Griffith University Nathan Campus

s2895058

2005EHR - Personality and its influence on Job Performance and

Job Satisfaction
Michaela Hardwick, s2895058

Personality traits are the individual characteristics that differentiate individuals by the way
they think, feel and act (Jia, Jia, & Karau, 2013). For the purposes of this essay, personality
is defined as the traits that separate us from other people and influence behaviours and
thought processes. The purpose of this essay is to elaborately outline a framework known as
the Big-Five and explore the relationship between this framework and job performance and
job satisfaction. It will also demonstrate the different personalities and show the influence
that they have over different organisational situations. This essay will place emphasis on how
the different dimensions of personality correlate and analyse any contradictions. It will go on
to discuss the effects of personalities not aligning in the workplace and discuss the
importance of personality testing in job-fitting. This essay will demonstrate how personality is
influential of job performance and job satisfaction.
There are several different views on personality, and means of assessing them. It has always
been perceived as a complex topic, especially when analysing the effects that personality
has on the workplace and workplace environments. One of the most definitive models used
to assess personality is the Big Five. It consists of the five widely accepted personality
dimensions that are used to represent individual psychological personality and how they
predict behavioural patterns in an organisational situation (Sur & Ng, 2014; Jia, Jia & Karau,
2013; Paunonen & Ashton, 2001; Caldwell & Burger, 1997; Gardiner & Jackson, 2012). The
five dimensions are classified

as extroversion, agreeableness,

conscientiousness,

neuroticism, and openness to experiences. Extroversion is associated with positiveness,

assertiveness
likeableness,

and

sociability, agreeableness

conscientiousness

is

associated

is

associated

with

with

cooperation

and

dependability, persistence

and

organisation, neuroticism is associated with instability, depression and insecurities, and

openness to experiences is associated with intellectuality and imagination. Within each of
these dimensions there are 6 facets that are more specific and can be used to describe how
an individual is likely to act within each of the five dimensions (Burke, Matthiesen, &
Pallesen, 2006; Krasman, 2010).
Along with predicting an individuals personality, the Big Five has been linked to predicting
organisational behaviours such as stress, job satisfaction and job performance (Jia, Jia &
Karau, 2013). Several researchers suggest that individuals who score highly on factors such
as extroversion, conscientiousness, openness to experiences and agreeableness have a

Griffith University Nathan Campus

s2895058

positive correlation with job satisfaction, motivation and job performance (Furnham,
Eracleous, & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2009; Spagnoli & Caetano, 2012; Le, Donnellan, &
Conger, 2014). Neuroticism is quite the opposite. More researchers have focussed their
studies on this particular dimension as it has a a high level of neuroticism has been found to
associate with poor job performance and job satisfaction, and high levels of stress (Gardiner
& Jackson, 2012; Furnham, 2006; Spagnoli & Caetano, 2012; Burke, Matthiesen, & Pallesen,
2006; Furnham, Eracleous, & Chamorro-Premuzic, 2009). This suggests that a person who
either takes more risks or stays highly focussed on their tasks and goals is more likely to
have a higher level of job satisfaction and perform better than those who have high levels of
instability and personal insecurites. It is also necessary to understand that these results are a
generalisation and each organisation is different and requires different things. It is also
important to reflect on the results of an individual to gain a further understanding of the
accuracy of them.
In order to fully understand how the Big Five works, it is essential to analyse the results of an
individual who has undertaken a Big-Five personality test. For the purpose of this essay, I
have completed the Big-Five personality testing. According to my Big-5 personality test
results, it was revealed that I have relatively high scores for all the dimensions (all were
above the halfway mark of 2.5) which means I tend to display these personality dimensions
frequently. For the Extraversion dimension I scored 4.38. This indicates that I have a high
tendency to be positive in situations, sociable, ambitious, and assertive. It also signifies that I
am more likely to take on leadership roles (Burke, Matthiesen, & Pallesen, 2006). When
referring to the agreeable dimension I scored 3.22 which suggests that Im slightly more
inclined to good-natured, cooperative, and trusting. It also indicated that I am slightly more
harmonious in nature (Spagnoli & Caetano, 2012). Therefore, it can be inferred that a high
score indicates that I am relationship driven. When analysing my results for the
conscientiousness dimension I scored 4.44 which signifies that I pursue fewer goals in a
more purposeful way. This means that I am likely to be task oriented, persistent, dependable
and responsible (Spagnoli & Caetano, 2012). For the openness dimension I scored 3.00.
This is only a little over the half-way mark which indicates the tendency to do either is
relatively even. I am slightly more inclined to be intellectual, non-conforming and imaginative
(Burke, Matthiesen, & Pallesen, 2006). When analysing the neuroticism dimension I scored
3.25. A high score in this suggests that I typically interpret people's behaviour and the events
that occur around me in a negative way. The higher the score is, the more likely I am to be
unstable, have more personal insecurities and be depressed.

