Big five personality factors, hardiness, and social judgment as predictors of leader performance
Author:
Bartone Paul T.,Eid Jarle,Helge Johnsen Bjorn,Christian Laberg Jon,Snook Scott A.
Abstract
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the influence of psychological hardiness, social judgment, and “Big Five” personality dimensions on leader performance in US military academy cadets at West Point.Design/methodology/approachArmy cadets were studied in two different organizational contexts, i.e. summer field training and during academic semesters. Leader performance was measured with leadership grades (supervisor ratings) aggregated over four years at West Point.FindingsAfter controlling for general intellectual abilities, hierarchical regression results showed leader performance in the summer field training environment is predicted by Big Five extroversion, and hardiness, and a trend for social judgment. During the academic period context, leader performance is predicted by mental abilities, Big Five conscientiousness, and hardiness, with a trend for social judgment.Research limitations/implicationsResults confirm the importance of psychological hardiness, extroversion, and conscientiousness as factors influencing leader effectiveness, and suggest that social judgment aspects of emotional intelligence can also be important. These results also show that different Big Five personality factors may influence leadership in different organizational contexts.Practical implicationsThe study identifies personality factors related to leader performance in different types of work environments or contexts. Results can be used to improve leader selection and development programs.Originality/valueThis is the first study to examine the influence of psychological hardiness together with Big Five personality factors on leader performance. It identifies hardiness as an important predictor of leadership, while also showing that organizational context makes a difference for what Big Five personality factors influence leader performance: extroversion appears to be more influential in highly social and active work environments, whereas conscientiousness has greater salience in academic and business settings.
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
Reference82 articles.
1. Ackerman, P.L. and Heggestad, E. (1997), “Intelligence, personality and interests: evidence for overlapping traits”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 121, pp. 219‐45. 2. Antonakis, J. (2004), “On why ‘emotional intelligence’ will not predict leadership effectiveness beyond IQ or the ‘big five’: an extension and rejoinder”, Organizational Analysis, Vol. 12, pp. 171‐82. 3. Astin, A.W., Korn, W.S. and Berz, E.R. (1990), The American Freshman: National Norms for Fall 1990, Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA. 4. Bar‐On, R. (2000), “Emotional and social intelligence: insights from the Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ‐i)”, in Bar‐On, R. and Parker, J.D.A. (Eds), Handbook of Emotional Intelligence, Jossey‐Bass, San Francisco, CA. 5. Barnes, M.L. and Sternberg, R.J. (1989), “Social intelligence and decoding of nonverbal cues”, Intelligence, Vol. 13, pp. 263‐87.
Cited by
88 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|