Chapter Two:
Individual Differences: Personality
and Values
Farhan Islam
Personality in Organizations
Relatively enduring pattern of thoughts, emotions,
and behaviours that characterize a person, along
with psychological processes.
Personality traits:
○Behaviour tendency categories
○Evident across situations
Influenced by both nature and nurture.
Personality stabilizes in young adulthood.
○Clearer, more stable self-concept
○Executive function regulates behaviour
○Some personality factors continue to change
Five-Factor Personality Model
TRAIT DESCRIPTION
Conscientiousness
Organized, dependable, goal-focused, thorough,
disciplined, methodical, industrious
Agreeableness
Trusting, helpful, good-natured, considerate,
tolerant, selfless, generous, flexible
Neuroticism
Anxious, insecure, self-conscious, depressed,
temperamental
Imaginative, creative, unconventional, curious,
Openness to experience nonconforming, autonomous, aesthetically
perceptive
Extraversion
Outgoing, talkative, energetic, sociable,
assertive
Exhibit 2.1 Five-Factor Model of Personality
Five-Factor Model and Work Performance
● Effective leaders,
salespeople are more
extraverted.
● Openness to experience may
predict creative work
performance.
● Conscientiousness is a weak
predictor of adaptive,
proactive performance.
● Agreeableness:
○Predicts team member, customer
service performance.
○Weak predictor of proficient,
● Ildar Galeev/Shutterstock: Fred Ho YeowHui/Shutterstock; malika.1028/Shutterstock: Aha-Soft/Shutterstock; Sign N Symbol Production/Shutterstockproactive performance.
Five-Factor Model Caveats
1. Higher Big Five scores aren’t always better.
2. Specific traits may predict better than their Big Five factor.
3. Personality isn’t static.
4. Five-factor model doesn’t cover all personality concepts.
The Dark Triad
Machiavellianism
○ Motivated to get what one wants at the expense of others.
○ Believes deceit is natural, enjoys misleading; low trust, low empathy.
Narcissism
○ Obsessive belief in own superiority and entitlement.
○ Intensely envious; need for attention.
Psychopathy
○ Social predators.
○ Mask of psychopathy.
○ Antisocial, impulsive, thrill-seeking behaviour.
Dark Triad and Workplace Behaviour
1. Dishonesty
2. Organizational politics
3. Serious white-collar crime
4. Workplace aggression, bullying
5. Excessively risky decision making
6. Team behaviour issues
But dark triad may predict better promotions and pay.
Jungian Personality Theory and MBTI
● Exhibit 2.3 Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator Types
● Sources: Adapted from an exhibit
found at http:www.16-
[Link]. Based on
data from CPP, Inc. Sunnyvale, CA
94086 from Introduction to Type
and Careers by Allen L. Hammer.
● Access the text alternative for slide images.
Jungian Theory in the Workplace
MBTI/Jungian theory widely used, but poor validity/quality
○ Some “types” ambiguously defined
○ Some opposing type pairs aren’t opposing
○ Assumptions contrary to research evidence
○ Dichotomizes people, not a range
○ Forced choice scale limits reliability
○ Poor predictor of job and leader effectiveness, team development
Potential strengths of Jungian/MBTI
○ Perceiving and deciding are logical views of interaction with environment
○ Adopts a neutral view of score results
○ Jung introduced extraversion-introversion dimension
Values in the Workplace
Stable, evaluative beliefs that guide our preferences.
Values system.
Personal versus shared values.
Unlike personality, values are:
○Evaluative (not descriptive)
○May conflict with each other
○More nurture than nature
Schwartz’s Values Model
Values influence
attractiveness of choices.
Values frame perceptions.
Values regulate consistency of
behaviour.
● Exhibit 2.4 Schwartz’s Values Circumplex
● Sources: S.H. Schwartz, “Universals in the Content and
Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests
in 20 Countries,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
25 (1992): 1–65; S.H. Schwartz and K. Boehnke, “Evaluating
the Structure of Human Values with Confirmatory Factor
Analysis,” Journal of Research in Personality 38, no. 3 (2004):
230–55.
