Personality, interview performance, and the mediating role of impression management

Abstract

The present study investigated the association between personality and job interview performance, as mediated by applicant use of impression management (IM) behaviours. We focused primarily on the novel role of Honesty‐Humility, with a secondary focus on Extraversion and an exploratory examination of other HEXACO personality traits. The sample consisted of 212 management students participating in high fidelity mock interviews with 70 experienced interviewers. Findings indicated that, across both self‐ and peer reports of personality, (low) Honesty‐Humility, (high) Extraversion, and (low) Emotionality predict IM use. In addition, mediation analyses indicated that individuals high in Extraversion and low on Emotionality may perform better in the interview through their use of IM. On the other hand, while Honesty‐Humility indirectly impacted interview performance through several paths, the overall effect was null, such that individuals low in Honesty‐Humility did not perform better in the interview. This is because they used both forms of IM that led to success, and those that detracted from success, thereby cancelling each other out. This study informs our knowledge of personality and interview performance, such that differences in the IM behaviours an individual chooses have implications for whether individuals with certain traits are successful.Practitioner points Impression management behaviours have an important impact on how applicants are evaluated by interviewers. Individuals who engage in IM may not be those who are necessarily better at the job once hired. They are predominantly high in Extraversion and low in Honesty‐Humility.

“Thought provoking”, “interactive”, and “more like a peer talk”: Testing the deliberative interview style in Germany

“…We therefore propose further research not only on the role of gender, age, and academic/professional background but also on the role of personality for conducting deliberative interviews. Personality has been studied in the context of employment interview situations ( Bourdage et al., 2020 ; Sears & Rowe, 2003 ); we propose to extend it to the context of research interviews as well.…”

Manager narcissism and employee silence: A socio‐analytic theory perspective

“…Socio‐analytic theory takes an evolutionary perspective on how personality affects individuals’ functioning in their social world, including their success in the workplace (Hogan, 1982; Hogan & Blickle, 2018; see Bourdage, Schmidt, Wiltshire, Nguyen, & Lee, 2020). Applying this theoretical lens to the manager–employee dynamic implies that managers need to build or maintain a good ‘reputation’ among their employees, which refers to how their employees view them.…”

The development and validation of a multi-dimensional Job Interview Self-efficacy scale

“…Self-promotion is a self-focused impression management tactic that is functional to direct listener attention to show that the applicant possesses desired qualities (Huffcutt et al, 2011;Levashina et al, 2014). Candidates can state that they are competent and claim their responsibility for positive outcomes in their experience (Amaral et al, 2019;Ellis et al, 2002), reaching better ratings (Bourdage et al, 2020). The existing ISE concepts and measures mostly pertain to the perceived ability to make credible self-presentation and impression, which leads to better interview outcomes (Latham & Budworth, 2006;Tay et al, 2006).…”

“…Coherently, research has highlighted that these three personality traits are involved with ISE (Tay et al, 2006) and other SE beliefs (i.e., Kim et al, 2019) in predicting interview and job search outcomes. For instance, extroverted, emotionally stable and conscientious interviewees are more capable of using self-promotion, managing stress management, and preparing for an interview (Bourdage et al, 2020;Huffcutt et al, 2011). Rooting upon these capabilities, their ISE raises (Tay et al, 2006).…”

“…In both hierarchical regressions, we included age and gender in step one, extraversion, conscientiousness, and emotional stability in step two. These variables were included as control variables because they influence the job interview outcomes (Bourdage et al, 2020;Caldwell & Burger, 1998;Tay et al, 2006). In step three of one hierarchical regression, we included the MJISE general factor as the independent variable.…”