BMGT 464 - Skills Assessment/Job Position
twinkletoes
Chapter3perceptionpersonalityvalues.pdf
1
This text was adapted by The Saylor Foundation under a Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License without
attribution as requested by the work’s original creator or licensee.
2
Chapter 3 Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and
Perception
L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following:
1. Define personality and describe how it affects work behaviors.
2. Understand the role of values in determining work behaviors.
3. Explain the process of perception and how it affects work behaviors.
4. Understand how individual differences affect ethics.
5. Understand cross-cultural influences on individual differences and perception.
Kronos Uses Science to Match Candidates to Jobs You are interviewing a candidate for a position as a cashier in a supermarket.
You need someone polite, courteous, patient, and dependable. The candidate
you are talking to seems nice. But how do you know who is the right person for
the job? Will the job candidate like the job or get bored? Will they have a lot of
accidents on the job or be fired for misconduct? Don’t you wish you knew
before hiring? One company approaches this problem scientifically, saving
companies time and money on hiring hourly wage employees.
Retail employers do a lot of hiring, given their growth and high turnover rate.
According to one estimate, replacing an employee who leaves in retail costs
companies around $4,000. High turnover also endangers customer service.
Therefore, retail employers have an incentive to screen people carefully so that
they hire people with the best chance of being successful and happy on the job.
Unicru, an employee selection company, developed software that quickly
became a market leader in screening of hourly workers. The company was
acquired by Massachusetts-based Kronos Inc. in 2006.
3
The idea behind the software is simple: If you have a lot of employees and
keep track of your data over time, you have access to an enormous resource.
By analyzing this data, you can specify the profile of the “ideal” employee. The
software captures the profile of the potential high performers, and applicants
are screened to assess their fit with this particular profile. More important, the
profile is continuously updated as new employees are hired. As the database
gets larger, the software does a better job of identifying the right people for the
job.
If you applied for a job in retail, you may have already been a part of this
database: The users of this system include giants such as Albertsons, Universal
Studios, Costco Wholesale Corporation, Macy’s, Blockbuster Inc., Target
Brands Inc., and other retailers and chain restaurants. In companies such as
Target or Blockbuster, applicants use a kiosk in the store to answer a list of
questions and to enter their background, salary history, and other
information. In other companies, such as some in the trucking industry,
candidates enter the data through the Web site of the company they are
applying to. The software screens people on basic criteria such as availability
in scheduling as well as personality traits.
Candidates are asked to agree or disagree with statements such as “slow
people irritate me” or “I don’t act polite when I don’t want to.” After the
candidates complete the questions, hiring managers are sent a report
complete with a color-coded suggested course of action. Red means the
candidate does not fit the job, yellow means proceed with caution, and green
means the candidate can be hired on the spot. Interestingly, the company
contends that faking answers to the questions of the software is not easy
because it is difficult for candidates to predict the desired profile. For example,
4
according to their research, being a successful salesman has less to do with
being an extraverted and sociable person and more to do with a passion for
the company’s product.
Matching candidates to jobs has long been viewed as a key way of ensuring
high performance and low turnover in the workplace, and advances in
computer technology are making it easier and more efficient to assess
candidate-job fit. Companies using such technology are cutting down the time
it takes to hire people, and it is estimated that using such techniques lowers
their turnover by 10%–30%.
Sources: Berta, D. (2002, February 25). Industry increases applicant
screening amid labor surplus, security concerns. Nation’s Restaurant
News, 36(8), 4; Frauenheim, E. (2006, March 13). Unicru beefs up data in
latest screening tool. Workforce Management, 85(5), 9–10; Frazier, M. (2005,
April). Help wanted. Chain Store Age,81(4), 37–39; Haaland, D. E. (2006,
April 17). Safety first: Hire conscientious employees to cut down on costly
workplace accidents. Nation’s Restaurant News,40(16), 22–24; Overholt, A.
(2002, February). True or false? You’re hiring the right people. Fast
Company, 55, 108–109; Rafter, M. V. (2005, May). Unicru breaks through in
the science of “smart hiring.” Workforce Management, 84(5), 76–78.
Individuals bring a number of differences to work, such as unique
personalities, values, emotions, and moods. When new employees enter
organizations, their stable or transient characteristics affect how they
behave and perform. Moreover, companies hire people with the expectation
that those individuals have certain skills, abilities, personalities, and values.
Therefore, it is important to understand individual characteristics that
matter for employee behaviors at work.
5
3.1 The Interactionist Perspective: The Role of Fit
L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S
1. Differentiate between person–organization and person–job fit.
2. Understand the relationship between person–job fit and work behaviors.
3. Understand the relationship between person–organization fit and work behaviors.
Individual differences matter in the workplace. Human beings bring in their
personality, physical and mental abilities, and other stable traits to work.
Imagine that you are interviewing an employee who is proactive, creative, and
willing to take risks. Would this person be a good job candidate? What
behaviors would you expect this person to demonstrate?
The question posed above is misleading. While human beings bring their traits
to work, every organization is different, and every job within the organization
is also different. According to the interactionist perspective, behavior is a
function of the person and the situation interacting with each other. Think
about it. Would a shy person speak up in class? While a shy person may not
feel like speaking, if the individual is very interested in the subject, knows the
answers to the questions, and feels comfortable within the classroom
environment, and if the instructor encourages participation and participation
is 30% of the course grade, regardless of the level of shyness, the person may
feel inclined to participate. Similarly, the behavior you may expect from
someone who is proactive, creative, and willing to take risks will depend on
the situation.
When hiring employees, companies are interested in assessing at least two
types of fit. Person–organization fit refers to the degree to which a person’s
6
values, personality, goals, and other characteristics match those of the
organization. Person–job fit is the degree to which a person’s skill, knowledge,
abilities, and other characteristics match the job demands. Thus, someone
who is proactive and creative may be a great fit for a company in the high-tech
sector that would benefit from risk-taking individuals, but may be a poor fit
for a company that rewards routine and predictable behavior, such as
accountants. Similarly, this person may be a great fit for a job such as a
scientist, but a poor fit for a routine office job. The opening case illustrates one
method of assessing person–organization and person–job fit in job applicants.
The first thing many recruiters look at is the person–job fit. This is not
surprising, because person–job fit is related to a number of positive work
attitudes such as satisfaction with the work environment, identification with
the organization, job satisfaction, and work behaviors such as job
performance. Companies are often also interested in hiring candidates who
will fit into the company culture (those with high person–organization fit).
When people fit into their organization, they tend to be more satisfied with
their jobs, more committed to their companies, and more influential in their
company, and they actually remain longer in their company. [1]
One area of
controversy is whether these people perform better. Some studies have found
a positive relationship between person–organization fit and job performance,
but this finding was not present in all studies, so it seems that fitting with a
company’s culture will only sometimes predict job performance. [2]
It also
seems that fitting in with the company culture is more important to some
people than to others. For example, people who have worked in multiple
companies tend to understand the impact of a company’s culture better, and
therefore they pay more attention to whether they will fit in with the company
when making their decisions. [3]
Also, when they build good relationships with
7
their supervisors and the company, being a misfit does not seem to lead to
dissatisfaction on the job. [4]
K E Y T A K E A W A Y
While personality traits and other individual differences are important, we need to
keep in mind that behavior is jointly determined by the person and the situation.
Certain situations bring out the best in people, and someone who is a poor
performer in one job may turn into a star employee in a different job.
E X E R C I S E S
1. How can a company assess person–job fit before hiring employees? What are the
methods you think would be helpful?
2. How can a company determine person–organization fit before hiring employees?
Which methods do you think would be helpful?
