Personality Measures as Predictors of Job Performance: A Meta‐analytic Review

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate conflicting findings in previous research on personality and job performance. Meta‐analysis was used to (a) assess the overall validity of personality measures as predictors of job performance, (b) investigate the moderating effects of several study characteristics on personality scale validity, and (c) appraise the predictability of job performance as a function of eight distinct categories of personality content, including the “Big Five” personality factors. Based on review of 494 studies, usable results were identified for 97 independent samples (total N= 13,521). Consistent with predictions, studies using confirmatory research strategies produced a corrected mean personality scale validity (.29) that was more than twice as high as that based on studies adopting exploratory strategies (.12). An even higher mean validity (.38) was obtained based on studies using job analysis explicitly in the selection of personality measures. Validities were also found to be higher in longer tenured samples and in published articles versus dissertations. Corrected mean validities for the “Big Five” factors ranged from .16 for Extroversion to .33 for Agreeableness. Weaknesses in the reporting of validation study characteristics are noted, and recommendations for future research in this area are provided. Contrary to conclusions of certain past reviews, the present findings provide some grounds for optimism concerning the use of personality measures in employee selection.

Current Status and Future Directions

“…These results are fairly consistent with results found in North American metaanalyses (Barrick & Mount, 1991;Hough, Eaten, Dunnette, Kamp, & McCloy, 1990;Hurtz & Donovan, 2000;Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991). It is also important to note that the Big Five personality characteristics have been replicated in an impressive series of studies, across raters and rating scales, but also in different countries and cultures (Collins & Gleaves, 1998;Ghorpade, Hattrup, & Lackritz, 1999;Saucier, Hampson, & Goldberg, 2000).…”

Can personality predict retirement behaviour? A longitudinal analysis combining survey and register data from Norway

“…Neuroticism means a tendency to be worried, touchy, nervous and strenuous. Previous research shows that neuroticism is associated with low job performance (Tett et al 1991), including low earnings (Gelissen and de Graaf 2006;Judge et al 1999;Sutin et al 2009), as well as low job satisfaction (Judge et al 2002). Hence, there is no surprise that it also predicts disability retirement.…”

“…In empirical research, neuroticism appears to be the most consistent predictor of job success amongst the Big Five personality traits. Tett et al (1991) found that, in a meta-analysis, neuroticism was adversely correlated with job performance. Later research has confirmed this finding; for example, individuals high in neuroticism have significantly lower earnings (Gelissen and de Graaf 2006;Judge et al 1999;Sutin et al 2009).…”

The adaptive value of personality differences revealed by small island population dynamics

“…Our research suggests that gene flow helps to explain why a large variety of individual personality differences are preserved in large populations with many different social and ecological environments available. The various alleles, which produce personality differences, seem to be very efficient at preserving themselves (Dawkins, 1977), since individuals with different personality traits actively search for a suitable environment (Barrick & Mount, 1991;Hettema & Kenrick, 1992;Scarr & McCartney, 1983;Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991). This explains why alleles influencing these personality traits are eliminated with difficulty through natural selection, thus preserving high population variability.…”