Personality at Work
II. Objectives of course:
General Objective: Provide the student with an understanding of how personality measures are used in selection, how personality interacts with situations factors in the work environment to influence performance. Upon completion of the course, students should have an enhanced understanding of the important role personality plays in organizational behavior. They will also gain a better understanding of the kind of work environment that best suits their personality type.
Specific Objectives are:
For each student to develop an in-depth understanding of his or her profile on the most widely used valid personality inventories and to understand how his or her profile fits best with specific work environments and settings
To gain an understanding of the primary issues relating to the measurement of personality constructs
To understand the issues relating to the effect use of personality as a predictor of successful job performance
To understand the dynamics of the role that personality plays in teamwork
To understand the effects of response distortion on the validity of personality uses for selection
To have a firm grasp on how his or her personality profile relates to occupational and organizational fit.
The class will be conducted as a seminar. Discussions will focus on chapters, readings and personality inventories (primarily, HPI, NEO-PI R, IPIP and CPI). Each student will bring a (1) one page written summary of each article assigned and pose two questions for each article, and (2) short answers to the questions for each Chapter (linked to chapter titles). Discussions will focus on the articles and chapters assigned, and questions. Students will be responsible for completing the self-assessments online or in the Wagman Lab outside of scheduled class time. Assignments for specific dates are subject to change, but advanced notice will be given.
Schneider, B. & Smith, D. B., eds. (2004).
Personality in Organizations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Pub: London.
V. Course requirements for each student:
The student will be evaluated on
Points possible Activity:
- 20 % Article summaries and answers to chapter questions
- 60 % Midterm and Final Exams (30% each)
- 20% Paper: Description of personal profile
- 100 % Total points possible
Grade scale: 90 = A; 80 = B; 70 = C
Links to useful information on personality at work:
- CPI California Personality Inventory at: to complete the CPI login at https://online.cpp.com/ (obtain LOGIN and PW from instructor)
- HPI on line: https://www2.hoganassessments.com/loginp.asp to complete HPI (obtain PW from instructor) Instructions for HPI online assessment
- SIOP Personality at Work
- OPM assessments http://apps.opm.gov/ADT/ADTclientMain.aspx
- SIOP employment testing: http://www.siop.org/workplace/employment%20testing/employment_testing_toc.aspx
|(1) Aug 28
|(2) Sept 4||
Chap1: Personality Psychology for Organizational Researchers (p. 3) R. Hogan
Complete: Goldberg's IPIP items measuring the Five Factors. (complete the self -estimation of FFM first)
|(3) Sept 11||
|(4) Sept 18||
Chap 3. Four Lessons Learned From the Person-Situation Debate (p. 61) Stewart & Barrick
|(5) Sept 25||
Chap 4: Personality, Interactional Psychology, and P-O Fit (p.
87) Judge & Kristof-Brown
|(6) Oct 2||
|(7) Oct 9||
|(8) Oct 16||
|(9) Oct 23||
Chap 6: Vocational Psychology and Personality (p. 141) Walsh
|(10) Oct 30||
Chap 7: The Dispositional Approach to Job Attitudes: An
Empirical and Conceptual Review (p163). Staw
|(11) Nov 6||
|(12) Nov 13||
McCrae article in Science on national stereotypes - Balt Sun
(no summary or questions required)
|(13) Nov 20||
Chap 10: Personality and Leadership (p. 251-265)Spangler, House & PalrechaSean
|(14) Nov 27||
Chap 15: Where We've Been and Where We're Going: Conclusions (p.
387) Smith & Schneider
*** Description of Profile Papers due ***
|(15) Dec 4||
Final Exam or submit model
return to homepage
* assigned for class discussion
*Arvey, R. D., Bouchard, T. J., Segal, N. L., & Abranham, L. M. (1989). Job satisfaction: Environmental and genetic components. Journal of Applied psychology, 74, 187-192.
*Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1993). Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 0021-9010.
*Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
*Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1996). Effects of impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 261-272.
*Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., Neubert, M. J., & Mount, M. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 377-391.
*Bouchard, T., Arvey, R. D., Keller, L. M., Segal, N. L. (1992). Genetic influences on job satisfaction: A reply to Cropanzano and James. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 89-93.
*Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). If we are so rich, why aren't we happy? American Psychologist, 54, 821-827.
Day, D. V., & Silverman, S. B. (1989). Personality and job performance: Evidence of incremental validity. Personnel Psychology, (1), 25-36.
*Davis-Blake, A., & Pfeffer, J. (1989). Lust a mirage; The search for dispositional effects in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 385-400.
*De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I. (1999). RIASEC types of big five traits as predictors of employment status and nature of employment. Personnel Psychology, 52, 701-727.
*Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions: Q&A. American Psychologist, May 469-477.
*Hogan, R. & Holland, B. (2003). Using theory to evaluate personality and job-performance relations: A socioanalytic perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1, 100-112.
Hough, L. M. .(1998). Effects of intentional distortion in personality measurement and evaluation of suggested palliatives. Human Performance, 11, 209-244.
Hough, L. M., & Furnham, A. (2003). Use of personality
variables in work settings In W. C. Borman, D. R. Illgen, & R. J.
Handbook of Psychology: I/O
Psychology. Chapter 7, 131-169.
*Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., Durham, C., & Kluger, A. H. (1998). Dispositional
effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 17-34.
Judge, T. A., J. E., Bono, R. Llies & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002) Personality and Leadership: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, No. 4, 765–780.
Klimoski (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of Psychology (Vol. 12, pp. 131-169). Industrial/Organizational Psychology. New York: Wiley.
*Loher, B. T.,
Noe, R. A., Moeller, H. L., & Fitzgerald, M. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of the
relation of job characteristics to job satisfaction.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 70 280-289.
*McFarland, L. A., & Ryan, A. M. (2000). Variance in faking across noncognitive measures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 812-821.
*Newman, G. A., & Wright, J. (1999). Team effectiveness; Beyond skills and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 376-389.
*O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., U Caldwell,
D. F. (1991).People and organizational culture: A profile comparison approach to
assessing person-organization fit.
Academy of Management Journal, 34, 487-516
*Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social desirability in personality testing for personnel selection: The red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(6), 660-679.
*Pittenger, D. J. (2005). Cautionary comments regarding the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Consulting Psychology Journal, 57, 210-221.
*Schmit, M. J., & Ryan, A. M. (1993). The big five in personnel selection: Factor structure in applicant and nonapplicant populations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 966-974.
*Schmit, M. J., & Ryan, A. M., Stierwalt, S. L., & Powell, A. B. (1995). Frame-of-reference effects on personality scale scores and criterion-related validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 607-620.
*Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are personal:
Comparing autonomous and controlled reasons for goals a predictors of effort
and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24 (5), 546-557.
*Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change; A dispositional approach to job attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 469-480.
*Salancik, G., R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing
approach to job attitudes and task design.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 427-456
*Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.
*Tokar, D. M. & Swanson, J. L. (1995). Evaluation of the correspondence between Holland' vocational personality typology and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 46, 89-108.