CHAPTER 3
Understanding People at
Work: Individual
Differences and Perception
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following:
1. Define personality and describe how it affects work behaviors.
2. Understand the role of values in determining work behaviors.
3. Explain the process of perception and how it affects work behaviors.
4. Understand how individual differences affect ethics.
5. Understand cross-cultural influences on individual differences and perception.
Individuals bring a number of differences to work, such as unique personalities, values, emotions,
and moods. When new employees enter organizations, their stable or transient characteristics
affect how they behave and perform. Moreover, companies hire people with the expectation that
those individuals have certain skills, abilities, personalities, and values. Therefore, it is important to
understand individual characteristics that matter for employee behaviors at work.
3.1 Hiring for Match: The Case of Netflix
FIGURE 3.1
Source: chrisdorney / Shutterstock.com
Hiring is perhaps one of the most important activities that takes place in a company, and it is
common to hear managers talk about hiring the “best” people. Who exactly are the best people,
though? And how do you get them to join your organization? Netflix, the entertainment company
specializing in media streaming, is a thought leader in recruitment and hiring, and is responsible
for many talent management practices adopted by other firms in recent years, including unlimited
vacation time and eliminating annual performance reviews.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
84
Organizational Behavior
In terms of the skills they look for, Netflix considers future as well as current needs. Past experience and keyword matches may not be so helpful if the job itself is new. For example, when the
company first became interested in hiring someone who could analyze big data, this was not a
skill listed on many résumés. So they had to look for the right people in all sorts of industries that
handled large amounts of data, such as insurance or credit card companies. They caution that
job descriptions may be outdated and written for the person who left the job, and the company
needs to consider the skills they will need in the future, or the skills they need right now in order
to solve the business problems they are experiencing.
Netflix has a unique culture. Unlike many Silicon Valley technology companies, they do not have
a lot of perks such as free lunch or on-site gaming. They also pride themselves in treating people like adults, which means a high level of empowerment and trust. Realizing that this culture
is not for everyone, they try to attract the right person in multiple ways. The description of their
culture is available for everyone to read, which they hope will weed out people who may not feel
comfortable in such an environment. They also make sure that their recruitment and hiring experience signals their most important values. They avoid misleading people as part of the process.
They share their biggest attractions, which they see as the ability to work with top-notch people. They also are honest in giving job candidates feedback about their concerns. Nellie Peshkov,
vice president of global talent acquisition, sees this as a test: “Do they get defensive, or do they
accept the feedback and seek to engage in a healthy and productive dialogue? That’s a clue to
see if they will be successful or not.” [1]
Video: Multimedia Extension—Patty McCord: Lessons from a Silicon
Valley Maverick
View the video online at: //www.youtube.com/embed/uvG0aCbuG60?rel=0
Read about the Netflix culture here: https://jobs.netflix.com/culture
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Who is Netflix looking for? Patty McCord, who served as the Chief Talent Officer for Netflix for 14
years until her departure in 2012, suggests that they are looking for a good “match.” She cautions that when people say they hire for fit with company culture, they typically are thinking of
someone they would enjoy sharing a beer with, which is not how match should be defined. Such
an approach leads to restricting diversity as hiring managers and teams end up hiring people who
are similar to them. Instead, they should be looking for someone who can solve their current and
future business problems, and someone who shares the key values and goals of the company.
In a Harvard Business Review article and a follow-up podcast, she shares the example of hiring
a programmer who was working in an Arizona bank. The candidate was not a typical Silicon Valley hire, as he was a quiet guy who enjoyed woodworking in his free time, and was working in a
traditional industry, but he had built an app enhancing Netflix. Ultimately, he fit the company so
well because he was passionate about Netflix and the customer experience, despite his different
background and personality. He was hired, and eventually rose through the ranks to become a
vice president.
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
85
Case Discussion Questions
1. Patty McCord cautions that in many companies, culture fit is treated as finding someone you
would like to spend time with. Do you agree with this observation? How do you think culture
fit should be defined?
2. How can organizations successfully hire someone who fits with their organization? What are
some methods they can use?
3. Based on the case, what are the values and skills of someone who could be successful at
Netflix?
4. Netflix uses realistic job previews of their culture. Do you believe that all companies should
do this? Why or why not?
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
5. Netflix cautions that hiring managers should not rely too much on the job descriptions. What
are the downsides of ignoring job descriptions when hiring someone?
3.2 The Interactionist Perspective: The Role of Fit
Learning Objectives
1. Differentiate between person–organization and person–job fit.
2. Understand the relationship between person–job fit and work behaviors.
3. Understand the relationship between person–organization fit and work behaviors.
Individual differences matter in the workplace. Human beings bring their personality, physical and
mental abilities, and other stable traits to work. Imagine that you are interviewing an employee
who is proactive, creative, and willing to take risks. Would this person be a good job candidate?
What behaviors would you expect this person to demonstrate?
The question posed above is misleading. While human beings bring their traits to work, every
organization is different, and every job within the organization is also different. According to the
interactionist perspective, behavior is a function of the person and the situation interacting with
each other. Think about it. Would a shy person speak up in class? While a shy person may not feel
like speaking, if the individual is very interested in the subject, knows the answers to the questions,
and feels comfortable within the classroom environment, and if the instructor encourages participation and participation is 30% of the course grade, regardless of the level of shyness, the student
may feel inclined to participate. Similarly, the behavior you may expect from someone who is proactive, creative, and willing to take risks will depend on the situation.
When hiring employees, companies are interested in assessing at least two types of fit.
Person–organization fit refers to the degree to which a person’s values, personality, goals, and other
characteristics match those of the organization. Person–job fit is the degree to which a person’s
skill, knowledge, abilities, and other characteristics match the job demands. Thus, someone who is
proactive and creative may be a great fit for a company in the high-tech sector that would benefit
from risk-taking employees, but may be a poor fit for a company that rewards routine and predictable behavior, such as an accounting firm. Similarly, this person may be a great fit for a job such
as a scientist, but a poor fit for a routine office job.
The first thing many recruiters look for is the degree of person–job fit. This is not surprising,
because person–job fit is related to a number of positive work attitudes such as satisfaction with
the work environment, identification with the organization, job satisfaction, and work behaviors
such as job performance. Companies are often also interested in hiring candidates who will fit into
the company culture (those with high person–organization fit). When people fit into their organi© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
person-organization
fit
The degree to which a
person’s values,
personality, goals, and
other characteristics
match those of the
organization.
person-job fit
The degree to which a
person’s skill, knowledge,
abilities, and other
characteristics match the
job demands.
86
Organizational Behavior
overqualification
The degree to which a
person’s skill, knowledge,
abilities, and other
characteristics exceed the
job requirements.
A special case of not fitting one’s job is being overqualified for the job. Overqualification is a
situation in which the employee has more skills, education, and experience than the job requires.
People take jobs for which they are overqualified for a number of reasons, including a lack of alternatives, to gain entry into a new field, or not realizing that the job is actually below his or her skill
level. Research shows that overqualification is related to negative job attitudes, greater tendency to
look for a job, and higher likelihood of counterproductive behaviors. At the same time, studies have
shown that there are situations where overqualification is positively related to job performance,
particularly when these employees work with other overqualified workers. Further, the negative
effects of overqualification only seem to emerge when employees are not empowered. In other
words, by allowing employees to control their work environment and have a say in how things are
done at work, companies can benefit from these highly qualified workers.[7]
Key Takeaway
While personality traits and other individual differences are important, we need to keep in mind
that behavior is jointly determined by the person and the situation. Certain situations bring out
the best in people, and someone who is a poor performer in one job may turn into a star
employee in a different job.
What do you think?
1. How can a company assess person–job fit before hiring employees? What are the methods
you think would be helpful?
2. How can a company determine person–organization fit before hiring employees? Which
methods do you think would be helpful?
3. What can organizations do to increase person–job and person–organization fit after they hire
employees?
4. How do you think organizations react to overqualified workers? Are these candidates viewed
as highly desirable job candidates? Why or why not?