3. What can organizations do to increase person–job and person–organization fit after
they hire employees?
3.2 Individual Differences: Values and Personality
L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S
1. Understand what values are.
2. Describe the link between values and individual behavior.
3. Identify the major personality traits that are relevant to organizational behavior.
4. Explain the link between personality, work behavior, and work attitudes.
5. Explain the potential pitfalls of personality testing.
8
Values
Values refer to stable life goals that people have, reflecting what is most
important to them. Values are established throughout one’s life as a result of
the accumulating life experiences and tend to be relatively stable. [1]
The values
that are important to people tend to affect the types of decisions they make,
how they perceive their environment, and their actual behaviors. Moreover,
people are more likely to accept job offers when the company possesses the
values people care about. [2]
Value attainment is one reason why people stay in
a company, and when an organization does not help them attain their values,
they are more likely to decide to leave if they are dissatisfied with the job
itself. [3]
What are the values people care about? There are many typologies of values.
One of the most established surveys to assess individual values is the Rokeach
Value Survey. [4]
This survey lists 18 terminal and 18 instrumental values in
alphabetical order. Terminal values refer to end states people desire in life,
such as leading a prosperous life and a world at
peace. Instrumental values deal with views on acceptable modes of conduct,
such as being honest and ethical, and being ambitious.
According to Rokeach, values are arranged in hierarchical fashion. In other
words, an accurate way of assessing someone’s values is to ask them to rank
the 36 values in order of importance. By comparing these values, people
develop a sense of which value can be sacrificed to achieve the other, and the
individual priority of each value emerges.
Figure 3.2 Sample Items From Rokeach (1973) Value Survey
9
Where do values come from? Research indicates that they are shaped early in
life and show stability over the course of a lifetime. Early family experiences
are important influences over the dominant values. People who were raised in
families with low socioeconomic status and those who experienced restrictive
parenting often display conformity values when they are adults, while those
who were raised by parents who were cold toward their children would likely
value and desire security. [5]
Values of a generation also change and evolve in response to the historical
context that the generation grows up in. Research comparing the values of
different generations resulted in interesting findings. For example, Generation
Xers (those born between the mid-1960s and 1980s) are more individualistic
and are interested in working toward organizational goals so long as they
coincide with their personal goals. This group, compared to the baby boomers
(born between the 1940s and 1960s), is also less likely to see work as central to
their life and more likely to desire a quick promotion. [6]
The values a person holds will affect his or her employment. For example,
someone who has an orientation toward strong stimulation may pursue
extreme sports and select an occupation that involves fast action and high risk,
10
such as fire fighter, police officer, or emergency medical doctor. Someone who
has a drive for achievement may more readily act as an entrepreneur.
Moreover, whether individuals will be satisfied at a given job may depend on
whether the job provides a way to satisfy their dominant values. Therefore,
understanding employees at work requires understanding the value
orientations of employees.
Personality
Personality encompasses the relatively stable feelings, thoughts, and
behavioral patterns a person has. Our personality differentiates us from other
people, and understanding someone’s personality gives us clues about how
that person is likely to act and feel in a variety of situations. In order to
effectively manage organizational behavior, an understanding of different
employees’ personalities is helpful. Having this knowledge is also useful for
placing people in jobs and organizations.
If personality is stable, does this mean that it does not change? You probably
remember how you have changed and evolved as a result of your own life
experiences, attention you received in early childhood, the style of parenting
you were exposed to, successes and failures you had in high school, and other
life events. In fact, our personality changes over long periods of time. For
example, we tend to become more socially dominant, more conscientious
(organized and dependable), and more emotionally stable between the ages of
20 and 40, whereas openness to new experiences may begin to decline during
this same time. [7]
In other words, even though we treat personality as
relatively stable, changes occur. Moreover, even in childhood, our personality
shapes who we are and has lasting consequences for us. For example, studies
show that part of our career success and job satisfaction later in life can be
explained by our childhood personality. [8]
11
Is our behavior in organizations dependent on our personality? To some
extent, yes, and to some extent, no. While we will discuss the effects of
personality for employee behavior, you must remember that the relationships
we describe are modest correlations. For example, having a sociable and
outgoing personality may encourage people to seek friends and prefer social
situations. This does not mean that their personality will immediately affect
their work behavior. At work, we have a job to do and a role to perform.
Therefore, our behavior may be more strongly affected by what is expected of
us, as opposed to how we want to behave. When people have a lot of freedom
at work, their personality will become a stronger influence over their
behavior. [9]
Big Five Personality Traits
How many personality traits are there? How do we even know? In every
language, there are many words describing a person’s personality. In fact, in
the English language, more than 15,000 words describing personality have
been identified. When researchers analyzed the terms describing personality
characteristics, they realized that there were many words that were pointing to
each dimension of personality. When these words were grouped, five
dimensions seemed to emerge that explain a lot of the variation in our
personalities. [10]
Keep in mind that these five are not necessarily the only
traits out there. There are other, specific traits that represent dimensions not
captured by the Big Five. Still, understanding the main five traits gives us a
good start for describing personality. A summary of the Big Five traits is
presented in Figure 3.4 "Big Five Personality Traits".
Figure 3.4 Big Five Personality Traits
12
Openness is the degree to which a person is curious, original, intellectual,
creative, and open to new ideas. People high in openness seem to thrive in
situations that require being flexible and learning new things. They are highly
motivated to learn new skills, and they do well in training settings. [11]
They
also have an advantage when they enter into a new organization. Their open-
mindedness leads them to seek a lot of information and feedback about how
they are doing and to build relationships, which leads to quicker adjustment to
the new job. [12]
When supported, they tend to be creative. [13]
Open people are
highly adaptable to change, and teams that experience unforeseen changes in
their tasks do well if they are populated with people high in
openness. [14]
Compared to people low in openness, they are also more likely
to start their own business. [15]
Conscientiousness refers to the degree to which a person is organized,
systematic, punctual, achievement oriented, and dependable.
13
Conscientiousness is the one personality trait that uniformly predicts how
high a person’s performance will be, across a variety of occupations and
jobs. [16]
In fact, conscientiousness is the trait most desired by recruiters and
results in the most success in interviews. [17]
This is not a surprise, because in
addition to their high performance, conscientious people have higher levels of
motivation to perform, lower levels of turnover, lower levels of absenteeism,
and higher levels of safety performance at work. [18]
One’s conscientiousness is
related to career success and being satisfied with one’s career over
time. [19]
Finally, it seems that conscientiousness is a good trait to have for
entrepreneurs. Highly conscientious people are more likely to start their own
business compared to those who are not conscientious, and their firms have
longer survival rates. [20]
Extraversion is the degree to which a person is outgoing, talkative, and
sociable, and enjoys being in social situations. One of the established findings
is that they tend to be effective in jobs involving sales. [21]
Moreover, they tend
to be effective as managers and they demonstrate inspirational leadership
behaviors. [22]
Extraverts do well in social situations, and as a result they tend
to be effective in job interviews. Part of their success comes from how they
prepare for the job interview, as they are likely to use their social
network. [23]
Extraverts have an easier time than introverts when adjusting to a
new job. They actively seek information and feedback, and build effective
relationships, which helps with their adjustment. [24]
Interestingly, extraverts
are also found to be happier at work, which may be because of the
relationships they build with the people around them and their relative ease in
adjusting to a new job. [25]
However, they do not necessarily perform well in all
jobs, and jobs depriving them of social interaction may be a poor fit.
