Beyond the Big Five: Personality and Job Performance in an E-Commerce Firm
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/2371-1647.2016.02.08Keywords:
Job achievement, personality, test validity, haloAbstract
The purpose of this paper was to investigate of the relationship between personality and job performance with employees of a rapidly expanding Swedish e-commerce firm. Two studies were carried out with the UPPTM test of personality. In Study 1, seventy persons took the test on an Internet site. Three groups at NN AB participated: a group of top performers, selected by management, a group of employees selected at random, and 8 members of NN AB's top management. In Study 2, the validity of the UPPTM test was investigated with relation to supervisor assessments in a group of employees in customer service at NN AB. In Study 1, large and significant differences were found between the group of employees selected at random, and the other two groups. In terms of correlations, validity was = 0.44. In Study 2, the tested subjects were assessed by supervisors using a comprehensive assessment form (40 variables), which could reduced to three criterion dimensions. The validities for the three criterion dimensions of value for the company (halo), efficiency and social functioning were 0.66, 0.52 and 0.40. Analysis of proxy criteria (work motivation and similar attitude scales) gave similar results
References
Ghiselli EE. The validity of occupational aptitude tests. New York: Wiley 1966.
Barrick MR, Mount MK, Judge TA. 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 2001; 9(1-2): 9-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00160 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00160
Schmidt FL, Shaffer JA, Oh I-S. Increased accuracy for range restriction corrections: Implications for the role of personality and general mental ability in job and training performance. Personnel Psychology 2008; 61(4): 827-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00132.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00132.x
Goodstein LD, Lanyon RI. Applications of personality assessment to the workplace: A review. Journal of Business and Psychology 1999; 13(3): 291-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022941331649 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022941331649
Salgado JF. Predicting job performance using FFM and non-FFM personality measures. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 2003 2003; 76: 323-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647201 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/096317903769647201
Allport GW. Personality and character. Psychological Bulletin 1921; 18(9): 441-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0066265 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0066265
Sjöberg L. Similarity and correlation. In: Lantermann E-D, Feger H, eds. Similarity and choice. Bern: Huber 1980: 70-87.
Sjöberg L. Attitude-behavior correlation, social desirability and perceived diagnostic value. British Journal of Social Psychology 1982; 21: 283-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1982.tb00550.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1982.tb00550.x
Christiansen ND, Robie C. Further consideration of the use of narrow trait scales. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement 2011; 43(3): 183-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023069 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023069
Conte JM, Gintoft JN. Polychronicity, big five personality dimensions, and sales performance. Human Performance 2005; 18(4): 427-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1804_8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1804_8
Griffith R, Jenkins M. Using personality constructs to predict performance: Narrow or broad bandwidth. Journal of Business and Psychology 2004; 19(2): 255-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-004-0551-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-004-0551-9
Tett RP, Steele JR, Beauregard RS. Broad and narrow measures on both sides of the personality-job performance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior 2003; 24(3): 335-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.191 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.191
Bergman D, Lornudd C, Sjöberg L, von Thile Schwartz U. Leader personality and 360-degree assessments of leader behaviour. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 2014; 55: 389-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12130 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12130
Sjöberg L. Skönmålning i personlighetstest. (Faking in personality tests). SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration, No 2012: 2 2012.
Peterson MH, Griffith RL, Converse PD. Examining the role of applicant faking in hiring decisions: Percentage of fakers hired and hiring discrepancies in single- and multiple-predictor selection. Journa of Business and Psychology 2009 2009; 24(4): 373-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9121-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9121-5
Robie C, Brown DJ, Beaty JC. Do people fake on personality inventories? A verbal protocol analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology 2007; 21(4): 489-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-007-9038-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-007-9038-9
McFarland LA, Ryan AM. Variance in faking across noncognitive measures. Journal of Applied Psychology 2000; 85(5): 812-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.812 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.85.5.812
Crowne DP, Marlowe D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1960; 24: 349-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0047358 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047358
Sjöberg L. Understanding personal potential: The UPP test. Manual. Version 1.0 Stockholm: Psykologisk Metod AB; 2013.
Sjöberg L. Correction for faking in self-report personality tes-ts. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 2015; 56(5): 582-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12231 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12231
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum 1988.
Bobko P, Roth PL, Buster MA. The usefulness of unit weights in creating composite scores: A literature review, application to content validity, and meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods 2007; 10(4): 689-709. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094428106294734 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106294734
Sjöberg L, Wolgers G. Personlighetstestning vid antagning till officersutbildning. En jämförelse mellan CTI och UPP-testet i olika grader av "skarpt läge". Ledarskapscentrum, Försvarshögskolan Forskningsrapport F: 39 2012.
Bologna C, Rosa ACD, Vivo AD, Gaeta M, Sansonetti G, Viserta V. Personality-Based Recommendation in E-Com-merce. http://ceur-wsorg/Vol-997/empire2013_paper_1pdf 2005.
Holland JL. Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL, US: Psychological Assessment Resources 1997.
Holland JL. Exploring careers with a typology: What we have learned and some new directions. American Psychologist 1996; 51(4): 397-406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.4.397 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.51.4.397
Sjöberg L. Bortom Big Five: Konstruktion och validering av ett personlighetstest. (Beyond Big Five: Construction and validation of a personality test). SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics; 2008. Report No.: 2008: 7.
Ding DX, Hu PJ-H, Verma R, Wardell DG. The impact of service system design and flow experience on customer satisfaction in online financial services. Journal of Service Research 2010; 13(1): 96-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094670509350674 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670509350674
Groth M, Goodwin RE. Customer service. APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol 3: Maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization: Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association 2011: 329-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/12171-009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/12171-009
Bettencourt LA, Gwinner KP, Meuter ML. A comparison of attitude, personality, and knowledge predictors of service-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology 2001; 86(1): 29-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.29 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.86.1.29
Brown TJ, Mowen JC, Donavan DT, Licata JW. The customer orientation of service workers: Personality trait effects on self- and supervisor performance ratings. Journal of Marketing Research 2002; 39(1): 110-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.110.18928 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.110.18928
Kline TJB, Sulsky LM. Measurement and assessment issues in performance appraisal. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne 2009; 50(3): 161-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015668 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015668
Borman WC, Motowidlo SJ. Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance 1997; 10: 99-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_3
Motowidlo SJ, Borman WC, Schmit MJ. A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance. Human Performance 1997; 10: 71-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1002_1
Sjöberg L. A third generation personality test. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics; 2010/2012. Report No.: 2010: 3.
Hogan J, Holland B. Using theory to evaluate personality and job-performance relations: A socioanalytic perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology 2003; 88(1): 100-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.100 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.100
Hogan R, Roberts BW, Walsh WB, Craik KH, Price RH. A socioanalytic perspective on person-environment interaction. In: Craik KH, Price RH, eds. Person-environment psychology: New directions and perspectives (2nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers 2000: 1-23.
Cattell RB, Vogelmann S. A comprehensive trial of the scree and KG criteria for determining the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research 1977; 12(3): 289-325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1203_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1203_2
Lefkowitz J. The role of interpersonal affective regard in supervisory performance ratings: A literature review and proposed causal model. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 2000; 73(1): 67-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317900166886 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/096317900166886
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Policy for Journals/Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work
Policy for Journals / Manuscript with Paid Access
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Publisher retain copyright .
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work .