3.3 Individual Differences: Values and Personality
Learning Objectives
1. Understand what values are.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
zation, they tend to be more satisfied with their jobs, more committed to their companies, and less
likely to experience burnout, and they actually remain longer in their company.[2] Further, applicants who believe that they fit with the organization during the stages of recruitment are more
attracted to the firm and are more likely to accept an offer by that company.[3] One area of controversy is whether these people perform better. Some studies have found a positive relationship
between person–organization fit and job performance, but this finding was not present in all studies, so it seems that fitting with a company’s culture will only sometimes predict job performance.[4]
It also seems that fitting in with the company culture is more important to some people than to
others. For example, people who are in more advanced stages of their careers are more strongly
affected by their level of person–organization fit.[5] Also, when they build good relationships with
their supervisors and the company, being a misfit does not seem to lead to dissatisfaction on the
job.[6]
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
87
2. Describe the link between values and individual behavior.
3. Identify the major personality traits that are relevant to organizational behavior.
4. Explain the link between personality, work behavior, and work attitudes.
5. Explain the potential pitfalls of personality testing.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Values
Values refer to stable life goals that people have, reflecting what is most important to them. Values
are established throughout one’s life as a result of the accumulating life experiences and tend to be
relatively stable.[8] The values that are important to people tend to affect the types of decisions they
make, how they perceive their environment, and their actual behaviors. Moreover, people are more
likely to accept job offers when the company possesses the values people care about.[9] Value attainment is one reason why people stay in a company, and when an organization does not help them
attain their values, they are more likely to decide to leave if they are dissatisfied with the job itself.[10]
values
Stable life goals people
have, reflecting what is
most important to them.
What are the values people care about? There are many typologies of values. One of the most
established surveys to assess individual values is the Rokeach Value Survey.[11] This survey lists 18
terminal and 18 instrumental values in alphabetical order. Terminal values refer to end states people desire in life, such as leading a prosperous life and a world at peace. Instrumental values deal
with views on acceptable modes of conduct, such as being honest and ethical, and being ambitious.
terminal values
According to Rokeach, values are arranged in hierarchical fashion. In other words, an accurate
way of assessing someone’s values is to ask them to rank the 36 values in order of importance. By
comparing these values, people develop a sense of which value can be sacrificed to achieve the
other, and the individual priority of each value emerges.
instrumental values
TABLE 3.1 Sample Items from Rokeach (1973) Value Survey
Terminal Values
Instrumental Values
A world of beauty
Broad minded
An exciting life
Clean
Family security
Forgiving
Inner harmony
Imaginative
Self-respect
Obedient
Where do values come from? Research indicates that they are shaped early in life and show
stability over the course of a lifetime. Early family experiences are important influences over the
dominant values. People who were raised in families with low socioeconomic status and those
who experienced restrictive parenting often display conformity values when they are adults, while
those who were raised by parents who were cold toward their children would likely value and
desire security.[12]
Values of a generation also change and evolve in response to the historical context that the
generation grows up in. It is important to keep in mind that generational differences, where they
exist, are modest, and are not strong enough to justify treating different age groups differently in
the workplace. At the same time, research identified some differences in the values of different generations. For example, Generation Xers (those born between 1965 and 1979) are thought to be more
individualistic and are interested in working toward organizational goals so long as they coincide
with their personal goals. This group, compared to the Baby Boomers (those born between 1946
and 1964), is also less likely to see work as central to their life and more likely to desire a quick promotion.[13] Millennials (those born between 1980 and 2000) value leisure more, report less work
centrality than boomers, and value work-life balance.[14] At the same time, the cut-offs between generations tend to be fuzzy, and the trends tend to be gradual.[15]
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
End states people desire in
life, such as leading a
prosperous life and a
world at peace.
Views on acceptable
modes of conduct, such
as being honest and
ethical, and being
ambitious.
88
Organizational Behavior
FIGURE 3.2
Source: Shutterstock.com
The values a person holds may affect their employment. For example, someone who has an
orientation toward strong stimulation may pursue extreme sports and select an occupation that
involves fast action and high risk, such as fire fighter, police officer, or emergency medical doctor.
Someone who has a drive for achievement may more readily act as an entrepreneur. Moreover,
whether individuals will be satisfied at a given job may depend on whether the job provides a
way to satisfy their dominant values. Therefore, understanding employees at work requires understanding the value orientations of employees.
Personality
personality
The relatively stable
feelings, thoughts, and
behavioral patterns a
person has.
Personality encompasses the relatively stable feelings, thoughts, and behavioral patterns a person
has. Our personality differentiates us from other people, and understanding someone’s personality
gives us clues about how that person is likely to act and feel in a variety of situations. In order to
effectively manage organizational behavior, an understanding of different employees’ personalities
is helpful. Having this knowledge is also useful for placing people in jobs and organizations.
When scholars discuss personality characteristics as being “stable,” this does not mean that
an individual’s personality exhibits no degree of change. You probably remember how you have
changed and evolved as a result of your own life experiences, attention you received in early childhood, the style of parenting you were exposed to, successes and failures you had in high school, and
other life events. In fact, our personality changes over long periods of time. For example, we tend
to become more socially dominant, more conscientious (organized and dependable), and more emotionally stable between ages 20 and 40, whereas openness to new experiences tends to decline as
we age.[16] In other words, even though we treat personality as relatively stable over short periods
of time, changes occur. Moreover, even in childhood, our personality shapes who we are and has
lasting consequences for us. For example, studies show that part of our career success and job satisfaction later in life can be explained by our childhood personality.[17]
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Values will affect the choices people make. For example, someone who has a strong stimulation orientation may
pursue extreme sports and be drawn to risky business ventures with a high potential for payoff.
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
89
Is our behavior in organizations dependent on our personality? Yes and no. While we will discuss the effects of personality for employee behavior, you must remember that the relationships
we describe are modest correlations. For example, having a sociable and outgoing personality may
encourage people to seek friends and prefer social situations. This does not mean that their personality will immediately affect their work behavior. At work, we have a job to do and a role to perform.
Therefore, our behavior may be more strongly affected by what is expected of us, as opposed to
how we want to behave. When people have a lot of freedom at work, their personality will become
a stronger influence over their behavior.[18]
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Big Five Personality Traits
How many personality traits exist? In the English language alone, more than 15,000 words describing personality have been identified. When researchers analyzed the terms describing personality
characteristics, they realized that many different words might be used to describe a single dimension of personality. When these words were grouped, five dimensions seemed to emerge that
explain a lot of the variation in our personalities.[19] The “Big Five” dimensions of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism can be remembered using the acronym
OCEAN. Everyone has some degree of each of these traits; it is the unique configuration of how
high a person rates on some traits and how low on others that produces the individual quality we
call personality. Keep in mind that these five traits are not necessarily the only ones that exist.
There are other, specific traits that represent dimensions not captured by the Big Five. Still, understanding the main five traits gives us a good start for describing personality.
Openness is the degree to which a person is curious, original, intellectual, creative, and open to
new ideas. People high in openness thrive in situations that require being flexible and learning new
things. For example, in a study tracking individuals from childhood to the age of 64, childhood
openness showed indirect effects on upward social mobility because these individuals were more
likely to acquire higher levels of education.[20] As employees, they have an advantage when they
enter into a new organization. Their open-mindedness leads them to seek a lot of information and
feedback about how they are doing and to build relationships, which leads to quicker adjustment
to the new job.[21] Open people are highly adaptable to change, and teams that experience unforeseen changes in their tasks do well if they are populated with people high in openness.[22] Compared
to people low in openness, they are also more likely to start their own business.[23] One downside of
openness is that their absorption in creative pursuits has been shown to result in less time spent
with spouses at home, which could lead to higher work-life conflict. [24]
openness
Conscientiousness refers to the degree to which a person is organized, systematic, punctual,
achievement oriented, and dependable. Conscientiousness is the one personality trait that uniformly predicts how high a person’s performance will be across a variety of occupations and jobs.
Conscientiousness has advantages on and off the job. For example, conscientiousness measured
during childhood predicts likelihood of unemployment in adulthood (with high conscientiousness
predicting low unemployment.[25] Not surprisingly, conscientiousness is the trait most desired by
recruiters, and highly conscientious applicants tend to succeed in interviews.[26] Once they are hired,
conscientious employees not only tend to perform well, but they also have higher levels of motivation to perform, lower levels of turnover, lower levels of absenteeism, and higher levels of safety
performance at work.[27] In other words, conscientious employees are highly desirable to businesses.
In return, companies tend to reward those who have this trait, treating them in more fair and considerate ways.[28] Finally, conscientiousness is a particularly valuable trait for entrepreneurs. Highly
conscientious people are more likely to start their own business compared with those who are not,
and their firms have longer survival rates and better performance.[29] This trait is not without a
downside, however. When they experience failure, such as in the form of unemployment, the wellbeing of conscientious people is much more negatively affected.[30]
conscientiousness
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
The degree to which a
person is curious, original,
intellectual, creative, and
open to new ideas.
The degree to which a
person is organized,
systematic, punctual,
achievement oriented, and
dependable.
extraversion
The degree to which a
person is outgoing,
talkative, sociable, and
enjoys being in social
situations.
