Personalidad y Valores Flashcards
(14 cards)
Personality
For our purposes, think of personality as the sum of ways in which an individual reacts to and interacts with others. We most often describe personality in terms of the measurable traits a person exhibit
Personality determinants
Heredity refers to factors determined at conception. Physical stature, facial features, gender, temperament, muscle composition and reflexes, energy level, and biological rhythms are either completely or substantially influenced by parentage—by your biological parents’ biological, physiological, and inherent psychological makeup. The heredity approach argues that the ultimate expla-nation of an individual’s personality is the molecular structure of the genes, located on the chromosomes.This is not to suggest that personality never changes. People’s scores on dependability tend to increase over time, as when young adults start families and establish careers. However, strong individual differences in dependability remain; everyone tends to change by about the same amount, so their rank order stays roughly the same
Personality Frameworks: Throughout history, people have sought to understand what makes individuals behave in myriad ways. Many of our behaviors stem from our personalities, so understanding the components of personality helps us predict behavior. Important theoretical frameworks and assessment tools help us categorize and study the dimensions of personality.The most widely used and best known personality frameworks are the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Big Five Personality Model.
- The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is the most widely used personality-assessment instrument in the world.12 It is a 100-question personality test that asks people how they usually feel or act in situations. Respondents are classified as
-extraverted or introverted (E or I),
- sensing or intuitive (S or N),
- thinking or feeling (T or F),
- and judging or perceiving (J or P): - Big Five Personality Model, discussed next, as the personality selection test for job candidates instead behave in a variety of real-life situations18 and remain relatively stable for an indi-vidual over time, with some daily variations.19 These are the Big Five factors:
- Conscientiousness. The conscientiousness dimension is a measure of reliability. A highly conscientious person is responsible, organized, dependable, and persistent. Those who score low on this dimension are easily distracted, disorganized, and unreliable.
- Emotional stability. The emotional stability dimension taps a person’s ability to withstand stress. People with emotional stability tend to be calm, self-confident, and secure. High scorers are more likely to be positive and optimistic and experience fewer negative emotions; they are gener-ally happier than low scorers. Emotional stability is sometimes discussed as its converse, neuroticism. Low scorers (those with high neuroticism) are hypervigilant and vulnerable to the physical and psychological effects of stress. Those with high neuroticism tend to be nervous, anxious, depressed, and insecure.
- Extraversion. The extraversion dimension captures our comfort level with relationships. Extraverts tend to be gregarious, assertive, and sociable. They are generally happier and are often ambitious.20 They experience more positive emotions than do introverts, and they more freely express these feelings. On the other hand, introverts (low extraversion) tend to be more thoughtful, reserved, timid, and quiet.
- Openness to experience. The openness to experience dimension addresses the range of interests and fascination with novelty. Open people are creative, curious, and artistically sensitive. Those at the low end of the category are conventional and find comfort in the familiar.
- Agreeableness. The agreeableness dimension refers to an individual’s propensity to defer to others. Agreeable people are cooperative, warm, and trusting. You might expect agreeable people to be happier than disagreeable people. They are, but only slightly. When people choose organizational team members, agreeable individuals are usually their first choice. In contrast, people who score low on agreeableness are cold and antagonistic.
How Do the Big Five Traits Predict Behavior at Work
Conscientiousness at Work As researchers recently stated, “Personal attributes related to conscientiousness and agreeableness are important for success across many jobs, spanning across low to high levels of job complexity, training, and experience.”22 Employees who score higher in conscientiousness develop higher levels of job knowledge, probably because highly conscientious people learn more (conscientiousness may be related to GPA),23 and these levels cor-respond with higher levels of job performance. Conscientious people are also more able to maintain their job performance when faced with abusive supervi-sion, according to a recent study in India.24Conscientiousness is important to overall organizational success. As Exhibit5-1 shows, a study of the personality scores of 313 CEO candidates in private equity companies (of whom 225 were hired) found conscientiousness—in the form of persistence, attention to detail, and setting high standards—was more important to success than other traits.Like any trait, conscientiousness has pitfalls. Highly conscientious individu-als can prioritize work over family, resulting in more conflict between their work and family roles (termed work-family conflict).25 They may also become too focused on their own work to help others in the organization,26 and they don’t adapt well to changing contexts. Furthermore, conscientious people may have trouble learning complex skills early in a training process because their focus is on performing well rather than on learning. Finally, they are often less creative, especially artistically.27Conscientiousness is the best predictor of job performance. However, the other Big Five traits are also related to aspects of performance and have other implications for work and for life. Exhibit 5-2 summarize
Emotional Stability at Work Of the Big Five traits, emotional stability is most strongly related to life satisfaction, job satisfaction, and low stress levels. People with high emotional stability can adapt to unexpected or changing demands in the workplace.28 At the other end of the spectrum, neurotic individuals, who may be unable to cope with these demands, may experience burnout.29 These people also tend to experience work-family conflict, which can affect work outcomes.3
Extraversion at Work Extraverts perform better in jobs with significant inter-personal interaction. They are socially dominant, “take charge” people who are usually more assertive than introverts.31 Extraversion is a relatively strong predictor of leadership emergence in groups. Some negatives are that extra-verts are more impulsive than introverts, more likely to be absent from work, and may be more likely than introverts to lie during job interviews