Moreover, they are not necessarily model employees. For example, they tend
14
to have higher levels of absenteeism at work, potentially because they may
miss work to hang out with or attend to the needs of their friends. [26]
Agreeableness is the degree to which a person is nice, tolerant, sensitive,
trusting, kind, and warm. In other words, people who are high in
agreeableness are likeable people who get along with others. Not surprisingly,
agreeable people help others at work consistently, and this helping behavior is
not dependent on being in a good mood. [27]
They are also less likely to retaliate
when other people treat them unfairly. [28]
This may reflect their ability to
show empathy and give people the benefit of the doubt. Agreeable people may
be a valuable addition to their teams and may be effective leaders because they
create a fair environment when they are in leadership positions. [29]
At the
other end of the spectrum, people low in agreeableness are less likely to show
these positive behaviors. Moreover, people who are not agreeable are shown to
quit their jobs unexpectedly, perhaps in response to a conflict they engage
with a boss or a peer. [30]
If agreeable people are so nice, does this mean that
we should only look for agreeable people when hiring? Some jobs may actually
be a better fit for someone with a low level of agreeableness. Think about it:
When hiring a lawyer, would you prefer a kind and gentle person, or a pit bull?
Also, high agreeableness has a downside: Agreeable people are less likely to
engage in constructive and change-oriented communication. [31]
Disagreeing
with the status quo may create conflict and agreeable people will likely avoid
creating such conflict, missing an opportunity for constructive change.
How Accurately Can You Describe Your Big Five Personality Factors? Go to http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/ to see how you score on these
factors.
15
Neuroticism refers to the degree to which a person is anxious, irritable,
aggressive, temperamental, and moody. These people have a tendency to have
emotional adjustment problems and experience stress and depression on a
habitual basis. People very high in neuroticism experience a number of
problems at work. For example, they are less likely to be someone people go to
for advice and friendship. [32]
In other words, they may experience relationship
difficulties. They tend to be habitually unhappy in their jobs and report high
intentions to leave, but they do not necessarily actually leave their jobs. [33]
Being high in neuroticism seems to be harmful to one’s career, as they have
lower levels of career success (measured with income and occupational status
achieved in one’s career). Finally, if they achieve managerial jobs, they tend to
create an unfair climate at work. [34]
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Aside from the Big Five personality traits, perhaps the most well-known and
most often used personality assessment is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(MBTI). Unlike the Big Five, which assesses traits, MBTI measures types.
Assessments of the Big Five do not classify people as neurotic or extravert: It is
all a matter of degrees. MBTI on the other hand, classifies people as one of 16
types. [35]
In MBTI, people are grouped using four dimensions. Based on how a
person is classified on these four dimensions, it is possible to talk about 16
unique personality types, such as ESTJ and ISTP.
MBTI was developed in 1943 by a mother–daughter team, Isabel Myers and
Katherine Cook Briggs. Its objective at the time was to aid World War II
veterans in identifying the occupation that would suit their personalities.
Since that time, MBTI has become immensely popular, and according to one
estimate, around 2.5 million people take the test annually. The survey is
criticized because it relies on types as opposed to traits, but organizations who
16
use the survey find it very useful for training and team-building purposes.
More than eighty of the Fortune 100 companies used Myers-Briggs tests in
some form. One distinguishing characteristic of this test is that it is explicitly
designed for learning, not for employee selection purposes. In fact, the Myers
& Briggs Foundation has strict guidelines against the use of the test for
employee selection. Instead, the test is used to provide mutual understanding
within the team and to gain a better understanding of the working styles of
team members. [36]
Figure 3.6 Summary of MBTI Types
Positive and Negative Affectivity
You may have noticed that behavior is also a function of moods. When people
are in a good mood, they may be more cooperative, smile more, and act
friendly. When these same people are in a bad mood, they may have a
tendency to be picky, irritable, and less tolerant of different opinions. Yet,
some people seem to be in a good mood most of the time, and others seem to
be in a bad mood most of the time regardless of what is actually going on in
their lives. This distinction is manifested by positive and negative affectivity
17
traits. Positive affective people experience positive moods more frequently,
whereas negative affective people experience negative moods with greater
frequency. Negative affective people focus on the “glass half empty” and
experience more anxiety and nervousness. [37]
Positive affective people tend to
be happier at work, [38]
and their happiness spreads to the rest of the work
environment. As may be expected, this personality trait sets the tone in the
work atmosphere. When a team comprises mostly negative affective people,
there tend to be fewer instances of helping and cooperation. Teams dominated
by positive affective people experience lower levels of absenteeism. [39]
When
people with a lot of power are also high in positive affectivity, the work
environment is affected in a positive manner and can lead to greater levels of
cooperation and finding mutually agreeable solutions to problems. [40]
OB Toolbox: Help, I work with a negative person! Employees who have high levels of neuroticism or high levels of negative
affectivity may act overly negative at work, criticize others, complain about
trivial things, or create an overall negative work environment. Here are some
tips for how to work with them effectively.
Understand that you are unlikely to change someone else’s personality.
Personality is relatively stable and criticizing someone’s personality will not
bring about change. If the behavior is truly disruptive, focus on behavior, not
personality.
Keep an open mind. Just because a person is constantly negative does not
mean that they are not sometimes right. Listen to the feedback they are giving
you.
Set a time limit. If you are dealing with someone who constantly complains
about things, you may want to limit these conversations to prevent them from
consuming your time at work.
18
You may also empower them to act on the negatives they mention. The next
time an overly negative individual complains about something, ask that
person to think of ways to change the situation and get back to you.
Ask for specifics. If someone has a negative tone in general, you may want to
ask for specific examples for what the problem is.
Sources: Adapted from ideas in Ferguson, J. (2006, October 31). Expert’s
view…on managing office moaners. Personnel Today, 29; Karcher, C. (2003,
September), Working with difficult people. National Public Accountant, 39–
40; Mudore, C. F. (2001, February/March). Working with difficult
people. Career World, 29(5), 16–18; How to manage difficult people. (2000,
May). Leadership for the Front Lines, 3–4.
Self-Monitoring
Self-monitoring refers to the extent to which a person is capable of monitoring
his or her actions and appearance in social situations. In other words, people
who are social monitors are social chameleons who understand what the
situation demands and act accordingly, while low social monitors tend to act
the way they feel. [41]
High social monitors are sensitive to the types of
behaviors the social environment expects from them. Their greater ability to
modify their behavior according to the demands of the situation and to
manage their impressions effectively is a great advantage for them. [42]
In
general, they tend to be more successful in their careers. They are more likely
to get cross-company promotions, and even when they stay with one company,
they are more likely to advance. [43]
Social monitors also become the “go to”
person in their company and they enjoy central positions in their social
networks. [44]
They are rated as higher performers, and emerge as
leaders. [45]
While they are effective in influencing other people and get things
done by managing their impressions, this personality trait has some
19
challenges that need to be addressed. First, when evaluating the performance
of other employees, they tend to be less accurate. It seems that while trying to
manage their impressions, they may avoid giving accurate feedback to their
subordinates to avoid confrontations. [46]
This tendency may create problems
for them if they are managers. Second, high social monitors tend to experience
higher levels of stress, probably caused by behaving in ways that conflict with
their true feelings. In situations that demand positive emotions, they may act
happy although they are not feeling happy, which puts an emotional burden
on them. Finally, high social monitors tend to be less committed to their
companies. They may see their jobs as a stepping-stone for greater things,
which may prevent them from forming strong attachments and loyalty to their
current employer. [47]
Proactive Personality
Proactive personality refers to a person’s inclination to fix what is perceived as
wrong, change the status quo, and use initiative to solve problems. Instead of
waiting to be told what to do, proactive people take action to initiate
meaningful change and remove the obstacles they face along the way. In
general, having a proactive personality has a number of advantages for these
people. For example, they tend to be more successful in their job
searches. [48]
They are also more successful over the course of their careers,
because they use initiative and acquire greater understanding of the politics
within the organization. [49]
Proactive people are valuable assets to their
companies because they may have higher levels of performance. [50]
They
adjust to their new jobs quickly because they understand the political
environment better and often make friends more quickly. [51]
Proactive people
are eager to learn and engage in many developmental activities to improve
their skills. [52]
Despite all their potential, under some circumstances a
proactive personality may be a liability for an individual or an organization.
