Chapter5 Personality and values LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, students should be able to: Describe personality, the way it is measured, and the factors that shape it. Describe the strengths and weaknesses of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality framework and the Big Five model. Discuss how the concepts of core self-evaluation (CSE), self-monitoring, and proactive personality contribute to the understanding of personality. Describe how the situation affects whether personality predicts behavior. Contrast terminal and instrumental values. Describe the differences between person-job fit and person-organization fit. Compare Hofstede’s five value dimensions and the GLOBE framework. INSTRUCTOR RESOURCES Instructors may wish to use the following resources when presenting this chapter. Text Exercises Career Objectives: How Do I Ace the Personality Test? Personal Inventory Assessments: Personality Style Indicator Myth or Science?: “We Can Accurately Judge Individual’s Personalities a Few Seconds After Meeting Them” An Ethical Choice: Do You Have a Cheating Personality? Point/Counterpoint: Millennials Are More Narcissistic Than Their Parents Questions for Review Experiential Exercise: Your Best Self Ethical Dilemma: Millennial Job Hopping Text Cases Case Incident 1: On the Costs of Being Nice Case Incident 2: The Power of Quiet Instructor’s Choice This section presents an exercise that is NOT found in the student's textbook. Instructor's Choice reinforces the text's emphasis through various activities. Some Instructor's Choice activities are centered on debates, group exercises, Internet research, and student experiences. Some can be used in class in their entirety, while others require some additional work on the student's part. The course instructor may choose to use these at any time throughout the class—some may be more effective as icebreakers, while some may be used to pull together various concepts covered in the chapter. Web Exercises At the end of each chapter of this Instructor’s Manual, you will find suggested exercises and ideas for researching OB topics on the Internet. The exercises “Exploring OB Topics on the Web” are set up so that you can simply photocopy the pages, distribute them to your class, and make assignments accordingly. You may want to assign the exercises as an out-of-class activity or as lab activities with your class. Summary and Implications for Managers Personality matters to organizational behavior. It does not explain all behavior, but it sets the stage. Emerging theory and research reveal how personality matters more in some situations than others. The Big Five has been a particularly important advancement, though the Dark Triad and other traits matter as well. Every trait has advantages and disadvantages for work behavior and there is no perfect constellation of traits that is ideal in every situation. Personality can help you understand why people (including yourself!) act, think, and feel the way we do, and the astute manger can put that understanding to use by taking care to place employees in situations that best fit their personality. Values often underlie and explain attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions. Consider screening job candidates for high conscientiousness—as well as the other Big Five traits—depending on the criteria your organization finds most important. Other aspects, such as core self-evaluation or narcissism, may be relevant in certain situations. Although the MBTI has faults, you can use it for training and development; to help employees better understand each other, open up communication in work groups, and possibly reduce conflicts. Evaluate jobs, work groups, and your organization to determine the optimal personality fit. Take into account employees' situational factors when evaluating their observable personality traits, and lower the situation strength to better ascertain personality characteristics. The more you consider people’s different cultures, the better you will be able to determine their work behavior and create a positive organizational climate that performs well. This chapter opens with a discussion about Mark Josephson, the founder and CEO of Bitley, a Web link shortening service. As you can see, personality plays a major role in Mark Josephson’s entrepreneurial success. Personality is indeed a strong factor for many life and work outcomes. We will explain traits such as extraversion, conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism—the most defined traits—that were discussed in the story. We’ll also review frameworks that describe an individual’s personality and tendencies. BRIEF CHAPTER OUTLINE Personality What Is Personality? Personality is a dynamic concept describing the growth and development of a person’s whole psychological system. Defining personality The text defines personality as the sum total of ways in which an individual reacts to and interacts with others. Measuring personality Personality tests are useful in hiring decisions and help managers forecast who is best for a job. The most common means of measuring personality is through self-report surveys, in which individuals evaluate themselves on a series of factors. Research indicates our culture influences the way we rate ourselves. People in individualistic countries trend toward self-enhancement, while people in collectivist countries like Taiwan, China, and South Korea trend toward self-diminishment. Observer-ratings surveys provide an independent assessment of personality. Here, a coworker or another observer does the rating. Though the results of self-reports and observer-ratings surveys are strongly correlated, research suggests observer-ratings surveys predict job success more than self-ratings alone. However, each can tell us something unique about an individual’s behavior, so a combination of self-reports and observer reports predicts performance better than any one type of information. Personality determinants Introduction An early argument centered on whether personality was the result of heredity or environment. Personality appears to be a result of both influences. Heredity refers to those factors that were determined at conception. The heredity approach argues that the ultimate explanation of an individual’s personality is the molecular structure of the genes, located in the chromosomes. Enduring characteristics that describe an individual’s behavior include shy, aggressive, submissive, lazy, ambitious, loyal, and timid. These are personality traits. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator The most widely used personality frameworks is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Individuals are classified as: Extroverted or Introverted (E or I). Sensing or Intuitive (S or N). Thinking or Feeling (T or F). Perceiving or Judging (P or J). These classifications are then combined into sixteen personality types. For example: INTJs are visionaries. They usually have original minds and great drive. They are characterized as skeptical, critical, independent, determined, and often stubborn. ESTJs are organizers. They are realistic, logical, analytical, decisive, and have a natural head for business or mechanics. The ENTP type is a conceptualizer. He or she is innovative, individualistic, versatile, and attracted to entrepreneurial ideas. This person tends to be resourceful in solving challenging problems but may neglect routine assignments. MBTI is widely used in practice. Some organizations using it include Apple Computer, AT&T, Citigroup, GE, 3M Company, and others. The Big Five Personality Model An impressive body of research supports that five basic dimensions underlie all other personality dimensions. The five basic dimensions are: Extraversion. Comfort level with relationships. Extroverts tend to be gregarious, assertive, and sociable. Introverts tend to be reserved, timid, and quiet. Agreeableness. Individual’s propensity to defer to others. High agreeableness people—cooperative, warm, and trusting. Low agreeableness people—cold, disagreeable, and antagonistic. Conscientiousness. A measure of reliability. A high conscientious person is responsible, organized, dependable, and persistent. Those who score low on this dimension are easily distracted, disorganized, and unreliable. Emotional stability. A person’s ability to withstand stress. People with positive emotional stability tend to be calm, self-confident, and secure. Those with high negative scores tend to be nervous, anxious, depressed, and insecure. Openness to experience. The range of interests and fascination with novelty. Extremely open people are creative, curious, and artistically sensitive. Those at the other end of the openness category are conventional and find comfort in the familiar. How do the Big Five traits predict behavior at work? Research has shown relationships between these personality dimensions and job performance. Employees who score higher, for example, in conscientiousness develop higher levels of job knowledge. Conscientiousness is as important for managers as for front-line employees.(Exhibit 5-1) The study found conscientiousness—in the form of persistence, attention to detail, and setting of high standards—was more important than other traits. These results attest to the importance of conscientiousness to organizational success. Although conscientiousness is the best predictor of job performance, there are other traits that are related to aspects of performance in some situations. All five traits also have other implications for work and for life. Let’s look at these one at a time. (Exhibit 5-2) Of the Big Five traits, emotional stability is most strongly related to life satisfaction, job satisfaction, and low stress levels. Extraverts tend to perform better in a job with significant interpersonal interaction. Open people are more likely to be effective leaders – and more comfortable with ambiguity. Agreeable individuals are better liked than disagreeable people, which helps explain why they tend to do better in interpersonally-oriented jobs such as customer service. The five personality factors identified in the Big Five model appear in almost all cross-cultural studies. These studies have included a wide variety of diverse cultures such as China, Israel, Germany, Japan, Spain, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, and the United States. Generally, the findings corroborate what has been found in U.S. research: of the Big Five traits, conscientiousness is the best predictor of job performance The Dark Triad With the exception of neuroticism, the Big Five traits are what we call socially desirable, meaning we would be glad to score high on them. Researchers have found that three other socially undesirable traits, which we all have in varying degrees, are relevant to organizational behavior. They are: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. Owing to their negative nature, researchers have labeled these three traits the “Dark Triad.” Machiavellianism An individual high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes that ends can justify means. High Mach’s manipulate more, win more, are persuaded less, and persuade others more. Narcissism Narcissism describes a person who has a grandiose sense of self-importance. They “think” they are better leaders. Often they are selfish and exploitive. Psychopathy In the OB context, psychopathy is defined as a lack of concern for others, and a lack of guilt or remorse when their actions cause harm. Measures of psychopathy attempt to assess the person’s motivation to comply with social norms; willingness to use deceit to obtain desired ends and the effectiveness of those efforts; impulsivity; and disregard, that is, lack of empathic concern, for others. Other Traits The Dark Triad is a helpful framework for studying the three dominant dark-side traits in current personality research, and researchers are exploring other traits as well. One emerging framework incorporates five additional aberrant compound traits based on the Big Five. First, antisocial people are indifferent and callous toward others. Second, borderline people have low self-esteem and high uncertainty. Third, schizotypal individuals are eccentric and disorganized. Fourth, obsessive compulsive people are perfectionists and can be stubborn, yet they attend to details, carry a strong work ethic, and may be motivated by achievement. Fifth, avoidant individuals feel inadequate and hate criticism. Other Personality Traits Relevant to OB Core self-evaluation (self-perspective) People who have a positive core self-evaluation see themselves as effective, capable, and in control. People who have a negative core self-evaluation tend to dislike themselves. Self-monitoring This refers to an individual’s ability to adjust his or her behavior to external, situational factors. Individuals high in self-monitoring show considerable adaptability. They are highly sensitive to external cues, can behave differently in different situations, and are capable of presenting striking contradictions between their public persona and their private self. Proactive personality Actively taking the initiative to improve their current circumstances while others sit by passively. Proactive identify opportunities, show initiative, take action, and persevere. Personality and Situations Increasingly, we are learning that the effect of particular traits on organizational behavior depends on the situation. Two theoretical frameworks help explain how this works. Situation strength theory Situation strength theory proposes that the way personality translates into behavior depends on the strength of the situation. By situation strength, we mean the degree to which norms, cues, or standards dictate appropriate behavior. Research suggests that personality traits better predict behavior in weak situations than in strong ones. Researchers have analyzed situation strength in organizations in terms of four elements: Clarity, or the degree to which cues about work duties and responsibilities are available and clear. Consistency, or the extent to which cues regarding work duties and responsibilities are compatible with one another. Constraints, or the extent to which individuals’ freedom to decide or act is limited by forces outside their control. Consequences, or the degree to which decisions or actions have important implications for the organization or its members, clients, supplies, and so on. Some researchers have speculated that organizations are, by definition, strong situations because they impose rules, norms, and standards that govern behavior. These constraints are usually appropriate. Trait Activation Theory (TAT) TAT predicts that