1 | P a g e

1. 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.

2 | P a g e

Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 1

2. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Company profile - Green Curve LLC ................................................................................. 5

2.2 Key objective ......................................................................................................................... 5

2.3 Variables ................................................................................................................................ 5

2.4 Key Definitions and Abbreviation ....................................................................................... 6

2.4.1 Job Performance: ......................................................................................................... 6

2.4.2 Extraversion: ................................................................................................................. 6

2.4.3 Agreeableness: ............................................................................................................. 6

2.4.4 Conscientiousness: ...................................................................................................... 6

2.4.5 Neuroticism/Low Emotional Stability: ........................................................................ 6

2.4.6 Openness: ..................................................................................................................... 6

2.4.7 FFM: ............................................................................................................................... 6

2.4.8 P-E Congruence: .......................................................................................................... 6

2.4.9 Non zero correlation .................................................................................................. 6

2.5 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................... 7

2.5.1 Big Five Online Assessment ....................................................................................... 7

2.5.2 Job Performance Score ............................................................................................... 7

2.5.3 Scholarly Journals ........................................................................................................ 7

2.6 Structure of the paper .......................................................................................................... 7

3. Research Methodology ............................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Measures ............................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.1 Personality ..................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.2 Job Performance: ......................................................................................................... 8

4. Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 9

5. Secondary Data Literature Review ........................................................................................ 9

5.1 Personality ............................................................................................................................. 9

5.2 Performance ........................................................................................................................ 10

5.3 The relation between Personality and Performance ..................................................... 11

5.3.1 Relation of personality and job performance based on match of person with

environment ................................................................................................................................. 11

5.3.2 Relation between personality traits and job performance in occupational groups

13

5.3.3 Big Five personality traits and expatriate job performance .................................. 14

5.4 Conclusion from Secondary Data .................................................................................... 14

3 | P a g e

6. Primary Data ............................................................................................................................... 16

6.1 Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 18

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 Conclusion from Primary Data ......................................................................................... 28

7. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 29

7.1 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 29

7.2 Limitations ........................................................................................................................... 29

8. References .................................................................................................................................. 30

9. Appendix ...................................................................................................................................... 31

4 | P a g e

List of Tables and Figures

Figure 2.1 - Variables .......................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 3.1 - Big Five personality test instructions ........................................................................... 8

Table 3.1 Job Performance score scale ........................................................................................ 8

Figure 5.1 - Five-Factor Model Big Five Personality Dimensions ............................................ 10

Figure 5.2- Hypothised structural model of personality similarity and work-related outcomes

.............................................................................................................................................................. 12

Table 6.1 - Employee scores for Big Five personality traits and Job Performance ................. 16

Table 6.2 - Sales employee scores for Big Five personality traits and Job Performance ...... 16

Table 6.3 - Employee Performance Rating .................................................................................... 17

Figure 6.1 - Performance vs Extraversion for all employees ....................................................... 18

Figure 6.2- Performance vs Extraversion in Managers ................................................................ 19

Figure 6.3 - Performance vs Extraversion in Skilled Workers ..................................................... 19

Figure 6.4 - Performance vs Extraversion in Sales Staff ............................................................. 20

Figure 6.1 - Performance vs Agreeableness for all the employees ........................................... 20

Figure 6.2 - Performance vs Agreeableness in Managers .......................................................... 21

Figure 6.3 - Performance vs Agreeableness in Skilled Workers ................................................ 21

Figure 6.4 -Performance vs Agreeableness in Sales Staff .......................................................... 22

Figure 6.5 -Performance vs Conscientiousness for all employees ............................................ 22

Figure 6.6 -Performance vs Conscientiousness in Managers..................................................... 23

Figure 6.7 -Performance vs Conscientiousness for Skilled Workers ......................................... 23

Figure 6.8 -Performance vs Conscientiousness in Sales Staff ................................................... 24

Figure 6.9 -Performance vs Neuroticism for all the employees .................................................. 24

Figure 6.10 -Performance vs Neuroticism in Managers ............................................................... 25

Figure 6.11 - Performance vs Neuroticism in Skilled Workers .................................................... 25

Figure 6.12 - Performance vs Neuroticism in Sales Staff ............................................................ 26

Figure 6.13 -Performance vs Openness for all the employees ................................................... 27

Figure 6.14 - Performance vs Openness in Managers................................................................. 27

Figure 6.15 - Performance vs Openness in Skilled Workers....................................................... 27

Figure 6.16 - Performance vs Openness in Sales Staff ............................................................... 28

5 | P a g e

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 project-

specific 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.

