Recent research has provided clear evidence that personality factors are associated with job performance. The construct of conscientiousness has been shown to be a particularly promising predictor of overall job performance. Some authors have proposed that conscientiousness might be the ‘g’ of personality and predict performance in most occupational areas. The nature of the construct of conscientiousness is reviewed and consideration given to the likely behaviour associated with high conscientiousness. It is hypothesized that, given the requirements of managerial work, the criterion‐related validity of conscientiousness may not extend to all managerial jobs. Conscientiousness scores are derived for a sample of managers (N= 437), with the aid of personality questionnaire data. In a concurrent validity design these scores are correlated with indicators of current job performance, promotability and specific job performance factors. The correlation of conscientiousness with current performance is close to zero and the correlation with promotability is ‐.20. The pattern of relationships between conscientiousness and the job performance factors is used to interpret the finding that conscientiousness is not influential in determining managerial performance. The results suggest that there may be limits to the range of occupational areas in which conscientiousness is closely linked with job performance.

No abstract

This paper attempts to provide some insight into the individual attributes underlying managerial performance. Managerial performance, like all aspects of human behaviour, is a function of both the personal attributes of the actor and the situation in which he or she exists. Managers work in a wide variety of situations and it is clear that job demands, job role, colleagues, organization systems and other situational factors will exert an influence on the behaviour of any individual manager. It is also reasonable to expect, on the basis of everyday experience and research evidence, that the individual attributes of a manager will influence his or her behaviour. The theoretical basis for this paper recognizes that behaviour is a result of the complex, reciprocating interplay of situational, personal and behavioural factors (Bandura, 1982;Robertson, 1993). Even a complete understanding of the specific personal factors involved in determining managerial behaviour would provide an incomplete model for understanding and predicting managerial performance, since situational factors also have a clear role to play in determining behaviour. Nevertheless, a clear grasp of these personal attributes should provide some help in seeking to unravel the complex interplay of behavioural, situational and personal factors.The empirical focus for this paper is on the personal, psychological attributes associated with managerial behaviour. In the past decade or so there has been considerable interest in the identification of the competencies associated with successful managerial performance (Boam and Sparrow, 1992;Boyatzis, 1982;Dulevwicz, 1989;Thornton and Byham, 1982). The competency approach provides a useful framework for examining managerial effectiveness but it has not yet been developed to the point where there is agreement on the key competencies involved in managerial performance. In fact, definitions of competencies are often poor and contradictory. Although some authors have proposed sets of competencies with broad applicability (e.g. Cockerill, Current models of the factors underlying management performance make use of a variety of variables at different levels of analysis. A framework is presented in which variables of three different types are linked together. Using data from a sample (n = 437) of British managers this article explores relationships between personality factors (using the big-five factors), work competencies and managerial performance. Results from the analyses reveal a set of underlying competency factors, which show different patterns of correlation with two facets of performance: current proficiency and promotability. In turn, these factors and the facets of performance show relationships with the big-five personality factors. Current proficiency is more closely related to competencies of organization, specialization and analysis -competencies more likely to be displayed by people who are conscientious and introverted. Promotability is linked more closely to competencies concerning action/motivation, fl...

Cet article présente les résultats de deux études de validation du questionnaire de personnalité OPQ/PPE (Occupational Personality Questionnaire, Profil de Personnalité en Entreprise en français). Ces deux études se sont déroulées à quatre ans d'intervalle, dans des organisations britanniques de différents secteurs industriels. Les résultats de la première étude de validation ont servi à prédire les résultats de la seconde étude. Cette procédure de validation croisée permet de s'assurer que les résultats de la seconde étude reposent sur des hypothèses a priori, claires et ne peuvent pas être imputés au hasard. Dans chacune de ces études, les cadres ont étéévalués suivant un ensemble de compétences professionnelles définies par chaque organisation, indépendamment l'une de l'autre. Cinq des compétences présentes dans la première étude sont directement comparables à cinq de la seconde étude. Les dimensions de l'OPQ/PPE qui prédisent la réussite sur chacune des compétences de la première étude ont été utilisées comme hypothèses dans la seconde étude. Les résultats confirment que l'OPQ/PPE prédit la réussite dans un poste (au‐delà de la mesure d'aptitudes) d'une maniére cohérente à travers différentes organisations et à des moments différents, et montrent que les relations mises en évidence ne relèvent pas de simples effets de hasard dans les données. This article presents the results of two separate validation studies of the Concept Model of the Occupational Personality Questionnaire (OPQ). The two studies were separated by a four‐year interval and the organisations came from different industry sectors in the UK. The results from the first validation study were used to predict the results in the second study. This cross validation procedure ensured that the results in the second study were based on clear a priori hypotheses and were not merely the result of chance. In each of the studies the managers were assessed against a separate set of job competencies which each organisation developed independently. Five job competencies were present in the earlier study which were directly comparable to five in the later study. The scales of the OPQ that predicted success on each of the competencies in the first study were used as hypotheses in the second study. The results confirm that the OPQ predicts job success (over and above measures of ability) in a consistent and predictable fashion across different organisations and over time, and demonstrates that this relationship is not merely a reflection of chance effects in the data.

No abstract