Organizational Behavior
Extraversion is the degree to which a person is outgoing, talkative, sociable, and enjoys socializing. Interacting with others and being social energizes extraverts, whereas similar levels of
stimulation and interactions may be viewed as draining to someone who is an introvert. One of the
established findings is that extraverts tend to be effective in jobs involving sales. For example, when
they force themselves to show “service with a smile,” they are more effective and convincing, which
results in earning more tips from customers, whereas similar behaviors seem to backfire for introverts and result in less tips![31] Moreover, they tend to be effective as managers and they
demonstrate inspirational leadership behaviors.[32] Extraverts tend to be effective in job interviews
and even have higher starting salaries. Part of this success comes from preparation, as they are
likely to reach out to their social network in order to prepare for the interview.[33] Extraverts have an
easier time than introverts do when adjusting to a new job. Adjusting to a new job requires seeking
a lot of information and feedback early on, which they seem to be more comfortable with.[34] Interestingly, extraverts are also found to be happier at work, which may be because of the relationships
they build with the people around them and their easier adjustment to a new job.[35] However, they
do not necessarily perform well in all jobs; jobs depriving them of social interaction may be a poor
fit. Moreover, they are not necessarily model employees. For example, they tend to have higher levels of absenteeism at work, potentially because they may miss work to hang out with or attend to
the needs of their friends.[36]
FIGURE 3.3
Studies show a positive relationship between being extraverted and effectiveness as a salesperson.
Source: Shutterstock.com
agreeableness
The degree to which a
person is nice, tolerant,
sensitive, trusting, kind,
and warm.
Agreeableness is the degree to which a person is affable, tolerant, sensitive, trusting, kind, and
warm. In other words, people who are high in agreeableness are likable and get along with others.
Not surprisingly, agreeable people help others at work consistently; this helping behavior does not
depend on their good mood.[37] They are also better able to cope with stressors such as family interference with work.[38] This may reflect their ability to show empathy and to give people the benefit
of the doubt. Agreeable people may be a valuable addition to their teams and may be effective leaders because they create a positive environment when they are in leadership positions. In fact, they
are regarded as highly ethical leaders by their subordinates.[39] At the other end of the spectrum,
people low in agreeableness are less likely to show these positive behaviors. Moreover, people who
are disagreeable are shown to quit their jobs unexpectedly, perhaps in response to a conflict with a
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
90
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
91
boss or a peer.[40] Despite its advantages, agreeableness also has some downsides. Research shows
that agreeable individuals tend to have lower levels of financial credit ratings, which may be a
result of making promises they are not able to keep, or even co-signing loans for friends and family and then getting into financial trouble because of it.[41] Because they avoid conflict, they may
miss opportunities for initiating constructive change or may get into difficulties while attempting
to please others. Finally, recent research answered the age-old question: Do nice guys finish last? It
seems that for men, agreeableness negatively relates to income level, whereas no relationship exists
for women.[42]
What are your Big Five traits?
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Go to http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/ to see how you score on these factors.
Neuroticism refers to the degree to which a person is anxious, irritable, temperamental, and
moody. It is the only Big Five dimension in which scoring high is undesirable. People very high in
neuroticism experience a number of problems at work. Most of their problems are due to difficulties in handling stress. Neurotic employees experience lower levels of satisfaction with their lives,
indicating their habitual levels of unhappiness.[43] Research has shown that they are more prone to
experience stressors such as work-life conflict, more negatively affected by stressors such as autocratic leadership, and have less healthy ways of coping with their daily stress, such as in the form
of increasing their daily intake of alcohol.[44] Out of the big five traits, this one is the strongest (and
negative) correlate of job satisfaction.[45] This personality trait has mixed effects on job search
behavior: On the one hand, they experience greater burnout on the job and greater financial inadequacy, motivating them to look for an alternative. On the other hand, they feel less confident about
their ability to find a new job, discouraging them from seeking a new job.[46]
FIGURE 3.4
One of the world’s most
famous (and most neurotic)
artists, Vincent Van Gogh did
not see success during his
lifetime.
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
Aside from the Big Five personality traits, perhaps the most well-known and most often used personality assessment is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Unlike the Big Five, which assesses
traits, MBTI measures types. Assessments of the Big Five do not classify people as neurotic or
extravert: It is all a matter of degrees. MBTI on the other hand, classifies people as one of 16 types.[47]
In MBTI, people are grouped using four dimensions. Based on how a person is classified on these
four dimensions, it is possible to talk about 16 unique personality types, such as ESTJ and ISTP.
MBTI was developed in 1943 by a mother-daughter team, Isabel Myers and Katharine Cook
Briggs. Its objective at the time was to aid World War II veterans in identifying the occupation that
would suit their personalities. Since that time, MBTI has become immensely popular, and according to one estimate, around 2.5 million people take the test annually. The survey is criticized
because it relies on types as opposed to traits, but organizations who use the survey find it very
useful for training and team-building purposes. More than 80 of the Fortune 100 companies used
Myers-Briggs tests in some form. One distinguishing characteristic of this test is that it is explicitly
designed for learning, not for employee selection purposes. In fact, the Myers & Briggs Foundation
has strict guidelines against the use of the test for employee selection. Instead, the test is used to
provide mutual understanding within the team and to gain a better understanding of the working
styles of team members.[48]
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Source: Shutterstock.com
neuroticism
The degree to which a
person is anxious, irritable,
temperamental, and
moody.
92
Organizational Behavior
TABLE 3.2 Summary of MBTI Types
Dimension
Explanation
EI
Introversion: Those who derive their energy from
inside.
Extraversion: Those who derive their energy
from other people and objects.
SN Sensing: Those who rely on their five senses
to perceive the external environment.
Intuition: Those who rely on their intuition and
hunches to perceive the external environment.
TF Thinking: Those who use logic to arrive at
solutions.
Feeling: Those who use their values and ideas
about what is right and wrong to arrive at
solutions.
Positive and Negative Affectivity
positive affective
people
People who experience
positive moods more
frequently, who tend to be
happier at work.
negative affective
people
People who experience
negative moods with
greater frequency, focus
on the “glass half empty,”
and experience more
anxiety and nervousness.
You may have noticed that behavior is also a function of moods. When people are in a good mood,
they may be more cooperative, smile more, and act friendly. When these same people are in a bad
mood, they may have a tendency to be picky, irritable, and less tolerant of different opinions. Yet
some people seem to be in a good mood most of the time, and others seem to be in a bad mood most
of the time regardless of what is actually going on in their lives. This distinction is manifested by
positive and negative affectivity traits. Positive affective people experience positive moods more
frequently, whereas negative affective people experience negative moods with greater frequency.
Negative affective people focus on the “glass half empty” and experience more anxiety and nervousness.[49] Positive affective people tend to be happier at work,[50] and their happiness spreads to the
rest of the work environment. As may be expected, this personality trait sets the tone in the work
atmosphere. When a team comprises mostly negative affective people, there tend to be fewer
instances of helping and cooperation. Teams dominated by positive affective people experience
lower levels of absenteeism.[51] When people with a lot of power are also high in positive affectivity,
the work environment is affected in a positive manner and can lead to greater levels of cooperation
and finding mutually agreeable solutions to problems.[52]
OB Toolbox: Help, I Work With a Negative Person!
Source: Shutterstock.com
Employees who have high levels of neuroticism or high levels of negative affectivity may act overly
negative at work, criticize others, complain about trivial things, or create an overall negative work
environment. Here are some tips for how to work with them effectively.[53]
• Understand that you are unlikely to change someone else’s personality. Personality is
relatively stable and criticizing someone’s personality will not bring about change. If the
behavior is truly disruptive, focus on behavior, not personality.
• Keep your emotional distance. It is very easy for their emotions to affect yours. As much
as you can, maintain emotional distance from their negativity.
• Keep an open mind. Just because a person is constantly negative does not mean that
they are not sometimes right. Listen to the feedback they are giving you.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
JP Judgment: Those who are organized,
Perception: Those who are curious, open
systematic, and would like to have clarity and minded, and prefer to have some ambiguity.
closure.
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
93
• Set a time limit. If you are dealing with someone who constantly complains about things,
you may want to limit these conversations to prevent them from consuming your time at
work.
• You may also empower them to act on the negatives they mention. The next time an
overly negative individual complains about something, ask that person to think of ways to
change the situation and get back to you.