2.2 Key objective

Green curve managing director would like to set a direction for organisation behaviour and

find out how he should go about adopting measures to improve the performance of his

employees. He would like to understand which key behaviour of his employees has an

impact on their job performance. To address this, our approach was to understand the

relationship between personality traits of employee and their job performance rating. Also

examine if job types (occupational group) has an impact on the relationship between

personality type and job performance. Thus our research question is How does personality

affect the job performance among the various occupational groups like managers, skilled

workers, sales etc. at Green curve.

2.3 Variables

Figure 2.1 - Variables

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.

Ind

epen

dan

t V

aria

ble

Personality

Med

iati

ng

Var

iab

le

Occupational groups

Dep

end

ant

Var

iab

ke

Job performance

6 | P a g e

2.4 Key Definitions and Abbreviation

2.4.1 Job Performance:

Job performance referred to in this report is the individual employee annual rating for the

year 2012. This is referred to as Performance as well in this paper. The company uses a

rating scale of 1 to 4, with 1 being the highest and 4 being the lowest.

2.4.2 Extraversion:

The broad dimension of extraversion encompasses the more specific traits such as

friendliness, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity Level and cheerfulness in personality

assessment that is used in this case study.

2.4.3 Agreeableness:

The broad dimension of agreeableness involves the more specific traits such as trust,

morality, altruism, cooperation, modesty and sympathy in personality assessment that is

used in this case study.

2.4.4 Conscientiousness:

The broad dimension of conscientiousness involves the more specific traits such as self-

efficacy, orderliness, dutifulness, achievement-striving, self-discipline and cautiousness in

personality assessment that is used in this case study.

2.4.5 Neuroticism/Low Emotional Stability:

The broad dimension of neuroticism involves the more specific traits such as anxiety, anger,

depression, self-consciousness, immoderation and vulnerability in personality assessment

that is used in this case study.

2.4.6 Openness:

The broad dimension of openness involves the more specific traits such as imagination,

artistic interests, emotionality, adventurousness, intellect and liberalism in personality

assessment that is used in this case study.

2.4.7 FFM:

FFM stands for Five Factor Model which is also commonly referred to as the Big Five

personality model.

2.4.8 P-E Congruence:

P-E Congruence stands for Person Environment Congruence or Match

2.4.9 Non zero correlation

Non-zero correlation is the relationship between 2 things can be expressed in terms of a

number/score called a correlation coefficient. This number ranges from 0 to 1, where 0

means no correlation and 1 means a perfect correlation. Therefore, the closer the score is to

1, the stronger the correlation (or the closer the link between 2 things) and the closer the

score is to 0, the weaker the correlation (or the more distant the link between 2 things).

7 | P a g e

2.5 Data Collection

2.5.1 Big Five Online Assessment

The online 120-item version of the IPIP-NEO (International Personality Item Pool

Representation of the NEO PI-R) was used to obtain the personality dimensions

(Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism and Openness) of the

employees. This data forms one part of the primary data.

2.5.2 Job Performance Score

In this case study the 2012 annual performance score of the employees are obtained from

the organization. This is the current performance rating system used by the organization and

the employees are rated by their managers. Employee job performance score is the second

part of the primary data.

2.5.3 Scholarly Journals

The secondary data source is the scholarly journals that have analyzed the relationship of

Big Five Personality dimensions and job performance. Scholarly journals that investigates

the effect of moderating variables such as occupational groups(managers, sales and skilled

workers), person-environment congruence and expatriate employees on Big Five personality

traits and job performance is used as a secondary data source. We have analysed journals

and books from the years: 1966, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1994, 1995, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2006,

2009, 2010, 2011 and 2013 in this report.

2.6 Structure of the paper

The paper first analyses, using secondary data, the relation of the Big Five personality

dimensions to job performance in general as well as to job performance in managers, sales

and skilled workers. Next similar analysis is done using the primary data followed by

conclusion and recommendation.

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.

8 | P a g e

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.

c. After completing all 60 questions click on send button ( ) at the bottom left on the page.

4. Next page is the last set of 60 questions. After completing all 60 questions click on

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

3.1.2 Job Performance:

Individual employee performances were collected from Green Curve. The rating used by

them is as follows:

Performance score scale

1 Outstanding (over achieving)

2 Satisfactory (meeting targets)

3 Average (meeting 80% of targets)

4 Under performer (well below targets) Table 3.1 Job Performance score scale

9 | P a g e

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.