some situations, events, or interventions “activate” a trait more than others. Exhibit 5-3 shows jobs in which certain Big Five traits are more relevant. Values Introduction Values represent basic convictions. The content attribute says a mode of conduct or end-state of existence is important. The intensity attribute specifies how important it is. They have both content and intensity attributes. An individual’s set of values ranked in terms of intensity is considered the person’s value system. Values have the tendency to be stable. The Importance and Organization of Values Values lay the foundation for the understanding of attitudes and motivation. We enter an organization with preconceived notions of what “ought” and “ought not” be. These notions are not value-free; on the contrary, they contain our interpretations of right and wrong and our preference for certain behaviors or outcomes over others. Values influence attitudes and behavior. Terminal Versus Instrumental Values How can we organize values? Milton Rokeach separates them into: Terminal Values—refer to desirable end states. Instrumental Values—refer to preferable modes of behavior. Generational Values Contemporary work cohorts Exhibit 5-4 segments employees by the era during which they entered the workforce. Because most people start work between the ages of 18 and 23, the eras also correlate closely with employee age. Boomers (Baby Boomers)—entered the workforce during the 1960s through the mid-1980s. Xers—entered the workforce beginning in the mid-1980s. The most recent entrants to the workforce are the Millennials. Though it is fascinating to think about generational values, remember these classifications lack solid research support. Generational classifications may help us understand our own and other generations better, but we must also appreciate their limits. Linking an Individual’s Personality and Values to the Workplace The Person-Job Fit This concern is best articulated in John Holland’s personality-job fit theory. Holland presents six personality types and proposes that satisfaction and the propensity to leave a job depends on the degree to which individuals successfully match their personalities to an occupational environment. The six personality types are: realistic, investigative, social, conventional, enterprising, and artistic.(Exhibit 5-5) The Vocational Preference Inventory questionnaire contains 160 occupational titles. Respondents indicate which of these occupations they like or dislike; their answers are used to form personality profiles. (Exhibit 5-6) The key point of this model is that people in jobs congruent with their personality should be more satisfied and less likely to voluntarily resign than people in incongruent jobs. The Person-Organization Fit The person-organization fit essentially argues that people are attracted to and selected by organizations that match their values, and they leave organizations that are not compatible with their personalities. Other Dimensions of Fit Although person-job fit and person-organization fit are considered the most salient dimensions for workplace outcomes, other avenues of fit are worth examining. These include person-group fit and person-supervisor fit. Person-group fit is important in team settings, where the dynamics of team interactions significantly affect work outcomes. Person-supervisor fit has become an important area of research since poor fit in this dimension can lead to lower job satisfaction and reduced performance. Cultural Values Hofstede’s Framework for Assessing Cultures Five value dimensions of national culture: Power distance: the degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally. Individualism versus collectivism: individualism is the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups; collectivism emphasizes a tight social framework in which people expect others in groups of which they are a part to look after them and protect them. Masculinity versus femininity: masculinity is the degree to which the culture favors traditional masculine roles such as achievement, power, and control, as opposed to viewing men and women as equals. Uncertainty avoidance: the degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations. Long-term versus short-term orientation: long-term orientations look to the future and value thrift and persistence. In a short-term orientation, people value the here and now; they accept change more readily and don’t see commitments as impediments to change. Hofstede’s research findings (Exhibit 5-6) Asian countries were more collectivistic than individualistic. United States ranked highest on individualism. Germany and Hong Kong rated high on masculinity. Russia and The Netherlands were low on masculinity. China and Hong Kong had a long-term orientation. France and the United States had short-term orientation. Research suggests Hofstede’s framework may be a valuable way of thinking about differences among people, but we should be cautious about assuming all people from a country have the same values. The GLOBE Framework The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) began updating Hofstede’s research with data from 825 organizations and 62 countries. Variables similar to Hofstede’s. Comparison of Hofstede’s Framework and the GLOBE Framework Which framework is better? We give more emphasis to Hofstede’s dimensions here because they have stood the test of time and the GLOBE study confirmed them. Summary and Implications for Managers Personality matters to organizational behavior. It does not explain all behavior, but it sets the stage. Emerging theory and research reveal how personality matters more in some situations than others. The Big Five has been a particularly important advancement, though the Dark Triad and other traits matter as well. Every trait has advantages and disadvantages for work behavior and there is no perfect constellation of traits that is ideal in every situation. Personality can help you understand why people (including yourself!) act, think, and feel the way we do, and the astute manger can put that understanding to use by taking care to place employees in situations that best fit their personality. Values often underlie and explain attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions. Consider screening job candidates for high conscientiousness—as well as the other Big Five traits—depending on the criteria your organization finds most important. Other aspects, such as core self-evaluation or narcissism, may be relevant in certain situations. Although the MBTI has faults, you can use it for training and development; to help employees better understand each other, open up communication in work groups, and possibly reduce conflicts. Evaluate jobs, work groups, and your organization to determine the optimal personality fit. Take into account employees' situational factors when evaluating their observable personality traits, and lower the situation strength, to better ascertain personality characteristics. The more you consider people’s different cultures, the better you will be able to determine their work behavior and create a positive organizational climate that performs well. EXPANDED CHAPTER OUTLINE Personality What Is Personality? Personality is the sum total of ways in which an individual reacts to and interacts with others. Measuring personality The most