Executive Summary
The key factor for success of any organization lies in the performance of their employees. As
organisations grow and mature, managements try to adopt measures to improve the
performance of their employees and a lot of questions arise on the best way to go about.
Managing Director of Green Curve Interiors, an established interior design and build
company, aims to implement an organizational behaviour aimed at ensuring improved job
performance of their employees. This paper tries to answer one of his question, How does
personality affect job performance among various occupational groups?, by investigating
the relation of the Big Five personality dimensions (Extraversion, Agreeableness,
Conscientiousness, Neuroticism and Openness) to job performance for three occupational
groups (Mangers, Skilled Workers and Sales).
Office based employees at Green Curve Interiors were administered a widely acknowledged
Big Five personality online test to obtain their personality trait score. Regression line and
scatter charts were the tools used in our study to find the relation between the results of
personality test score and job performance ratings. In our study we categorised green curve
employees according to their occupational groups.
From our analysis we found that conscientiousness was the best predictor for overall job
performance among different occupational groups. We also found that extraversion and
openness traits did not predict overall job performance, but they did predict success in
specific occupations like managers and sales staff.
We conclude our study by recommending Green Curve to incorporate the can do attitude
and continuous improvement as part of their organisational behaviour. Can do attitude
relates to the tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement; while
continuous improvement relates to disciplined, rigorous and systematic ways to monitor
and improve; both these are facets of conscientiousness.
1|Page
Table of Contents
1.
2.
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 5
2.1
2.2
2.3
Variables ................................................................................................................................ 5
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
Extraversion: ................................................................................................................. 6
2.4.3
Agreeableness: ............................................................................................................. 6
2.4.4
Conscientiousness: ...................................................................................................... 6
2.4.5
2.4.6
Openness: ..................................................................................................................... 6
2.4.7
FFM: ............................................................................................................................... 6
2.4.8
2.4.9
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.6
3.
Measures ............................................................................................................................... 8
3.1.1
Personality ..................................................................................................................... 8
3.1.2
4.
5.
Personality ............................................................................................................................. 9
5.2
Performance........................................................................................................................ 10
5.3
5.3.1
Relation of personality and job performance based on match of person with
environment................................................................................................................................. 11
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.4
6.
6.1.1
Extraversion ................................................................................................................ 18
6.1.2
Agreeableness ............................................................................................................ 20
6.1.3
Conscientiousness ..................................................................................................... 22
6.1.4
Neuroticism ................................................................................................................. 24
6.1.5
Openness .................................................................................................................... 26
6.2
7.
Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 18
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 29
7.1
Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 29
7.2
Limitations ........................................................................................................................... 29
8.
References .................................................................................................................................. 30
9.
Appendix ...................................................................................................................................... 31
3|Page
4|Page
2. Introduction
2.1 Company profile - Green Curve LLC
Established in 2006, Green Curve is an interior design and build company which has
developed a successful synergy between innovative interior design solutions and
professional and on-time delivery of projects. The company aims to amalgamate the various
faculties involved in the realization of building interior, from design through project
management, contracting & execution, under a single umbrella.
At Green Curve, they offer their clients, a broad spectrum of services, which are projectspecific and sensitive to the budgetary and programming requirement of the job. These
include Interior Design & Consultancy Services, Interior Project Management, Interior
Contracting and Turn-key Solution.
The Corporate Office for Green Curve Interiors, located in the heart of new Dubai, embodies
a design brief encapsulating the image and corporate vision of the client.
Occupational
groups
Dependant Variabke
Personality
Mediating Variable
Independant Variable
2.3 Variables
Job
performance
The independent variable for our case study is Personality and the dependant variable is
Job Performance. The role of the employee in the organizational (i.e. in which occupational
group) is a mediating variable as it could influence the effect of personality trait on
performance.
5|Page
6|Page
3. Research Methodology
Green Curve LLC has 18 office based employees and 30 field workers. Our study was
focussed on the 18 office based employees. The office based employees work in teams
comprising of Interior Design & Consultancy Services, Interior Project Management, Office
Administration and Sales & Marketing.