5. Secondary Data Literature Review

5.1 Personality

Personality is the independent variable used in our case study and hence a brief description

on this variable is provided before proceeding to understand the relationship between

personality and performance of an employee.

Robbins and Judge (2013, p.167) says that Personality is the sum total of ways in which an

individual reacts to and interacts with others. We most often describe it in terms of the

measurable traits a person exhibits. One of the most impressive ways to describe

personality is through the Big Five Model. This is the model which we use in our case study.

From our research, we have been able to conclude that Big Five traits emerged as the

culmination of many years of analyses. Zhang states that The five-factor personality traits

model (FFM) resulted from several decades of factor analytic research focusing on trait

personality (2006, p 3).It is also mentioned in the journal by Zhang that Digman (1990)

concluded that the Big Five is a fundamental model for describing personality (2006, p 2).

McShane and Gilnow (2009) has defined the Big Five dimensions represented by the handy

acronym CANOE as below:

Conscientiousness: Conscientiousness is the trait which defines those who are

careful, dependable, self-disciplined and have the will to achieve. People with low

conscientiousness tend to be careless, less thorough, more disorganized and

irresponsible.

Agreeableness: Agreeableness includes the traits of being courteous, good-natured,

empathetic and caring. People with low agreeableness tend to be uncooperative,

short-tempered and irritable.

10 | P a g e

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.

Figure 5.1 - Five-FactorModelBigFivePersonalityDimensions

Source: McShane and Gilnow (2009)

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).

11 | 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).

5.3 The relation between Personality and Performance

The relation between personality and job performance is a topic that is frequently researched

upon in industrial-organisational psychology in the past century (Barrick et al

2001).Throughout our readings, it has been noticed that personality traits and job

performance have a strong relation. Organisations often administer a personality test to its

prospective employees as such tests aid the hiring decisions and help managers forecast

who is best fit for a job as they believe this method of selection ensures better job

performance. Robbins and Judge (2013, p.170) states that Individuals who are dependable,

reliable, careful, thorough, able to plan, organized, hardworking, persistent and

achievement-oriented tend to have higher job performance in most if not all occupations.

Employees who have a high score on conscientiousness develop higher levels of job

knowledge which in turn leads to higher levels of job performance. Such people also

maintain high performance even when faced with negative feedback (Robbins & Judge

2013).

A journal by Tett, Jackson and Rothstein (1991) reveals that several of the personality

dimensions, in particular, Neuroticism, Openness to Experience, and Agreeableness, have

meaningful relation to job performance. However Barrick and Mount (1991) found that

validity was associated with only two factors, Conscientiousness and Extraversion.

5.3.1 Relation of personality and job performance based on match of person

with environment

According to Hollands (1966) theory of personality types and model environments,

outcomes such as job performance are a function of congruence or match between an

individuals personality and psychological environment. According to this study, people tend

to perform better when the environment matches their personalities and they will also remain

in those environments because of reinforcements received. In the studies which followed

later using this approach for example Muchinsky and Monahan (1987) proposed different

models of person environment congruence (P-E congruence) : Supplementary and

Complementary. Supplementary congruence is the match between an individual and existing

members of an environment setting (e.g., an organization). According to this model, people

seek to join specific environments because they perceive themselves as possessing

characteristics (e.g., personality traits) that are similar to individuals within the environments.

Complementary congruence is the match between the characteristics of an individual and

the corresponding needs of an environment. The complementary basis of P-E congruence is

the placing of individuals with certain knowledge, skills and abilities in specific jobs that

requires these characteristics for successful coping. Complementary P-E congruence is the

12 | P a g e

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.

13 | 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 Relation between personality traits and job performance in occupational

groups

As mentioned earlier in our literature review, a study by Barrick and Mount (1991) reported

Extraversion to be a valid predictor of job performance for occupations involving social

interaction, management and sales. Conscientiousness (which includes achievement and

dependability constructs), is a valid predictor of job performance for all occupational groups

and all job related criterion types studied.

In 1993, Barrick and Mount examined whether moderators would affect the relation between

the Big Five and performance within various job categories (e.g., professionals, police,

managers, sales and skilled or semiskilled). Since then, a lot of meta-analyses have been

conducted along these lines. The study by Hurtz and Donovan (2000) tries to validate these

analyses. The initial part of their study reinstates the fact that Conscientiousness construct

does seem to be logically related to job performance. In the later part, they have treated two

characteristics viz.: Type of worker occupation and type of performance criterion and

conducted studies to find out their relation to Big 5 traits

Hurtz and Donovan (2000) categorised worker occupation type as sales workers, customer

service representatives, managers and skilled and semi skilled workers. The categories of

type of performance were analyzed in two separate ways:

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.