When Values Don’t Predict Behaviour
Situational factors.
Counter-motivational forces.
Lack of values awareness.
■ Values are abstract
■ Less mindful of values with
routine behaviour
● Oliver Marquardt/Westend61/Image Source
Values Congruence
Similarity of person’s values hierarchy to another entity’s
values hierarchy.
Effect of congruence with organizational values:
○ Higher job satisfaction, loyalty, citizenship, lower stress and turnover
○ Decisions aligned with organizational expectations
Corporate cult problems when values congruence is very
high.
Ethical Values and Behaviour
● Ethics: Moral principles (human good) or societal norms that
determine whether actions are right or wrong and outcomes are good
or bad.
● Four ethical principles:
○Utilitarianism
○Individual rights
○Distributive justice
○Ethic of care
Moral Intensity and Ethics
The degree that an issue demands the application of ethical
principles.
Moral intensity depends on:
○ Probability decision will have good or bad consequences
○ Severity of consequences
○ Number of people who will experience those consequences
○ Level of agreement decision has good or bad consequences
Moral Sensitivity and Ethics
Ability to detect a moral dilemma, estimate its relative
importance.
Moral sensitivity is higher in people with:
1. Expertise/knowledge of prescriptive norms and rules.
2. Past experience with specific moral dilemmas.
3. Empathy with those affected.
4. Morally sensitive person self-view.
5. High situational mindfulness.
Supporting Ethical Behaviour
● Corporate code of ethical conduct.
● Train and test employee’s ethical knowledge.
● Systems for reporting and investigating wrongdoing.
● Compliance-focused initiatives.
● Ethical culture and ethical leadership.
Individualism
High Individualism*
● The degree to which people
S. Africa
value personal freedom, self-
Canada
sufficiency, control over
themselves, being appreciated Japan
for unique qualities
Denmark
Venezuela
Taiwan
Low Individualism*
● *Derived from Oyserman et al (2002) meta-analysis
Collectivism
The degree to which people value High Collectivism*
their group membership and
harmonious relationships within the Taiwan
group Israel
India
Canada
Japan
Low Collectivism*
● *Derived from Oyserman et al (2002) meta-analysis
Power Distance
High Power Distance
● High power distance
Malaysia
○ Value obedience to authority
○ Comfortable receiving commands
from superiors India
○ Prefer formal rules and authority
to resolve conflicts
Japan
● Low power distance Canada
○ Expect relatively equal power
sharing Denmark
○ View relationship with boss as Israel
interdependence, not dependence
Low Power Distance
Uncertainty Avoidance
● High uncertainty avoidance High U. A.
○ Feel threatened by ambiguity and Greece
uncertainty
Belgium
○ Value structured situations and
direct communication
● Low uncertainty avoidance Norway
○ Tolerate ambiguity and Canada
uncertainty
Denmark
Singapore
Low U. A.
Achievement-Nurturing
High achievement orientation Achievement
○ Assertiveness Japan
○ Competitiveness
Austria
○ Materialism
Canada
High nurturing orientation
○ Value relationships Brazil
○ Focus on human interaction
Netherlands
Sweden
Nurturing
Cultural Diversity within Canada
Deep-level diversity across ethnic and regional groups.
Compared to Anglophones, Francophones:
○ Less authority deference, more tolerant and morally permissive
Indigenous Canadians
○ High collectivism, low power distance, non-interference, natural time orientation
Personal values/traits vary across Canadian regions.
Regional variations seem to be caused by:
○ Regional institutions
○ Regional migration
Canadian vs American Values
Canadians tend to: Americans tend to:
Have higher moral permissiveness Have lower moral permissiveness
Encourage more collective rights Encourage more individual rights
Have less affiliation with religious Have more affiliation with religious
institutions, separation from policy institutions, involvement in policy
Have less deference to patriarchal Have more deference to patriarchal
authority authority