a member. Members can be assigned only one piece of paper, and no switching is permitted once an assignment has been made. 9.5 Group members should then announce whether the piece of paper assigned to them was in fact their set of scores. If the assignment was incorrect, they should find their actual piece of paper and describe the differences in the scores. 9.6 Class discussion (whether in groups or as a class) should center on the following topics: How accurate were the guesses? Were the guesses more accurate in groups that knew one another well than in groups with less familiarity? Which personality dimensions were relied upon most heavily when making assignment decisions? What is it that makes those dimensions more immediately observable? EN DN OTES 9.1 Funder, D.C. “Personal- 9.2 Hogan, “Personal- ity.” Annual Review of Psychology 52 (2001), pp. 197–221; and Hogan, R.T. “Personality and Personality Measurement.” Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 2, ed. M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1991, pp. 873–919. ity and Personality Measurement.” Psychology 97 (2009), pp. 1097–1114. 9.4 Rokeach, M. The Nature 9.3 Ibid.; Fleeson, W., and P. Gallagher. “The Implications of Big Five Standing for the Distribution of Trait Manifestation in Behavior: Fifteen ExperienceSampling Studies and a Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Personality and Social of Human Values. New York: The Free Press, 1973; and Steers, R.M., and C.J. SanchezRunde. “Culture, Motivation, and Work Behavior.” In Blackwell Handbook of CrossCultural Management, ed. M.J. Gannon and C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values K.L. Newman. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2002, pp. 190–213. 9.5 Goldberg, L.R. “From Ace to Zombie: Some Explorations in the Language of Personality.” In Advances in Personality Assessment, Vol. 1, ed. C.D. Spielberger and J.N. Butcher. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1982, pp. 203–34; Allport, G.W., and H.S. Odbert. “Trait-Names: A PsychoLexical Study.” Psychological Monographs 47 (1936), Whole No. 211; and Norman, W.T. 2800 Personality Trait Descriptors: Normative Operating Characteristics for a University Population. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Department of Psychology, 1967. 9.6 Tupes, E.C., and R.E. Christal. Recurrent Personality Factors Based on Trait Ratings. USAF ASD Technical Report No. 61–97, Lackland Air Force Base, TX: United States Air Force, 1961, reprinted in Journal of Personality 60, pp. 225–51; Norman, W.T. “Toward an Adequate Taxonomy of Personality Attributes: Replicated Factor Structure in Peer Nomination Personality Ratings.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 66 (1963), pp. 574–83; Digman, J.M., and N.K. Takemoto-Chock. “Factors in the Natural Language of Personality: Re-Analysis, Comparison, and Interpretation of Six Major Studies.” Multivariate Behavioral Research 16 (1981), pp. 149–70; McCrae, R.R., and P.T. Costa Jr. “Updating Norman’s ‘Adequate Taxonomy’: Intelligence and Personality Dimensions in Natural Language and in Questionnaires.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49 (1985), pp. 710–21; and Goldberg, L.R. “An Alternative ‘Description of Personality’: The Big-Five Factor Structure.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59 (1990), pp. 1216–29. 9.7 Goldberg, L.R. “Lan- guage and Individual Differences: The Search for Universals in Personality Lexicons.” In Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 2, ed. L. Wheeler. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1981, pp. 141–65. 9.8 Arvey, R.D., and T.J. Bouchard Jr. “Genetics, Twins, and Organizational Behavior.” In Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 16, ed. B.M. Staw and L.L. Cummings. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1994, pp. 47–82. 9.9 Loehlin, J.C. Genes and Environment in Personality Development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992. 9.10 Ibid. 9.11 Roberts, B.W.; K.E. Walton; and W. Viechtbauer. “Patterns of Mean-Level Change in Personality Traits across the Life Course: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies.” Psychological Bulletin 132 (2006), pp. 1–25. 9.12 Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988. 9.13 Loehlin, Genes and Environment. 9.14 Roberts et al., “Patterns of Mean-Level Change in Personality Traits across the Life Course”; Jackson, J.J.; T. Bogg; K.E. Walton; D. Wood; P.D. Harms; J. LodiSmith; G.W. Edmonds; and B.W. Roberts. “Not All Conscientiousness Scales Change Alike: A Multimethod, Multisample Study of Age Differences in the Facets of Conscientiousness.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96 (2009), pp. 446–59; and Soto, C.J.; O.P. John; S.D. Gosling; and J. Potter. “Age Differences in Personality Traits from 10 to 65: Big Five Domains and Facets in a Large Cross-Sectional Sample.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100 (2011), pp. 330–48. 9.15 Saucier, G. “Mini- Markers: A Brief Version of Goldberg’s Unipolar Big-Five Markers.” Journal of Personality Assessment 63 (1994), pp. 506–16; Goldberg, L.R. “The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure.” 295 296 C H A P T E R 9    Personality and Cultural Values Psychological Assessment 4 (1992), pp. 26–42; and McCrae, R.R., and P.T. Costa Jr. “Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality Across Instruments and Observers.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (1987), pp. 81–90. 9.16 Barrick, M.R., and M.K. Mount. “The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A MetaAnalysis.” Personnel Psychology 44 (1991), pp. 1–26. 9.17 Barrick, M.R.; G.L. Stewart; and M. Piotrowski. “Personality and Job Performance: Test of the Mediating Effects of Motivation among Sales Representatives.” Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (2002), pp. 43–51. 9.18 Barrick, M.R.; M.K. Mount; and J.P. Strauss. “Conscientiousness and Performance of Sales Representatives: Test of the Mediating Effects of Goal Setting.” Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (1993), pp. 715–22. 9.19 Stewart, G.L. “Trait Bandwidth and Stages of Job Performance: Assessing Differential Effects for Conscientiousness and its Subtraits.” Journal of Applied Psychology 84 (1999), pp. 959–68. 9.20 Judge, T.A.; C.A. Hig- gins; C.J. Thoreson; and M.R. Barrick. “The Big Five Personality Traits, General Mental Ability, and Career Success across the Life Span.” Personnel Psychology 52 (1999), pp. 621–52. 9.21 Friedman, H.S.; J.S. Tucker; J.E. Schwartz; L.R. Martin; C. Tomlinson-Keasey; D.L. Wingard; and M.H. Criqui. “Childhood Conscientiousness and Longevity: Health Behaviors and Cause of Death.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68 (1995), pp. 696–703. 9.22 Roberts, B.W.; O.S. Chernyshenko; S. Stark; and L.R. Goldberg. “The Structure of Conscientiousness: An Empirical Investigation Based on Seven Major Personality Dimensions.” Personnel Psychology 58 (2005), pp. 103–39. 9.23 Barrick et al., “Person- ality and Job Performance”; and Hogan, J., and B. Holland. “Using Theory to Evaluate Personality and Job-Performance Relations: A Socioanalytic Perspective.” Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (2003), pp. 100–12. 9.24 Barrick and Mount, “The Big Five Personality Dimensions.” 9.25 Frei, R.L., and M.A. McDaniel. “Validity of Customer Service Measures in Personnel Selection: A Review of Criterion and Construct Evidence.” Human Performance 11 (1998), pp. 1–27. 9.26 Graziano, W.G.; L.A. Jensen-Campbell; and E.C. Hair. “Perceiving Interpersonal Conflict and Reacting to It: The Case for Agreeableness.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (1996), pp. 820–35. 9.27 Mehl, M.R.; S.D. Gosling; and J.W. Pennebaker. “Personality in Its Natural Habitat: Manifestations and Implicit Folk Theories of Personality in Daily Life.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90 (2006), pp. 862–77. 9.28 Albright, L.; D.A. Kenny; and T.E. Malloy. “Consensus in Personality Judgments at Zero Acquaintance.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55 (1988), pp. 387–95; and Levesque, M.J., and D.A. Kenny. “Accuracy of Behavioral Predictions at Zero Acquaintance: A …