• Ask for specifics. If someone has a negative tone in general, you may want to ask for specific examples and evidence for the problems they have identified.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Self-Monitoring
Self-monitoring refers to the extent to which a person is capable of altering his or her actions and
appearance in social situations. In other words, people who are self-monitors are social chameleons
who understand what the situation demands and act accordingly, while low self-monitors tend to
act the way they feel.[54] High self-monitors are sensitive to the types of behaviors the social environment expects from them. Their greater ability to modify their behavior according to the
demands of the situation and to manage their impressions effectively is a great advantage for
them.[55] In general, they tend to be more successful in their careers. They are more likely to get
cross-company promotions, and even when they stay with one company, they are more likely to
advance.[56] Self-monitors also become the “go to” person in their company and they enjoy central
positions in social networks.[57] They are rated as higher performers, and emerge as leaders.[58] While
they are effective in influencing other people and get things done by managing their impressions,
this personality trait has some challenges that need to be addressed. First, when evaluating the
performance of other employees, they tend to be less accurate. It seems that while trying to manage their impressions, they may avoid giving accurate feedback to their subordinates to avoid
confrontations.[59] This tendency may create problems for them if they are managers. Second, high
self-monitors tend to experience higher levels of stress, probably caused by behaving in ways that
conflict with their true feelings. In situations that demand positive emotions, they may act happy
although they are not feeling happy, which puts an emotional burden on them. Finally, high selfmonitors tend to be less committed to their companies. They may see their jobs as a stepping-stone
for greater things, which may prevent them from forming strong attachments and loyalty to their
current employer.[60]
self-monitoring
The extent to which
people are capable of
monitoring their actions
and appearance in social
situations.
Proactive Personality
Proactive personality refers to a person’s inclination to fix what is perceived as wrong, change the
status quo, and use initiative to solve problems. Instead of waiting to be told what to do, proactive
people take action to initiate meaningful change and remove the obstacles they face along the way.
In general, having a proactive personality has a number of advantages for these people. For example, they tend to be more successful in their job searches.[61] Proactive employees are also more
successful over the course of their careers, because they use initiative and acquire greater understanding of the politics within the organization.[62] Proactive people are valuable assets to their
companies because they may have higher levels of performance.[63] They adjust to their new jobs
quickly because they understand the political environment better and often make friends more
quickly and are more responsive to the feedback they receive.[64] Proactive people are eager to learn
and engage in many developmental activities to improve their skills.[65] Despite all their potential,
under some circumstances a proactive personality may be a liability for an individual or an organization. Individuals who are proactive but who are perceived as being too pushy try to change things
other people are not willing to let go, or use their initiative to make decisions that do not serve a
company’s best interests. Research shows that the success of proactive people depends on their
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
proactive personality
A person’s inclination to fix
what is perceived to be
wrong, change the status
quo, and use initiative to
solve problems.
94
Organizational Behavior
understanding of a company’s core values, their ability and skills to perform their jobs, and their
ability to assess situational demands correctly.[66]
self-esteem
The degree to which a
person has overall positive
feelings about oneself.
Self-esteem is the degree to which a person has overall positive feelings about themselves. People
with high self-esteem view themselves in a positive light, are confident, and respect themselves. On
the other hand, people with low self-esteem experience high levels of self-doubt and question their
self-worth. High self-esteem is related to higher levels of satisfaction with one’s job and higher levels of performance on the job as well as higher levels of creativity at work.[67] People with low selfesteem are attracted to situations in which they will be relatively invisible, such as large
companies.[68] Managing employees with low self-esteem may be challenging at times, because negative feedback given with the intention to improve performance may be viewed as a judgment on
their worth as an employee. Individuals with low self- esteem are sensitive to social feedback, and
they interpret ambiguous situations as definitive signals of social exclusion, which in turn leads to
negative self-evaluations.[69] Therefore, effectively managing employees with relatively low selfesteem requires tact and providing lots of positive feedback when discussing performance
incidents.
FIGURE 3.5
Source: Adapted from information in Denissen, J. J. A., Penke, L., & Schmitt, D. P. (2008, July). Self-esteem reactions to social
interactions: Evidence for sociometer mechanisms across days, people, and nations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 95,
181–196; Hitti, M. (2005). Who’s No. 1 in self-esteem? Serbia is tops, Japan ranks lowest, U.S. is no. 6 in global survey. WebMD.
Retrieved June 1, 2018 from http://www.webmd.com/skin-beauty/news/20050927/whos-number-1-in-self-esteem; Schmitt, D. P., &
Allik, J. (2005). The simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale in 53 nationals: Culture-specific features of global
self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 623–642.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Self-Esteem
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
95
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is a belief that one can perform a specific task successfully. Research shows that the
belief that we can do something is a good predictor of whether we can actually do it. Self-efficacy is
different from other personality traits in that it is job specific. You may have high self-efficacy in
being successful academically, but low self-efficacy in relation to your ability to fix your car. At the
same time, people have a certain level of generalized self-efficacy, and they have the belief that
whatever task or hobby they tackle, they are likely to be successful in it.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Research shows that self-efficacy at work is related to job performance.[70] This relationship is
probably a result of people with high self-efficacy setting higher goals for themselves and being
more committed to these goals, whereas people with low self-efficacy tend to procrastinate.[71] Managerial self-efficacy is a good predictor of whether the manager seeks input from employees as
managers with low self-efficacy will be more defensive of themselves, and less likely to want to hear
about how they can manage more effectively. [72]
Is there a way of increasing employees’ self-efficacy? Hiring people who are capable of performing their tasks and training people to increase their self-efficacy may be effective. Some people
may also respond well to verbal encouragement. By showing that you believe they can be successful and effectively playing the role of a cheerleader, you may be able to increase self-efficacy. Giving
people opportunities to test their skills so that they can see what they are capable of doing (or
empowering them) is also a good way of increasing self-efficacy.[73]
OB Toolbox: Ways to Build Your Self-Confidence
Source: Shutterstock.com
Having high self-efficacy and self-esteem are boons to your career. People who have an overall
positive view of themselves and those who have positive attitudes toward their abilities project an
aura of confidence. How do you achieve higher self-confidence?[74]
• Take a self-inventory. What are the areas in which you lack confidence? Then consciously
tackle these areas. Take part in training programs; seek opportunities to practice these
skills. Confront your fears head-on.
• Set manageable goals. Success in challenging goals will breed self-confidence, but do
not make your goals impossible to reach. If a task seems daunting, break it apart and set
mini goals.
• Find a mentor. A mentor can point out areas in need of improvement, provide accurate
feedback, and point to ways of improving yourself.
• Don’t judge yourself by your failures. Everyone fails, and the most successful people have
more failures in life. Instead of assessing your self-worth by your failures, learn from mistakes and move on.
• Until you can feel confident, be sure to act confident. Acting confident will influence how
others treat you, which will boost your confidence level. Pay attention to how you talk and
behave, and act like someone who has high confidence.
• Know when to ignore negative advice. If you receive negative feedback from someone
who is usually negative, try to ignore it. Surrounding yourself with naysayers is not good
for your self-esteem. This does not mean that you should ignore all negative feedback,
but be sure to look at a person’s overall attitude before making serious judgments based
on that feedback.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
self-efficacy
A belief that one can
perform a specific task
successfully.
96
Organizational Behavior
internal locus of
control
A person’s belief they they
control their own destiny
and what happens to them
is their own doing.
external locus of
control
A person’s belief that
things happen because of
other people, luck, or a
powerful being.
Locus of control deals with the degree to which people feel accountable for their own behaviors.
Individuals with high internal locus of control believe that they control their own destiny and
what happens to them is their own doing, while those with high external locus of control feel that
things happen to them because of other people, luck, or a powerful being. Internals feel greater
control over their own lives, and therefore they act in ways that will increase their chances of success. For example, they are more involved with their jobs. They demonstrate higher levels of
motivation and have more positive experiences at work. When they are faced with problems, they
adopt problem-focused coping strategies.[75] Interestingly, internal locus is also related to one’s subjective well-being and happiness in life, while being high in external locus is related to a higher rate
of depression.[76] The connection between internal locus of control and health is interesting, but
perhaps not surprising. In fact, one study showed that having internal locus of control at the age
of 10 was related to a number of health outcomes, such as lower obesity and lower blood pressure
later in life.[77] It is possible that internals take more responsibility for their health and adopt healthier habits, while externals may see less of a connection between how they live and their health.
Internals thrive in contexts in which they have the ability to influence their own behavior. Successful entrepreneurs tend to have high levels of internal locus of control.[78]
FIGURE 3.6 Core Self-Evaluations
Researchers view neuroticism, locus of control, self-efficacy, and self-esteem as part of a person’s self-evaluations.
Positive feelings about oneself are beneficial for effectiveness and happiness at work.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Locus of Control
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
97
Personality Testing in Employee Selection
FIGURE 3.7
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Goldman Sachs started using a personality test focusing on the Big Five traits in 2018.
