The Extent Behaviour at Work - Essay Example

The Extent Behaviour at work is a Product of people’s individual differences An organization is fundamentally a human system and for this reason, every member or one influences it by bringing to bear their different psychological, social and emotional behaviour, which is manifested while they are engaged in their various activities. Human emotions are undoubtedly crucial in determining their behaviour, additionally, their personality, covertly or overtly is influential in determining how they behave and/or interact with their jobs, superiors, co-workers and clients. Behaviour, for purposes of this paper can be derived from observable actions such as punctuality, interpersonal relations, motivation, readiness to go beyond the call of duty etc. Today behavioural science which is concerned with the various forms and motivation of employee behaviour has become commonplace owing to the fact that the contemporary corporate world has is highly competitive and one needs to ensure their employees are in the best emotional form possible to maximize on the quality of their output. Personality is widely considered one of the key ingredients in studies relating to individuals behaviour in various contexts and this is especially pronounced in the prediction and analysis of work performance (Denissen, Van Aken & Roberts, 2011). It can loosely be define as the fundamental behaviour that sets apart ones individual from others and can be used to provide grounds for determining if one is capable of carrying out a given task with comparatively more acumen than someone possess with a different personality traits (Beer & Brooks, 2011). For an action to qualify as a personality trait, it must be stable and consistent throughout an individual’s life, naturally, people are bound to display variances in their tendencies, however personality theories are used to isolate and analyses the variances to determine the dominant characteristic. This paper aims at an incisive examination of the individual personality in connection to their behaviour in the context of a formal work environment by discussing different personalities theoretical information and how they weigh in on the behaviour of their owners and the organization at large. Experts in personality hold that the long-term traits individuals exhibit impact directly on their behaviour and performance at work which has led to some scholar postulating that it is the most effective tool to predict performance (Ozer &Benet-Martinez, 2006; Schulman, 2011). Personality is paramount in an individual’s decision of which activities they want to take part in or situations they would like to initiate or sustain. It has been determined through multiple empirical studies that the relationship between the personality of employees and job performance is significant with a correlation of r =.24 being noted (Tett, Jackson & Rothstein, 1991). This and many other studies in addition to the theoretical consideration presented herein are the basis on which a rationale for the study of personality in relation to employee behaviour is being carried out. For example, a naturally creative employee will likely initiate projects that require they use their imagination an innovation and if they are assigned such they are likely to demonstrate a positive behaviour and high level of motivation, ultimately they will likely perform better than someone whose personality does not favour creativity as much as theirs since their motivation is intrinsic. At the end of the day, when individual personalities are identified and strategically aligned within the firm, the overall output of the organization in question is likely to appreciate since personality translates to behaviour, which translates in turn to positive or negative results depending on the nature of the deployed individuals. The importance of personality does not however stop at the level of job performance, as research has shown that the collective personalities of employees in an organization constitute the organizational culture and “personality”. Therefore, work environment does not only affect employees’ behaviour, but is it also affected and to some extent a result of the multiple personalities that co-exist within its premises (Chen, 2004). The Five-Factor Model and Job Performance With respect to personality traits, the five-factor model, (FFM) is the most widely applied and trusted framework among researchers and practitioners both in the corporate and scientific world. The FFM is broadly based on five key factors or personality dimensions, which are referred to as the Big Five personality traits, the dimensions contained in the FFM model are neuroticism, extroversion, Openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (Goldberg, 1992). Before they were accepted in mainstream application, the retrospectively leading model or evaluating personalities was based on GMA, cognitive ability. However, several independent studies have found that the human personality traits that comprise the big 5 are very pertinent and relevant in regard to the analysing and understanding of employee’s personality and the consequent impact on their behaviour and job performance. Individuals that fall under the category of extroversion are outgoing, expressive, talkative, and self-assured and possess a decided sense of direction and purpose, they are also known as Extroverts. They long for social recognition and acknowledgment and they like to be in control and take command of