14 | P a g e

Validity by performance criterion

After partitioning performance into task performance, job dedication and interpersonal

facilitation, Hurtz and Donovan (2000) found that Conscientiousness predicted all three

performance dimensions equally well and the same was found for Emotional Stability.

Agreeableness also emerged as a valid predictor predicting interpersonal facilitation as

strongly as did Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability. Thus when one considers

validities and credibility from findings, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability and

Agreeableness seem to have a rather stable impact on interpersonal facilitation criteria,

suggesting that personality traits may have a more stable impact on jobs that are more

interpersonal in nature (e.g., customer service, sales, and management).

We have also based our study on similar lines as Hurtz and Donovan (2000). We analysed

the relation between personality traits and job performance of skilled workers, sales persons

and mangers.

5.3.3 Big Five personality traits and expatriate job performance

We found a study by Rose et al (2010) which looked at the role of Big Five personality in

expatriate performance in overseas assignments worth mentioning as part of our literature

review because the employees of the organisation who participated in our survey were all

expatriates as well. The study was conducted on 322 expatriates working in Malaysia and

personality factor was found to be a significant determinant of expatriate job performance in

international assignments. Their study revealed that the expatriates with greater

conscientiousness personality performed better on their task and contextual performance.

The ones with greater openness to experience performed better in their task, contextual and

assignment-specific performance. However they found that Agreeableness and extraversion

had no support in predicting the job performance of expatriates.

The study conducted by Rose et al (2010) is especially beneficial for organisations and

individuals considering international assignments. They state that if personality is considered

in relation to host country culture, then this can have an impact on job performance. For

example, their studies have found evidence that individuals high on openness to experience

and Conscientiousness perform better in their job when assigned to host culture

predominantly collective in nature such as Malaysia. They also state that cross-cultural

training is likely to improve expatriate performance and suggest that MNCs should select the

person with the required personality characteristics and the give cross-cultural training to

improve their performance.

5.4 Conclusion from Secondary Data

From the above secondary data analysis, we can conclude that though there is a low to

moderate strength in the relation between Big Five personality traits and job performance,

the different personality dimensions were found to affect performance in different types of

jobs.

Barrick and Mount (1991) from their research concluded that conscientiousness was the only

strong predictor of job performance across different occupational groups and criterion types.

In contrast, Tett et al (1991) concluded that only emotional stability has a non-zero

correlation with performance and agreeableness and openness showed higher correlations

15 | P a g e

with performance than conscientiousness, whereas another study by Anderson and

Viswesvaran (1998) emphasised that emotional stability and conscientiousness showed non

zero correlation with performance.

We are more interested in the case study by Hurtz and Donovan (2000) which examined the

relation between job performance and personality traits in different types of jobs. They

concluded that Conscientiousness dimension was found to have strongest relation to overall

job performance. Those who believe that they are hard-working, reliable, organized and so

on, seemed to perform a bit better than do those who believe they are less strong in these

characteristics. Their studies showed that Emotional Stability showed an almost stable

influence on performance throughout all of their analyses and hence concluded that being

clam, secure, well adjusted, and low in anxiety has a small but consistent impact on job

performance. And last but not the least, being extraverted was found to influence sales and

managerial jobs and Openness to experience appears to affect performance in customer

service jobs. One interesting conclusion of their study is that if selected facets of

Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability and Agreeableness are combined, then this can

facilitate the prediction of performance in jobs involving interpersonal facilitation.

As a final note to our secondary data and to answer our research question which tries to

examine the relation between Big Five personality traits and job performance, we find it

fitting to quote from the study by Barrick et al (2001) which analysed 15 prior meta-analytic

studies. They agree with the previous findings which support the validity of

conscientiousness being able to predict the performance in all occupations analysed. Their

journal states that emotional stability is also a generalizable predictor on considering overall

work performance, but had less consistency than conscientiousness when specific

performance criteria and occupations were considered. According to Barrick et al (2001),

Extraversion, agreeableness and openness to experience did not predict overall work

performance, but they did predict success in specific occupations.

16 | 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.

