جنبه های پنج عامل بزرگ به عنوان پیش بینی کننده عملکرد آموزش شغلی: نقش تقاضاهای شغلی خاص
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|34267||2014||7 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Learning and Individual Differences, Volume 29, January 2014, Pages 1–7
Personality facets, especially Big Five facets, have been shown to predict learning in school and university. This paper investigates their potential predictive power for training performance in a work environment. Based on trait activation theory by Tett and Burnett (2003) it was expected that depending on specific job demands, specific personality facets would be predictive. However, it was also tested whether invariant influences exist. Additionally, the impact of age, gender, and general mental ability was controlled for. The sample consisted of N = 501 apprentices. Training performance was operationalized by supervisor ratings in several learning domains. Findings confirm the hypotheses and revealed invariant positive contributions from dutifulness and Openness to ideas and invariant negative contributions from deliberation and Openness to fantasy. All other facets only functioned within a specific occupational group. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
The idea that specific situational demands and job characteristics influence the way personality affects job performance has been formalized in a theoretical model by Tett and Burnett (2003). Those authors suggested that the activation of personality traits is dependent on certain situational characteristics (i.e., job demands, distracters, constraints, releasers, and facilitators, see below for an explanation). However, job success is often operationalized in terms of supervisor ratings, earnings or hierarchy level. For these criteria empirical evidence for the predictive power of personality traits exists (Barrick & Mount, 1991). Nowadays, though, there is broad acknowledgment that continued learning is a vital part of succeeding in life in general and within the job in particular (Beckmann & Birney, 2012). Whereas some progress has been made regarding the predictive power of personality traits, especially the Big Five, with regard to learning at an adolescent or young adult age within school (Heaven and Ciarrochi, 2012 and Ziegler et al., 2009) or university (MacCann et al., 2009, Poropat, 2009 and Ziegler et al., 2010) contexts, little is known about the way personality influences job training processes. To this end the current study systematically investigated the predictive power of Big Five facets for job training in a longitudinal design for different jobs thereby adding to our understanding how individual differences in personality affect the process of training performance. 1. Trait activation through situational characteristics Tett and Burnett (2003) suggested that trait activation due to situational characteristics can be regarded as an important factor influencing test–criterion correlations in work settings. Consequently, the model can also be applied when investigating the role of personality as a predictor of job training success. Tett and Burnett's trait activation theory differentiates five situational features relevant to personality expression and thus relevant to the predictive power of personality at work. (1) Job demands can be found within the specific job descriptions and naturally go along with specific personality traits (e.g., finding people to form a study group requires a certain degree of Extraversion). (2) In contrast, distracters are not part of the actual job description but interfere with performance (e.g., the presence of other people in a study group might distract a talkative and extraverted person from learning due to chatting). (3) A constraint means that the situation does not allow for specific behaviors to be shown and thereby making the impact of the corresponding trait impossible (e.g., an extraverted participant of an online training cannot profit from his/her sociability in learning groups). (4) A releaser on the other hand is a situational feature that counteracts a constraint (e.g., the same participant will profit from his/her sociability if the online training includes presence days allowing for making contacts and forming a study group). (5) A facilitator underscores trait relevant situation information and makes trait activation more likely (e.g., the present day invitation sent out by the teaching institution might include a note pointing out the opportunity to form study groups). Thus, the work context offers many diverse situations that potentially activate or deactivate a trait and thereby influence its predictive power. Regarding job training the same mechanisms can be assumed. There might even be stronger situational influences within job training programs that include formal schooling like in an apprenticeship. Here, work contexts are interspersed with school contexts possibly increasing the variety of situational features.