83% of the office based employees participated in our study by responding to the Big Five
online questionnaire. Of the employees who participated in the study, 80% were male, 20%
females; 93% ranged in age group of 21 to 40 years and 7% above 40 years.
Employees were categorized into three occupational groups, namely Manager, Sales &
Skilled Workers. The percentage of each occupational group is as follows:
Managers 40%
Skilled workers 60%
Sales 27%
Note that employees in the sales occupational group were also included in the skilled group.
7|Page
3.1 Measures
3.1.1 Personality
The employees were administered the Big Five personality test. The below instruction was
send to all employees:
Please find below step by step instruction to do the online personality test and how to print
the results. (Ensure you have internet access before you start)
1. Got to the URL - http://www.personal.psu.edu/j5j/IPIP/ipipneo120.htm in your
browser.
2. On the 1st page you need to tick two check boxes (
) as agreement of
terms and conditions and then click on send button (
) at the bottom left on
the page.
3. On the next page you will need to enter your Nick Name, Gender, Age and Country
first and then answer 60 questions.
a. In the nickname field we recommend you to enter your initials (1st letter of
your first name, middle name & last name)
b. In the country field please select your nationality.
4.
send button (
) at the bottom left on the page.
5. Now you are on the final page which shows the results. Do NOT close this page or
close the browser window. Take a printout of this page and record your name on
the top of the print out.
6. We will collect this report from you on Thursday, 4th April 2013.
Note:
1. Once you complete the personality test you can save the page or keep an extra copy
of the print out if you need a personal copy of the results. You will not be able to
come back to page once you close it or navigate out of the result page.
Figure 3.1 - Big Five personality test instructions
1
2
3
4
8|Page
4. Data Analysis
Regression line can be used as a way of visually depicting the relationship between the
independent (x) and dependent (y) variables in a graph. A straight line depicts a linear trend
in the data. The linear trend line can be calculated using the least squares fit for a line with
following equation, where m is the slope and b is the intercept:
y = mx + b
A trend line is most accurate when its R2 value is at or near 1. MS Excel automatically
calculates both the slope and R2 value in a scatter chart. The slope of the graph varies with
the strength of the relation, thus lines almost horizontal to the x-axis shows the relation is
weak or almost nil.
Scatter charts were generated in MS Excel by placing the dependant variable-job
performance, on y-axis verses the independent variable-personality trait score, on x-axis.
Linear trend line is derived using MS Excel graph tools for each graph to analyse the
impact of personality type on job performance. The slope m and R2 values are displayed on
the graph as well.
Neuroticism/Low Emotional Stability: This trait characterizes people with high levels
of anxiety, hostility, depression and self-consciousness. In contrast, people with low
neuroticism (high emotional stability) are poised, secure and calm.
Openness to experience - This dimension is most complex and it generally has the
least agreement among scholars. It refers to the extent to which people are sensitive,
flexible, creative and curious. Those who score low on this dimension tend to be
more resistant to change, less open to new ideas and more fixed on their ways.
Extroversion Extroversion characterizes people who are outgoing, talkative,
sociable and assertive. The opposite is introversion, which refers to those who are
quiet, shy and cautious.
The five personality traits are not independent of each other. Agreeableness,
Conscientiousness and low neuroticism represent a common underlying characteristic
broadly described as getting along. The other two dimensions share the common
underlying factor called getting ahead(McShane&Gilnow 2009).
In addition to the Big Five, a number of personality traits (e.g., negative affectivity, locus of
control, Type A behavior pattern) etc are present as well, but in our analyses we only
considered Big Five as the Big Five personality traits are often described as broad and
provide a comprehensive description of personality (Petrou et al. 2011). Furthermore,
behaviour of people in a variety of real-life situations are predicted in a good way by the test
scores of these traits.
5.2 Performance
Performance is the dependant variable used in our case study. Performance is defined as
behaviors or actions that are relevant to the goals of the organisation in question.
Performance is not the outcome, consequence, or result of behavior or action; performance
is the action itself (McCloy, Campbell, Cudeck 1994).