situations since they are naturally spontaneous and communicative often beaming with positive and enthusiastic energy (Goldberg, 1990; Watson & Clark, 1997). In comparison to the other four, extroverts are more closely associated with affirmative emotions and practicing commitment, which often results in gratification in respect to the job, they are tasked with. Their emotional stability makes them more likely to be firm and objective and they often make good leaders, this is because among other qualities, their objectivity makes it easy for them to analyses situations form a disinterested point of view without letting emotions cloud their judgment (Connolly & Viswesvaran, 2000). Extroverts are able to engage in successful interpersonal communication since they have a generally more developed interaction abilities, individuals with a low level of extroversion are likely to be shy and hesitant to take the spotlight. Neuroticism on the other hand represents the individual’s tendency to feel pain and suffering, in a sense it is the opposite of emotional intelligence and individuals with this personality are likely to be emotionally insecure and unstable. As a result, in the work place they will exhibit behaviour such as annoyance, being sulky, low confidence self-doubt and a high level of cynicism and scepticism in the abilities of others. Neurotic personalities tend to have little faith in others and thus they are poor team players, owing to their deficient social expertise and emotional intelligence, they will often have difficulties in handling crises. Most studies on neurotics have found neurotics more negative than the rest of the personality types owing to this underlying negativity they will be naturally more predisposed to low job satisfaction and motivation; therefore, they will be likely to perform poorly in their tasks and even have a negative impact on the output of their colleagues (Magnus et al., 1993). Neuroticism has been found to negatively correlate with leadership or supervisory tasks as well as teamwork since their negativity prevents them from making productive interaction of encouraging and inspiring others. Conscientiousness is made up of traits such as diligence, attentiveness, responsibility, and determination, individuals falling under this category tend to exhibit responsibility, both personal and professionalism , reliability and caution , they have a great sense of foresight and will only take action after considering all the possible outcomes and contingencies that may need to be put up. Conscientious employees will ensure they avert risk and their primary focus in success both in the short and long run, instead of taking on risks similar to the extrovert is wont to, they will work to find or create the best possible environment under which success in guaranteed and risk minimized (Raja, Johns & Ntalianis, 2004). They are more patient than most of the other personalities and as such, they make for excellent leaders and project managers especially due to their propensity for meticulous planning and execution (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000). Agreeableness is manifested in employees through attributes such as self-sacrifice, helpfulness, and emotional empathy, however on the other hand, it is the contrary extreme end can define enmity to others or selfishness. Normally, agreeable individuals exhibit traits such as naivety, mercifulness and kind-heartedness, although these traits are often useful, this personality type is often considered the most divisive of the five. There is very little connection between agreeableness and job performance owing to the fact that agreeable people tend to be relatively easily influenced and distracted as they may end up spending too much time helping others and neglect their own work. In addition, they can be easily manipulated and thus taken advantage of since they are not firm or decisive and depend too much on the good opinion of others. They make poor leaders since in most scenarios they try to please everyone, which is an excise of futility; ultimately, despite their good intentions their lack of aggression makes them ineffective managers. Openness to Experience is often correlated to innovation and creativity especially in technical terms, and personalities in this category are often viewed as possessing a social predisposition for creation and curiosity. They are in most cases open minded and highly intellectual with a persistent desire for diversity and authenticity, therefore they will often apply their rich imagination toward the achievement of the two. The open personality will sometimes break or bend rule and operate outside the conventional and traditional parameters in an effort to explore different and new technique of doing things. This characteristic is however comes with a binary dimension that has been described by scholars a double-edged sword, as these personalities sometimes experience high intensity of positive feelings which are however replaced occasionally with equally intense negative ones. Consequently, employees categorized under this class can be unpredictable and sometime unreliable since they also tend to be emotional and can vent out their negative feelings on others (Judge, Heller & Mount, 2002). They however tend to have a very positive attitude towards learning and training other since in most cases their lives and careers are an endless search for new knowledge and information. Thus they make excellent trainers and they are also very open to new