The Influence of Personality on Behavior and Performance Within an Organization

According to Digman (1990) job performance is considered the ultimate criterion variable when considering employees for job selection, promotion, and compensation. Digon (1990) further says that there are a variety of things that influence job performance and personality of an employee is one of the major factors. According to Goleman., Boyatzis, and McKee (2002), the ability of an employee to work with others and stay motivated is usually determined by one's personality. Goleman., Boyatzis, and McKee (2002) add that the expression of positive emotions is usually associated with great service delivery whereas some emotional dissonance is associated with poor job performance and lack of job satisfaction. According to Klehe and Anderson (2007), there is a great relationship between employees emotional labor and job strain. Digon (1997) believes that human beings strive for psychological consistency internally in order to function in a real world. Kumar (1987) argues when employees experience internal inconsistency they become psychologically uncomfortable and their cognitive dissonance goes down affecting their job performance. Klehe and Anderson (2007) on the other hand illustrate how neuroticism is negatively related to job performance within an organization. On the other hand, extraversion, conscientiousness, and agreeableness are positively related to job performance. Maio and Olson (1998) argue that extraversion is negatively correlated with job performance because it appears to inspire people to miss work and to do unnecessary stuff during work time. On the other hand, Klehe and Anderson (2007) further argue that extraversion is only negatively associated with job performance in cases where it is combined with low levels of conscientiousness.

Theory that improves performance in existing organizations

According to Organ and Lingl (1995), satisfaction plays a great part in the success of the organization structure of any company. They further point out a good organization spurred by satisfaction leads to an excellent performance of all employees. Bateman and Organ (1983) argue that happiness is the key to good performance and improvement in the general production of an organization. Organ and Konovsky (1989) in their research they found out that the satisfaction of employees caused by different factors in a job such as a salary and a supervisor's appraisal determines their performance. They further point out that the job appraisal done defines the mood and the willingness of an individual to contribute towards the goals of the organization. According to Greene and Organ (1973), how clear a role that one is assigned to carry determines their satisfaction and better performances as they align their goals with the organizational goals. Organ and Konovsky (1989) therefore see a personal willingness of an employee to work as vital to their satisfaction and ultimate job performance leading to improvement of an organization. Latham and Pinder (2005) support the theory that satisfaction of employees in an organization improves both individual and overall performance of the firm as a whole. They further highlight that the motivation of the employees is the key to satisfaction and is influenced by justice that takes place in a workplace. Klehe and Anderson (2007) further hypotheses that the performance of an organization can be improved by having individuals who have the right skills to perform a task because they have higher output than less skilled and unskilled employees. Schumann (2001) adds that moral ethics in an organization is vital to the future success as well as better performance.

Emotional Intelligence and Its Influence on Behavior and Influence on Leaders, Coworkers, and Subordinates

Klehe and Anderson (2007) define emotional intelligence as the ability of people to recognize their emotions and other peoples feelings. Also, Klehe and Anderson (2007) say that emotional intelligence enables people to discern between different emotions and to react to them appropriately. Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee (2002) believe that high emotional intelligence enables one to use the information about feelings appropriately to guide one's thinking and behavior. According to Law, Wong, and Song (2004) high emotional intelligence give employees the ability to motivate and endure oneself even in times of frustration. Law, Wong, and Song (2004) also believe that emotional intelligence gives employees the ability to control impulses and postpone satisfaction. It is also the ability to manage one's emotions and ensuring that emotions don't overwhelm them and take away from them the power to think. According to pinder (1977), a high emotional intelligence enables one to adapt to environments and achieve goals. Pinder (1977) concluded from research that employees with high emotional intelligence have a higher job performance and good leadership skills. According to Bateman and Organ (1983) employees with a high emotional intelligence can control the perception of the environment they work. Bateman and Organ (1983) also explain that leaders with a high emotional intelligence are capable of using their positive emotive emotions to become aware of their organizations' major progress in performance. According to Greene and Organ (1973) managers with a high emotional intelligence usually create positive interactions among employees, and this leads to a great coordination, cooperation, and organizational behavior.

References

Bateman, T., & Organ, D. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: the relationship between affect and employee "citizenship". Academy of Management Journal, 26(4), 587-595. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/255908

Digman, J. (1990). Personality structure: emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41(1), 417-440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221

Digman, J. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 73(6), 1246-1256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1246

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2002). The emotional reality of teams. Journal of Organizational Excellence, 21(2), 55-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/npr.10020

Greene, C., & Organ, D. (1973). An evaluation of causal models linking the received role with job satisfaction. Administrative Science Quarterly, 18(1), 95. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2391931

Klehe, U., & Anderson, N. (2007). Working hard and working smart: Motivation and ability during typical and maximum performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 978-992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.978

Kumar, P. (1987). Role of personal characteristics in cognitive dissonance and causal attribution. The Journal of Social Psychology, 127(3), 355-357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1987.9713706

Latham, G., & Pinder, C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 485-516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142105

Law, K., Wong, C., & Song, L. (2004). The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 483-496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.483

LePine, J., Erez, A., & Johnson, D. (2002). The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 52-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.1.52

Maio, G., & Olson, J. (1998). Values as truisms: Evidence and implications. Journal of Personality And Social Psychology, 74(2), 294-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.74.2.294

Organ, D., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 157-164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.74.1.157

Organ, D., & Lingl, A. (1995). Personality, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135(3), 339-350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1995.9713963

Pinder, C. (1977). Concerning the application of human motivation theories in organizational settings. The Academy of Management Review, 2(3), 384. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/257695

Schumann, P. (2001). A moral principles framework for human resource management ethics. Human Resource Management Review, 11(1-2), 93-111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1053-4822(00)00042-5