10 | P a g e
A journal by J.P. Campbell (1990a) and J.P. Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, and Sager(1992)
assumes that performance in virtually any job is multidimensional and that the substantive
content of performance can be discussed in terms of basic dimensions, such as might be
identified in job description with task analysis or the critical incident procedure.
The performance of employees is very crucial for any organisation and forms the base of its
growth. To perform any task an employee should have the pre-requisite knowledge, master
the pre-requisite skills and work on the job task for some period of time with at some level of
effort (McCloy, Campbell, Cudeck 1994).
basis for most employee-selection decisions (Day&Bedeian 1995). The same journal also
states that Personality is a relevant element in supplementary P-E congruence since it is
the attraction of similar types of people to the same work setting that that begins to
determine the setting. Also, people with similar personalities are not likely to be attracted to
each other but also likely to behave in similar ways thus ensuring better performance for the
organization. A hypothised relation was drawn among few Big five traits and several
representative work-place variables (viz., psychological climate, role stress , job satisfaction,
job performance and organization tenure). Role stress was hypothised as a mediator
between the exogenous variables of personality similarity and psychological climate and the
endogenous variables of job satisfaction, job performance and organization tenure(1995,
p.3). The relation is represented as below:
Figure 5.2- Hypothised structural model of personality similarity and work-related outcomes
(solid lines indicate significant paths; dashed lines indicate nonsignificant paths)
Source : Day and Biedman (1995)
The variables are positioned as shown in the figure to be consistent with the outlook that
certain antecedents such as interpersonal alikeness and psychological environment (as
measured by personality similarity and psychological climate, respectively) lead to stress
reactions. In turn stress has been shown to lead to specific behavioral e.g., job performance
outcomes. Day and Bedeian (1995) goes on to mention that The model in Fig.1 estimated
direct paths from personality similarity to job performance, job satisfaction and organization
tenure. These paths follow from the predictions of Muchinsky and Monahans (1987)
supplementary congruence model, as well as Hollands research. The fit of the data to the
model depicted in Fig. 1 was tested using a structured equation modelling and they
concluded that only agreeableness significantly predicted job performance(1995, p4). From
the findings, our research question on how personality affects job performance has been
answered by the conclusion that only agreeableness significantly predicted job performance.
12 | P a g e
One explanation provided by Day and Bedeain (1995) for this effect is that employees who
are noticeably disagreeable than their co-workers or those who are noticeably so friendly
and agreeable as to appear to be disingenuous, receive unfavourable evaluations from
better-established organization members (i.e., supervisors) than employees who are closer
to the norm set by others. Thus, being substantially different in terms of agreeableness might
result in the employee being less liked and lead to higher negative effect on the part of a
supervisor/rater.
The supplementary model of P-E congruence (Muchinsky&Monahan 1987), along with
predictions from Hollands (1996) theory of personality types and model environments
suggest that similarity in person characteristics like personality will express itself in
enhanced job performance.
5.3.2
First they used a two category classification of job performance as either measures
of job proficiency or measures of training proficiency
Second they performed an analysis by partitioning job performance criterion into task
performance, job dedication and interpersonal facilitation.
The findings from study by Hurtz and Donovan (2000) can be summarised as follows:
Validity by Occupation:
For all four occupational categories, Conscientiousness exhibited the highest estimated true
validity. For jobs involving customer service, Agreeableness, Openness to Experience and
Emotional Stability had low levels of validity. Similarly for sales and managerial jobs,
Emotional stability and extraversion had rather low but stable validities.
13 | P a g e
15 | P a g e
6. Primary Data
Online Big Five test results of employees collected from Green Curve was entered in to a
table grouped by occupational groups : manages and skilled workers along with respective
job performance score for each employee, as shown in Table 5.1.