Openness at Work Open people are more likely to be effective leaders—and more comfortable with ambiguity. They cope better with organizational change and are more adaptable. While openness isn’t related to initial performance on a job, individuals higher in openness are less susceptible to a decline in performance over a longer time period.33 Open people also experience less work-family conflict
Agreeableness at Work Agreeable individuals are better liked than disagreeable people; they tend to do better in interpersonally-oriented jobs such as customer service. They’re more compliant and rule abiding, less likely to get into acci-dents, and more satisfied in their jobs. They also contribute to organizational performance by engaging in organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).35 Dis-agreeable people, on the other hand, are more likely to engage in counterpro-ductive work behaviors (CWBs), as are people low in conscientiousness.36 Low agreeableness also predicts involvement in work accidents.37 Lastly, agreeable-ness is associated with lower levels of career success (especially earnings), perhaps because highly agreeable people consider themselves less marketable and are less willing to assert themselves.38In general, the Big Five personality factors appear in almost all cross- cultural studies,39 including China, Israel, Germany, Japan, Spain, Nigeria, Norway Pakistan, and the United States. However, a study of illiterate indigenous people in Bolivia suggested the Big Five framework may be less applicable when study-ing the personalities of small, remote groups
The Dark Triad:With the exception of neuroticism, the Big Five traits are what we call socially desirable, meaning we would be glad to score high on them. Researchers have found three other socially undesirable traits, which we all have in varying degrees, are also relevant to organizational behavior: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. Owing to their negative nature, researchers have labeled these the Dark Triad—though they do not always occur together
- An individual high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes ends can justify means. “If it works, use it” is consistent with a high-Mach perspective. High Machs manipulate more, win more, are persuaded less by others, but persuade others more than do low Machs.43 They are more likely to act aggressively and engage in CWBs as well. Surprisingly, Machiavellianism does not significantly predict overall job performance.44 High-Mach employees, by manipulating others to their advan-tage, win in the short term at a job, but they lose those gains in the long term because they are not well liked.Machiavellianism tendencies may have ethical implications.
- narcissism describes a person who has a grandiose sense of self-importance, requires excessive admiration, and is arrogant. Narcis-sists often have fantasies of grand success, a tendency to exploit situations and people, a sense of entitlement, and a lack of empathy.47 However, narcissists can be hypersensitive and fragile people.48 They also may experience more anger.49While narcissism seems to have little relationship to job effectiveness or OCB,50 it is one of the largest predictors of increased CWB in individualistic cultures—but not in collectivist cultures that discourage self-promotion.51 Nar-cissists commonly think they are overqualified for their positions.52 When they receive feedback about their performance, they often tune out information that conflicts with their positive self-perception, but they will work harder if rewards are offere;d
- psychopathy: lack of concern for others, and a lack of guilt or remorse when ac-tions cause harm.60 Measures of psychopathy attempt to assess the motivation to comply with social norms, impulsivity, willingness to use deceit to obtain desired ends, and disregard, that is, lack of empathic concern for others.The literature is not consistent about whether psychopathy is important to work behavior. One review found little correlation between measures of psy-chopathy and job performance or CWB. Another found antisocial personality, which is closely related to psychopathy, was positively related to advancement in the organization but unrelated to other aspects of career success and effective-ness.61 Still other research suggests psychopathy is related to the use of hard influence tactics (threats, manipulation) and bullying work behavior (physical or verbal threatening).62 The cunning displayed by people who score high on psychopathy may thus help them gain power in an organization but keep them from using it toward healthy ends for themselves or their organization
Other Personality Attributes Relevant to OB: As we’ve discussed, studies of traits have much to offer to the field of OB. Now we’ll look at other attributes that are powerful predictors of behavior in organiza-tions: core self-evaluations, self-monitoring, and proactive personality. Core self-evaluations (CSEs) are bottom-line conclusions individuals have about their capabilities, competence, and worth as a person. People who have positive CSEs like themselves and see themselves as effective and in control of their envi-ronment. Those with negative CSEs tend to dislike themselves, question their capabilities, and view themselves as powerless over their environment.65 Recall we discussed in Chapter 3 that CSEs relate to job satisfaction because people who are positive on this trait see more challenge in their jobs and actually attain more complex jobs
- Self-monitoring describes an individual’s ability to adjust behavior to exter-nal, situational factors. High self-monitors show considerable adaptability in adjusting their behavior to external situational factors. They are highly sensitive to external cues and can behave differently in varying situations, sometimes pre-senting striking contradictions between their public personae and their private selves. Low self-monitors like Zoe can’t disguise themselves in that way. They tend to display their true dispositions and attitudes in every situation; hence, there is high behavioral consistency between who they are and what they do.Evidence indicates high self-monitors pay closer attention to the behavior of others and are more capable of conforming than are low self-monitors.69 High self-monitor employees show less commitment to their organizations, but receive better performance ratings and are more likely to emerge as leaders.70 High self-monitor managers tend to be more mobile in their careers, receive more promotions (both internal and cross-organizational), and are more likely to occupy central positions in organization
- Those with a proactive personality identify opportunities, show initiative, take action, and persevere until meaningful change occurs, compared to others who generally react to situations. Proactive individuals have many desirable behaviors that organizations covet. They have higher levels of job performance73 and do not need much oversight.74 They are receptive to changes in job demands and thrive when they can informally tailor their jobs to their strengths.