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 Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Openness Performance

Score

Sales 68 46 95 41 54 3

Sales 86 57 81 23 56 3

Sales 70 25 95 56 42 2

Sales 75 80 98 8 15 2

Table 6.2 - Sales employee scores for Big Five personality traits and Job Performance

Role Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Openness Performance

Score

Manager 74 9 53 56 42 2

Manager 73 59 96 1 60 1

Manager 86 57 81 23 56 3

Manager 22 65 45 30 46 3

Manager 70 25 95 56 42 2

Manager 75 80 98 8 15 2

Skilled 80 54 58 43 21 3

Skilled 38 52 97 25 73 2

Skilled 72 62 48 60 19 3

Skilled 66 38 65 69 5 2

Skilled 48 65 79 26 16 2

Skilled 74 35 53 10 15 2

Skilled 25 91 4 94 24 2

Skilled 36 50 21 60 19 2

Skilled 68 46 95 41 54 3

17 | P a g e

Table 5.3 Below is the employee job performance rating for 2012 provided to us by Green

Curve management.

Name Designation Performance

Sameer CP Manager-Sales&Marketing 2

Vinson Antony Senior Account Manager 2

Rajeev Kumar Account Manager 3

Aahad Sayed Operations Manager 2

Rakesh Pillai Project Manager 3

Thanseer Attassery Office Manager 1

Ragil Raj Sales Executive 3

Sonal Jakkal 3D Designer 2

Sanjai Kumar Architect 2

Noor Mohammed 3D Designer 2

Nisha Amith Interior Designer 3

Shakir Abdul Wahab Public Relations Officer 2

Hani Ishaque Accounts Officer 2

Gail Ponce de Leon Project Engineer 3

Rosanna Carasig Admin Assistant 2

Performance score scale

1 Outstanding (over achieving)

2 Satisfactory (meeting targets)

3 Average (meeting 80% of targets)

4 Under performer (well below targets)

Table 6.3 - Employee Performance Rating

18 | 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

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.

y = 0.0022x + 2.136 R = 0.0058

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce S

core

Extraversion

Performance vs Extraversion

Performance

Linear(Performance)

19 | P a g e

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.

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.

y = -0.0125x + 2.9967 R = 0.1392

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce S

core

Extraversion

Performance vs Extraversion Managers

Performance

Linear(Performance)

y = 0.0162x + 1.4207 R = 0.4131

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce S

core

Extraversion

Performance vs Extraversion Skilled Workers

Performance

Linear(Performance)

20 | P a g e

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

Figure 6.1 - Performance vs Agreeableness for all the employees

Similar to extraversion there no evidence that agreeableness is related to overall job

performance when employees are considered as a whole. From figure 7.1 its clear that the

slope is negligible (0.002) and accuracy is very low (R = 0.0076).

y = 0.0231x + 0.7728 R = 0.104

0

1

2

3

4

60 70 80 90 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce S

core

Extraversion

Performance vs Extraversion Sales

Performance

Linear(Performance)

y = 0.0025x + 2.1347 R = 0.0076

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Per

form

ance

Agreeableness

Performance vs Agreeableness

Performance

Linear(Performance)

21 | P a g e

Figure 6.2 - Performance vs Agreeableness in Managers

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.

Figure 6.3 - Performance vs Agreeableness in Skilled Workers

From Figure 6.3 there no evidence that agreeableness is related to overall job performance

in skilled workers as well.

y = 0.0039x + 1.9754 R = 0.019

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Agreeableness

Performance vs Agreeableness Managers

Performance

Linear(Performance)

y = -0.001x + 2.3902 R = 0.0012

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Agreeableness

Performance vs Agreeableness Skilled Workers

Performance

Linear(Performance)

22 | P a g e

Figure 6.4 -Performance vs Agreeableness in Sales Staff

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

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.

y = -0.0006x + 2.533 R = 0.0006

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Agreeableness

Performance vs Agreeableness Sales

Performance

Linear(Performance)

y = -0.0027x + 2.4449 R = 0.0178

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Conscientiousness

Performance vs Conscientiousness

Performance

Linear(Performance)

23 | P a g e

Figure 6.6 -Performance vs Conscientiousness in Managers

There is strong evidence that in managers increase in conscientiousness score increases

job performance and hence conscientiousness has a positive relation to overall job

performance. In Figure 6.6 the slope (0.0175) is high and there is good level accuracy (R =

0.2972).

Figure 6.7 -Performance vs Conscientiousness for Skilled Workers

y = -0.0175x + 3.5351 R = 0.2972

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Conscientiousness

Performance vs Conscientiousness Managers

Performance

Linear(Performance)

y = 0.0036x + 2.1281 R = 0.0491

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Conscientiousness

Performance vs Conscientiousness Skilled Workers

Performance

Linear(Performance)

24 | P a g e

However in skilled workers there is no evidence that conscientiousness affects overall job

performance.