Source: 360b / Shutterstock.com
Personality is a potentially important predictor of work behavior. Matching people to jobs matters, because when people do not fit with their jobs or the company, they are more likely to leave,
costing companies as much as a person’s annual salary to replace them. In job interviews, companies try to assess a candidate’s personality and the potential for a good match, but interviews
are only as good as the people conducting them. Unfortunately, research has shown that most
interviewers are not particularly good at detecting the one trait that best predicts performance:
conscientiousness.[79] One method some companies use to improve this match and detect the people who are potentially good job candidates is personality testing. Several companies conduct
pre-employment personality tests. Companies using them believe that these tests improve the
effectiveness of their selection and reduce turnover. For example, Overnight Transportation in
Atlanta found that using such tests reduced their on-the-job delinquency by 50%–100%.[80]
Experts have not yet reached an agreement regarding the best way to select employees, and
the topic is highly controversial. Some experts cite data that personality tests predict performance
and other important criteria such as job satisfaction. A key consideration in this debate is the
knowledge that how a personality test is used influences its validity. Imagine filling out a personality test in class. You may be more likely to fill it out as honestly as you can. Then, if your instructor
correlates your personality scores with your class performance, we could say that the correlation is
meaningful. In employee selection, one complicating factor is that people filling out the survey in a
hiring context do not have a strong incentive to be honest. In fact, they have a greater incentive to
guess what the job requires and answer the questions to match what they think the company is
looking for. As a result, the rankings of the candidates who take the test may be affected by their
ability to fake desired qualities. Some experts believe that this is a serious problem. In fact, it is estimated that 20%–50% of all job applicants give fake responses in personality tests.[81] Others point
out that even with faking, the tests remain valid because the scores are still related to job performance.[82] It is even possible that the ability to fake is related to a personality trait that increases
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
faking
The practice of answering
questions in a way one
thinks the company is
looking for.
98
Organizational Behavior
success at work, such as self-monitoring. This issue raises potential questions regarding whether
personality tests are the most effective way of measuring candidate personality.
Another problem with personality tests is the uncertain relationship between performance
and personality. Research has shown that personality is not a particularly strong indicator of how a
person will perform at work. According to one estimate, personality only explains about 10%–15% of
variation in job performance. Our performance at work depends on many factors, and personality
does not seem to be the key factor for performance. In fact, cognitive ability (your overall mental intelligence) is a much more powerful influence on job performance, and instead of personality
tests, cognitive ability tests may do a better job of predicting who will be good performers. Personality is a better predictor of job satisfaction and other attitudes, but screening people out on the
assumption that they may be unhappy at work is a challenging argument to make in the context
of employee selection.
Reprinted by permission. Originally published on ScienceForWork.
In any case, if you decide to use personality tests for selection, you need to be aware of their
limitations. Relying only on personality tests for selection of an employee is a bad idea, but if
they are used together with other tests such as tests of cognitive abilities, better decisions may be
made. The company should ensure that the test fits the job and actually predicts performance. This
process is called validating the test. Before giving the test to applicants, the company could give
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Scores are not only distorted because of some candidates faking better than others. For example, using a survey assumes that individuals understand their own personalities, but this may not
be the case. How supervisors, coworkers, and customers see our personality matters more than how
we see ourselves. Therefore, using self-report measures of performance may not be the best way of
measuring someone’s personality, whereas asking our former colleagues or supervisors may reveal
more accurate answers. In fact, observers are surprisingly accurate in assessing our personality. In
one study, evaluators were able to accurately assess the personality of others simply by looking at
and rating their Facebook pages.[83] In addition, individuals may be tempted to give “aspirational”
answers to surveys. If you are asked if you are honest, you may think, “Yes, I always have the intention to be honest.” While this answer is related to how you value honesty, it may say nothing about
your actual level of honest behavior in any given situation.
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
it to existing employees to find out the traits that are most important for success in the particular company and job. Then, in the selection context, the company can pay particular attention to
those traits. The company should also make sure that the test does not discriminate against people
on the basis of sex, race, age, disabilities, and other legally protected characteristics. Rent-A-Center
experienced legal difficulties when the test they used was found to be a violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA). The test they used for selection, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, was developed to diagnose severe mental illnesses and included items such as “I see
things or people around me others do not see.” In effect, the test served the purpose of a clinical
evaluation and was discriminating against people with mental illnesses, which is a protected category under ADA.[84]
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Key Takeaway
Values and personality traits are two dimensions on which people differ. Values are stable life
goals. When seeking jobs, employees are more likely to accept a job that provides opportunities
for value attainment, and they are more likely to remain in situations that satisfy their values. Personality comprises the stable feelings, thoughts, and behavioral patterns people have. The Big
Five personality traits (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism) are important traits that seem to be stable and can be generalized to other cultures. Other
important traits for work behavior include self-efficacy, self-esteem, self-monitoring, proactive
personality, positive and negative affectivity, and locus of control. It is important to remember
that a person’s behavior depends on the match between the person and the situation. While
personality is a strong influence on job attitudes, its relation to job performance is weaker. Some
companies use personality testing to screen out candidates. This method has certain limitations,
and companies using personality tests are advised to validate their tests and use them as a supplement to other techniques that have greater validity.
What do you think?
1. Think about the personality traits covered in this section. Can you think of jobs or occupations that seem particularly suited to each trait? Which traits would be universally desirable
across all jobs?
2. What are the unique challenges of managing employees who have low self-efficacy and low
self-esteem? How would you deal with this situation?
3. What are some methods that companies can use to assess employee personality?
4. Have you ever held a job where your personality did not match the demands of the job? How
did you react to this situation? How were your attitudes and behaviors affected?
5. Can you think of any limitations of developing an “ideal employee” profile and looking for
employees who fit that profile while hiring?
3.4 Perception
Learning Objectives
1. Understand the influence of self in the process of perception.
2. Describe how we perceive visual objects and how these tendencies may affect our behavior.
3. Describe the biases of self-perception.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
99
100
Organizational Behavior
4. Describe the biases inherent in perception of other people.
perception
The process with which
individuals detect and
interpret environmental
stimuli.
Our behavior is not only a function of our personality, values, and preferences, but also of the situation. We interpret our environment, formulate responses, and act accordingly. Perception may be
defined as the process with which individuals detect and interpret environmental stimuli. What
makes human perception so interesting is that we do not solely respond to the stimuli in our environment. We go beyond the information that is present in our environment, pay selective attention
to some aspects of the environment, and ignore other elements that may be immediately apparent
to other people. Our perception of the environment is not entirely rational. For example, have you
ever noticed that while glancing at a news website, information that is interesting or important to
you seems to jump out of the page and catches your eye? If you are a sports fan, while scrolling
down the pages you may immediately see a news item describing the latest success of your team. If
you were recently turned down for a loan, an item of financial news may jump out at you. Therefore, what we see in the environment is a function of what we value, our needs, our fears, and our
emotions.[85] In fact, what we see in the environment may be objectively, flat-out wrong because of
our personality, values, or emotions. For example, one experiment showed that when people who
were afraid of spiders were shown spiders, they inaccurately thought that the spider was moving
toward them.[86] In this section, we will describe some common tendencies we engage in when perceiving objects or other people, and the consequences of such perceptions. Our coverage of biases
and tendencies in perception is not exhaustive—there are many other biases and tendencies on our
social perception.
Visual Perception
FIGURE 3.8
What do you see?
Our visual perception definitely goes beyond the physical information available
to us. First of all, we extrapolate from the information available to us. Take a look
at the figure with three circles. The white triangle you see in the middle is not
really there, but we extrapolate from the information available to us and see it
there.[87]
Our visual perception is often biased because we do not perceive objects in
isolation. The contrast between our focus of attention and the remainder of the
environment may make an object appear bigger or smaller. This principle is illustrated in the figure with circles. Which of the middle circles is bigger? To most
people, the one on the left appears bigger, but this is because it is surrounded by
smaller circles. The contrast between the focal object and the objects surrounding it may make an object bigger or smaller to our eye.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
5. Explain what attributions mean, how we form attributions, and their consequences for organizational behavior.
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
101
FIGURE 3.9
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Which of the circles in the middle is bigger? At first glance, the one on the left may appear bigger, but they are in fact
the same size. We compare the middle circle on the left to its surrounding circles, whereas the middle circle on the
right is compared to the bigger circles surrounding it.
How do these tendencies influence behavior in organizations? You may have realized that the
fact that our visual perception is faulty may make witness testimony faulty and biased. How do
we know whether the employee you judge to be hardworking, fast, and neat is really like that? Is it
really true, or are we comparing this person to other people in the immediate environment? Or let’s
say that you do not like one of your peers and you think that this person is constantly surfing the
Web during work hours. Are you sure? Have you really seen this person surf unrelated websites,
or is it possible that the person was surfing the Web for work-related purposes? Our biased visual
perception may lead to inaccurate inferences about the people around us.
Self-Perception
Human beings are prone to errors and biases when perceiving themselves. The types of bias people
have depends on their personality. Many people suffer from self-enhancement bias, in which individuals hold the tendency to overestimate their performance and capabilities and see themselves
in a more positive light than others see us. At the same time, other people have the opposing
extreme, which may be labeled as self-effacement bias (or modesty bias). This is the tendency to
underestimate performance and capabilities and see events in a way that puts oneself in a more
negative light. Individuals with low self-esteem are more prone to making this error. These tendencies have real consequences for behavior in organizations. For example, people who suffer from
extreme levels of self-enhancement tendencies may not understand why they are not getting promoted or rewarded, while those who have a tendency to self-efface may project low confidence and
take more blame for their failures than necessary.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
self-enhancement
bias
The tendency to
overestimate our
performance and
capabilities, and to see
ourselves in a more
positive light than others
see us.
self-effacement bias
The tendency to
underestimate our
performance and
capabilities, and to see
events in a way that puts
ourselves in a more
negative light.