Griffith University Nathan Campus

s2895058

When comparing and contrasting these factors to understand the reliability of it, it can be
seen that I have high tendencies for both extroversion and neuroticism which are clearly
distinctive from each other (one is mainly positive and the other is perceived as a negative
trait). However; it just shows that I have both tendencies, although I am more inclined to be
an extrovert. The other noticeable conflict between factors was the conscientiousness and
agreeableness factors. This is because the conscientiousness factor identifies me as task
oriented individual, while the agreeableness factor identifies me as more of a harmonious,
relationship driven individual (Burke, Matthiesen, & Pallesen, 2006). Based on the
differences in scores, it can be assumed that I am inclined to show more task oriented
tendencies than relationship oriented tendencies. It can be inferred that an individual who
displays higher tendencies in all of the attributes, has the ability to adjust to different
organisational situations better, due to having empathy based on a personality trait. This
highlights that one person can have conflicting tendencies and it can be productive, however;
the outcome can be the opposite if two or more people have conflicting personality traits and
tendencies.
Personality testing is essential in organisations to reduce or eliminate the opportunity for
conflict to arise. I believe that employers should have some control over who they employee
as employing and training individuals is an expensive process and they cannot afford to
make mistakes in the process when their goal is profit maximisation. It is not just about
profitability or the cost of training an employee with a personality that does not match that of
the organisation. If one employee with a personality that does not positive correlate with the
other employees, it can cause productivity to decrease and all the employees involved can
have a reduced level of job satisfaction which will lead to a higher employee turnover and
absenteeism due to stress (Paunonen & Ashton, 2001). In the case study presented, Alice
should consider looking for another person for the job that better suits the work environment.
This is because both the current employees and Jana will feel uncomfortable with the
situation and it is likely to result in reduced job satisfaction and job performance for both
employees. Research suggests that extroverts perform better at their tasks and are more
satisfied with their job which suggests that Marks productivity and satisfaction may decrease
with the introduction of a person who overshadows him and makes him feel uncomfortable
(Spagnoli & Caetano, 2012). It could also have adverse effects on Janas performance and
result in her also decreasing productivity and job satisfaction because the other employee is
causing her neuroticism factor to increase.

Griffith University Nathan Campus

s2895058

Personality tests can be useful in internal circumstances after a person has been selected for
a job. Two job performance based situations are performance reviews and promotions. This
is because when giving a performance review to an employee, it can be helpful to know why
they are or are not performing the expected way. Sometimes asking the employee this
question does not give an employer enough insight to the situation. In regards to promotions,
it can be useful to have some indication as to whether an employee will be neurotic and
struggle to cope with the extra pressures and stresses involved with stepping up to a
management position or whether they succeed and excel as a manager (Sur & Ng, 2014).
The division or allocation of employees to teams for group based projects is another work
context where personality testing can be a useful tool. This is because teams are usually
formed to achieve a goal in a limited amount of time, so there is no real room for conflict due
to personality clashes. For this reason, personality tests can be used to ensure that all the
members of the team are well suited to each other.
Throughout this essay, the Big-Five personality framework has been analysed using various
methods. The five personality dimensions (extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness,
neuroticism and openness to experience) that are widely accepted as the fundamental
dimensions were identified. It was discovered that all except neuroticism positively correlate
with job performance and job satisfaction. Some contradictions were found in the Big-Five
personality testing, when results of the opposite standards both had high scores, however; it
was concluded that it is possible to display contradicting tendencies simultaneously although
one is generally stronger than the other. An analysis of job-fit and personality testing in an
organisation demonstrated how important matching a personality to the organisation can be,
in order to maintain productivity and job satisfaction. Overall, the essay showed how
personality has a strong influence over organisational behaviour.

Word Count: 1644

Griffith University Nathan Campus

s2895058

References
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job
Performance: A Meta Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
Burke, R. J., Matthiesen, S. B., & Pallesen, S. (2006, April). Personality correlates
of Workaholism. Personality and Individual Differences, 40(6), 1223-1233.
Caldwell, D. F., & Burger, J. M. (1997, October). Personality and Social Influence
Strategies in the Workplace. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
23(10), 1003-1012.
Furnham, A. (2006). Personality Disorders and Intelligence. Journal of Individual
Differences, 27(1), 42-46.
Furnham, A., Eracleous, A., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2009). Personality,
motivation and job satisfaction: Hertzberg meets the Big Five. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 24(8), 765-779.
Gardiner, E., & Jackson, C. J. (2012). Workplace Mavericks: How Personality and
risk-taking propensity predicts maverickism. British Journal of Pyschology,
103, 497-519.
Jia, H., Jia, R., & Karau, S. (2013). Cyberloafing and Personality: The Impact of the
Big Five Traits and Workplace Situational Factors. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 20(3), 358-365.
Krasman, J. (2010). The Feedback-Seeking Personality: Big Five and FeedbackSeeking Behaviour. Journal of Leadership & Organisational Studies, 17(1),
18-32.
Le, K., Donnellan, M. B., & Conger, R. (2014). Personality Development at Work:
Workplace Conditions, Personality Changes, and the Corresponsive
Principle. Journal of Personality, 82(1), 44-56.
Lind, K., Glas, L., Pallesen, S., & Einarsen, S. (2009). Personality Profiles Among
Targets and Nontargets of Workplace Bullying. Eurpoean Psychologist,
14(3), 231-237.

Griffith University Nathan Campus

s2895058

Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Strauss, J. P. (1994). Validity of Observer Ratings of
the Big Five Personality Factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(2), 272280.
Paunonen, S. V., & Ashton, M. C. (2001). Big Five Factors and Facets and the
Prediction of Behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(3),
524-539.
Spagnoli, P., & Caetano, A. (2012). Personality and Organisational Commitment.
Career Development International, 17(3), 255-275.
Sur, S., & Ng, E. S. (2014). Extending Theory on Job Stress: The Interaction
Between the ''Other 3'' and ''Big 5'' Personality Traits on Job Stress. Human
Resource Development Review, 13(1), 79-101.