20
Imagine a person who is proactive but is perceived as being too pushy, trying
to change things other people are not willing to let go, or using their initiative
to make decisions that do not serve a company’s best interests. Research
shows that the success of proactive people depends on their understanding of
a company’s core values, their ability and skills to perform their jobs, and their
ability to assess situational demands correctly. [53]
Self-Esteem
Self-esteem is the degree to which a person has overall positive feelings about
his or herself. People with high self-esteem view themselves in a positive light,
are confident, and respect themselves. On the other hand, people with low
self-esteem experience high levels of self-doubt and question their self-worth.
High self-esteem is related to higher levels of satisfaction with one’s job and
higher levels of performance on the job. [54]
People with low self-esteem are
attracted to situations in which they will be relatively invisible, such as large
companies. [55]
Managing employees with low self-esteem may be challenging
at times, because negative feedback given with the intention to improve
performance may be viewed as a judgment on their worth as an employee.
Therefore, effectively managing employees with relatively low self-esteem
requires tact and providing lots of positive feedback when discussing
performance incidents.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is a belief that one can perform a specific task successfully.
Research shows that the belief that we can do something is a good predictor of
whether we can actually do it. Self-efficacy is different from other personality
traits in that it is job specific. You may have high self-efficacy in being
successful academically, but low self-efficacy in relation to your ability to fix
your car. At the same time, people have a certain level of generalized self-
21
efficacy and they have the belief that whatever task or hobby they tackle, they
are likely to be successful in it.
Research shows that self-efficacy at work is related to job
performance. [56]
This relationship is probably a result of people with high
self-efficacy setting higher goals for themselves and being more committed to
these goals, whereas people with low self-efficacy tend to
procrastinate. [57]
Academic self-efficacy is a good predictor of your GPA,
whether you persist in your studies, or drop out of college. [58]
Is there a way of increasing employees’ self-efficacy? Hiring people who are
capable of performing their tasks and training people to increase their self-
efficacy may be effective. Some people may also respond well to verbal
encouragement. By showing that you believe they can be successful and
effectively playing the role of a cheerleader, you may be able to increase self-
efficacy. Giving people opportunities to test their skills so that they can see
what they are capable of doing (or empowering them) is also a good way of
increasing self-efficacy. [59]
OB Toolbox: Ways to Build Your Self-Confidence Having high self-efficacy and self-esteem are boons to your career. People who
have an overall positive view of themselves and those who have positive
attitudes toward their abilities project an aura of confidence. How do you
achieve higher self-confidence?
Take a self-inventory. What are the areas in which you lack confidence? Then
consciously tackle these areas. Take part in training programs; seek
opportunities to practice these skills. Confront your fears head-on.
22
Set manageable goals. Success in challenging goals will breed self-confidence,
but do not make your goals impossible to reach. If a task seems daunting,
break it apart and set mini goals.
Find a mentor. A mentor can point out areas in need of improvement, provide
accurate feedback, and point to ways of improving yourself.
Don’t judge yourself by your failures. Everyone fails, and the most successful
people have more failures in life. Instead of assessing your self-worth by your
failures, learn from mistakes and move on.
Until you can feel confident, be sure to act confident. Acting confident will
influence how others treat you, which will boost your confidence level. Pay
attention to how you talk and behave, and act like someone who has high
confidence.
Know when to ignore negative advice. If you receive negative feedback from
someone who is usually negative, try to ignore it. Surrounding yourself with
naysayers is not good for your self-esteem. This does not mean that you
should ignore all negative feedback, but be sure to look at a person’s overall
attitude before making serious judgments based on that feedback.
Sources: Adapted from information in Beagrie, S. (2006, September 26).
How to…build up self confidence. Personnel Today, p. 31; Beste, F. J., III.
(2007, November–December). Are you an entrepreneur? In Business, 29(6),
22; Goldsmith, B. (2006, October). Building self confidence. PA Times,
Education Supplement, p. 30; Kennett, M. (2006, October). The scale of
confidence. Management Today, p. 40–45; Parachin, V. M. (March 2003,
October). Developing dynamic self-confidence. Supervision, 64(3), 13–15.
Locus of Control
Locus of control deals with the degree to which people feel accountable for
their own behaviors. Individuals with high internal locus of control believe
23
that they control their own destiny and what happens to them is their own
doing, while those with high external locus of control feel that things happen
to them because of other people, luck, or a powerful being. Internals feel
greater control over their own lives and therefore they act in ways that will
increase their chances of success. For example, they take the initiative to start
mentor-protégé relationships. They are more involved with their jobs. They
demonstrate higher levels of motivation and have more positive experiences at
work. [60]
Interestingly, internal locus is also related to one’s subjective well-
being and happiness in life, while being high in external locus is related to a
higher rate of depression. [61]
The connection between internal locus of control
and health is interesting, but perhaps not surprising. In fact, one study
showed that having internal locus of control at the age of ten was related to a
number of health outcomes, such as lower obesity and lower blood pressure
later in life. [62]
It is possible that internals take more responsibility for their
health and adopt healthier habits, while externals may see less of a connection
between how they live and their health. Internals thrive in contexts in which
they have the ability to influence their own behavior. Successful entrepreneurs
tend to have high levels of internal locus of control. [63]
Understand Your Locus of Control by Taking a Survey at the Following Web Site: http://discoveryhealth.queendom.com/questions/lc_short_1.html
Personality Testing in Employee Selection
Personality is a potentially important predictor of work behavior. Matching
people to jobs matters, because when people do not fit with their jobs or the
company, they are more likely to leave, costing companies as much as a
person’s annual salary to replace them. In job interviews, companies try to
assess a candidate’s personality and the potential for a good match, but
24
interviews are only as good as the people conducting them. In fact,
interviewers are not particularly good at detecting the best trait that predicts
performance: conscientiousness. [64]
One method some companies use to
improve this match and detect the people who are potentially good job
candidates is personality testing. Companies such as Kronos and Hogan
Assessment Systems conduct preemployment personality tests. Companies
using them believe that these tests improve the effectiveness of their selection
and reduce turnover. For example, Overnight Transportation in Atlanta found
that using such tests reduced their on-the-job delinquency by 50%–100%. [65]
Yet, are these methods good ways of selecting employees? Experts have not yet
reached an agreement on this subject and the topic is highly controversial.
Some experts believe, based on data, that personality tests predict
performance and other important criteria such as job satisfaction. However,
we must understand that how a personality test is used influences its validity.
Imagine filling out a personality test in class. You may be more likely to fill it
out as honestly as you can. Then, if your instructor correlates your personality
scores with your class performance, we could say that the correlation is
meaningful. In employee selection, one complicating factor is that people
filling out the survey do not have a strong incentive to be honest. In fact, they
have a greater incentive to guess what the job requires and answer the
questions to match what they think the company is looking for. As a result, the
rankings of the candidates who take the test may be affected by their ability to
fake. Some experts believe that this is a serious problem. [66]
Others point out
that even with faking, the tests remain valid—the scores are still related to job
performance. [67]
It is even possible that the ability to fake is related to a
personality trait that increases success at work, such as social monitoring. This
issue raises potential questions regarding whether personality tests are the
most effective way of measuring candidate personality.
