Personality: Its measurement and validity for employee selection

Hough, L. M., & Dilchert, S.
In J. L. Farr & N. T. Tippins (Eds.),
Handbook of employee selection (pp. 299-319).
New York: Routledge.
(2010)

One of the most important advances in our field can be attributed to the recognition of the importance of personality variables in determining and explaining performance. With the addition of personality variables to our models of job performance, we are now able to explain significantly more variation in behavior and performance than ever before. In this chapter, we review the issues, document the evidence, and describe the consensus emerging about the usefulness of personality variables in employee selection. We describe factors that hinder our understanding and those that help increase our knowledge of personality variables and their role in more accurately predicting work-related criteria. We address issues related to taxonomic structure, measurement methods, level of measurement, validity, and factors that threaten and enhance the validity of personality measures.

Cognitive abilities

Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C. & Salgado, J. F.
In J. L. Farr & N. T. Tippins (Eds.),
Handbook of employee selection (pp. 255-275).
New York: Routledge.
(2010)

Intelligence affects individuals’ lives in countless ways. As such, it is an exceedingly precious trait to include in employee selection systems. In this chapter, we provide an overview of cognitive ability’s key role in staffing organizations and provide evidence-based practice recommendations. We first present a brief synopsis of the history, current usage, and acceptance of cognitive ability tests in employee selection. Second, we highlight the theoretical underpinnings of cognitive ability as a construct. Third, we discuss developments in its measurement. Fourth, we present an overview of the criterion-related validity of cognitive ability tests in predicting valued work behaviors and outcomes. Fifth, we discuss the issue of group differences in cognitive ability test scores both within the United States and internationally. We conclude by discussing future research and practice challenges.

Personality tests in the workplace

Ones, D. S. & Dilchert, S.
InTheBlack, 54-55.
(2009)

We make judgments and evaluations about others’ personalities every day – when we meet new acquaintances, when we catch up with old friends, and even when we interact with our spouses or partners. Personality is important – it describes the general tendencies of individuals to feel, think, act, and react in a variety of life situations. And our work lives, of course, are one of those domains where personality plays a primary role. Organisations have long tried to glean information on individuals’ personalities for a variety of purposes, including career counselling, employee development and coaching, or candidate selection. The method most commonly used to try to learn more about someone’s “character” is the employment interview, and such interviews can be useful when properly designed and applied (especially when they are standardised to minimise the influence of human error and bias).

Assessment center dimensions: Individual differences correlates and meta-analytic incremental validity

Dilchert, S., & Ones, D. S.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 254-270.
(2009)

This study provides an investigation of the nomological net for the seven primary assessment center (AC) dimensions identified by Arthur, Day, McNelly, and Eden (Personnel Psychology, 56, 125–154, 2003). In doing so, the authors provide the first robust estimates of the relationships between all primary AC dimensions with cognitive ability and the Big 5 factors of personality. Additionally, intercorrelations between AC dimensions based on sample sizes much larger than those previously available in the meta-analytic literature are presented. Data were obtained from two large managerial samples (total N = 4985). Primary data on AC dimensions, personality, and cognitive ability interrelationships were subsequently integrated with meta-analytic data to estimate incremental validity for optimally and unit-weighted AC dimension composites as well as overall AC ratings over psychometric tests of personality and cognitive ability. Results show that unit- and optimally weighted composites of construct-based AC dimensions add incremental validity over tests of personality and cognitive ability, while overall AC ratings (including those obtained using subjective methods of data combination) do not.

Personality scale validities increase throughout medical school

Lievens, F., Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1514-1535.
(2009)

Admissions and personnel decisions rely on stable predictor–criterion relationships. The authors studied the validity of Big Five personality factors and their facets for predicting academic performance in medical school across multiple years, investigating whether criterion-related validities change over time. In this longitudinal investigation, an entire European country’s 1997 cohort of medical students was studied throughout their medical school career (Year 1, N = 627; Year 7, N = 306). Over time, extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness factor and facet scale scores showed increases in operational validity for predicting grade point averages. Although there may not be any advantages to being open and extraverted for early academic performance, these traits gain importance for later academic performance when applied practice increasingly plays a part in the curriculum. Conscientiousness, perhaps more than any other personality trait, appears to be an increasing asset for medical students: Operational validities of conscientiousness increased from .18 to .45. In assessing the utility of personality measures, relying on early criteria might underestimate the predictive value of personality variables. Implications for personality measures to predict work performance are discussed.