important reason managers need to know how to measure personality is that research has shown personality tests are useful in hiring decisions and help managers forecast who is best for a job. The most common means of measuring personality is through self-report surveys, with which individuals evaluate themselves on a series of factors. Research indicates our culture influences the way we rate ourselves. People in individualistic countries trend toward self-enhancement, while people in collectivist countries like Taiwan, China, and South Korea trend toward self-diminishment. Observer-ratings surveys provide an independent assessment of personality. Here, a coworker or another observer does the rating. Though the results of self-reports and observer-ratings surveys are strongly correlated, research suggests observer-ratings surveys predict job success more than self-ratings alone. However, each can tell us something unique about an individual’s behavior, so a combination of self-reports and observer reports predicts performance better than any one type of information. Personality determinants Introduction An early argument centered on whether personality was the result of heredity or environment. Personality appears to be a result of both influences. Heredity refers to those factors that were determined at conception. The heredity approach argues that the ultimate explanation of an individual’s personality is the molecular structure of the genes, located in the chromosomes. Early work on personality revolved around attempts to identify and label enduring characteristics. Popular characteristics include shy, aggressive, submissive, lazy, ambitious, loyal, and timid. These are personality traits. The more consistent the characteristic, the more frequently it occurs, the more important it is. Personality Framework The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator One of the most widely used personality frameworks is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). It is a 100-question personality test that asks people how they usually feel or act in particular situations. Individuals are classified as: Extroverted or Introverted (E or I). Sensing or Intuitive (S or N). Thinking or Feeling (T or F). Perceiving or Judging (P or J). These classifications are then combined into sixteen personality types. For example: INTJs are visionaries. They usually have original minds and great drive. They are characterized as skeptical, critical, independent, determined, and often stubborn. ESTJs are organizers. They are realistic, logical, analytical, decisive, and have a natural head for business or mechanics. The ENTP type is a conceptualizer. He or she is innovative, individualistic, versatile, and attracted to entrepreneurial ideas. This person tends to be resourceful in solving challenging problems but may neglect routine assignments. MBTI is widely used in practice although its validity as a measure of personality is unclear. The Big Five Personality Model An impressive body of research supports that five basic dimensions underlie all other personality dimensions. The five basic dimensions known as the Big Five Model are: Extraversion. Comfort level with relationships. Extroverts tend to be gregarious, assertive, and sociable. Introverts tend to be reserved, timid, and quiet. Agreeableness. Individual’s propensity to defer to others. High agreeableness people—cooperative, warm, and trusting. Low agreeableness people—cold, disagreeable, and antagonistic. Conscientiousness. A measure of reliability. A high conscientious person is responsible, organized, dependable, and persistent. Those who score low on this dimension are easily distracted, disorganized, and unreliable. Emotional stability. A person’s ability to withstand stress. People with positive emotional stability tend to be calm, self-confident, and secure. Those with high negative scores tend to be nervous, anxious, depressed, and insecure. Openness to experience. The range of interests and fascination with novelty. Extremely open people are creative, curious, and artistically sensitive. Those at the other end of the openness category are conventional and find comfort in the familiar. How do the Big Five traits predict behavior at work? Research has shown relationships between these personality dimensions and job performance. Employees who score higher, for example, in conscientiousness develop higher levels of job knowledge. The study found conscientiousness—in the form of persistence, attention to detail, and setting of high standards—was more important than other traits. (Exhibit 5-1) These results attest to the importance of conscientiousness to organizational success. Conscientious people live longer because they take better care of themselves (they eat better and exercise more) and engage in fewer risky behaviors like smoking, drinking and drugs, and risky sexual or driving behavior. Probably because they’re so organized and structured, conscientious people don’t adapt as well to changing contexts. They are generally performance-oriented and have more trouble learning complex skills early in the training process because their focus is on performing well rather than on learning. Finally, they are often less creative than less conscientious people, especially artistically. Although conscientiousness is the Big Five trait most consistently related to job performance, there are other traits that are related to aspects of performance in some situations. All five traits also have other implications for work and life. Let’s look at these one at a time. (Exhibit 5-2) Of the Big Five traits, emotional stability is most strongly related to life satisfaction, job satisfaction, and low stress levels. People with high emotional stability can adapt to unexpected or changing demands in the workplace. Extraverts Tend to perform better in jobs that require significant interpersonal interaction. Extraversion is a relatively strong predictor of leadership emergence in groups. One downside is that extraverts are more impulsive than introverts and may be more likely than introverts to lie during job interviews. Individuals who score high on openness to experience are more likely to be effective leaders and are more comfortable with ambiguity. They cope better with organizational change and are more adaptable in changing contexts. Agreeable individuals are better liked than disagreeable people, which explains why they tend to do better in interpersonally-oriented jobs such as customer service. They also are more compliant and rule abiding and less likely to get into accidents as a result. People who are agreeable are more satisfied in their jobs and contribute to organizational performance by engaging in citizenship behavior. They are also less likely to engage in organizational deviance. One downside is that agreeableness is associated with lower levels of career success (especially earnings). The five personality factors identified in the Big Five model appear in almost all cross-cultural studies. These studies have included a wide variety of diverse cultures such as China, Israel, Germany, Japan, Spain, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, and the United States. Generally, the findings corroborate what has been found in U.S. research: of the Big Five traits, conscientiousness is the best predictor of job performance. The