A Research Proposal on How Low Level of Agreeableness Combined with

Extroversion Affect an Employee`s (Perceived) Performance.

Problem Statement

Due increasing levels of global competition, the question of thesurvival of an entity in a business environment is very crucial. In acompetitive arena, performance is based on the achievements. Thisaspect distinguishes one company from the other. The urgency in manycompanies to expect a maximum contribution from their employeeshinges on these considerations. In reality, most companies haverecreated their working behaviors of the employees alongside the jobrequirements to survive in a competitive market. The employees areaccountable for the outcomes. Since collective performance has thetendency of scoring higher than the individual performance, manyorganizations are focusing on utilizing teams rather than usingindividual’s ability to maximize their output (Carr, 118).

A specialized working structure embraces responsibility, solidinterdependence and strong sovereignty. Different personality traitsof different individuals are critical in determining theeffectiveness or performance of individuals. It means that traits areincorporated into individual’s skills and their capabilities.Traits dictate the manner in which individuals think, feel and act.This has a major bearing on the over performance and productivity ofthe employees. Individuals with low levels of agreeablenesscompounded with extraversion tend to have low productivity (Carr,118). It is highly likely that one’s perceptions and attitudestowards certain tasks influence their overall performance to a largeextent. However, an employee who is self-interested and extravert canbe able to use others to fulfill his needs and hence improve theperformance.

This research explores the how the individual personalities influenceindividual performance and consequently the organizational behavior.It should be noted here that an individual’s personality and theirability differ in many ways. Personality influences an individual’sattitudes and perceptions to various situations. In the workenvironment, an individual’s personality defines their level ofagreeableness that consequently impacts on the overall performance ofan employee (Myers, 113). Employees form an integral part of anorganization. As such, their personalities determine whether or notthe organization will thrive. Several companies will believe that theengagement of the employees is the key to success and, therefore,focus on this area. The study focuses on a five-factor model thataims at determining the impacts of teamwork. The five factors areextraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, andconscientiousness (Boyle et al., 67). This paper seeks to addressonly extraversion and low level of agreeableness. A causal studywill be performed to determine how extraversion and agreeablenessinfluence employees’ engagement in individual performance. Thecorrelation between an individual’s cognitive ability and theability to work with others is also found to have a bearing on theoverall productivity of a person (Boyle et al., 71).

Research Questions

  • How does personality traits relate to the performance?

  • Do extroversions and the level agreeableness have the greatest impact on the individual’s performance?

  • To what extent does an organization utilize the five models to reap maximally from individuals?

Objectives

To find out how a low level of agreeableness combined withextraversion affects an employee’s performance at an individuallevel. The detailed analysis focuses on the relationship betweenextraversion and agreeableness in determining optimal individualperformance and overall organizational productivity. It is expectedthat teams that work together in harmony are likely to register highproductivity, unlike the ones that are composed of people withdissenting opinions (Weseley et al., 472). If productivity isenhanced at an individual level, then this is translated into theoverall productivity of the entire organization. Studies have shownthat extraversion is a vital tenet of organizational leadership. Inaddition, this moderately analyzes the impacts of employees’engagement in an organization (Northouse, 64).

Extraversion

Extraversion is the behaviors of engaging in activities that singlesyou out as assertive, talkative and dominant (McShane et al., 117).Various studies have shown that extraverted employees are likely towin employment promotions since they are quickly noticed by theirsupervisors or subordinate members. Transformational leadershipperformance is determined by the extraversion characteristics(Chamorro et al., 253). Extroverts are also capable of utilizingideas from other colleagues to find out and achieve whatever theyneed. Both typical and maximum ratings of the performance leadershipare based on the levels of extroversions. However, different researchindicates that even though extraversions are reliable predictors thatapply in determining the effectiveness of employees (Eagly and Linda,89). It is because the supervisors or subordinates judgments on theperformance of individual talents may be based on the “haloeffects.”

However, if the individuals are not proactive, the contributions fromextraversion result in lower performance. For example, an individualwith high extraversion and low agreeableness will always resistchange in the organization and is also likely to incite others hencelowering performance. Such people with negative extraversion are alsobehind staff conflict within the organization. Forster (2005)suggests that, as organization life turns dynamic, uncertain andunpredictable, it become extremely difficult for supervisors tosucceed by simply developing and presenting their visions top down tothe employees. They are trying to create a bottom-up leadershipthrough voicing constructive agendas to their subordinates to developtheir organization’s performance (Fox et al., 39). However, someproactive behaviors might bring distractions to the employees, thushindering their high anticipated performance.

Low level of Agreeableness

As pointed out in the primary objective of this research paper, astudy is conducted to establish how low levels of agreeableness arelikely to affect the individual performance of employees in anorganization. Korter (2012) argues that a person with a low level ofagreeableness has poor communication skills and is a poor teamplayer. According to this argument, therefore, low level ofagreeableness translates to reduced performance at an individuallevel (Hancock et al., 126). On the contrary, employees with highlevel of agreeableness manage to control the negative emotions, thushelping the organization to cope even in extreme situations. Thisaspect scores excellent in rating the performance of the five modelfactors in the relation to the work ethics.

Domineering, aggressiveness, and self-interest

In most cases, the general performance of individuals will depend onthe above-stated characters. For example, self-interest createsmotivation to individuals with positive intrinsic value. On the otherhand, aggressiveness signifies the toughness of the employees andhence how likely they are to develop a desirable level ofagreeableness. In connection with this they will be able to attainmeasurable performance standards.