25
Scores are not only distorted because of some candidates faking better than
others. Do we even know our own personality? Are we the best person to ask
this question? How supervisors, coworkers, and customers see our personality
matters more than how we see ourselves. Therefore, using self-report
measures of performance may not be the best way of measuring someone’s
personality. [68]
We all have blind areas. We may also give “aspirational”
answers. If you are asked if you are honest, you may think, “Yes, I always have
the intention to be honest.” This response says nothing about your actual level
of honesty.
There is another problem with using these tests: How good a predictor of
performance is personality anyway? Based on research, not a particularly
strong one. According to one estimate, personality only explains about 10%–
15% of variation in job performance. Our performance at work depends on so
many factors, and personality does not seem to be the key factor for
performance. In fact, cognitive ability (your overall mental intelligence) is a
much more powerful influence on job performance, and instead of personality
tests, cognitive ability tests may do a better job of predicting who will be good
performers. Personality is a better predictor of job satisfaction and other
attitudes, but screening people out on the assumption that they may be
unhappy at work is a challenging argument to make in the context of employee
selection.
In any case, if you decide to use these tests for selection, you need to be aware
of their limitations. Relying only on personality tests for selection of an
employee is a bad idea, but if they are used together with other tests such as
tests of cognitive abilities, better decisions may be made. The company should
ensure that the test fits the job and actually predicts performance. This
process is called validating the test. Before giving the test to applicants, the
26
company could give it to existing employees to find out the traits that are most
important for success in the particular company and job. Then, in the selection
context, the company can pay particular attention to those traits. The
company should also make sure that the test does not discriminate against
people on the basis of sex, race, age, disabilities, and other legally protected
characteristics. Rent-A-Center experienced legal difficulties when the test they
used was found to be a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The test they used for selection, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory, was developed to diagnose severe mental illnesses and included
items such as “I see things or people around me others do not see.” In effect,
the test served the purpose of a clinical evaluation and was discriminating
against people with mental illnesses, which is a protected category under
ADA. [69]
K E Y T A K E A W A Y
Values and personality traits are two dimensions on which people differ. Values are
stable life goals. When seeking jobs, employees are more likely to accept a job that
provides opportunities for value attainment, and they are more likely to remain in
situations that satisfy their values. Personality comprises the stable feelings,
thoughts, and behavioral patterns people have. The Big Five personality traits
(openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) are
important traits that seem to be stable and can be generalized to other cultures.
Other important traits for work behavior include self-efficacy, self-esteem, social
monitoring, proactive personality, positive and negative affectivity, and locus of
control. It is important to remember that a person’s behavior depends on the match
between the person and the situation. While personality is a strong influence on job
attitudes, its relation to job performance is weaker. Some companies use personality
testing to screen out candidates. This method has certain limitations, and companies
27
using personality tests are advised to validate their tests and use them as a
supplement to other techniques that have greater validity.
E X E R C I S E S
1. Think about the personality traits covered in this section. Can you think of jobs or
occupations that seem particularly suited to each trait? Which traits would be
universally desirable across all jobs?
2. What are the unique challenges of managing employees who have low self-efficacy
and low self-esteem? How would you deal with this situation?
3. What are some methods that companies can use to assess employee personality?
4. Have you ever held a job where your personality did not match the demands of the
job? How did you react to this situation? How were your attitudes and behaviors
affected?
5. Can you think of any limitations of developing an “ideal employee” profile and
looking for employees who fit that profile while hiring?
3.3 Perception
L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S
1. Understand the influence of self in the process of perception.
2. Describe how we perceive visual objects and how these tendencies may affect our
behavior.
3. Describe the biases of self-perception.
4. Describe the biases inherent in perception of other people.
5. Explain what attributions mean, how we form attributions, and their consequences
for organizational behavior.
28
Our behavior is not only a function of our personality, values, and preferences,
but also of the situation. We interpret our environment, formulate responses,
and act accordingly. Perception may be defined as the process with which
individuals detect and interpret environmental stimuli. What makes human
perception so interesting is that we do not solely respond to the stimuli in our
environment. We go beyond the information that is present in our
environment, pay selective attention to some aspects of the environment, and
ignore other elements that may be immediately apparent to other people. Our
perception of the environment is not entirely rational. For example, have you
ever noticed that while glancing at a newspaper or a news Web site,
information that is interesting or important to you jumps out of the page and
catches your eye? If you are a sports fan, while scrolling down the pages you
may immediately see a news item describing the latest success of your team. If
you are the parent of a picky eater, an advice column on toddler feeding may
be the first thing you see when looking at the page. So what we see in the
environment is a function of what we value, our needs, our fears, and our
emotions. [1]
In fact, what we see in the environment may be objectively, flat-
out wrong because of our personality, values, or emotions. For example, one
experiment showed that when people who were afraid of spiders were shown
spiders, they inaccurately thought that the spider was moving toward
them. [2]
In this section, we will describe some common tendencies we engage
in when perceiving objects or other people, and the consequences of such
perceptions. Our coverage of biases and tendencies in perception is not
exhaustive—there are many other biases and tendencies on our social
perception.
Visual Perception
Our visual perception definitely goes beyond the physical information
available to us. First of all, we extrapolate from the information available to us.
29
Take a look at the following figure. The white triangle you see in the middle is
not really there, but we extrapolate from the information available to us and
see it there. [3]
Figure 3.7
Our visual perception goes beyond the information physically available. In this
figure, we see the white triangle in the middle even though it is not really there.
Our visual perception is often biased because we do not perceive objects in
isolation. The contrast between our focus of attention and the remainder of
the environment may make an object appear bigger or smaller. This principle
is illustrated in the figure with circles. Which of the middle circles is bigger?
To most people, the one on the left appears bigger, but this is because it is
surrounded by smaller circles. The contrast between the focal object and the
objects surrounding it may make an object bigger or smaller to our eye.
Figure 3.8
30
Which of the circles in the middle is bigger? At first glance, the one on the left
may appear bigger, but they are in fact the same size. We compare the middle
circle on the left to its surrounding circles, whereas the middle circle on the right
is compared to the bigger circles surrounding it.
How do these tendencies influence behavior in organizations? You may have
realized that the fact that our visual perception is faulty may make witness
testimony faulty and biased. How do we know whether the employee you
judge to be hardworking, fast, and neat is really like that? Is it really true, or
are we comparing this person to other people in the immediate environment?
Or let’s say that you do not like one of your peers and you think that this
person is constantly surfing the Web during work hours. Are you sure? Have
you really seen this person surf unrelated Web sites, or is it possible that the
person was surfing the web for work-related purposes? Our biased visual
perception may lead to the wrong inferences about the people around us.
Self-Perception
Human beings are prone to errors and biases when perceiving themselves.
Moreover, the type of bias people have depends on their personality. Many
people suffer from self-enhancement bias. This is the tendency to overestimate
our performance and capabilities and see ourselves in a more positive light
than others see us. People who have a narcissistic personality are particularly
subject to this bias, but many others are still prone to overestimating their
abilities. [4]
At the same time, other people have the opposing extreme, which
may be labeled as self-effacement bias. This is the tendency for people to
underestimate their performance, undervalue capabilities, and see events in a
way that puts them in a more negative light. We may expect that people with
low self-esteem may be particularly prone to making this error. These
tendencies have real consequences for behavior in organizations. For example,
31
people who suffer from extreme levels of self-enhancement tendencies may
not understand why they are not getting promoted or rewarded, while those
who have a tendency to self-efface may project low confidence and take more
blame for their failures than necessary.