Dark Triad With the exception of neuroticism, the Big Five traits are what we call socially desirable, meaning we would be glad to score high on them. Researchers have found that three other socially undesirable traits, which we all have in varying degrees, are relevant to organizational behavior. They are: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. Owing to their negative nature, researchers have labeled these three traits the “Dark Triad.” Machiavellianism Named after Niccolo Machiavelli, who wrote in the sixteenth century on how to gain and use power. An individual high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes that ends can justify means. High Mach’s manipulate more, win more, are persuaded less, and persuade others more. Machiavellianism does not significantly predict overall job performance. Narcissism Narcissism describes a person who has a grandiose sense of self-importance. They “think” they are better leaders. Often they are selfish and exploitive. Psychopathy In the OB context, psychopathy is defined as a lack of concern for others, and a lack of guilt or remorse when their actions cause harm. Measures of psychopathy attempt to assess the person’s motivation to comply with social norms; willingness to use deceit to obtain desired ends and the effectiveness of those efforts; impulsivity; and disregard, that is, lack of empathic concern, for others. The literature is not consistent about whether psychopathy or other aberrant personality traits are important to work behavior. Other Traits The Dark Triad is a helpful framework for studying the three dominant dark-side traits in current personality research, and researchers are exploring other traits as well. One emerging framework incorporates five additional aberrant compound traits based on the Big Five. First, antisocial people are indifferent and callous toward others. Second, borderline people have low self-esteem and high uncertainty. Third, schizotypal individuals are eccentric and disorganized. Fourth, obsessive compulsive people are perfectionists and can be stubborn, yet they attend to details, carry a strong work ethic, and may be motivated by achievement. Fifth, avoidant individuals feel inadequate and hate criticism. Other Personality Traits Relevant to OB Core self-evaluations (CSEs) People who have a positive core self-evaluation see themselves as effective, capable, and in control. People who have a negative core self-evaluation tend to dislike themselves. People with positive core self-evaluations perform better than others because they set more ambitious goals, are more committed to their goals, and persist longer in attempting to reach these goals. Self-monitoring This refers to an individual’s ability to adjust his or her behavior to external, situational factors. Individuals high in self-monitoring show considerable adaptability. They are highly sensitive to external cues, can behave differently in different situations, and are capable of presenting striking contradictions between their public persona and their private self. Low self-monitors cannot disguise themselves in that way. They tend to display their true dispositions and attitudes in every situation, resulting in a high behavioral consistency between who they are and what they do. Evidence suggests: High self-monitors tend to pay closer attention to the behavior of others. High self-monitoring managers tend to be more mobile in their careers and receive more promotions. Proactive personality Actively taking the initiative to improve their current circumstances while others sit by passively. Proactive identify opportunities, show initiative, take action, and persevere. Create positive change in their environment. More likely to be seen as leaders and change agents. More likely to achieve career success. Personality and Situations Increasingly, we are learning that the effect of particular traits on organizational behavior depends on the situation. Two theoretical frameworks help explain how this works. Situation strength Situation strength theory proposes that the way personality translates into behavior depends on the strength of the situation. By situation strength, we mean the degree to which norms, cues, or standards dictate appropriate behavior. Research suggests that personality traits better predict behavior in weak situations than in strong ones. Researchers have analyzed situation strength in organizations in terms of four elements: Clarity, or the degree to which cues about work duties and responsibilities are available and clear. Consistency, or the extent to which cues regarding work duties and responsibilities are compatible with one another. Constraints, or the extent to which individuals’ freedom to decide or act is limited by forces outside their control. Consequences, or the degree to which decisions or actions have important implications for the organization or its members, clients, supplies, and so on. Some researchers have speculated that organizations are, by definition, strong situations because they impose rules, norms, and standards that govern behavior. These constraints are usually appropriate. Trait Activation Theory (TAT) TAT predicts that some situations, events, or interventions “activate” a trait more than others. Exhibit 5-3 shows jobs in which certain Big Five traits are more relevant. Values Introduction Values represent basic convictions. The intensity attribute specifies how important it is. The content attribute says a mode of conduct or end-state of existence is important. They have both content and intensity attributes. An individual’s set of values ranked in terms of intensity is considered the person’s value system. Values have the tendency to be stable. Many of our values were established in our early years from parents, teachers, friends, and others. The Importance and Organization of Values Values lay the foundation for the understanding of attitudes and motivation. We enter an organization with preconceived notions of what “ought” and “ought not” be. These notions are not value-free; on the contrary, they contain our interpretations of right and wrong and our preference for certain behaviors or outcomes over others. Values influence attitudes and behavior. Terminal Versus Instrumental Values How can we organize values? Milton Rokeach separates them into: Terminal Values—refer to desirable end states of existence; the goals that a person would like to achieve during his/her lifetime. Instrumental Values—refer to preferable modes of behavior; the means of achieving the terminal values. Generational Values Contemporary work cohorts Exhibit 5-4 segments employees by the era during which they entered the workforce. Because most people start work between the ages of 18 and 23, the eras also correlate closely with employee age. Boomers (Baby Boomers)—entered the workforce during the 1960s through the mid-1980s. Xers—entered the workforce beginning in the mid-1980s. The most recent entrants to the workforce are the Millennials. Though it is fascinating to think about generational values, remember these classifications lack solid research support. Generational classifications may help us understand our own and other generations better, but we must also appreciate their limits. Linking an Individual’s Personality and Values to the Workplace The Person-Job Fit This concern is best