102
false consensus error
How we as human beings
overestimate how similar
we are to other people.
Organizational Behavior
When human beings perceive themselves, they are also subject to the false consensus error.
Simply put, such individuals overestimate how similar they are to other people.[88] Another example of this error is when individuals assume that whatever quirks they have are shared by a larger
number of people than in reality. People who take home office supplies, tell white lies to their boss
or colleagues, or take credit for other people’s work to get ahead may genuinely feel that these
behaviors are more common than they are in reality. The problem for behavior in organizations is
that, when people believe that a behavior is common and normal, they may repeat the behavior
more freely. Under some circumstances, this may lead to a high level of unethical or even illegal
behaviors.
How we perceive other people in our environment is also shaped by our values, emotions, feelings,
and personality. Moreover, how we perceive others will shape our behavior, which in turn will shape
the behavior of the person we are interacting with.
stereotypes
Generalizations based on
a perceived group
characteristic.
self-fulfilling
prophecy
This happens when an
established stereotype
causes one to behave in a
certain way, which leads
the other party to behave
in a way that makes the
stereotype come true.
selective perception
When we pay selective
attention to parts of the
environment while ignoring
other parts.
One of the factors biasing our perception is stereotypes. Stereotypes are generalizations based
on group characteristics. For example, believing that women are more cooperative than men, or
men are more assertive than women, is a stereotype. Stereotypes may be positive, negative, or neutral. Human beings have a natural tendency to categorize the information around them to make
sense of their environment. What makes stereotypes potentially discriminatory and a perceptual
bias is the tendency to generalize from a group to a particular individual. If the belief that men are
more assertive than women leads to choosing a man over an equally (or potentially more) qualified
female candidate for a position, the decision will be biased, illegal, and unfair.
Stereotypes often create a situation called a self-fulfilling prophecy. This cycle occurs when
people automatically behave as if an established stereotype is accurate, which leads to reactive
behavior from the other party that confirms the stereotype.[89] If you have a stereotype such as
“Asians are friendly,” you are more likely to be friendly toward an Asian. Because you are treating
the other person better, the response you get may also be better, confirming your original belief
that Asians are friendly. Of course, just the opposite is also true. Suppose you believe that “young
employees are slackers.” You are less likely to give a young employee high levels of responsibility or
interesting and challenging assignments. The result may be that the young employee reporting to
you may become increasingly bored at work and start goofing off, confirming your suspicions that
young people are slackers.
Stereotypes persist because of a process called selective perception. Selective perception simply means that we pay selective attention to parts of the environment while ignoring other parts.
When we observe our environment, we see what we want to see and ignore information that may
seem out of place. Here is an interesting example of how selective perception leads our perception
to be shaped by the context: As part of a social experiment, the Washington Post newspaper
arranged for Joshua Bell, the internationally acclaimed violin virtuoso, to perform in a corner of the
Metro station in Washington, D.C. The violin he was playing was worth $3.5 million, and tickets for
Bell’s concerts usually cost around $100. During the rush hour in which he played for 45 minutes,
only one person recognized him, only a few realized that they were hearing extraordinary music,
and he made only $32 in tips. When you see someone playing at the metro station, would you
expect them to be extraordinary?[90]
Our background, expectations, and beliefs will shape which events we notice and which events
we ignore. For example, the functional background of executives affects the changes they perceive
in their environment.[91] Executives with a background in sales and marketing see the changes in
the demand for their product, while executives with a background in information technology may
more readily perceive the changes in the technology the company is using. Selective perception
may perpetuate stereotypes, because we are less likely to notice events that go against our beliefs.
A person who believes that men drive better than women may be more likely to notice women dri-
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Social Perception
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
103
ving poorly than men driving poorly. As a result, a stereotype is maintained because information to
the contrary may not reach our brain.
FIGURE 3.10
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
First impressions are lasting. A job interview is one situation in which first impressions formed during the first few
minutes may have consequences for your relationship with your future boss or colleagues.
Source: Shutterstock.com
Let’s say we noticed information that goes against our beliefs. What then? Unfortunately, this
is no guarantee that we will modify our beliefs and prejudices. First, when we see examples that
go against our stereotypes, we tend to come up with subcategories. For example, when people who
believe that women are more cooperative, upon seeing a woman who is assertive, they may classify
this person as a “career woman.” Therefore, the example to the contrary does not violate the stereotype, and instead is explained away as an exception to the rule.[92] Second, we may simply discount
the information. In one study, people who were either in favor of or opposed to the death penalty
were shown two studies, one showing purported benefits from the death penalty and the other discounting any benefits. People rejected the study that went against their belief as methodologically
inferior and actually reinforced the belief in their original position even more.[93] In other words,
trying to debunk people’s beliefs or previously established opinions with data may not necessarily
help.
One other perceptual tendency that may affect work behavior is that of first impressions. The
first impressions we form about people tend to have a lasting impact. People have a tendency to
use irrelevant information such as baby-faceness, similarity to familiar faces, fitness, or youthfulness to arrive at impressions relating to the person’s competence, warmth, or power.[94] First
impressions, once formed, are surprisingly resilient to contrary information. The reason is that,
once we form first impressions, they become independent of the evidence that created them. It is
possible to reverse first impressions by providing information that results in a complete reinterpretation of initial information, but this is not always easy and feasible.[95] Being aware of this tendency
and consciously opening your mind to new information may protect you against some of the
downsides of this bias. Also, it would be to your advantage to pay careful attention to the first
impressions you create, particularly during job interviews.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
first impressions
Initial thoughts and
perceptions we form about
people, which tend to be
stable and resilient to
contrary information.
104
Organizational Behavior
OB Toolbox: How Can I Make a Great First Impression in a Job
Interview?
Source: Shutterstock.com
• Your first opportunity to make a great impression starts even before the interview, the
moment you send your résumé. Make sure that your résumé looks professional and is
free from typos and grammar problems. Have someone else read it before you upload or
send your résumé.
• Dress the part. Take a shower. Keep make-up, perfume, and jewelry light. Clean and trim
nails. Wear clean and pressed clothes. These tips seem obvious, except that many interviewees skip on some of these steps, only to be remembered in stories of what not to
do. What to wear is a harder question due to industry and geographic differences, but it
should probably be more formal than what you would wear to work on a daily basis, and
something you feel comfortable in.
• Be prepared for the interview. Many interviews have some standard questions such as
“Tell me about yourself” or “Why do you want to work here?” Be ready to answer these
questions. Prepare answers highlighting your skills and accomplishments, and practice
your message. Better yet, practice an interview with a friend. Practicing your answers will
prevent you from regretting your answers or finding a better answer after the interview is
over!
• Research the company. If you know a lot about the company and the job in question, you
will come across as someone who is really interested in the job. If you ask basic questions
such as “What does this company do?” you will not be taken as a serious candidate. Visit
the company’s website as well as others, and learn as much about the company and the
job as you can.
• Be on time to the interview. Being late will show that you either don’t care about the interview or you are not very reliable. While waiting for the interview, don’t forget that your
interview has already started. As soon as you enter the company’s parking lot, every person you see on the way or talk to may be a potential influence over the decision maker.
Act professionally and treat everyone nicely.
• During the interview, be polite. Use correct grammar, avoid filler words such as “umm”
or “like,” show eagerness and enthusiasm, and watch your body language. From your
handshake to your posture, your body is communicating whether you are the right person
for the job!
Attributions
Your colleague Peter failed to meet the deadline. What do you do? Do you help him finish up his
work? Do you give him the benefit of the doubt and place the blame on the difficulty of the project? Or do you think that he is irresponsible? Our behavior is a function of our perceptions. More
specifically, when we observe others behave in a certain way, we ask ourselves a fundamental question: Why? Why did he fail to meet the deadline? Why did Mary get the promotion? Why did Mark
help you when you needed help? The answer we give is the key to understanding our subsequent
behavior. If you believe that Mark helped you because he is a nice person, your action will be different from your response if you think that Mark helped you because your boss pressured him to.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
A job interview is your first step to getting the job of your dreams. It is also a social interaction in
which your actions during the first 5 minutes will determine the impression you make. Here are
some tips to help you create a positive first impression.[96]
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
105
An attribution is the causal explanation we give for an observed behavior. If you believe that a
behavior is due to the internal characteristics of an actor, you are making an internal attribution.