When perceiving themselves, human beings are also subject to the
false consensus error. Simply put, we overestimate how similar we are to
other people. [5]
We assume that whatever quirks we have are shared by a larger
number of people than in reality. People who take office supplies home, tell
white lies to their boss or colleagues, or take credit for other people’s work to
get ahead may genuinely feel that these behaviors are more common than they
really are. The problem for behavior in organizations is that, when people
believe that a behavior is common and normal, they may repeat the behavior
more freely. Under some circumstances this may lead to a high level of
unethical or even illegal behaviors.
Social Perception
How we perceive other people in our environment is also shaped by our
values, emotions, feelings, and personality. Moreover, how we perceive others
will shape our behavior, which in turn will shape the behavior of the person we
are interacting with.
One of the factors biasing our perception is stereotypes. Stereotypes are
generalizations based on group characteristics. For example, believing that
women are more cooperative than men, or men are more assertive than
women, is a stereotype. Stereotypes may be positive, negative, or neutral.
Human beings have a natural tendency to categorize the information around
them to make sense of their environment. What makes stereotypes potentially
discriminatory and a perceptual bias is the tendency to generalize from a
32
group to a particular individual. If the belief that men are more assertive than
women leads to choosing a man over an equally (or potentially more) qualified
female candidate for a position, the decision will be biased, potentially illegal,
and unfair.
Stereotypes often create a situation called a self-fulfilling prophecy. This cycle
occurs when people automatically behave as if an established stereotype is
accurate, which leads to reactive behavior from the other party that confirms
the stereotype. [6]
If you have a stereotype such as “Asians are friendly,” you
are more likely to be friendly toward an Asian yourself. Because you are
treating the other person better, the response you get may also be better,
confirming your original belief that Asians are friendly. Of course, just the
opposite is also true. Suppose you believe that “young employees are slackers.”
You are less likely to give a young employee high levels of responsibility or
interesting and challenging assignments. The result may be that the young
employee reporting to you may become increasingly bored at work and start
goofing off, confirming your suspicions that young people are slackers!
Stereotypes persist because of a process called selective perception. Selective
perception simply means that we pay selective attention to parts of the
environment while ignoring other parts. When we observe our environment,
we see what we want to see and ignore information that may seem out of
place. Here is an interesting example of how selective perception leads our
perception to be shaped by the context: As part of a social experiment, in 2007
the Washington Post newspaper arranged Joshua Bell, the internationally
acclaimed violin virtuoso, to perform in a corner of the Metro station in
Washington DC. The violin he was playing was worth $3.5 million, and tickets
for Bell’s concerts usually cost around $100. During the rush hour in which he
played for 45 minutes, only one person recognized him, only a few realized
33
that they were hearing extraordinary music, and he made only $32 in tips.
When you see someone playing at the metro station, would you expect them to
be extraordinary? [7]
Our background, expectations, and beliefs will shape which events we notice
and which events we ignore. For example, the functional background of
executives affects the changes they perceive in their
environment. [8]
Executives with a background in sales and marketing see the
changes in the demand for their product, while executives with a background
in information technology may more readily perceive the changes in the
technology the company is using. Selective perception may perpetuate
stereotypes, because we are less likely to notice events that go against our
beliefs. A person who believes that men drive better than women may be more
likely to notice women driving poorly than men driving poorly. As a result, a
stereotype is maintained because information to the contrary may not reach
our brain.
Let’s say we noticed information that goes against our beliefs. What then?
Unfortunately, this is no guarantee that we will modify our beliefs and
prejudices. First, when we see examples that go against our stereotypes, we
tend to come up with subcategories. For example, when people who believe
that women are more cooperative see a female who is assertive, they may
classify this person as a “career woman.” Therefore, the example to the
contrary does not violate the stereotype, and instead is explained as an
exception to the rule. [9]
Second, we may simply discount the information. In
one study, people who were either in favor of or opposed to the death penalty
were shown two studies, one showing benefits from the death penalty and the
other discounting any benefits. People rejected the study that went against
their belief as methodologically inferior and actually reinforced the belief in
34
their original position even more. [10]
In other words, trying to debunk people’s
beliefs or previously established opinions with data may not necessarily help.
One other perceptual tendency that may affect work behavior is that
of first impressions. The first impressions we form about people tend to have a
lasting impact. In fact, first impressions, once formed, are surprisingly
resilient to contrary information. Even if people are told that the first
impressions were caused by inaccurate information, people hold onto them to
a certain degree. The reason is that, once we form first impressions, they
become independent of the evidence that created them. [11]
Any information
we receive to the contrary does not serve the purpose of altering the original
impression. Imagine the first day you met your colleague Anne. She treated
you in a rude manner and when you asked for her help, she brushed you off.
You may form the belief that she is a rude and unhelpful person. Later, you
may hear that her mother is very sick and she is very stressed. In reality she
may have been unusually stressed on the day you met her. If you had met her
on a different day, you could have thought that she is a really nice person who
is unusually stressed these days. But chances are your impression that she is
rude and unhelpful will not change even when you hear about her mother.
Instead, this new piece of information will be added to the first one: She is
rude, unhelpful, and her mother is sick. Being aware of this tendency and
consciously opening your mind to new information may protect you against
some of the downsides of this bias. Also, it would be to your advantage to pay
careful attention to the first impressions you create, particularly during job
interviews.
OB Toolbox: How Can I Make a Great First Impression in the Job Interview?
35
A job interview is your first step to getting the job of your dreams. It is also a
social interaction in which your actions during the first 5 minutes will
determine the impression you make. Here are some tips to help you create a
positive first impression.
Your first opportunity to make a great impression starts even before the
interview, the moment you send your résumé. Be sure that you send your
résumé to the correct people, and spell the name of the contact person
correctly! Make sure that your résumé looks professional and is free from
typos and grammar problems. Have someone else read it before you hit the
send button or mail it.
Be prepared for the interview. Many interviews have some standard
questions such as “tell me about yourself” or “why do you want to work here?”
Be ready to answer these questions. Prepare answers highlighting your skills
and accomplishments, and practice your message. Better yet, practice an
interview with a friend. Practicing your answers will prevent you from
regretting your answers or finding a better answer after the interview is over!
Research the company. If you know a lot about the company and the job in
question, you will come out as someone who is really interested in the job. If
you ask basic questions such as “what does this company do?” you will not be
taken as a serious candidate. Visit the company’s Web site as well as others,
and learn as much about the company and the job as you can.
When you are invited for an office interview, be sure to dress properly. Like
it or not, the manner you dress is a big part of the impression you make. Dress
properly for the job and company in question. In many jobs, wearing
professional clothes, such as a suit, is expected. In some information
technology jobs, it may be more proper to wear clean and neat business casual
clothes (such as khakis and a pressed shirt) as opposed to dressing formally.
Do some investigation about what is suitable. Whatever the norm is, make
sure that your clothes fit well and are clean and neat.
36
Be on time to the interview. Being late will show that you either don’t care
about the interview or you are not very reliable. While waiting for the
interview, don’t forget that your interview has already started. As soon as you
enter the company’s parking lot, every person you see on the way or talk to
may be a potential influence over the decision maker. Act professionally and
treat everyone nicely.
During the interview, be polite. Use correct grammar, show eagerness and
enthusiasm, and watch your body language. From your handshake to your
posture, your body is communicating whether you are the right person for the
job!