Figure 6.8 -Performance vs Conscientiousness in Sales Staff

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

Figure 6.9 -Performance vs Neuroticism for all the employees

y = -0.0486x + 6.9871 R = 0.4134

0

1

2

3

4

60 70 80 90 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Conscientiousness

Performance vs Conscientiousness Sales

Performance

Linear(Performance)

y = 0.0038x + 2.1142 R = 0.0273

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Neuroticism

Performance vs Neuroticism

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

25 | 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.

Figure 6.10 -Performance vs Neuroticism in Managers

From Figure 6.10, for managers, there is slightly more accuracy that neuroticism has a

negative effect on overall job performance.

Figure 6.11 - Performance vs Neuroticism in Skilled Workers

y = 0.0085x + 1.9214 R = 0.0686

0

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Neuroticism

Performance vs Neuroticism Managers

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

y = 0.0002x + 2.3215 R = 0.0002

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80 100

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Neuroticism

Performance vs Neuroticism Skilled Workers

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

26 | P a g e

From Figure 6.11, there is no evidence that neuroticism is related to overall job performance

in skilled workers.

Figure 6.12 - Performance vs Neuroticism in Sales Staff

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

y = 2.5 R = 0

0

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Neuroticism

Performance vs Neuroticism Sales

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

y = 0.0001x + 2.2621 R = 2E-05

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Openness

Performance vs Openness

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

27 | P a g e

Figure 6.13 -Performance vs Openness for all the employees

As seen in Figure 6.13 there is no evidence that openness is related to overall job

performance when all the employees are considered.

Figure 6.14 - Performance vs Openness in Managers

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.

Figure 6.15 - Performance vs Openness in Skilled Workers

y = -0.0012x + 2.2188 R = 0.0006

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80

Per

form

ance

Openness

Performance vs Openness Managers

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

y = 0.0032x + 2.2462 R = 0.0191

0

1

2

3

4

0 20 40 60 80

Per

form

ance

Openness

Performance vs Openness Skilled Workers

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

28 | P a g e

The observation remains same for skilled workers too.

Figure 6.16 - Performance vs Openness in Sales Staff

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).

6.2 Conclusion from Primary Data

Based on the above analysis of the primary data (collected by us from Green Curve), we

conclude that only conscientiousness trait from Big Five personality traits have an effect on

employee job performance. However for the different occupational groups namely Manager,

Skilled Workers and Sales Employees, two other behaviour traits, Extraversion and

Openness, are also related to job performance. While extraversion has a positive effect for

manager, it has a negative effect for skilled workers on job performance. Also for sales

employees it is observed that higher openness score relates to lower job performance and

vice versa. Agreeableness was found to have no relation to performance and only for

managers, Neuroticism showed a negative impact on overall job performance. However it is

good to note that accuracy levels for these findings are moderate to low.

y = 0.0248x + 1.4648 R = 0.6571

0

1

2

3

4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Pe

rfo

rman

ce

Openness

Performance vs Openness Sales

PerformanceScore

Linear(PerformanceScore)

29 | 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.

30 | P a g e

8. References

Anderson, G, Viswesvaran, C (1998), An update of the validity of personality scales in personnel selection : A meta-analysis of the studies published after 1992, in 13th Annual Conference of the Society of Industrial and Organisational Psychology, Dallas

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

Day, David V, Bedeian, Arthur G (1995), Personality Similarity and Work-Related Outcomes among African-American Nursing Personnel: A Test of the Supplementary Model of Person-Environment Congruence, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, vol.46, pp 55-70

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

Munchinsky, P M, Monahan, CJ (1987), What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit, Journal of Vocational Behaviour, vol.31, pp 268-27

Petrou, P, Kouvonen, A, Murray, Maria Karanika 2011, Social Exchange at Work and Emotional Exhaustion:The Role of Personality1, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol 41, no. 9, p.2169.

Robbins, Stephen P & Judge, Timothy A 2013, Organisational Behavior Pearson, Essex.

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

Tett, Robert P, Jackson, Douglas N, Rothstein, Mitchell 1991, Personality Measures as Predictors Of Job Performance: A Meta-Analytic Review, Personnel Psychology, vol 44

Zhang, Li-fang (2006), Thinking styles and the big five personality traits revisited, Journal of Personality and Individual differences, vol.40, pp 1177-118

31 | P a g e

9. Appendix