learning experiences and whenever this are available they make full use of them, although the can sometime be unconventional in their methods, organizations often benefit from their innovative natures and creativity which can save or generate money. Motivation In addition to the big 5, Abraham Marlow’s theory of motivation can be used to further extrapolate on the connection between employee personality and their behaviour, the theory propounds that there are two primary motivations intrinsic and extrinsic (Ryan et al., 2000). Managers in an organization should undertake to identify which of the two their various employees can be classified under to formulate the most effective strategies for motivation. Employees who are motivated intrinsically are driven to work by the work itself, thus it can be said they work for the sake of the task itself without regard to the rewards expected after its complexion. Many who fall in this category enjoy challenges and they are creative personalities using the work environment to experiment and try out new ideas, to motivate them, employee should encourage them to express themselves creatively and provide forums and resources for this. In addition, they can set a series of challenges for them and have them tackle them individually or in teams based on the prevailing scenario, this way the employees will feel needed and relish the opportunity to develop their skills. Extrinsically motivated people on the other hand should like to base their actions on the hope or expiation of reward, this range from money, promotion, praise and many others. In such cases, the employer also needs to identify the rewards that their staff desire and provide mechanism through which they can be achieved; therefore, the extrinsically motived worker will always have some motivation for making their work more effective and efficient (Ryan, Alexander & Deci, 2000). Although it is popularly assumed that intrinsic motivation is better since it is self-driven, extrinsic motivation can also be as effective since the individual in question attributed their desire for the external reward to the task they are assigned. However extrinsically motivated employees are likely to only work extra hard when there is a reward in the offing as opposed to intrinsically motivated ones who will work without caring about it. Personal Assessment Some people tend to be more predisposed to self-assessment than others in the work place are, there are employees that are naturally self-critical, in a positive way and always set goals via which they assess their own performance. These personalities are often likely to be task and goal oriented and they will plan for the future through reflecting on their pasta actions to determine what needs to be improved. Self-assessment is inevitably well correlated with work performance and an organization with such an employee stands to benefit from their exceptional and continuously improving performance. To foster this characteristic and the accompanying behaviour, firms use training workshops in which they help their staff rediscover their character and re-examine their strengths and weakness so they are prepared to self-asses. Reflection However, it is noteworthy that like the humours, no individual possess only one specific character trait and everyone has a potential and indeed manifests from time to time a wide variety of them. Ergo whether one uses the FFM model or theorizes on motivation self-assessment or any other technique it is important they realize that what is often defined as a personality is often a result of different traits with the dominant ones being flagged as the determinants of the personality. The SU leadership profiler is divided into learning and thinking self, and based on my ratings, I was able to analyse my personality traits in respect to my behaviour and performance through reflection and a comparison with some of the traits discussed in the first part of the essay. In goal setting, I was ranked at 3.9 which is a strong medium just 0.1 away from 4 the baseline for a strong personality. My capacity for monitoring action was awarded 3.9 points, this goes to show that although am generally an efficient self-monitor, I do not keep the best standards and I stand to improve on it. Introspection into my behaviour in this regard proves the study to be largely corrects since although I do strive to self-asses, I sometimes end up deliberately lowering my standards to avoid exerting too much effort and I need to take positive steps to remedy this. I have always seen myself as a Conscientiousness personality as described in the FFM and to a large extent and, this explains my high ranking on the regulating and directing showing that I will often adjust my performance and actions if I feel they are not likely to produce the intended results. I will work to maintain this by constantly re-evaluating goals individually and as part of a team so I can bring out the best of myself and to the society. My ranking in involvement in constructive dialogue are relatively low at 3.3 and based on the study above, this can be attributed to a low level of extroversion. I must concede that I am often reluctant to engage other people often preferring to keep to myself unless I absolutely must confront or deal with interpersonal issues especially when it comes to correcting and criticizing others. This is a weakness that I intend to work on considering that low extroversion is closely related to neuroticism based this on my new understating of