Sources: Adapted from ideas in Bruce, C. (2007, October). Business
Etiquette 101: Making a good first impression. Black Collegian, 38(1), 78–80;
Evenson, R. (2007, May). Making a great first impression. Techniques, 14–17;
Mather, J., & Watson, M. (2008, May 23). Perfect candidate. The Times
Educational Supplement, 4789, 24–26; Messmer, M. (2007, July). 10 minutes
to impress. Journal of Accountancy,204(1), 13; Reece, T. (2006, November–
December). How to wow! Career World, 35, 16–18.
Attributions
Your colleague Peter failed to meet the deadline. What do you do? Do you help
him finish up his work? Do you give him the benefit of the doubt and place the
blame on the difficulty of the project? Or do you think that he is irresponsible?
Our behavior is a function of our perceptions. More specifically, when we
observe others behave in a certain way, we ask ourselves a fundamental
question: Why? Why did he fail to meet the deadline? Why did Mary get the
promotion? Why did Mark help you when you needed help? The answer we
give is the key to understanding our subsequent behavior. If you believe that
Mark helped you because he is a nice person, your action will be different from
37
your response if you think that Mark helped you because your boss pressured
him to.
An attribution is the causal explanation we give for an observed behavior. If
you believe that a behavior is due to the internal characteristics of an actor,
you are making an internal attribution. For example, let’s say your classmate
Erin complained a lot when completing a finance assignment. If you think that
she complained because she is a negative person, you are making an internal
attribution. An external attribution is explaining someone’s behavior by
referring to the situation. If you believe that Erin complained because finance
homework was difficult, you are making an external attribution.
When do we make internal or external attributions? Research shows that three
factors are the key to understanding what kind of attributions we make.
Consensus: Do other people behave the same way?
Distinctiveness: Does this person behave the same way across different
situations?
Consistency: Does this person behave this way in different occasions in the
same situation?
Let’s assume that in addition to Erin, other people in the same class also
complained (high consensus). Erin does not usually complain in other classes
(high distinctiveness). Erin usually does not complain in finance class (low
consistency). In this situation, you are likely to make an external attribution,
such as thinking that finance homework is difficult. On the other hand, let’s
assume that Erin is the only person complaining (low consensus). Erin
38
complains in a variety of situations (low distinctiveness), and every time she is
in finance, she complains (high consistency). In this situation, you are likely to
make an internal attribution such as thinking that Erin is a negative
person. [12]
Interestingly though, our attributions do not always depend on the consensus,
distinctiveness, and consistency we observe in a given situation. In other
words, when making attributions, we do not always look at the situation
objectively. For example, our overall relationship is a factor. When a manager
likes a subordinate, the attributions made would be more favorable (successes
are attributed to internal causes, while failures are attributed to external
causes). [13]
Moreover, when interpreting our own behavior, we suffer
from self-serving bias. This is the tendency to attribute our failures to the
situation while attributing our successes to internal causes. [14]
Table 3.1 Consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency determine the type of
attribution we make in a given situation.
Consensus Distinctiveness Consistency Type of
attribution
High consensus High distinctiveness Low consistency
External
Everyone else behaves the same way.
This person does not usually behave this way in different situations.
This person does not usually behave this way in this situation.
Low consensus Low distinctiveness High consistency
Internal No one else behaves the
This person usually behaves this way in
Every time this person is in this
39
Consensus Distinctiveness Consistency Type of
attribution
same way. different situations. situation, he or she acts the same way.
How we react to other people’s behavior would depend on the type of
attributions we make. When faced with poor performance, such as missing a
deadline, we are more likely to punish the person if an internal attribution is
made (such as “the person being unreliable”). In the same situation, if we
make an external attribution (such as “the timeline was unreasonable”),
instead of punishing the person we might extend the deadline or assign more
help to the person. If we feel that someone’s failure is due to external causes,
we may feel empathy toward the person and even offer help. [15]
On the other
hand, if someone succeeds and we make an internal attribution (he worked
hard), we are more likely to reward the person, whereas an external
attribution (the project was easy) is less likely to yield rewards for the person
in question. Therefore, understanding attributions is important to predicting
subsequent behavior.
K E Y T A K E A W A Y
Perception is how we make sense of our environment in response to environmental
stimuli. While perceiving our surroundings, we go beyond the objective information
available to us, and our perception is affected by our values, needs, and emotions.
There are many biases that affect human perception of objects, self, and others.
When perceiving the physical environment, we fill in gaps and extrapolate from the
available information. We also contrast physical objects to their surroundings and
may perceive something as bigger, smaller, slower, or faster than it really is. In self-
perception, we may commit the self-enhancement or self-effacement bias,
depending on our personality. We also overestimate how much we are like other
40
people. When perceiving others, stereotypes infect our behavior. Stereotypes may
lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. Stereotypes are perpetuated because of our
tendency to pay selective attention to aspects of the environment and ignore
information inconsistent with our beliefs. When perceiving others, the attributions
we make will determine how we respond to the situation. Understanding the
perception process gives us clues to understand human behavior.
E X E R C I S E S
1. What are the implications of contrast error for interpersonal interactions? Does this
error occur only when we observe physical objects? Or have you encountered this
error when perceiving behavior of others?
2. What are the problems of false consensus error? How can managers deal with this
tendency?
3. Is there such a thing as a “good” stereotype? Is a “good” stereotype useful or still
problematic?
4. How do we manage the fact that human beings develop stereotypes? How would
you prevent stereotypes from creating unfairness in decision making?
5. Is it possible to manage the attributions other people make about our behavior?
Let’s assume that you have completed a project successfully. How would you
maximize the chances that your manager will make an internal attribution? How
would you increase the chances of an external attribution when you fail in a task?
3.4 The Role of Ethics and National Culture
L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S
1. Consider the role of individual differences for ethical behavior.
2. Consider the role of national culture on individual differences.
41
Individual Differences and Ethics
Our values and personality influence how ethical we behave. Situational
factors, rewards, and punishments following unethical choices as well as a
company’s culture are extremely important, but the role of personality and
personal values should not be ignored. Research reveals that people who have
an economic value orientation, that is, those who value acquiring money and
wealth, tend to make more unethical choices. In terms of personality,
employees with external locus of control were found to make more unethical
choices. [1]
Our perceptual processes are clear influences on whether or not we behave
ethically and how we respond to other people’s unethical behaviors. It seems
that self-enhancement bias operates for our ethical decisions as well: We tend
to overestimate how ethical we are in general. Our self-ratings of ethics tend to
be higher than how other people rate us. This belief can create a glaring
problem: If we think that we are more ethical than we are, we will have little
motivation to improve. Therefore, understanding how other people perceive
our actions is important to getting a better understanding of ourselves.
How we respond to unethical behavior of others will, to a large extent, depend
on the attributions we make. If we attribute responsibility to the person in
question, we are more likely to punish that person. In a study on sexual
harassment that occurred after a workplace romance turned sour, results
showed that if we attribute responsibility to the victim, we are less likely to
punish the harasser. [2]
Therefore, how we make attributions in a given
situation will determine how we respond to others’ actions, including their
unethical behaviors.
42
Individual Differences Around the Globe
Values that people care about vary around the world. In fact, when we refer to
a country’s culture, we are referring to values that distinguish one nation from
others. In other words, there is systematic variance in individuals’ personality
and work values around the world, and this variance explains people’s
behavior, attitudes, preferences, and the transferability of management
practices to other cultures.
When we refer to a country’s values, this does not mean that everyone in a
given country shares the same values. People differ within and across nations.