For example, let’s say your classmate Erin complained a lot when completing a finance assignment.
If you think that she complained because she is a negative person, you are making an internal attribution. An external attribution is explaining someone’s behavior by referring to the situation. If
you believe that Erin complained because the finance homework was difficult, you are making an
external attribution.
When do we make internal or external attributions? Research shows that three factors are the
key to understanding what kind of attributions we make.
Consensus: Do other people behave the same way?
The causal explanation we
give for an observed
behavior.
internal attribution
Explaining someone’s
behavior using the internal
characteristics of the
actor.
external attribution
Distinctiveness: Does this person behave the same way across different situations?
Consistency: Does this person behave this way in different occasions in the same situation?
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
attribution
Explaining someone’s
behavior by referring to the
situation.
Let’s assume that in addition to Erin, other people in the same class also complained (high consensus). Erin does not usually complain in other classes (high distinctiveness). Erin usually does not
complain in finance class (low consistency). In this situation, you are likely to make an external
attribution, such as thinking that this finance homework is difficult. On the other hand, let’s
assume that Erin is the only person complaining (low consensus). Erin complains in a variety of
situations (low distinctiveness), and every time she is in finance, she complains (high consistency).
In this situation, you are likely to make an internal attribution such as thinking that Erin is a negative person.[97]
Interestingly though, our attributions do not always depend on the consensus, distinctiveness,
and consistency we observe in a given situation. In other words, when making attributions, we do
not always look at the situation objectively. For example, our overall relationship is a factor. When
a manager likes a subordinate, the attributions made would be more favorable (successes are attributed to internal causes, while failures are attributed to external causes).[98] Moreover, when
interpreting our own behavior, we suffer from self-serving bias. This is the tendency to attribute
our failures to the situation while attributing our successes to internal causes.[99]
TABLE 3.3 Consensus, Distinctiveness, and Consistency Determine Types of Attributions
Made
Consensus
Distinctiveness
Consistency
Type of
Attribution
High consensus
High distinctiveness
Low consistency
External
Everyone else
behaves the
same way.
This person does not usually
behave in this way in different
situations.
This person does not usually
behave this way in this situation.
Low consensus
Low distinctiveness
High consistency
No one else
behaves the
same way.
This person usually behaves this
way in different situations.
Every time this person is in this
situation, he or she acts the same
way.
Internal
How we react to other people’s behavior would depend on the type of attributions we make.
When faced with poor performance, such as missing a deadline, we are more likely to punish the
person if an internal attribution is made (such as “the person being unreliable”). In the same situation, if we make an external attribution (such as “the timeline was unreasonable”), instead of
punishing the person we might extend the deadline or assign more help to the person. If we feel
that someone’s failure is due to external causes, we may feel empathy toward the person and even
offer help.[100] On the other hand, if someone succeeds and we make an internal attribution (he
worked hard), we are more likely to reward the person, whereas an external attribution (the project
was easy) is less likely to yield rewards for the person in question. Therefore, understanding attributions is important to predicting subsequent behavior.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
self-serving bias
The tendency to attribute
our failures to the situation
while attributing our
successes to internal
causes.
106
Organizational Behavior
Key Takeaway
What do you think?
1. What are the implications of contrast error for interpersonal interactions? Does this error
occur only when we observe physical objects? Or have you encountered this error when perceiving behavior of others?
2. What are the problems of false consensus error? How can managers deal with this tendency?
3. Is there such a thing as a “good” stereotype? Is a “good” stereotype useful or still problematic?
4. How do we manage the fact that human beings develop stereotypes? How would you prevent stereotypes from creating unfairness in decision making?
5. Is it possible to manage the attributions other people make about our behavior? Let’s
assume that you have completed a project successfully. How would you maximize the
chances that your manager will make an internal attribution? How would you increase the
chances of an external attribution when you fail in a task?
3.5 The Role of Ethics and National Culture
Learning Objectives
1. Consider the role of individual differences for ethical behavior.
2. Consider the role of national culture on individual differences.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Perception is how we make sense of our environment in response to environmental stimuli. While
perceiving our surroundings, we go beyond the objective information available to us, and our
perception is affected by our values, needs, and emotions. There are many biases that affect
human perception of objects, self, and others. When perceiving the physical environment, we
fill in gaps and extrapolate from the available information. We also contrast physical objects to
their surroundings and may perceive something as bigger, smaller, slower, or faster than it really
is. In self-perception, we may commit the self-enhancement or self-effacement bias, depending
on our personality. We also overestimate how much we are like other people. When perceiving others, stereotypes infect our behavior. Stereotypes may lead to self-fulfilling prophecies.
Stereotypes are perpetuated because of our tendency to pay selective attention to aspects of
the environment and ignore information inconsistent with our beliefs. When perceiving others,
the attributions we make will determine how we respond to the situation. Understanding the perception process gives us clues to understand human behavior.
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
107
Individual Differences and Ethics
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Our values and personality influence how ethically we behave. Situational factors, rewards, and
punishments following unethical choices as well as a company’s culture are extremely important,
but the role of personality and personal values should not be ignored. Research reveals that individuals high in conscientiousness and agreeableness demonstrate lower levels of academic
dishonesty (i.e., cheating).[101] Employees with external locus of control were found to make more
unethical choices.[102]
Our perceptual processes are clear influences on whether or not we behave ethically and how
we respond to other people’s unethical behaviors. It seems that self-enhancement bias operates for
our ethical decisions as well: We tend to overestimate how ethical we are in general. Our self-ratings
of ethics tend to be higher than how other people rate us. This belief can create a glaring problem:
If we think that we are more ethical than we are, we will have little motivation to improve. Therefore, understanding how other people perceive our actions is important to getting a better
understanding of ourselves.
Source: Shutterstock.com
How we respond to unethical behavior of others will, to a large extent, depend on the attributions we make. If we attribute responsibility to the person in question, we are more likely to punish
that person. In a study on sexual harassment that occurred after a workplace romance turned
sour, results showed that if we attribute responsibility to the victim, we are less likely to punish
the harasser.[103] Therefore, how we make attributions in a given situation will determine how we
respond to others’ actions, including their unethical behaviors.
Individual Differences Around the Globe
Values that people care about vary around the world. In fact, when we refer to a country’s culture,
we are referring to values that distinguish one nation from others. In other words, there is systematic variance in individuals’ personality and work values around the world, and this variance
explains people’s behavior, attitudes, preferences, and the transferability of management practices
to other cultures.
When we refer to a country’s values, this does not mean that everyone in a given country
shares the same values. People differ within and across nations. There will always be people who
care more about money and others who care more about relationships within each culture. Yet
there are also national differences in the percentage of people holding each value. A researcher
from the Netherlands, Geert Hofstede, conducted a landmark study covering more than 60 countries and found that countries differ in four dimensions: the extent to which they put individuals
or groups first (individualism), whether the society subscribes to equality or hierarchy among people (power distance), the degree to which the society fears change (uncertainty avoidance), and the
extent to which the culture emphasizes acquiring money and being successful (masculinity).[104]
Knowing about the values held in a society will tell us what type of a workplace would satisfy and
motivate employees.
Are personality traits universal? Researchers found that personality traits identified in Western cultures translate well to other cultures. For example, the five-factor model of personality is
universal in that it explains how people differ from each other in over 79 countries. At the same
time, there is variation among cultures in the dominant personality traits. In some countries,
extraverts seem to be the majority, and in some countries the dominant trait is low emotional stability. For example, people from Europe and the United States are characterized by higher levels
of extraversion compared to those from Asia and Africa. There are many factors explaining why
some personality traits are dominant in some cultures. For example, the presence of democratic
values is related to extraversion. Because democracy usually protects freedom of speech, people
may feel more comfortable socializing with strangers as well as with friends, partly explaining
the larger number of extraverts in democratic nations. Research also shows that in regions of the
world that historically suffered from infectious diseases, extraversion and openness to experience
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Source: Shutterstock.com
108
Organizational Behavior
was less dominant. Infectious diseases led people to limit social contact with strangers, explaining
higher levels of introversion. Plus, to cope with infectious diseases, people developed strict habits
for hygiene and the amount of spice to use in food, and deviating from these standards was bad for
survival. This explains the lower levels of openness to experience in regions that experienced infectious diseases.[105]
There seems to be some variation in the perceptual biases we commit as well. For example,
human beings have a tendency to self-enhance. We see ourselves in a more positive light than others do. Yet the traits in which we self-enhance are culturally dependent. In Western cultures, people
may overestimate how independent and self-reliant they are. In Asian cultures, such traits are not
necessarily desirable, so they may not embellish their degree of independence. Yet they may overestimate how cooperative and loyal to the group they are because these traits are more desirable in
collectivistic cultures.[107] Given the variation in individual differences around the globe, being sensitive to these differences will increase our managerial effectiveness when managing a diverse group
of people.