Order from Academic Writers Bay
Best Custom Essay Writing Services


Why Choose Us?

  • 100% non-plagiarized Papers
  • 24/7 /365 Service Available
  • Affordable Prices
  • Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
  • Will complete your papers in 6 hours
  • On-time Delivery
  • Money-back and Privacy guarantees
  • Unlimited Amendments upon request
  • Satisfaction guarantee

How It Works

  • Click on the “Place Your Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
  • Fill in your paper’s requirements in the “PAPER DETAILS” section.
  • Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
  • Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
  • From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.

About AcademicWritersBay.com

AcademicWritersBay.com is an easy-to-use and reliable service that is ready to assist you with your papers 24/7/ 365days a year. 99% of our customers are happy with their papers. Our team is efficient and will always tackle your essay needs comprehensively assuring you of excellent results. Feel free to ask them anything concerning your essay demands or Order.

AcademicWritersBay.com is a private company that offers academic support and assistance to students at all levels. Our mission is to provide proficient and high quality academic services to our highly esteemed clients. AcademicWritersBay.com is equipped with competent and proficient writers to tackle all types of your academic needs, and provide you with excellent results. Most of our writers are holders of master’s degrees or PhDs, which is an surety of excellent results to our clients. We provide assistance to students all over the world.
We provide high quality term papers, research papers, essays, proposals, theses and many others. At AcademicWritersBay.com, you can be sure of excellent grades in your assignments and final exams.


error: Content is protected !!