Research Of The Relationships Between Personality Traits And Work Function In Terms Of Five-Factor Model
This study analyzes the relationships between personality traits distinguished in the Five-Factor Model and work function, namely emotional labor, work engagement and job satisfaction in services. Studies concluded that only neuroticism, conscientiousness and agreeability relates significantly to certain aspects of work function. The authors’ hope that a deeper understanding of the correlations allow for successful work function.
Theoretical Perspective
The authors view that factors affecting successful work function are related to both job characteristics and an employee’s personality traits. They hypothesized that neuroticism positively correlates to surface acting, but negatively correlates with deep acting, work engagement and job satisfaction. Conscientiousness and extraversion have negative correlations with surface acting but positive correlations with deep acting, work engagement and job satisfaction. Openness to experience has a negative correlation with deep acting but positive correlations with surface acting. Agreeableness has positive correlations with surface acting, deep acting and work engagement. There are several tensions between the relationships. First, the studies only explore linear relationships between personality traits and work function variables. However, they may not always be linear. According to Converse and Oswald (2014) “many personality – performance relationships remains unclear, as both conceptual considerations and empirical evidence regarding linearity are mixed”. Second, the findings concluded in this study yielded inconsistent results when tested with other models of personality traits.
Findings by Furnham et al. (2000; 2009) showed that between 8% - 13% of the variance in job satisfaction was explained by personality factors on the Big Five measure. However, with the personality super factors from the Eysenck Personality Profiler, only 5% of the variance could be explained. Third, the Big Five measure does not capture the variety of individual difference factors in relation to the service profession. These include factors like attributional style, or variables derived from measures unrelated to the big five.
Quality of supporting evidence
The authors established measurement equivalence by using Polish versions of the 5 questionnaires. The use of adapted surveys to fit the profile of the participants minimizes the chances of a faulty analysis that can arise in cross-cultural comparisons. However, there were limitations. First, the sample used was not representative. The research conducted used non-random and identified participants from only Southern Poland. This could lead to potential selection bias. Second, 3 of 4 questionnaires employed were based on a 5-point (1-strongly disagree, 5-strongly agree) or 7-point scale (1- completely disagree, 7- absolutely agree). The questionnaires are subjected to central tendency bias as most participants avoid the extreme and choose choices in the centre. To reduce bias, the researchers can provide only two choices so that respondents are forced to decide and thus increase the accuracy of the results. Third, the assessment scale used to test for job satisfaction only measured the cognitive and not the affective aspect. To include the affective component, the researchers can use the Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction (BIAJS), which is a four-item scale that is “ validated for internal consistency and test–retest reliability; content, convergent, and criterion-related validity; and cross-population equivalence by factors including nationality as well as job level and type”.
Assumptions
The researchers made a positive assumption that there is a direct relationship between personality and job satisfaction. Arvey et al. (1989) proved a 30 % variance in job satisfaction being influenced by genetics. Given that most studies regarding heritability of personality report an average of 0. 5, it is reasonable to assume that personality accounts for a part of this contribution. Furthermore, a meta-analysis by Judge et al. (2002) accounted for a multiple correlation of 0. 41 with job satisfaction. Particularly strong associations were found between job satisfaction and neuroticism (−0. 29), extraversion (0. 25), and conscientiousness (0. 26). However, one negative assumption was that the Big Five traits represented individuals’ when it only accounts for 56% of the normal personality trait sphere alone (Boyle GJ et al, 1995), thus do not explain all of human personality.
Furthermore, the researchers also assumed that the relationships identified in the study were associated to the personality trait as a whole (e. g. extraversion) as compared to a sub-factor (e. g. socially proactive), which is not the case. Inceoglu and Warr (2011) identified that “it was the more activated sub-factors within Extraversion and Conscientiousness that were important (in association with job satisfaction)”. Thus, they overlooked the possibility that the findings would be over/under-representative of actual correlations.
Conclusion
One limitation of BIAJS as a measurement of the affective aspect is its use of a 5-point scale, thus is subjected to central tendency bias. Also, the researchers’ use of a non-random sample might be justifiable due to this being an initial study exploring the general relationships. Hence the choice of non-random sampling can be used to generate initial hypotheses regarding the links between personality and various work functions, for use in later studies. Their use of the Five- Factor Model may be substantiated with the fact that their findings describe trends more than facts. Lack of measurement equivalence entails faulty analyses, as cross‐cultural comparisons have tendancies to produce inappropriate interpretations. However, the existence of each trait is verified by cross-cultural research demonstrating the consistency of existence in individuals outside of Western nations, and is known to be serviceable in a wide variety of cultures. Since personality traits are expressed differently across different cultures, a singleset of questionnaire items would not be optimal across all cultures. With further longitudinal studies conducted, an adapted model, such as HEXACO Model of Personality Structure that is consistent with cross-culturally replicated findings of a common six-dimensional structure and includes several personality variables that are poorly assimilated within the B5/FFM can be adopted.
For future studies, the researchers can include a larger age range, given that age does affect personality, and the average retirement age of Polish men is 65 and women, 60.