Key Takeaway
There is a connection between how ethically we behave and our individual values, personality,
and perception. Possessing values emphasizing economic well-being predicts unethical behavior. Having an external locus of control is also related to unethical decision making. We are also
likely to overestimate how ethical we are, which can be a barrier against behaving ethically. Culture seems to be an influence over our values, personality traits, perceptions, attitudes, and
work behaviors. Therefore, understanding individual differences requires paying careful attention
to the cultural context.
What do you think?
1. If ethical decision making depends partially on personality, what can organizations do to
increase the frequency of ethical behaviors?
2. Do you think personality tests used in Western cultures in employee selection can be used
in other cultures?
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Is basic human perception universal? It seems that there is variation around the globe in how
we perceive other people as well as ourselves. One difference is the importance of the context. Studies show that when perceiving people or objects, Westerners pay more attention to the individual,
while Asians pay more attention to the context. For example, in one study, when judging the emotion felt by the person, the Americans mainly looked at the face of the person in question, while the
Japanese also considered the emotions of the people surrounding the focal person. In other words,
the Asian subjects of the experiment derived meaning from the context as well as by looking at the
person.[106]
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
3.6 Using Big Data to Match Applicants to Jobs: The
Case of Cornerstone OnDemand
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
FIGURE 3.11
Source: Shutterstock.com
You are interviewing a candidate for a position at a call center. You need someone polite, courteous, patient, and dependable. The candidate you are talking to seems nice. But how do you
know who is the right person for the job? Will the job candidate like the job or get bored? Will they
steal from the company or be fired for misconduct? Don’t you wish you knew before hiring? Retail
employers do a lot of hiring, given their growth and high turnover rate. According to one estimate, replacing an employee who leaves in retail costs companies around $4,000. High turnover
also endangers customer service. Therefore, retail employers have an incentive to screen people
carefully so that they hire people with the best chance of being successful and happy on the job.
One company approaches this problem scientifically, saving companies time and money on hiring hourly wage employees. Evolv finds data-driven predictors of job performance and uses this
information to help select the right fit for the job. In October 2014, Cornerstone OnDemand, a
publicly traded talent management company, acquired Evolv for $42.5 million, potentially extending its reach.
The idea behind the software is simple: If you have a lot of employees and keep track of your data
over time, you have access to an enormous resource. By analyzing data from a large number of
employees, you can specify the profile of the “ideal” employee. The software captures the profile
of high performers, and applicants are screened to assess their fit with this particular profile. As
the database gets larger, the software does a better job of identifying the right people for the job.
Employers such as Xerox are using the software developed by Evolv, where job applicants complete a test that takes half an hour. The system compares the applicant to the ideal profile, and
the hiring manager gets a color-coded message from the system, where green indicates a high
potential employee. Xerox won’t even look at a résumé if the system generates a red sign.
The profile of the ideal candidate is often counterintuitive. For example, data on call center
employees indicate that the best candidate has a short commute to work and participates in a
small number of social networking sites. Contrary to what some people may think, job-hopping
and unemployment status are not good predictors of effectiveness in the next job. One thing
the system pays a lot of attention to is personality. It seems that for call center workers, being
inquisitive results in leaving the job sooner. The system also measures honesty. For example, one
question asks candidates to report how much computer skills they have, and then a follow-up
question asks what control-V does.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
109
110
Organizational Behavior
The users of the system praise the time savings and the results: Xerox saw increases in performance and reductions in the turnover of their employees after adopting the system. On
the negative side, anti-discrimination lawyers think that this is new territory with potential legal
downsides. Moreover, these systems are used only for hourly or retail workers where data
exists for thousands of employees and the system can identify a reliable employee profile. Its
applicability to higher-level, professional, and more unique jobs is not yet clear. How big data
approaches change the face of selection continues to evolve, including becoming Cornerstone
OnDemand.[108]
View the video online at: //www.youtube.com/embed/DHc8NJCG3Rs?rel=0
Case Discussion Questions
1. Have you ever taken part in a selection system such as the one described in the case? How
do you feel about these tests as a job candidate?
2. Should organizations care about how job applicants react to pre-employment selection
tests?
3. Do you feel these tests do a good job of selecting the right person for the job? What are the
barriers to their effectiveness? What problems can organizations experience when they use
employee selection tests measuring personality and other attributes described in the case?
3.7 Conclusion
In conclusion, in this chapter we have reviewed major individual differences that affect employee
attitudes and behaviors. Our values and personality explain our preferences and the situations
we feel comfortable with. Personality may influence our behavior, but the importance of the context in which behavior occurs should not be neglected. Many organizations use personality tests
in employee selection, but the use of such tests is controversial because of problems such as faking and low predictive value of personality for job performance. Perception is how we interpret our
environment. It is a major influence over our behavior, but many systematic biases color our perception and lead to misunderstandings.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Video: Multimedia Extension—Take a Tour of Cornerstone
OnDemand
Chapter 3
Understanding People at Work: Individual Differences and Perception
3.8 Exercises
Ethical Dilemma
You are interviewing a job applicant for a corporate sales position. The job involves frequent
interactions with clients, an impeccable work ethic and punctuality. There is a job candidate you
thought was a good fit for the position, but now you have doubts. In a moment of weakness, you
googled the applicant’s name and you came across his Facebook profile, several public posts,
and past tweets. The online presence of this person suggests that he frequently parties - there
are many photos where he seems to be drinking with friends, and other posts where he talks
about his dislike of routine and deadlines. Now you are torn. Should you hire this person or not?
Created exclusively for modi alabdulwahab
Discussion Questions
1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of checking the online footprint of prospective
employees?
2. What would you really do in a situation like this?
Individual Exercise
Changing Others’ Perceptions of You
How do other people perceive you? Identify one element of how others perceive you that you
are interested in changing. It could be a positive perception (maybe they think you are more
helpful than you really are) or a negative perception (maybe they think you don’t take your studies seriously).
• What are the reasons why they formed this perception? Think about the underlying reasons.
• What have you done to contribute to the development of this perception?
• Do you think there are perceptual errors that contribute to this perception? Are they stereotyping? Are they engaging in selective perception?
• Are you sure that your perception is the accurate one? What information do you have that
makes your perceptions more valid than theirs?
• Create an action plan about how you can change this perception.
Group Exercise
Selecting an Expatriate Using Personality Tests
Your department has over 50 expatriates working around the globe. One of the problems you
encounter is that the people you send to other cultures for long-term (2- to 5-year) assignments
have a high failure rate. They either want to return home before their assignment is complete, or
they are not very successful in building relationships with the local employees. You suspect that
this is because you have been sending people overseas solely because of their technical skills,
which does not seem to be effective in predicting whether these people will make a successful adjustment to the local culture. Now you have decided that when selecting people to go on
these assignments, personality traits should be given some weight.
1. Identify the personality traits you think might be relevant to being successful in an expatriate
assignment.
2. Develop a personality test aimed at measuring these dimensions. Make sure that each
dimension you want to measure is captured by at least 10 questions.
© 2018 Boston Academic Publishing, Inc., d.b.a. FlatWorld. All rights reserved.
111
112
Organizational Behavior
3. Exchange the test you have developed with a different team in class. Have them fill out the
survey and make sure that you fill out theirs. What problems have you encountered? How
would you feel if you were a candidate taking this test?
4. Do you think that prospective employees would fill out this questionnaire honestly? If not,
how would you ensure that the results you get would be honest and truly reflect their personality?
5. How would you validate such a test? Describe the steps you would take.
1. Case written by Berrin Erdogan and Talya Bauer to accompany Bauer, T. N., & Erdogan, B. (2018). Organizational Behavior (3.0). Boston, MA: FlatWorld.
Partially based on ideas and information contained in Anonymous (January 2, 2018). Hiring the best people. Retrieved June 1, 2018 from https://hbr.org/
ideacast/2018/01/hiring-the-best-people; Anonymous (March 27, 2018). Former Netflix talent chief shares her secrets for hiring successfully. Retrieved June
1, 2018 from https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/business-and-economy/2018-03-27-former-netflix-talent-chief-shares-her-secrets-for-hiring-successfully/;
Eyring, A. (August 24, 2017). Why you need to only hire people who fit your culture (No matter how overqualified they are). Retrieved June 1, 2018 from
https://www.inc.com/alison-eyring/why-linkedin-and-netflix-only-hire-people-who-fit-.html; McCord, P. (January-February 2018). How to hire. Harvard Business Review, pp. 90-97.
2. Cable, D. M., & DeRue, D. S. (2002). The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 875–884;
Caldwell, D. F., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1990). Measuring person–job fit with a profile comparison process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 648–657; Chatman,
J. A. (1991). Matching people and organizations: ...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment