Individual determinants of work attendance: evidence on the role of personality

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. www.econstor.eu Terms of use: Documents in D I S C U S S I O N P A P E R S E R I E S ABSTRACT Individual Determinants of Work Attendance: Evidence on the Role of PersonalityWe investigate the influence of personality as measured by the Big Five personality scale on absenteeism using representative data for Germany. In particular, the 2005 wave of the German Socio-Economic Panel provides detailed information on socio-economic background characteristics along with a Big Five personality scale. Estimates of a Logit model and of count data regression are used to analyze an empirical model based on the theory of hedonic labour market outcomes. These estimates allow us to test hypotheses on the influence of the Big Five personality traits on work attendance. We find clear negative correlations between the probability to be absent and Conscientiousness as well as Agreeableness. We find a strong positive impact of Neuroticism on work attendance decisions in general and clues for a positive impact of Extraversion among men. When looking at the length of absence occurrences the personality dimensions of Neuroticism and Agreeableness are found to significantly influence male absenteeism. Implications of our results are discussed.JEL Classification: J20, M12, M51

Overeducation dynamics and personality

“…Other mechanisms might be the mediating effect that personality exerts on absenteeism (Störmer and Fahr 2010), the likelihood of self-employment (Caliendo, Fossen, and Kritikos 2008) and unemployment duration (Caliendo, Cobb-Clark, and Uhlendorff 2010). Dohmen et al (2009) highlighted the role of reciprocity in generating better labour market prospects by showing that reciprocal workers are paid more, exert greater efforts on the job, are more likely to be employed and report higher life satisfaction.…”

Strengthening State Capabilities: The Role of Financial Incentives in the Call to Public Service*

“…Anderson, Burks, DeYoung, and Rustichini (2011) find that personality traits are better predictors of credit scores and job persistence than traditional economic preferences such as time discounting and attitudes to risk. Using a representative dataset from Germany, Störmer and Fahr (2010) find that individuals who are conscientious and agreeable are much less likely to be absent at work, whereas absenteeism is much higher among neurotic individuals.…”

Questioning the Stereotype of the “Malingering Bureaucrat”: Absence from Work in the Public and Private Sector in Germany

“…Concerning the penalty of dismissal, this becomes less likely the longer a worker is employed in a firm since the dismissal costs to the employer and employment protection tend to increase with tenure in many countries, including Germany. Interestingly, although tenure has been found to be positively related to worker absence in a study across 34 European countries by Arnold and de Pinto (2015), several studies for Germany do not show a statistically significant relationship (Störmer andFahr 2013, Arnold et al 2018). Dismissals are even more unlikely in the public sector where employees enjoy a very high employment protection in Germany.…”

“…A recent analysis with GSOEP data by Arnold et al (2018) reports sickness incidence to be 11.6 percent higher and sickness days to be about 1.5 days higher in the public sector, ceteris paribus. In contrast, other studies find increased absenteeism in the public sector only for certain groups of workers such as men or white-collar employees (Thalmaier 2002, Störmer andFahr 2013). Unfortunately, these studies do not specifically investigate whether the determinants of absence differ between employees in the private and public sector, whether differences in workloads and job satisfaction between both sectors play a role, and whether employees in the public sector react differently to problems of health and working conditions.…”

“…Adverse working conditions, which make absence from work more likely by increasing employees' disutility from work, also play a role in standard economic models (such as Allen 1981). Consequently, many empirical studies report that the frequency and duration of (sickness) absence is significantly related to health and work characteristics such as health complaints, perceived workload, working conditions, and work strain (see, e.g., Leigh 1991, Arnold andde Pinto 2015, the survey by Beemsterboer et al 2009, and the meta-analysis by Darr and Johns 2008;Beblo andOrtlieb 2012 andStörmer andFahr 2013 provide evidence on Germany). It is sometimes argued that health issues play a more important role for explaining sickness absence in the public than in the private sector in Germany since the public sector is a more socially-minded employer and less selective in hiring or keeping contractual employees with respect to their (age-related) health status and capabilities (see, e.g., Oppolzer 1999).…”