Individual Differences in the Workplace

IndividualDifferences in the Workplace

IndividualDifferences in the Workplace

Irrespectiveof the fact that employees must have the elementary skills essentialto perform their duties, skills alone don’t make them greatworkers. They should rather possess individual personality’s traitthat enhances production and performance at the workplace. Workerpersonality at all times trumps skills and talent. A trait refers toa temporally constant, cross-situational distinct variance. Thefive-factor model comprises of five key personalized traits: opennessto experience, secondly is extraversion, thirdly is neuroticism, andfourthly is conscientiousness and lastly agreeableness (Robbins,2009).

Accordingto the model, everyone consistently possesses a trait in the fivecontinuums. Openness to experience involves individuals who arehighly interested in experiencing a new phenomenon and are flexiblein their thinking. John was an employee we used to work together at acar manufacturing plant. He was a very flexible individual who wasready to learn new things without any hesitation. Furthermore, Johnwas interested in experimenting on new models and new designs of carsdeveloped at the factory. His passion and openness to experience gavehim a vast knowledge on cars (Robbins 2009). Most customers soughtprofessional advice from him before purchasing any car. Jane was thesecretary at the plant. On the contrary, she was close minded andrigid in how she approached new experiences. When faced with adilemma, she could not perform as expected. Most of the employeescomplained that she was an impediment in reaching the company’sboss. Consequently, a number of employees hated her.

Conscientiousnessis the second factor in the big five model. Persons with highconscientiousness have a tendency to be dutiful and diligent inapproaching life and work. On the contrary, individuals with lowconscientiousness tend to be less interested in detail and are bigpicture thinkers. John was a diligent individual who possesses broadthinking spectrum. He had many ways of dealings with a problem andwas very interested in the details of how things should run. Jane, onthe other hand, was careless and was less interested with details.She was only interested in ensuring that the manager was okay withoutinvoking a holistic approach to the issues facing the company.Through employee orderliness, industriousness, time management andself-initiative conscientiousness can be demonstrated. It envisagesintrinsic and extrinsic career feat such as job satisfaction and jobbenefits. Overall cognitive aptitude and high conscientiousnessrelate to the execution of intricate tasks (McCrae &amp Allik,2002).

Agreeablenesslooks at the degree of friendliness that an individual possesses incomparison with hostility that an individual tend to display wheninteracting with others. John was highly approachable individual whohad an open door policy to other workers. Openness characteristicmade him more trustworthy and modest among other workers. Ultimately,he was elected into the welfare docket of the workers’ union. Janewas high-handed person who was hostile to other workers especiallythose of the lower class. She never paid attention to the grievancesof her fellow colleagues.

Theassociation between friendliness and job satisfaction is mostostensible in transactional work setting. When employees who are lowin agreeableness become satisfied with their work setting, they areprobable to participate in prosocial organizational behaviors. Highlyagreeable workers, engage in prosocial organizational conductsirrespective of the work environment, or character of others they aresupposed to labor with as they have a tendency to lay emphasis on thedesires of the organization and others. Further, deviant conduct isgreater among employees low in agreeableness, predominantly whenorganizational provision is low (Robbins 2009).

Extraversionrefers to being accountable for individual thoughtfulness to reward.It is extraversion`s core aspects of sociability, assertiveness andtalkativeness that are connected to approach predispositions. Similarto most human doings, the dictum of the world of work comprisesrewards. Extraversion is synonymous to high sensitivity to reward,making employees who exhibit high extraversion probable to beproductive and highly motivated in collaborative and autonomous work.It predominantlyintensifies when the jobembracessupervision andmanagement of resources. Extravertshave a tendency to experience moreaffirmativetouch, identify themselves more confidently, and remembermore optimistic than adverse work-related events compared tointroverts. Intent to quit among assertive person is less reliant onbureaucratic impartiality within the organization, mainly when theprospect for societal rewards at work is seemingly high (Raad &ampPerugini 2002).

Neuroticismrefers to the emotional stability that an individual possesses.Individuals who are highly neurotic have a tendency to be less stableand often exhibit undesirable emotions. Jane had underlying personalproblems that manifested at the workplace. She had an abusive husbandwho was not responsible for providing in the home. The behavior madeJane emotionally instable. The harshness she portrayed was because ofthe underlying personal problems she faced back at home. On the otherhand individuals such as John, who are emotionally stable arenormally pleasant and have a tendency to be resilient to stress (Raad&amp Perugini2002).

Traitslike&nbspemotional stability and conscientiousness transform intoenthusiasm and an aspiration to meet or surpass job requirements, andthe ability to contain pressure.Agreeableness aids nurture teamwork lessens the predisposition toconflict and makes collaboration with others easier. However, thecombinationof individual traits that can transform to effective job performancecan differ depending on the kind of position (McCrae&amp Allik,2002).


McCrae,R. R., &amp Allik, I. U. (2002).Thefive-factor model of personality across cultures.New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Raad,B. ., &amp Perugini, M. (2002). Bigfive assessment.Seattle, WA: Hogrefe &amp Huber Publishers.

Robbins,S. P. (2009). Organisationalbehaviour: Global and Southern African perspectives.Cape Town: Pearson Education South Africa.