Download Tag: journal articles

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.

In support of personality assessment in organizational settings

Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Judge, T. A.
Personnel Psychology, 60, 995-1027.
(2007)

Personality constructs have been demonstrated to be useful for explaining and predicting attitudes, behaviors, performance, and outcomes in organizational settings. Many professionally developed measures of personality constructs display useful levels of criterion-related validity for job performance and its facets. In this response to Morgeson et al. (2007), we comprehensively summarize previously published meta-analyses on (a) the optimal and unit-weighted multiple correlations between the Big Five personality dimensions and behaviors in organizations, including job performance; (b) generalizable bivariate relationships of Conscientiousness and its facets (e.g., achievement orientation, dependability, cautiousness) with job performance constructs; (c) the validity of compound personality measures; and (d) the incremental validity of personality measures over cognitive ability. Hundreds of primary studies and dozens of meta-analyses conducted and published since the mid 1980s indicate strong support for using personality measures in staffing decisions. Moreover, there is little evidence that response distortion among job applicants ruins the psychometric properties, including criterion-related validity, of personality measures. We also provide a brief evaluation of the merits of alternatives that have been offered in place of traditional self-report personality measures for organizational decision making. Given the cumulative data, writing off the whole domain of individual differences in personality or all self-report measures of personality from personnel selection and organizational decision making is counterproductive for the science and practice of I-O psychology.

Response distortion in personality measurement: Born to deceive, yet capable of providing valid self-assessments?

Dilchert, S., Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Deller, J.
Psychology Science, 48, 209-225.
(2006)

This introductory article to the special issue of Psychology Science devoted to the subject of “Considering Response Distortion in Personality Measurement for Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology Research and Practice” presents an overview of the issues of response distortion in personality measurement. It also provides a summary of the other articles published as part of this special issue addressing social desirability, impression management, self-presentation, response distortion, and faking in personality measurement in industrial, work, and organizational settings.

Personality at work: Raising awareness and correcting misconceptions

Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S.
Human Performance, 18, 389-404.
(2005)

Personality variables have always predicted important behaviors and outcomes in industrial, work, and organizational psychology. In this commentary, we first review empirically supported structural models of personality that show the following: (a) Personality traits are hierarchically organized, (b) the Big Five are not orthogonal, (c) abnormal personality measures assess the same continuum of traits as normal adult personality measures, and (d) there are compound personality traits that are especially useful in the prediction of organizational behaviors. Second, we provide a brief overview of meta-analyses of compound personality variables. The highest operational validities of single scales (.40s) are associated with personality measures assessing broad, compound personality characteristics, such as integrity, violence potential, customer service orientation, and managerial potential, that incorporate aspects from multiple dimensions of the Big Five. Third, we also review meta-analytic evidence that has linked personality attributes to other important organizational attitudes and behaviors, such as job satisfaction, motivation, and leadership, with multiple correlations for the Big Five in the .40 to .50 range. Fourth, we discuss the important role that meta-analysis has had in establishing the predictive and explanatory value of personality variables. We conclude with some caveats and directions for future research.