Role
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Neuroticism
Openness
Manager
Manager
Manager
Manager
Manager
Manager
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
Skilled
74
73
86
22
70
75
80
38
72
66
48
74
25
36
68
9
59
57
65
25
80
54
52
62
38
65
35
91
50
46
53
96
81
45
95
98
58
97
48
65
79
53
4
21
95
56
1
23
30
56
8
43
25
60
69
26
10
94
60
41
42
60
56
46
42
15
21
73
19
5
16
15
24
19
54
Performance
Score
2
1
3
3
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
3
Table 6.1 - Employee scores for Big Five personality traits and Job Performance
Further emplyes in sales were idnetified and entered into a sepatare table, i.e. Table 5.2
Role
Sales
Sales
Sales
Sales
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Neuroticism
Openness
Performance
Score
68
86
70
75
46
57
25
80
95
81
95
98
41
23
56
8
54
56
42
15
3
3
2
2
Table 6.2 - Sales employee scores for Big Five personality traits and Job Performance
16 | P a g e
Table 5.3 Below is the employee job performance rating for 2012 provided to us by Green
Curve management.
Name
Sameer
CP
Vinson
Antony
Rajeev
Kumar
Aahad
Sayed
Rakesh
Pillai
Thanseer
Attassery
Ragil
Raj
Sonal
Jakkal
Sanjai
Kumar
Noor
Mohammed
Nisha
Amith
Shakir
Abdul Wahab
Hani
Ishaque
Gail
Ponce de Leon
Rosanna
Carasig
Designation
Manager-Sales&Marketing
Senior Account Manager
Account Manager
Operations Manager
Project Manager
Office Manager
Sales Executive
3D Designer
Architect
3D Designer
Interior Designer
Public Relations Officer
Accounts Officer
Project Engineer
Admin Assistant
Performance
2
2
3
2
3
1
3
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
2
17 | P a g e
6.1 Analysis
Table 5.1 and Table 5.2 were used to generate scatter graphs using MS Excel showing
linear regression formula for slope and R2. For each personality traits four graphs were
generated: one for all employees and one each for three occupational groups (Managers,
Skilled Workers and Sales). Analysis of each of these graphs is discussed below. Please
note that Green Curve has 1 as the maximum rating and 4 as the least.
6.1.1
Extraversion
Performance vs Extraversion
4
Performance
Performance Score
3
Linear
(Performance)
2
y = 0.0022x + 2.136
R = 0.0058
1
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Extraversion
Figure 6.1 - Performance vs Extraversion for all employees
The slope of the linear trend line in the Figure 6.1 indicated employees with higher
extraversion level has lower job performance. However the slope is very low (0.002) and the
accuracy is very low (R = 0.0058) as well, hence we conclude that there no indication of
extraversion impacting job performance on considering employees as a whole.
18 | P a g e
Performance vs Extraversion
Managers
4
Performance Score
Performance
3
Linear
(Performance)
y = -0.0125x + 2.9967
R = 0.1392
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Extraversion
Figure 6.2- Performance vs Extraversion in Managers
However as seen in Figure 6.2 managers with higher extraversion seem to have higher job
performance. It can be stated with better level of accuracy (R = 0.1392) that extraversion in
manager has a positive relation to their overall job performance.
Performance vs Extraversion
Skilled Workers
4
Performance Score
Performance
3
Linear
(Performance)
y = 0.0162x + 1.4207
R = 0.4131
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Extraversion
Figure 6.3 - Performance vs Extraversion in Skilled Workers
On the other hand, as shown in Figure 5.3, there is strong evidence (higher accuracy, R =
0.4131) that extraversion has negative impact on skilled workers overall job performance.
19 | P a g e
Performance vs Extraversion
Sales
Performance
Performance Score
3
Linear
(Performance)
2
y = 0.0231x + 0.7728
R = 0.104
1
0
60
70
80
90
100
Extraversion
Figure 6.4 - Performance vs Extraversion in Sales Staff
According the Figure 6.4, extraversion has negative impact on overall job performance for
employees in sales; however its not a strong relation as in skilled workers.
6.1.2
Agreeableness
Performance vs Agreeableness
4
Performance
Performance
3
Linear
(Performance)
y = 0.0025x + 2.1347
R = 0.0076
0
0
20
40
60
Agreeableness
80
100
Performance vs Agreeableness
Managers
Performance
Performance
3
Linear
(Performance)
y = 0.0039x + 1.9754
R = 0.019
0
0
20
40
60
Agreeableness
80
100
In managers too there no evidence that agreeableness is related to overall job performance.
Similar to the overall values Figure 7.2 shows a negligible slop and very low accuracy.
Performance vs Agreeableness
Skilled Workers
Performance
Performance
3
Linear
(Performance)
2
y = -0.001x + 2.3902
R = 0.0012
1
0
0
20
40
60
Agreeableness
80
100
From Figure 6.3 there no evidence that agreeableness is related to overall job performance
in skilled workers as well.
21 | P a g e
Performance vs Agreeableness
Sales
Performance
Performance
3
Linear
(Performance)
2
y = -0.0006x + 2.533
R = 0.0006
1
0
0
20
40
60
Agreeableness
80
100
Similarly in Figure 6.4 as well there no evidence that agreeableness is related to overall job
performance in sales employees.
6.1.3
Conscientiousness
Performance vs Conscientiousness
Performance
Performance
Linear
(Performance)
y = -0.0027x + 2.4449
R = 0.0178
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Conscientiousness
Figure 6.5 -Performance vs Conscientiousness for all employees
For the full set of employees analysed, conscientiousness have a positive impact on overall
job performance.
22 | P a g e
Performance vs Conscientiousness
Managers
Performance
Performance
Linear
(Performance)
y = -0.0175x + 3.5351
R = 0.2972
0
0
20
40
60
80
Conscientiousness
100
120
Performance vs Conscientiousness
Skilled Workers
Performance
Performance
Linear
(Performance)
y = 0.0036x + 2.1281
R = 0.0491
1
0
0
20
40
60
80
Conscientiousness
100
120
23 | P a g e
However in skilled workers there is no evidence that conscientiousness affects overall job
performance.
Performance vs Conscientiousness
Sales
Performance
Performance
Linear
(Performance)
2
y = -0.0486x + 6.9871
R = 0.4134
1
0
60
70
80
Conscientiousness
90
100
Similar to managers, for employees in sales too there is strong evidence of positive impact
of conscientiousness on overall job performance.
6.1.4
Neuroticism
Performance vs Neuroticism
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 0.0038x + 2.1142
R = 0.0273
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Neuroticism
Figure 6.9 -Performance vs Neuroticism for all the employees
24 | P a g e
From Figure 6.9 the slope of the line indicates that higher the score of neuroticism lower is
overall job performance; however the accuracy of this very low.
Performance vs Neuroticism
Managers
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 0.0085x + 1.9214
R = 0.0686
0
0
10
20
30
Neuroticism
40
50
60
From Figure 6.10, for managers, there is slightly more accuracy that neuroticism has a
negative effect on overall job performance.
Performance vs Neuroticism
Skilled Workers
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 0.0002x + 2.3215
R = 0.0002
0
0
20
40
60
Neuroticism
80
100
25 | P a g e
From Figure 6.11, there is no evidence that neuroticism is related to overall job performance
in skilled workers.
Performance vs Neuroticism
Sales
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 2.5
R = 0
0
0
10
20
30
Neuroticism
40
50
60
Similar to skilled workers, for sales employees as well there is no evidence that neuroticism
is related to overall job performance.
6.1.5
Openness
Performance vs Openness
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 0.0001x + 2.2621
R = 2E-05
0
0
20
40
60
80
Openness
26 | P a g e
As seen in Figure 6.13 there is no evidence that openness is related to overall job
performance when all the employees are considered.
Performance vs Openness
Managers
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = -0.0012x + 2.2188
R = 0.0006
0
0
20
40
Openness
60
80
The observation for the entire set of employees is valid for mangers as well i.e. there is no
evidence that openness has any affect on overall job performance as seen from Figure 6.14.
Performance vs Openness
Skilled Workers
Performance
Performance
Score
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 0.0032x + 2.2462
R = 0.0191
20
40
Openness
60
80
27 | P a g e
Performance vs Openness
Sales
Performance
Score
Performance
Linear
(Performance
Score)
y = 0.0248x + 1.4648
R = 0.6571
0
0
10
20
30
Openness
40
50
60
However for sales employees its interesting to note that there is strong relation between
openness and overall job performance. From Figure 6.16, slope of the linear regression line
indicates as higher the score in openness lower is the overall job performance. The accuracy
of the slope is high as well (R = 0.6571).
28 | P a g e
7. Conclusion
The primary data analysis concluded that conscientiousness was the only predictor of job
performance across different occupational groups and this is in line with our scholarly journal
findings. Thus those who are self-disciplined, act dutifully, aim for achievement, are
organized, dependable and planned rather than having spontaneous behaviour, perform a
bit better than those who believe they are less strong in these characteristics
Similarly, from our findings in the analysis of primary data we saw that extraversion and
openness traits did not predict overall work performance, but they did predict success in
specific occupations and this is also in agreement with our scholarly journal findings.
Although accuracy was moderate, we found that emotional stability predicted performance
among managers. However we did not find a relation that agreeableness could predict
success in specific occupations unlike our finding in scholarly journals.
7.1 Recommendations
After analysing the primary and secondary data to find the relationship between personality
traits and job performance of employees we conclude that conscientiousness is a good
predictor of job performance across different occupational groups. Based on this conclusion
we recommend Green Curve to incorporate the can do attitude and continuous
improvement as part of their organisational behaviour that the management is targeting to
drive throughout the organisation. Both these are facets of conscientiousness; can do
attitude relates to tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully, and aim for achievement,
while continuous improvement relates to disciplined, rigorous and systematic ways to
monitor and improve.
We can also recommend Green Curve to conduct trainings like Time-management workshop
for their employees to help them become more conscientious in their work. They can also
encourage their employees to take up stress relieving exercises like Yoga or start a laughter
club which will help to gradually improve their emotional stability.
7.2 Limitations
On hindsight, we realise that our study has few limitations. The personality traits in the study
were measured using a small survey of 120 questions. Some researchers argue that the use
of a wider mix of questions would offer more precision and better prediction (Mount et al
2006). Also, we felt that if we administered multiple personality surveys which measures the
various Big Five traits, then we would have a better accurate measure of the employees
personality traits score. We also have concern with the use of self-evaluation survey to
measure personality. External observers would provide valid insight into a persons
behavioural or externally observed traits (Barrick et al. 2001). The same journal states that
Big Five traits are relatively behavioural traits and because job performance is an externally
observed behaviour, measures of the Big Five given by external observers like managers
and co-workers would co-relate more with job performance than self-evaluation. Finally we
have considered the full the data set for our analysis and thus the outliers i.e., extreme
values could affect the analysis.
29 | P a g e
8. References
Barrick, MR, Mount, MK 1991, The big five personality dimensions and job
performance : A meta-analysis, Personnel Psychology, vol 44, pp 1-26
Barrick, Murray R, Mount, Micheal K, Judge, Timothy A (2001), Personality and
Performance at the Beginning of the New Millennium: What Do We Know and Where
Do We Go Next?, Journal of Personality and Performance, vol. 9, no.1/2 pp 9-29
Holland, J.L. (1966), A psychological classification scheme for vocations and major
fields, Journal of Counseling Psychology, vol 13, pp 278-288
Hurtz, Gregory M & Donovan, John J 2000, Personality and Job Performance : The
Big Five Revisited, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85, no. 6, pp 869-879
McCloy, Rodney A., Campbell John P, Cudeck, Robert 1994, A Confirmatory Test of
a Model of Performance Determinants, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 79, no. 4,
pp.493-494
McShane & Gilnow, Von 2009, Organisational Behavior McGraw Hill, New York
Rose, Raduan Che, Ramalu, Subramaniam Sri, Uli, Jegak, Kumar, Naresh (2010),
Expatraite Performance in Overseas Assignments: The Role of Big Five Personality,
Asian Social Science, vol 6, no. 9, pp 104-113
Zhang, Li-fang (2006), Thinking styles and the big five personality traits revisited,
Journal of Personality and Individual differences, vol.40, pp 1177-118
30 | P a g e
9. Appendix
31 | P a g e