Applied personality psychology: lessons learned from the IWO field

Abstract

The industrial, work, and organizational (IWO) psychology domain might corroborate on new insights developed within the fundamental personality area, but also, vice versa, the personality field should also build upon applied research on individual differences. It is our conviction that these two fields developed too independently in the past. A selective number of issues and themes that cross the personality–IWO bridge are discussed that can be addressed in future research or implemented in professional practice, including processes explaining trait–performance relationships, trait assessment in the workplace, variable versus person centred approaches towards personality description, personality of teams and groups, and finally maladaptive personality functioning. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Psychiatric Association (APA). (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders(4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Anderson

Ones

D. S.

(2003).The construct validity of three entry‐level personality inventories used in the UK: Cautionary findings from a multiple‐inventory investigation. European Journal of Personality, 17,S39–S66.

Asendorpf

J. B.

(2002).Editorial: The puzzle of personality types. European Journal of Personality, 16,1–5.

Asendorpf

J. B.

Borkenau

Ostendorf

Van Aken

(2001).Carving personality description at its joints: Confirmation of three replicable personality prototypes for both children and adults. European Journal of Personality, 3,169–198.

Ashton

M. C.

Lee

(2001).A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality, 15,327–353.

Barrick

M. R.

Mount

M. K.

Judge

T. A.

(2001).Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9,9–30.

Barrick

M. R.

Stewart

G. L.

Neubert

M. J.

Mount

M. K.

(1998).Relating member ability and personality to work‐team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83,377–391.

Barry

Stewart

G. L.

(1997).Composition, process, and performance in self‐managed groups: The role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82,62–78.

De Fruyt

(2002).A person‐centred approach to P–E fit questions using a multiple trait model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60,73–90.

10.

De Fruyt

Mervielde

(1999).RIASEC types and Big Five traits as predictors of employment status and nature of employment. Personnel Psychology, 52(3),701–727.

11.

De Fruyt

Mervielde

Van Leeuwen

(2002).The consistency of personality type classification across samples and five‐factor measures. European Journal of Personality, 16,57–72.

12.

Hofstee

W. K. B.

(2002).Types and variables: Towards a congenial procedure for handling personality data. European Journal of Personality, 16,89–96.

13.

Hogan

Roberts

(2002, July).Generalized use of occupational personality scales for selecting entry‐level personnel.Symposium on Personality and I/O Psychology. 11th European Conference on Personality Psychology, Jena.

14.

Hogan

(2002, July).Personality and the laws of history. Keynote lecture at the 11th European Conference on Personality, Jena.

15.

Lievens

De Fruyt

Van Dam

(2001).Assessors' use of personality traits in descriptions of assessment centre candidates: A Five‐Factor model perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74,623–636.

16.

Lynam

D. R.

Widiger

T. A.

(2001).Using the five‐factor model to represent the DSM‐IV personality disorders: An expert consensus approach. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110,401–412.

17.

Neumann

G. A.

Wright

(1999).Team effectiveness: Beyond skills and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84,376–389.

18.

Ones

D. S.

Viswesvaran

(1997, July).Empirical and theoretical considerations in using conscientiousness measures in personnel selection. Paper presented at the Fifth European Congress of Psychology, Dublin.

19.

Ones

D. S.

Viswesvaran

Schmidt

F. L.

(2003).Personality and absenteeism: A meta‐analysis of integrity tests. European Journal of Personality, 17,S19–S38.

20.

Rolland

J. P.

De Fruyt

(2003).The validity of FFM personality dimensions and maladaptive traits to predict negative affects at work: A six month prospective study in a military sample. European Journal of Personality, 17,S101–S121.

21.

Salgado

J. F.

(2002).The Big Five personality dimensions and counterproductive behaviors. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10,117–125.

22.

Salgado

J. F.

(2003).Predicting job performance with FFM‐based and non‐FFM based personality inventories. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, in press.

23.

Salgado

J. F.

Moscoso

Lado

(2003).Evidence of cross‐cultural invariance of the Big Five personality dimensions in work settings. European Journal of Personality, 17,S67–S76.

24.

Schmidt

F. L.

Hunter

J. E.

(1998).The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 2,262–274.

25.

Steiner

I. D.

(1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic.

26.

Tett

R. P.

Burnett

D. D.

(in press).A personality trait‐based interactionist model for job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology.

27.

Van der Zee

Zaal

Piekstra

(2003).Validation of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire in the context of personnel selection. European Journal of Personality, in press.

28.

Viswesvaran

(2002).Absenteeism and measures of job performance: A meta‐analysis. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10,12–17.

29.

Widiger

T. A.

Trull

T. J.

Clarkin

J. F.

Sanderson

C. J.

Costa

P. T.

(2002). A description of the DSM‐IV personality disorders with the five‐factor model of personality. In P. T. Costa, Jr. , & T. A. Widiger (Eds.), Personality disorders and the five‐factor model of personality(2nd ed., pp.89–99). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

30.

Witt

L. A.

Burke

L. A.

Barrick

M. R.

Mount

M. K.

(2002).The interactive effects of conscientiousness and agreeableness on job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87,164–169.