the concepts. In this case, I will make a conscious effort to be more interactive and assertive since I have learnt that the most effective way to rise in leadership is by learning how to make positive and productive interactions. My conscientiousness is further underlined by highly ranked goal directed behaviour, which attests to the fact that before I take up any task I need to have a clear vision of the results, ergo I plan every minute detail and ensure I focus on the goal to avoid getting side tracked. I however realize that this is not always a permanent nor naturally sustained state but one that requires deliberate effort, ergo to keep myself focused I will have to work on avoiding anything that my distract me doing my work and take time to make meticulous plans and contingencies. From the psychometric traits analysis, I can conclude that my personality is more comfortable playing a supportive role rather than a leading one and I prefer my own company rather and thus avoid excessive social interaction. However, I tend to be a team player and when dealing with challenges they do not destabilize me since I always feel in control of situations possibly, because of my thorough planning in advance of everything. In addition, I am prefer the familiar over the new and I would rather solve practical rather than intellectual or academic problems, all this point towards my being conscientious and I believe that the best way for me to improve my overall performance is by focusing on my strengths. However, I must admit that although there is not right or wrong personality, I need to improve on my interpersonal communication skills since in today’s world, networking is paramount and without some of the extroverted traits, I may lag behind and miss opportunities for growth and knowledge that I can get from a deeper interaction with others. Furthermore, leadership skills are also important since I realize that even if I make a good technician I must have leadership skills to be able to handle big projects with people under me otherwise my latitude of action will remain limited to what I can accomplish on my own or as a passive part of a team. At the end of the day, whether an employee is lazy, motivated, confident, having or lacking leadership qualities ultimately manifests in their behaviour, as it has been stated previously in this paper, behaviour predominantly derives from one’s personality among other things. Nevertheless, one must concede that despite the undeniable connection between behaviour and personality and by extension individual and collective performance external factors come into play. For instance, the environment in which people work may be hostile to some behaviour such as creativity and innovation in such cases they will often end up repressing their creative drive or look elsewhere for a job that is more accommodating. Despite this, there is overwhelming evidence that the most decisive factor in the determination of and individual tendencies and behaviour in the work place irrespective of internal and external pressures is their inherent characteristic. Therefore, many firms have their employees carries out studies similar to the one reflected on below so they may asses and to some extent, adjusts their personality so as to aligning themselves to the organizational goals. References Beer, A., & Brooks, C. (2011). Information quality in personality judgment: The value of personal disclosure. Journal of Research in Personality , 45 (2), 175-185 Chen, E. (2004). Why Socioeconomic Status Affects the Health of Children: A PsychosocialPerspective. A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science , 13 (3), 112-115. Connolly, J. J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2000). The role of affectivity in job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences,29, 265- 281. Denissen, J. J., Van Aken, M. A., & Roberts, B. W. (2011). Personality Development acrossthe Life Span. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham, The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Individual Differences. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative "Description of personality": The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229. Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42 Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869–879. Judge, T.A., Heller., D & Mount., M.K. (2002). Five Factor Model of Personality and JobSatisfaction: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87:530-541. Magnus, K., Diener, E., Fujita, F., & Pavot, W. (1993). Extraversion and neuroticism as predictors of objective life events: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1046-1053. Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personality and the Prediction of Consequential Outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology , 57, 401-421. Raja, U., Johns, G., & Ntalianis, F., (2004). The impact of personality on psychological contracts. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 350-367. Ryan, R, Alexander, P. & Deci, E. (January 01, 2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 1. Schulman, S. (2011). The Use of Personality Assessments to Predict Job Performance.Burlington: The University of Vermont. Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703–742. Watson, D., & Clark, E. A. 1997. Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. A. Johnson, & S. R. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767-793).San Diego: Academic Press. Read More