articulated in John Holland’s personality-job fit theory. Holland presents six personality types and proposes that satisfaction and the propensity to leave a job depends on the degree to which individuals successfully match their personalities to an occupational environment. The six personality types are: realistic, investigative, social, conventional, enterprising, and artistic. (Exhibit 5-5) Each one of the six personality types has a congruent occupational environment. Vocational Preference Inventory questionnaire contains 160 occupational titles. Respondents indicate which of these occupations they like or dislike; their answers are used to form personality profiles. The theory argues that satisfaction is highest and turnover lowest when personality and occupation are in agreement. The key point of this model is that people in jobs congruent with their personality should be more satisfied and less likely to voluntarily resign than people in incongruent jobs. Person-Organization Fit The person-organization fit essentially argues that people are attracted to and selected by organizations that match their values, and they leave organizations that are not compatible with their personalities. Using the Big Five terminology, for instance, we could expect that people high on extraversion fit well with aggressive and team-oriented cultures, that people high on agreeableness match up better with a supportive organizational climate than one focused on aggressiveness, and that people high on openness to experience fit better in organizations that emphasize innovation rather than standardization. Research on person-organization fit has also looked at whether people’s values match the organization’s culture. This match predicts job satisfaction, commitment to the organization, and low turnover. Other Dimensions of Fit Although person-job fit and person-organization fit are considered the most salient dimensions for workplace outcomes, other avenues of fit are worth examining. These include person-group fit and person-supervisor fit. Person-group fit is important in team settings, where the dynamics of team interactions significantly affect work outcomes. Person-supervisor fit has become an important area of research since poor fit in this dimension can lead to lower job satisfaction and reduced performance. Cultural Values Hofstede’s Framework for Assessing Cultures Five value dimensions of national culture: Power distance: the degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally. Individualism versus collectivism: individualism is the degree to which people in a country prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups; collectivism emphasizes a tight social framework in which people expect others in groups of which they are a part to look after them and protect them. Masculinity versus femininity: masculinity is the degree to which the culture favors traditional masculine roles such as achievement, power, and control, as opposed to viewing men and women as equals. Uncertainty avoidance: the degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations. Long-term versus short-term orientation: long-term orientations look to the future and value thrift and persistence. In a short-term orientation, people value the here and now; they accept change more readily and don’t see commitments as impediments to change. Hofstede’s research findings. (Exhibit 5-6) Asian countries were more collectivistic than individualistic. United States ranked highest on individualism. Germany and Hong Kong rated high on masculinity. Russia and The Netherlands were low on masculinity. China and Hong Kong had a long-term orientation. France and the United States had short-term orientation. Hofstede’s recent research Studies investigated the relationship of cultural values and a variety of organizational criteria at both the individual and national level of analysis. Overall, the five original culture dimensions were equally strong predictors of relevant outcomes, meaning researchers and practicing managers need to think about culture holistically and not just focus on one or two dimensions. The researchers also found that individual scores were much better predictors of most outcomes than assigning all people in a country the same cultural values. In sum, this research suggests that Hofstede’s value framework may be a valuable way of thinking about differences among people, but we should be cautious about assuming all people from a country have the same values. The GLOBE Framework for Assessing Cultures The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) began updating Hofstede’s research with data from 825 organizations and 62 countries. Variables similar to Hofstede’s. Which framework is better? We give more emphasis to Hofstede’s dimensions here because they have stood the test of time and the GLOBE study confirmed them. Researchers continue to debate the differences between these frameworks, and future studies may, in time, favor the more nuanced perspective of the GLOBE study. Summary and Implications For Managers Personality matters to organizational behavior. It does not explain all behavior, but it sets the stage. Emerging theory and research reveal how personality matters more in some situations than others. The Big Five has been a particularly important advancement, though the Dark Triad and other traits matter as well. Every trait has advantages and disadvantages for work behavior and there is no perfect constellation of traits that is ideal in every situation. Personality can help you understand why people (including yourself!) act, think, and feel the way we do, and the astute manger can put that understanding to use by taking care to place employees in situations that best fit their personality. Values often underlie and explain attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions. Consider screening job candidates for high conscientiousness—as well as the other Big Five traits—depending on the criteria your organization finds most important. Other aspects, such as core self-evaluation or narcissism, may be relevant in certain situations. Although the MBTI has faults, you can use it for training and development; to help employees better understand each other, open up communication in work groups, and possibly reduce conflicts. Evaluate jobs, work groups, and your organization to determine the optimal personality fit. Take into account employees' situational factors when evaluating their observable personality traits, and lower the situation strength, to better ascertain personality characteristics. The more you consider people’s different cultures, the better you will be able to determine their work behavior and create a positive organizational climate that performs well. Career Objectives How do I ace the personality test? I just landed a second-round interview with a great company, and I’m super excited. And super nervous because hear that they’ll give me tests. I’ve read a few articles about how more and more companies are using them. Do you have tips for how I can put my best foot forward?