Future Research Agenda That Judge, Et Al. Essay

future research agenda that Judge, et al. (2008) present addresses their critique of personality research in organizational behavior.

According to Judge, Klinger, Simon and Yang (2008), the various criticisms directed at early organizational behavioral theories have been countered by a growing body of evidence that supports these fundamental precepts. In this regard Judge et al. report that there have been three main pieces of evidence to date that have been particularly influential:

The growth of meta-analysis allowed for cumulation of results across studies. This development was particularly important in the area of personality, given the myriad traits that had been considered over decades of scientific research.

The widespread acceptance of the five-factor model (or the 'Big Five' -- Extraversion, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience) of personality provided a framework to organize the diverse set of traits. While the gains from the five-factor model have been considerable, its acceptance in organizational behavior is so widespread that it threatens to 'white out' other potentially relevant traits.

3. There was an accumulating body of evidence in personality psychology that supported the enduring nature of personality traits, their genetic origins, and their neuropsychological basis (Judge et al., 2008, p. 1983).

Despite the criticisms leveled at the use of personality traits for human resource research and planning, the research to date supports this practice because personality has consistently been shown to be relevant to individual attitudes and behavior as well as team and organizational functioning (Judge et al., 2008). An excerpt from their literature review makes this clear: "Personality traits do matter at work, and indeed, the data appear to support [this] conclusion" (p. 1983). Notwithstanding this growing body of evidence, though, Judge et al. also note that not everyone is convinced of the efficacy of personality research for organizational behavior applications.In this regard, Judge and his associates emphasize that, "Perhaps the most intensive application of personality research in organizational settings, and arguably the most controversial, has been in relation to job performance. One reason for this interest -- and controversy -- concerns the role of personality testing in hiring decisions" (p. 1983).

Because the decisions that are based on personality traits affect people's lives, it is vitally important for them to be legitimate and evidence based, but this is not currently the case. In this regard, Judge and his colleagues note that, "The acceptance of personality traits as important predictors of employment outcomes is far from universal" (p. 1983). Personality traits, though, are not the only factors involved in employee performance. Indeed, work motivation, job attitudes, and the type and quality of leadership have all been shown to play critical roles in shaping employee morale and organizational performance (Judge et al., 2008).

As noted above, though, the research to date remains controversial in spite of the growing consensus concerning its legitimacy. In this regard, Judge et al. report that, "Though there is general acceptance that personality predicts most broad organizational attitudes and behaviors, not all scholars are convinced of the usefulness of personality measures in organizational research" (p. 1990). Among the criticisms that have most often been directed at personality traits include:

1. The validities are sufficiently weak as to question the usefulness of personality measures in predicting organizational criteria, particularly job performance; and,

2. Because items on self-report personality measures are socially desirable (i.e., the 'right' response is transparent), faking undermines the usefulness of personality measures (Judge et al., p. 1990)

There are also some gaps in the existing body of knowledge concerning the influences of so-called "dark-side".....