There will always be people who care more about money and others who care
more about relationships within each culture. Yet there are also national
differences in the percentage of people holding each value. A researcher from
Holland, Geert Hofstede, conducted a landmark study covering over 60
countries and found that countries differ in four dimensions: the extent to
which they put individuals or groups first (individualism), whether the society
subscribes to equality or hierarchy among people (power distance), the degree
to which the society fears change (uncertainty avoidance), and the extent to
which the culture emphasizes acquiring money and being successful
(masculinity). [3]
Knowing about the values held in a society will tell us what
type of a workplace would satisfy and motivate employees.
Are personality traits universal? Researchers found that personality traits
identified in Western cultures translate well to other cultures. For example,
the five-factor model of personality is universal in that it explains how people
differ from each other in over 79 countries. At the same time, there is variation
among cultures in the dominant personality traits. In some countries,
extraverts seem to be the majority, and in some countries the dominant trait is
low emotional stability. For example, people from Europe and the United
43
States are characterized by higher levels of extraversion compared to those
from Asia and Africa. There are many factors explaining why some personality
traits are dominant in some cultures. For example, the presence of democratic
values is related to extraversion. Because democracy usually protects freedom
of speech, people may feel more comfortable socializing with strangers as well
as with friends, partly explaining the larger number of extraverts in
democratic nations. Research also shows that in regions of the world that
historically suffered from infectious diseases, extraversion and openness to
experience was less dominant. Infectious diseases led people to limit social
contact with strangers, explaining higher levels of introversion. Plus, to cope
with infectious diseases, people developed strict habits for hygiene and the
amount of spice to use in food, and deviating from these standards was bad for
survival. This explains the lower levels of openness to experience in regions
that experienced infectious diseases. [4]
Is basic human perception universal? It seems that there is variation around
the globe in how we perceive other people as well as ourselves. One difference
is the importance of the context. Studies show that when perceiving people or
objects, Westerners pay more attention to the individual, while Asians pay
more attention to the context. For example, in one study, when judging the
emotion felt by the person, the Americans mainly looked at the face of the
person in question, while the Japanese also considered the emotions of the
people surrounding the focal person. In other words, the Asian subjects of the
experiment derived meaning from the context as well as by looking at the
person. [5]
There seems to be some variation in the perceptual biases we commit as well.
For example, human beings have a tendency to self-enhance. We see ourselves
in a more positive light than others do. Yet, the traits in which we self-enhance
44
are culturally dependent. In Western cultures, people may overestimate how
independent and self-reliant they are. In Asian cultures, such traits are not
necessarily desirable, so they may not embellish their degree of independence.
Yet, they may overestimate how cooperative and loyal to the group they are
because these traits are more desirable in collectivistic cultures. [6]
Given the variation in individual differences around the globe, being sensitive
to these differences will increase our managerial effectiveness when managing
a diverse group of people.
Personality Around the Globe Which nations have the highest average self-esteem? Researchers asked this
question by surveying almost 17,000 individuals across 53 nations, in 28
languages.
Based on this survey, these are the top 10 nations in terms of self-reported
self-esteem.
1. Serbia
2. Chile
3. Israel
4. Peru
5. Estonia
6. United States
7. Turkey
8. Mexico
9. Croatia
10. Austria
The 10 nations with the lowest self-reported self-esteem are the following:
45
South Korea
Switzerland
Morocco
Slovakia
Fiji
Taiwan
Czech Republic
Bangladesh
Hong Kong
Japan
Source: Adapted from information in Denissen, J. J. A., Penke, L., & Schmitt,
D. P. (2008, July). Self-esteem reactions to social interactions: Evidence for
sociometer mechanisms across days, people, and nations. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 181–196; Hitti, M. (2005). Who’s no. 1
in self-esteem? Serbia is tops, Japan ranks lowest, U.S. is no. 6 in global
survey. WebMD. Retrieved November 14, 2008,
from http://www.webmd.com/skin-beauty/news/20050927/whos-number-
1-in-self-esteem; Schmitt, D. P., & Allik, J. (2005). The simultaneous
administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale in 53 nationals: Culture-
specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 89, 623–642.
K E Y T A K E A W A Y
There is a connection between how ethically we behave and our individual values,
personality, and perception. Possessing values emphasizing economic well-being
predicts unethical behavior. Having an external locus of control is also related to
unethical decision making. We are also likely to overestimate how ethical we are,
which can be a barrier against behaving ethically. Culture seems to be an influence
over our values, personality traits, perceptions, attitudes, and work behaviors.
46
Therefore, understanding individual differences requires paying careful attention to
the cultural context.
E X E R C I S E S
1. If ethical decision making depends partially on personality, what can organizations
do to increase the frequency of ethical behaviors?
2. Do you think personality tests used in Western cultures in employee selection can be
used in other cultures?
3.5 Conclusion In conclusion, in this chapter we have reviewed major individual differences
that affect employee attitudes and behaviors. Our values and personality
explain our preferences and the situations we feel comfortable with.
Personality may influence our behavior, but the importance of the context in
which behavior occurs should not be neglected. Many organizations use
personality tests in employee selection, but the use of such tests is
controversial because of problems such as faking and low predictive value of
personality for job performance. Perception is how we interpret our
environment. It is a major influence over our behavior, but many systematic
biases color our perception and lead to misunderstandings.
3.6 Exercises
E T H I C A L D I L E M M A
You are applying for the job of sales associate. You have just found out that you will
be given a personality assessment as part of the application process. You feel that
47
this job requires someone who is very high in extraversion, and someone who can
handle stress well. You are relatively sociable and can cope with some stress but
honestly you are not very high in either trait. The job pays well and it is a great
stepping-stone to better jobs. How are you going to respond when completing the
personality questions? Are you going to make an effort to represent yourself as how
you truly are? If so, there is a chance that you may not get the job. How about
answering the questions to fit the salesperson profile? Isn’t everyone doing this to
some extent anyway?
Discussion Questions
1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of completing the questions honestly?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of completing the questions in a way
you think the company is looking for?
3. What would you really do in a situation like this?
I N D I V I D U A L E X E R C I S E
Changing Others’ Perceptions of You
How do other people perceive you? Identify one element of how others perceive you
that you are interested in changing. It could be a positive perception (maybe they
think you are more helpful than you really are) or a negative perception (maybe they
think you don’t take your studies seriously).
What are the reasons why they formed this perception? Think about the
underlying reasons.
What have you done to contribute to the development of this perception?
Do you think there are perceptual errors that contribute to this perception? Are
they stereotyping? Are they engaging in selective perception?
Are you sure that your perception is the accurate one? What information do
you have that makes your perceptions more valid than theirs?
Create an action plan about how you can change this perception.
G R O U P E X E R C I S E
48
Selecting an Expatriate Using Personality Tests
Your department has over 50 expatriates working around the globe. One of the
problems you encounter is that the people you send to other cultures for long-term
(2- to 5-year) assignments have a high failure rate. They either want to return home
before their assignment is complete, or they are not very successful in building
relationships with the local employees. You suspect that this is because you have
been sending people overseas solely because of their technical skills, which does not
seem to be effective in predicting whether these people will make a successful
adjustment to the local culture. Now you have decided that when selecting people to
go on these assignments, personality traits should be given some weight.
1. Identify the personality traits you think might be relevant to being successful in an
expatriate assignment.
2. Develop a personality test aimed at measuring these dimensions. Make sure that
each dimension you want to measure is captured by at least 10 questions.
3. Exchange the test you have developed with a different team in class. Have them fill
out the survey and make sure that you fill out theirs. What problems have you
encountered? How would you feel if you were a candidate taking this test?
4. Do you think that prospective employees would fill out this questionnaire honestly?
If not, how would you ensure that the results you get would be honest and truly
reflect their personality?
5. How would you validate such a test? Describe the steps you would take.