—Lauren Dear Lauren: Congratulations! It’s natural for you to want to understand the tests your prospective employer uses. You’ve probably deduced that it’s possible to respond In a favorable manner. For example, if statement says, “I am always prepared, “you know that employers are looking for an applicant who agrees with this statement. You might think responding in the most favorable way possible increases your chances of getting hired, and you might be right. There are a few caveats, however. First, some companies build in “liescales” that flag individuals who respond to statements in an extremely favorable manner. It’s not always easy to detect them, but they usually appear across a number of items. If you respond in the most favorable way to a long list of items, then, you might pop up on the lie scale. Second, high scores on every trait are not desirable for every kind of job. Some employers might be more interested in low scores on a particular trait or pay more attention to a total profile that would be hard to “game.” For example, agreeableness is not a good predictor of job performance for jobs that are competitive in nature (sales, coach, trader). Third, there is an ethical perspective you should consider. How are you going to feel once you are in the organization if you have not represented yourself correctly in the hiring process? What is your general attitude toward lying? Hoare you going to make sure your behavior fits the traits you tried to portray? Finally, perhaps you should look at the assessment differently. The organization—and you—should be looking for a good match. If you are not a good match and are hired, you are likely to be unsuccessful, and miserable in the process. However, if you have a good, honest match, you can arrive for your first day confident and ready for success. In the end, you might increase your chances of getting hired by responding to a personality test in a favorable manner. However, we still think honesty is the best policy—for you and for your future employer! Sources: M. N. Bing, H. K. Davison, and J. Smothers, “Item-Level Frame-of-Reference Effects in Personality Testing: An Investigation of Incremental Validity in an Organizational Setting,” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 22, no. 2 (2014): 165–78; P. R. Sackett and P. T. Walmsley, “Which Personality Attributes Are Most Important in the Workplace?” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 5 (2014): 538–51; and L. Weber, “To Get a Job, New Hires are Put to the Test,” The Wall Street Journal, April 15, 2015, A1, A10. Personal Inventory Assessments Personality Style Indicator What’s your personality? You’ve probably been wondering as you read this chapter. Take this PIA to obtain some indications of your personality style. Myth or Science? “We Can Accurately Judge Individuals’ Personalities a Few Seconds After Meeting Them” Surprisingly, this statement appears to be true. Research indicates that individuals can accurately appraise others’ personalities only a few seconds after first meeting them, or sometimes even from a photo. This “zero acquaintance” approach shows that regardless of the way in which people first meet someone, whether in person or online, their first judgments about the other’s personality have validity. In one study, for example, individuals were asked to introduce themselves in, on average, 7.4 seconds. Observers’ ratings of those individuals ‘extraversion were significantly correlated with the individuals’ self-reported extraversion. Other research suggests personalities can be surmised from online profiles at zero acquaintance as well. One study even found that participants were able to determine the personality traits of individuals at the ends of the trait spectrum from viewing only photos. Some traits, such as extraversion, are easier to perceive than others upon initial acquaintance, but less obvious traits like self-esteem are also often judged fairly accurately by others. Even being forced to make intuitive, quick judgments rather than deliberate evaluations does not seem to undermine the accuracy of the appraisals. Situations make a difference in the accuracy of the judgments for some personality traits. For example, although neuroticism is perhaps the most difficult trait to detect accurately, a recent study found neuroticism could be judged much more accurately when the situation made the individual react nervously. This makes sense when you consider that some situations activate or draw out a trait much more readily than others. Almost everybody looks calm when they’re about to fall asleep! The moderate accuracy of “thin slices “helps to explain the moderate validity of employment interviews, which we discuss in Chapter 17. Specifically, research shows that interviewers make up their minds about candidates within2 minutes of first meeting them. While this is hardly an ideal way to make important employment decisions, the research on personality shows these judgments do have some level of validity. It is important to keep in mind, however, that though we can ascertain people’s personalities quickly, we should still keep an open mind and suspend judgment. There is always more to people than first meets the eye. Sources: A. Beer, “Comparative Personality Judgments: Replication and Extension of Robust Findings in Personality Perception Using an Alternative Method,” Journal of Personality Assessment 96, no. 6 (2014):610–18; S. Hirsch Mueller, B. Egloff, S. C.Schmukle, S. Nestler, and M. D. Back, “Accurate Judgments of Neuroticism at Zero Acquaintance: A Question of Relevance, ”Journal of Personality 83, no. 2 (2015): 221–28; S. Hirsch muller, B. Egloff, S. Nestler, and D. Mitja, “The Dual Lens Model: A ComprehensiveFramework for Understanding Self–Other Agreement of Personality Judgments at Zero Acquaintance,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104 (2013): 335–53; and J. M. Stopfer, B. Egloff, S. Nestler, and M. D. Back, “Personality Expression and ImpressionFormation in Online Social Networks: An Integrative Approach to Understanding the Processes of Accuracy, Impression Management, and Meta-Accuracy,” European Journal of Personality 28 (2014): 73–94. Class Exercise Place the students in teams of five. Ask students to have a two-minute conversation with each other. Then, ask students to write down a description of each team member. Next, ask students to record their own assessment of their personalities. Ask students to compare their assessments of each other and the self-assessments. Finally, ask students to present their results to the class and explain their experience with the concept of “zero-acquaintance.” Teaching Notes This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. An Ethical Choice Do You Have a Cheating Personality?