Openness to Experience

The concept of openness to experience draws largely to from the levelof agreeableness. This aspect is exemplified by persons who areimaginative, intellectual and sensitive. Different scholars indicatethat employees with high openness to experience are open-minded, andwilling to take duties responsibly (Hersen et al., 93). Anorganization with broad-minded workers tends to solve problems withcreativity since they employ new ideas. With this kind of behavior,every objective looks achievable raising the performance of theorganization (Robbins et al., 381). Consequently, there will belimited conflicts between the supervisors and the employees(Langan-Fox., 205).

Research Design and Methodology

The research was a causal study of hypothesis testing with an aim ofexploring the relationship between variables. The study waspredictive, whereby the research team investigated the correlationbetween variables. This study evaluated how the personality traitsrelate and influence the individual’s performance in the U.Sorganizations (Levy et al., 283). In addition, it explored how theengagement of the employees correlates with the personality traitsand final contributions to the company. This research mainlyconcentrates on individual employee performance and how it isinfluenced by a low level of agreeableness and extraversion.

Method

The study involved 200 items questionnaire that were designed forthis purpose. In these items, there were 50 sub-items that touched onthe five personality traits (Swanwick, 59). These are 10 items ofextraversion, 10 items of neuroticism, 10 items of openness toexperience, 10 items on conscientiousness, and 10 items onagreeableness. 20 items covered the employees’ engagement, and 50items evaluated the performance. Among the various scales available,the five (5) point Likert scale was applied in the entire research.

The wording of the questionnaire was simplified for the employees tounderstand the primary concepts, and the general effect of thepersonality on the performance (Locke, 63). A pilot study wasdeveloped to determine the reliability of the tools and instrumentsfor this purpose.

Results and Discussion

The descriptive analysis included the descriptive information on thecentral tendency. The research team calculated the mean, maximum andminimum attributes, skewness, and the kurtosis of the study (Lord etal., 372).

The minimum value was two (2), and the maximum value was 8. Thisindicated that the data was entered correctly. The skewness ofExtraversion averaged at (.234), agreeableness (-.765),conscientiousness (-. 234), neuroticism (.87), openness to experience(-.435), employee engagement (-.253) and team performance (-.452).There was little deviation from the values of kurtosis.

Work Cited

Boyle, Gregory J, Gerald Matthews, and Donald H. Saklofske. TheSage Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment: Vol. 2.London: SAGE Publications, 2008. Internet resource.

Carr, Stuart C. The Psychology of Global Mobility. New York:Springer, 2010. Print.

Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas, and Adrian Furnham. The Psychology ofPersonnel Selection. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,2010. Print

Eagly, Alice H, and Linda L. Carli. Through the Labyrinth: TheTruth About How Women Become Leaders. Boston, Mass: HarvardBusiness School Press, 2007. Print.

Fluker, Walter E. Ethical Leadership: The Quest for Character,Civility, and Community. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2009.Print.

Forster, Nick. Maximum Performance: A Practical Guide to Leadingand Managing People at Work. Cheltenham, U.K: Edward Elgar, 2005.Internet resource.

Fox, Suzy, and Paul E. Spector. Counterproductive Work Behavior:Investigations of Actors and Targets. Washington, DC: AmericanPsychological Association, 2005. Print

Hancock, Peter A, and James L. Szalma. Performance Under Stress.Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. Internet resource.

Hersen, Michel, and Jay C. Thomas. Comprehensive Handbook ofPsychological Assessement. New York: Wiley, 2003. Print

International Abstracts of Human Resources: A Guide to theLiterature of Management, Human Resources, and Personnel.Chelsea, Mich: International Abstracts of Human Resources, 2003.Print.

Kahnweiler, Jennifer B. The Introverted Leader: Building on YourQuiet Strength. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers,2009. Internet resource.

Kirst-Ashman, Karen K. Human Behavior in the Macro SocialEnvironment: An Empowerment Approach to Understanding Communities,Organizations, and Groups. Australia: Brooks/Cole, 2011. Print.

Kotter, John P. Leading Change. Boston, Mass: Harvard BusinessReview Press, 2012. Print.

Langan-Fox, Janice, Cary L. Cooper, and Richard J. Klimoski. ResearchCompanion to the Dysfunctional Workplace: Management Challenges andSymptoms. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2007. Internet resource.

Levy, Shankman M, Scott J. Allen, and Paige Haber-Curran. EmotionallyIntelligent Leadership: A Guide for Students. , 2015. Print.

Locke, Edwin A. Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior:Indispensable Knowledge for Evidence-Based Management.Chichester, Sussex: John Wiley &amp Sons, 2009. Print.

Lord, Robert G, Richard J. Klimoski, and Ruth Kanfer. Emotions inthe Workplace: Understanding the Structure and Role of Emotions inOrganizational Behavior. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass, 2002.Print.

Lussier, Robert N, and Christopher F. Achua. Leadership: Theory,Application, Skill Development. Australia: SouthWestern/CengageLearning, 2010. Print

McShane, Steven L, and Steven L. McShane. Brownstone Diploma forWindows to Accompany Canadian Organizational Behaviour, FourthEdition. Whitby, Ont.: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 2001. Print.

Myers, David G. Exploring Psychology. New York, NY: WorthPublishers, 2011. Print.

Northouse, Peter G. Leadership: Theory and Practice. ThousandOaks: Sage Publications, 2010. Print.

Robbins, Stephen P, and Tim Judge. Essentials of OrganizationalBehavior. Boston: Pearson, 2014. Print.

Swanwick, Tim, and Judy McKimm. Abc of Clinical Leadership.New York, NY: John Wiley &amp Sons, 2011. Internet resource.

Weseley, Allyson, Robert McEntarffer, and Robert McEntarffer. Ap®Psychology. Hauppauge, N.Y: Barron`s Educational Series, 2010.Print.