Monday, February 14, 2011

NEO Personality Development and Human Behavior

One of the biggest challenges in understanding human behavior is that it addresses issues that aren’t obvious. Like an iceberg, behavior has a small visible dimension and a much larger hidden portion. What we see when we look at people is their visible aspects: actions, attitudes, speech, acts, dress, language used, gait, etc. But under the surface are other elements that we need to understand – elements that influence how people behave they way they do and how they work. As we shall see, behavior provides us with considerable insights into these important, but hidden, aspects of human beings.

Attitudes are evaluative statements – either favorable or unfavorable – concerning objects, people, or events. They reflect how an individual feels about something. When a person says, “I like my job,” he or she is expressing an attitude about work. Research has generally concluded that people seek consistency among their attitudes and between their attitudes and behavior. This means that individuals try to reconcile differing attitudes and align their attitudes and behavior so they appear rational and consistent. When there is an inconsistency, individuals will take steps to make it consistent either by altering the attitudes or the behavior or by developing a rationalization for the

Some people are quiet and passive; others are loud and aggressive. When we describe people using terms such as quiet, passive, loud, aggressive, ambitious, extroverted, loyal, tense, or sociable, we’re categorizing them in terms of personality traits. An individual’s personality is the unique combination of the psychological traits we use to describe that person. Personality assessment tests are commonly used to reveal an individual’s personality traits. One of the most popular personality tests is the Myer-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). It consists of more than a hundred questions that ask people how they usually act or feel in different situations. The way you respond to these questions puts you at one end or another of four dimensions:

1. Social interactions: Extrovert or Introvert (E or I). An extrovert is someone who is outgoing, dominant, and often aggressive and who wants to change the world. Extroverts need a work environment that is varied and action oriented, that lets them be with others, and that gives them a variety of experiences. An individual who’s shy and withdrawn and focuses on understanding the world is described as an introvert. Introverts prefer a work environment that is quiet and concentrated, that lets them be alone, and that gives them a chance to explore in depth a limited set of experiences.
2. Preference for gathering data: Sensing or Intuitive (S or N). Sensing types dislike new problems unless there are standard ways to solve them; they like an established routine, have a high need for closure, show patience with routine details, and tend be good at precise work. On the other hand, intuitive types are individuals who like solving new problems, dislike doing the same thing over and over again, jump to conclusions, are impatient with routine details, and dislike taking time for precision.
3. Preference for decision making: Feeling or Thinking (F or T). Individuals who are feeling type are aware of other people and their feelings, like harmony, need occasional praise, dislike telling people unpleasant things, tend to be sympathetic, and relate well to most people. Thinking type are unemotional and uninterested in people’s feelings, like analysis and putting things into logical order, are able to reprimand people and fire them when necessary, may seem hard-hearted, and tend to relate well only to other thinking types.
4. Style of making decision: Perceptive or Judgmental (P or J). Perceptive types are curious, spontaneous, flexible, adaptable, and tolerant. They focus on starting a task, postpone decisions, and want to find out all about the task before starting it. Judgmental types are decisive, good planners, purposeful, and exacting. They focus on completing a task, make decisions quickly, and want only the information necessary to get a task done.

The Big-Five Model of Personality

Although the MBTI is very popular, it suffers from one major criticism. It lacks evidence to support its validity. That same criticism cannot be applied to the five-factor model of personality, more often called the big-five model. The big-five personality traits are:
1. Extraversion: The degree to which one is sociable, talkative, and assertive.
2. Agreeableness: The degree to which someone is good natured, cooperative, and trusting.
3. Conscientiousness: The degree to which someone is responsible, dependable, persistent, and achievement oriented.
4. Emotional stability: The degree to which someone is calm, enthusiastic, and secure (positive)or tense, nervous, depressed, and insecure (negative).
5. Openness to experience: The degree to which someone is imaginative, artistically sensitive, and intellectual.

Emotional Intelligence
Research into the area of emotional intelligence has offered some new insights into personality. Emotional intelligence (EI) is an assortment of non-cognitive skills, capabilities, and competencies that influence a person’s ability to succeed in coping with environmental demands and pressures. It’s composed of five dimensions:

Self-awareness: The ability to be aware of what you’re feeling
Self-management: The ability to manage one’s own emotions and impulses
Self-motivation: The ability to persist in the face of setbacks and failures
Empathy: The ability to sense how others are feeling
Social skills: The ability to handle the emotions of others.