personality and situations: Situation Strength Theory
Situation strength theory proposes that the way personality translates into behavior depends on the strength of the situation. By situation strength, we mean the degree to which norms, cues, or standards dictate appropriate behavior. Strong situations show us what the right behavior is, pressure us to exhibit it, and discourage the wrong behavior. In weak situations, conversely, “anything goes,” and thus we are freer to express our personality in behavior. Thus, per-sonality traits better predict behavior in weak situations than in strong ones. Jobs with important consequences represent strong situations because the environment is probably heavily structured to guard against mistakes. A surgeon’s job, for example, has higher consequences than a foreign- language teacher’s. Some researchers have speculated organizations are, by definition, strong situations because they impose rules, norms, and standards that govern behav-ior. These constraints are usually appropriate. For example, we would not want an employee to feel free to engage in sexual harassment, follow questionable accounting procedures, or come to work only when the mood strikes.Beyond the basics, though, it is not always desirable for organizations to create strong situations for their employees for a number of reasons. First, the elements of situation strength are often determined by organization rules and guidelines, which adds some objectivity to them. However, the percep-tion of these rules influences how the person will respond to the situation’s strength. For instance, a person who is usually self-directed may view step-by-step instructions (high clarity) for a simple task as a lack of faith in his ability. Another person who is a rule-follower might appreciate the detailed instruc-tions. Their responses (and work attitudes) will reflect their perception of the situation.81Second, jobs with myriad rules and tightly controlled processes can be dull or demotivating. Imagine that all work was executed with an assembly-line approach. Some people may prefer the routine, but many prefer having some variety and freedom. Third, strong situations might suppress the creativity, ini-tiative, and discretion prized by some organizational cultures.
Personality and situations: Trait Activation Theory
Another important theoretical framework toward understanding personality and situations is trait activation theory (TAT). TAT predicts that some situations, events, or interventions “activate” a trait more than others. Using TAT, we can foresee which jobs suit certain personalities. For example, a commission-based compensation plan would likely activate individual differences because extra-verts are more reward-sensitive, than, say, open people. Conversely, in jobs that encourage creativity, differences in openness may better predict desired behav-ior than differences in extraversion. TAT also applies to personality tendencies. For example, a recent study found people learning online responded differently when their behavior was being electronically monitored. Those who had a high fear of failure had higher apprehension from the monitoring than others and learned significantly less. In this case, a feature of the environment (electronic monitoring) activated a trait (fear of failing), and the combination of the two meant lowered job per-formance.83 TAT can also work in a positive way. One study found that, in a supportive environment, everyone behaved prosocially, but in a harsh environ-ment, only people with prosocial tendencies exhibited them.84Together, situation strength and trait activation theories show that the debate over nature versus nurture might best be framed as nature and nurture. Not only does each affect behavior, but they interact with one another. Put another way, personality and the situation both affect work behavior, but when the situa-tion is right, the power of personality to predict behavior is even higher.
values
Values represent basic convictions that “a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence.”85 Values contain a judgmental ele-ment because they carry an individual’s ideas about what is right, good, or desir-able. They have both content and intensity attributes. The content attribute says a mode of conduct or end-state of existence is important. The intensity attribute specifies how important it is. When we rank values in terms of intensity, we obtain that person’s value system. We all have a hierarchy of values according to the relative importance we assign to values.Values tend to be relatively stable and enduring.86 Many of the values we hold are established in our early years—by parents, teachers, friends, and oth-ers. If we question our values, they may change, but more often they are rein-forced.
The Importance and Organization of Values
Values lay the foundation for understanding attitudes and motivation, and they influence our perceptions. We enter an organization with preconceived notions of what “ought” and “ought not” to be. These notions contain our interpreta-tions of right and wrong and our preferences for certain behaviors or outcomes. Regardless of whether they clarify or bias our judgment, our values influence our attitudes and behaviors at work.
Terminal versus Instrumental Value
How can we organize values? we can separate them into two categories. One set, called terminal values, refers to desirable end-states. These are the goals a person would like to achieve during a lifetime. The other set, called instrumental values, refers to preferable modes of behavior, or means of achieving the terminal values. A balance between the two is important, as well as an understanding of how to strike this balance
Linking an Individual’s Personality andValues to the Workplace
- Person–Job Fit
The effort to match job requirements with personality characteristics is described by John Holland’s personality–job fit theory, one of the more proven theories in use internationally.92 The Vocational Preference Inventory questionnaire contains 160 occupational titles. Respondents indicate which they like or dislike, and their answers form personality profiles. Holland pre-sented six personality types and proposed that satisfaction and the propensity to leave a position depend on how well individuals match their personalities to a job. Exhibit 5-5 describes the six types, their personality characteristics, and examples of the congruent occupations for each.There are cultural implications for person–job fit that speak to workers’ expectations that jobs will be tailored. In individualistic countries where work-ers expect to be heard and respected by management, increasing person–job fit by tailoring the job to the person increases the individual’s job satisfaction. However, in collectivistic countries, person–job fit is a weaker predictor of job satisfaction because people do not expect to have a job tailored to them, so they value person–job fit efforts less. Therefore, managers in collectivistic cul-tures should not violate cultural norms by designing jobs for individuals; rather they should seek people who will likely thrive in jobs that have already been structured - Person–Organization Fit
We’ve noted that researchers have looked at matching people to organizations and jobs. If an organization has a dynamic and changing environment and needs employees able to readily change tasks and move easily between teams, it’s more important that employees’ personalities fit with the overall organization’s culture than with the characteristics of any specific job.Person–organization fit essentially means people are attracted to and selected by organizations that match their values, and they leave organiza-tions that are not compatible with their personalities.94 Using the Big Five ter-minology, for instance, we could expect that extraverts fit well with aggressive and team-oriented cultures, people high on agreeableness match up better with a supportive organizational climate, and highly open people fit better in organizations that emphasize innovation rather than standardization.95 Following these guidelines when hiring should yield employees who fit bet-ter with the organization’s culture, which should, in turn, result in higher employee satisfaction and reduced turnover. Research on person–organiza-tion fit has also looked at whether people’s values match the organization’s culture. A match predicts job satisfaction, commitment to the organization, and low turnover.96It is more important than ever for organizations to manage their image online since job seekers view company websites as part of their pre-application process. Applicants want to see a user-friendly website that provides informa-tion about company philosophies and policies. For example, Millennials in par-ticular may react positively when they perceive an organization is committed to work-life balance. The website is so important to the development of perceived person–organization fit that improvements to its style (usability) and substance (policies) can lead to more applicants
Cultural values
Hofstede’s FrameworkOne of the most widely referenced approaches for analyzing variations among cultures.five value dimensions of national culture:
-Power distance. Power distance describes the degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally. A high rating on power distance means large inequalities of power and wealth exist and are tolerated in the culture, as in a class or caste system that discourages upward mobility. A low power distance rating characterizes societies that stress equality and opportunity.
- Individualism versus collectivism. Individualism is the degree to which people prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups and believe in an individual’s rights above all else. Collectivism emphasizes a tight social framework in which people expect others in groups of which they are a part to look after them and protect them.
- Masculinity versus femininity. Hofstede’s construct of masculinity is the degree to which the culture favors traditional masculine roles such as achievement, power, and control, as opposed to viewing men and women as equals. A high masculinity rating indicates the culture has separate roles for men and women, with men dominating the society. A high femininity rating means the culture sees little differentiation between male and female roles and treats women as the equals of men in all respects.
- Uncertainty avoidance. The degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations defines their uncertainty avoidance. In cultures scoring high on uncertainty avoidance, people have increased anxiety about uncertainty and ambiguity and use laws and controls to reduce uncertainty. People in cultures low on uncertainty avoidance are more accepting of ambiguity, are less rule oriented, take more risks, and more readily accept change.
- Long-term versus short-term orientation. This typology measures a society’s devotion to traditional values. People in a culture with long-term orientation look to the future and value thrift, persistence, and tradition. In a short-term orientation, people value the here and now; they also accept change more readily and don’t see commitments as impediments to change.