The importance of exercise and dimension factors in assessment centers: Simultaneous examinations of construct-related and criterion-related validity

Lievens, F., Dilchert, S., & Ones, D. S.
Human Performance, 22, 375-390.
(2009)

This study presents a simultaneous examination of multiple evidential bases of the validity of assessment center (AC) ratings. In particular, we combine both construct-related and criterion-related validation strategies in the same sample to determine the relative importance of exercises and dimensions. We examine the underlying structure of ACs in terms of exercise and dimension factors while directly linking these factors to a work-related criterion (salary). Results from an AC (N = 753) showed that exercise factors not only explained more variance in AC ratings than dimension factors but also were more important in predicting salary. Dimension factors explained a smaller albeit significant portion of the variance in AC ratings and had lower validity for predicting salary. The implications of these findings for AC theory, practice, and research are discussed.

How special are executives? How special should executive selection be? Observations and recommendations

Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S.
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2, 163-170.
(2009)

Hollenbeck (2009) suggests that executive selection decisions are often wrong and believes that selection of executives should be differentiated from selection at lower levels. In addition, he asserts that by focusing on competencies, rather than characteristics, ‘‘we are doing it backwards.’’ We agree with Hollenbeck that sound personnel selection should start with and be based on personal characteristics rather than amorphous, often ill-defined competencies. Yet, this principle applies to all selection not just executive selection. In order to determine whether executive selection should truly be a special process, two key questions must be asked and answered.

Personality and extrinsic career success: Predicting managerial salary at different organizational levels

Dilchert, S., & Ones, D. S.
Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie, 7, 1-23.
(2008)

The relationship between personality and salary was investigated among 4,150 managers. Individuals at five different managerial levels completed a measure of the Big Five personality dimensions as part of a work-related psychological assessment. The validity of personality for predicting salary was examined separately by managerial level, sex, as well as by purpose of assessment (selection versus development). Results indicated that personality predicts managerial salaries with useful levels of validity and thus is valuable for predicting extrinsic career success. While there was no evidence for differential validity by sex or purpose of assessment, results differed across managerial levels, with stronger relationships among the lowest and highest managerial groups (i.e., supervisors and top executives) largely due to increased predictor and criterion score variability.

Peaks and valleys: Predicting interests in leadership and managerial positions from personality profiles

Dilchert, S.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 317-334.
(2007)

This study investigates the relationship between personality and leadership and managerial interests at different levels of the vocational interest taxonomy. Personality scale scores from four different inventories were used to predict vocational interests of 574 adults. Influencing/enterprising interests, leadership and supervisory interests, and job-specific managerial interests (e.g., CEO, Media Executive, Human Resources Director) served as criterion measures. A multiple regression-based pattern recognition procedure recently devised by Davison and Davenport was applied to identify configurations of personality scores relating to these interest criteria. The personality profile pattern predictive of influencing and leadership interests was stable across different managerial domains. Results indicate that personality profile patterns drive the predictive power of personality scores, and that they explain a larger proportion of the variance in influencing and leadership interests compared with individuals’ absolute trait levels.

Cognitive ability predicts objectively measured counterproductive work behaviors

Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., Davis, R. D., & Rostow, C. D.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 616-627.
(2007)

Over the past 2 decades, increasing attention has been directed at the relationship between individual differences and counterproductive work behaviors (CWB). However, most of this research has focused on personality variables as potential predictors of CWB; surprisingly little research has investigated the link between counterproductivity and cognitive ability. This study presents the first focal investigation of the cognitive ability-CWB relationship. The authors measured organizational and interpersonal CWB using organizational records of formally recorded incidents (e.g., destruction of property, physical violence). In a predictive study, for a large sample of law enforcement job applicants, a standardized psychometric test of cognitive ability predicted CWB, whereas educational attainment did not.