Stories of widespread cheating have been on the rise, leading many experts to conclude that the incidence of cheating is increasing. Recently a major cheating scandal was uncovered at Harvard University, where more than 125 students were found to be involved in an organized cheating scheme. Like most complex behaviors, cheating in school, at work, and in life is a product of the person and the situation. As for the person, research reveals that certain traits are related to the tendency to cheat, including high levels of narcissism, low levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness, and high levels of competitiveness. As for the situation, cheating increases when it is easier to cheat (such as on take-home exams), when there is greater pressure to cheat, and when clear standards are lacking or are not reinforced (such as when an organization’s sexual harassment policy is not communicated to employees). How can this research help inform you as a student and employee? 1. Recognize situations that are more likely to provoke pressures to cheat. Being explicit and open with yourself about your response to these pressures should keep you from succumbing to a moral blind spot, in which you engage in behavior without considering its ethical undertones. Remember that technological advancements in the detection of cheating increase the probability of being caught. 2. If you score high on certain traits that predispose you to cheat, this does not mean you are destined to cheat. However, you should realize that you might be more susceptible and therefore need to avoid certain situations, especially unethical ones. Sources: M. J. Cooper, and C. Pullig, “I’m Number One! Does Narcissism Impair Ethical Judgment Even for the Highly Religious?” Journal of Business Ethics 112 (2013), pp. 167–-176; H. E. Hershfield, T. R. Cohen, and L. Thompson, “Short Horizons and Tempting Situations: Lack of Continuity to our Future Selves Leads to Unethical Decision Making and Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 117 (2012), pp. 298–310; M. Carmichael, “Secret E-mail Searches on Harvard Cheating Scandal Broader Than Initially Described,” Boston Globe (April 2, 2013), http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/04/02/secret-mail-searches-harvard-cheating-scandal-broader-than-initially-described/Mgz0mc8hSk3IgWGjxLwsJP/story.html; P. E. Mudrack, J. M. Bloodgood, and W. H. Turnley, “Some Ethical Implications of Individual Competitiveness,” Journal of Business Ethics 108 (2012), pp. 347–-359; and R. Pérez-Peña, “Studies Find More Students Cheating, with High Achievers No Exception,” The New York Times (September 8, 2012), p. A13. Class Exercise Ask student to reflect on situations in which they were aware that cheating was taking place. Then, ask students what, if anything, they did about it. Students should consider why they made the choices they did. Is not doing anything ethical? Is it more ethical to protect a friend who is cheating? Point/Counterpoint Millennials Are More Narcissistic Than Their Parents
Point Millennials have some great virtues: as a group, they are technologically savvy, socially tolerant, and engaged. They value their quality of life as equal to their career, seeking a balance between home and work. In these ways, Millennials surpass their baby boomer parents, who are less technologically adept, less tolerant more localized, and who have a history of striving to get ahead at all costs. However, Millennials have a big Achilles’ heel—they are more narcissistic. Several large-scale, longitudinal studies found Millennials are more likely than baby boomers to have seemingly inflated views of themselves, and psychologists have found narcissism has been growing since the early 1980s. More Millennials rate themselves as above average on attributes such as academic ability, leadership, public speaking ability, and writing ability. Millennials are also more likely to agree they would be “very good” spouses (56 percent, compared to37 percent among 1980 graduates), parents (54 percent; 36 percent for 1980 graduates), and workers (65 percent; 49 percent for 1980graduates). Cliff Zukin, a senior faculty fellow at Rutgers University, believes the reason is in the childhood upbringing of Millennials. “This is the most affirmed generation in history,” he said. “They were raised believing they could do anything they wanted to, and that they have skills and talents to bring to a job setting.” Jean M. Twenge, author of Generation Me, agrees. “People were not saying, ‘Believe in yourself’ and ‘You are special’ in the ‘60s.” Narcissism is bad for society, and particularly bad for the workplace. “[Narcissists] tend to be very self-absorbed; they value fun in their personal and their work life,” one administrator said. “I can’t expect them to work on one project for any amount of time without getting bored.” Counterpoint Wasn’t “The Me Generation” generations ago? Honestly, every generation thinks they are better than the ones that come after! “You can find complaints [about the younger generation]in Greek literature, in the Bible,” Professor Cappelli of the Wharton School observed. “There’s no evidence Millennials are different. They’re just younger.” While Millennials are the 20-somethings of today, what is universally true is that young people share certain characteristics … because they are young. A recent study shows the similarity between how Millennials and baby boomers thought about themselves at the same stage of life. As college freshmen, 71 percent of Millennials thought they were above average academically, and 63 percent of baby boomers thought the same thing when they were college freshmen. Similarly, 77 percent of Millennials believed they were above average in the drive to achieve, versus 68 percent for baby boomers. Millennials, like their baby boomer counterparts, expect to work hard and to work overtime. So we think young people are different when in fact they’re just the way today ‘solder folks were when they were younger. In other words, “Every generation is Generation Me.” In some ways, Millennials may be less narcissistic than baby boomers today. As one manager observed, “[Millennials] don’t have that line between work and home that used to exist, so they’re doing Facebook for the company at night, on Saturday, or Sunday. We get incredible Productivity out of them." Millennials are also more altruistic. For example, 29 percent of Millennials believe individuals have a responsibility to remain involved in issues and causes for the good of all, while only 24 percent of baby boomers feel the same level of responsibility. Rather than comparing different generations, it is more accurate to compare people at one life stage with others at the same life stage. Research supports the idea that people in their 20s tend to be more narcissistic than baby boomers were in their youth. Sources: J. M. Twenge, W. K. Campbell, and E. C. Freeman, “Generational Differences in Young Adults’ Life Goals, Concern for Others, and Civic Orientation, 1966–2009,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012), pp. 1045–-1062; J. Jin and J. Rounds, “Stability and Change in Work Values: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 80 (2012), pp. 326–-339; and S. W. Lester, R. L. Standifer, N. J. Schultz, and J. M. Windsor, “"Actual Versus Perceived Generational Differences at Work: An Empirical Examination,”" Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19 (2012), pp. 341–-354. Class Exercise Divide the class into paired groups of three to four students each. Assign half the paired groups to take the Point position and the other half to take the Counterpoint position. Call upon a pair to come to the front of the classroom. Have the sides present their views of their perspective positions. After each debate, ask the class to vote on the “winning side.” Teaching Notes This exercise is applicable to face-to-face classes or synchronous online classes such as Black Board 9.1, WIMBA, and Second Life Virtual Classrooms. See http://www.baclass.panam.edu/imob/SecondLife for more information. Instructor Manual for Organizational Behavior Timothy A. Judge Stephen P. Robbins 9781292146300, 9780133507645, 9780136124016