EI has been shown to be positively related to job performance at all levels. For instance, one study looked at the characteristics of Bell Lab engineers who were rated as stars of their peers. The researchers concluded that stars were better at relating to others. That is, it was EI, not academic intelligence that characterized high performers. A second study of Air Force recruiter generated similar findings. Top-performing recruiters
exhibited high levels of EI. What can we conclude from these results? EI appears to be especially relevant to success in jobs that demand a high degree of social interaction.

Predicting behavior from personality traits
Five personality traits have proved to be the most powerful in explaining individual behavior in organizations. They are locus of control, Machiavellianism, self-esteem, self- monitoring, and risk propensity.

Locus of control: Some people believe that they control their own fate. Others see themselves as pawns, believing that what happens to them in their lives is due to luck or chance. The locus of control in the first case is internal; these people believe that they control their own destiny. The locus of control in the second case is external; these people believe that their lives are controlled by outside forces. Research evidence indicates that employees who rate high on externality are less satisfied with their jobs, more alienated from the work setting. and less involved in their jobs than are those who are high on internality.

Machiavellianism: The second characteristic is called Machiavellianism (Mach) named after Niccolo Machiavelli, who wrote in the 16th century on how to gain and manipulate power. An individual who is high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes that ends can justify means. “If it works, use it” is consistent with a high Mach perspective. Do high Machs make good employees? That depends on the type of job and whether you consider ethical factors in evaluating performance. In jobs that require bargaining kills (such as a purchasing manager) or that have substantial rewards for winning (such as a salesperson working on commission), high Machs are productive. In jobs in which ends do not justify the means or that lack absolute measure of performance, it’s difficult to predict the performance of high Machs.

Self-Esteem: People differ in the degree to which they like or dislike themselves. This trait is called selfesteem. The research on self-esteem (SE), offers some interesting insights into the study of human behavior. For example, self-esteem is directly related to expectations for success. High SEs believe that they posses the ability they need in order to succeed at work. They will take more risk in job selection and are more likely to choose unconventional jobs than are people with low self-esteem. The most common finding on self-esteem is that low SEs are more susceptible to external influence than are high SEs. Low SEs are dependent on receiving positive evaluation from others. As a result, they are more likely to seek approval from other and are more prone to conform to the beliefs and behaviors of those they respect than are high SEs. Low SEs will tend to be concerned with pleasing others and, therefore, will be less likely to take unpopular stands than are high SEs. Not surprisingly, self-esteem has also been found to be related to job satisfaction. A number of studies confirm that high SEs are more satisfied with their jobs than are low SEs.

Self-Monitoring: Another personnel trait that has received increased attention is called self-monitoring. It refers to an individual’s ability to adjust his or her behavior to external, situational factors. Individuals high in self-monitoring show considerable adaptability in adjusting their behavior. They’re highly sensitive to external cues and can behave differently in different situations. High self-monitors are capable of presenting striking contradictions between their personnel persona and their private selves. Low self-monitors cannot adjust their behavior. They tend to display their true dispositions and attitudes in every situation, and there’s high behavioral consistency between who they are and what they do. Research on self-monitoring is fairly new; thus, predictions are hard to make. However, preliminary evidence suggests that high self-monitors pay closer attention to the behavior of others and are more flexible than are low self-monitors. We might also hypothesize that high self-monitors are successful in managerial positions that require them to play multiple, and even contradictory, roles. The high self-monitor is capable of putting on different ‘faces’ for the audience.

Risk Taking: People differ in their willingness to take chances. Differences in the propensity to assume or to avoid risk have been shown to affect how long it takes managers to make a decision and how much information they require before making their choice. For instance, in one study, a group of managers worked on simulated exercises that required them to make hiring decisions. High risk-taking managers took less time to make decisions and used less information in making their choices than did low risk-taking managers. Interestingly, the decision accuracy of the two groups was the same. To maximize organizational effectiveness, managers should try to align employee risk-taking propensity with specific job demands. For instance, high risk-propensity may lead to effective performance for a commodities trader in brokerage firm because this type of job demands rapid decision making. On the other hand, high risk-taking propensity might prove a major obstacle to accountants auditing financial statements.

People who read this post also read :


Post a Comment

Please leave your comments!