intrinsic factos affecting the job performance of … m. ellyson, justin h... · web viewintrinsic...

2012 Cambridge Business amp Economics Conference ISBN 9780974211428

Intrinsic Factors Affecting the Job Performance

of Military Leaders

A study of Fiedlerrsquos Contingency Theory The Five Factor Model

And Goal Orientation

Landen M Ellyson

Indiana Wesleyan University Marion Indiana USA(567) 231-6108

Justin H Gibson


Michael Nichols


Shawn M Carraher

June 27-28 2012Cambridge UK 1


Intrinsic Factors Affecting the Job Performance of Military Leaders

ABSTRACT

Purpose ndash This study examines the difference between interpersonal and task oriented leadership

in the military The paper seeks to explain how personality and goal orientation affect these two

styles of leadership and improve job performance

Designmethodologyapproach ndash The study collected data from 869 soldiers comprised of

enlisted personnel and officers All participants were in the age range of 18 to 55 years old The

research was gathered from the United States Military during peacetime efforts The instruments

used for data analysis were Fred Fiedlerrsquos Contingency Model of Leadership the Least Preferred

Coworker Scale (LPC) Goal Orientation and the Five Factor Model (FFM)

Findings ndash Findings concluded that goal orientation and the personality trait of

conscientiousness significantly influenced the job performance of military leaders Both of the

influencing factors are characteristics found in task-oriented leaders The low LPC scores

recorded in the data substantially add to this conclusion

Research limitationsimplications ndash Research was administered only during a peacetime

environment limiting the scope of certain aspects affecting military job performance

Originalityvalue ndash The recent study is original due to its attempt to show that Fiedlers LPC is

directly related to certain dimensions of the FFM The study also reveals that the FFM trait of

Conscientiousness connected with a strong emphasis on Goal-Orientation is the strongest

determinant of a successful leader in military operations Psychologists may also contribute

from the value added by this study in the analysis of FFM Goal-Orientation and Fred Fiedlerrsquos

Contingency Theory



PURPOSE

This study examines the difference between interpersonal and task oriented leadership in

the military The paper seeks to explain how personality and goal orientation affect these two

styles of leadership and improve job performance The Five Factor Model (FFM) Fiedlerrsquos

Contingency Theory and Goal Orientation will be analyzed within the data gathered from

military personnel

Since the 1960s researchers have conducted studies to determine whether there is any

relationship between personality and leadership They based their studies on the Five Factor

Model consisting of conscientiousness agreeableness neuroticism openness and extraversion

(Bligh 2009) DeRue Barnes amp Morgeson discussed recentmeta-analysis that proves there is a

multiple correlation of 39 between the FFM traits and leadership (as cited in Judge Bono Ilies

amp Werner 2002) More specifically this studyrsquos data analysis will uncover how the FFM

specifically correlates with task-oriented leadership

Fiedlers Contingency Theory (Fiedler 1971b 1978) implies that the effectiveness of

leadership is a function of the interactions between the leader and the leadership situation

(Peters Hartke amp Pohlmann 1985) The purpose of the contingency theory in this study is to

analyze the data relating to the Least Preferred Co-Worker (LPC) scale and determine how it

relates to the job performance of task-oriented leaders versus relationship-oriented leaders By

studying the correlation between the two different orientations of leadership and our data

collection we hope to narrow down why LPC favors one leadership style over the other

This study will look at the intrinsic value of goal orientation and how it affects the job

performance of leaders Scriffignano wrote that the results of previous research suggested goal

orientation can influence an individualrsquos approach and success in achieving goals (as cited in



Carson Mosley amp Boyar 2004) A better understanding of the role that goal orientation plays

on leadership could prove the advantages of task-oriented leaders

LITERATURE REWVIEW

The United States Military has been always been on the forefront of developing quality

leaders and has been the testing ground for many different leadership theoriesMilitary

leadership is defined as influencing people by providing purpose direction and motivation

while operating to accomplish the mission and improve the organization (Headquarters

Department of the Army 2007) Military leaders operate in fast paced work environment that is

fraught with complexity The military is constantly changing whether it be their tactics

operational strategy training exercises weapons technology policies or leadership theories

These changes increase the level complexity in a commanderrsquos task at all levels and multiply the

challenges faced by military leaders (Shamir B amp Ben-Ari E 2000)

The way in which performance within the military can be observed is often very

challenging due to multi-faceted responsibilities that are placed upon military leaders Different

wars and international operations have proved that the context in which leadership takes place

can drastically change the expectations of leadership-behavior and its perception by subordinates

and the leaders themselves (Rozčenkova A amp Dimdiņš Ģ 2010) Military leadership is

dynamic in its nature and it may be necessary to clearly define leadership in its different contexts

in order to be able to truly evaluate a leaders effectiveness (Wong L Bliese P amp McGurk D

2003)

Rozčenkova and Dimdiņš (2010) used 203 members of international militaries in conflict

environments in order to define the relationship between self-reported transformational

leadership and social identification in the military Striving to prove a difference in self-reported



leadership behavior among officers non-commissioned officers and privates they conduct a

multivariate analysis of variance with the levels of hierarchy and the memberrsquos nationality as

independent variables They also used the subscales of self-reported leadership behavior as

dependent variables Through Rozčenkova and Dimdiņšrsquo research it was partially confirmed

that higher-ranking officers would report more transformational leadership behavior than lower

ranking officers and soldiers would These findings are in concurrence with previous research

conducted by Kane and Tremble (2000) who also found differences in transformational

leadership between different organizational levels

Utecht and Heier (1976) studied a group of 479 officers out of a total population of 744

They hypothesized that according to Fred Fiedlerrsquos contingency model that military leaders

primarily have attained their success by holding positions that cater towards their leadership

style Leader-member relations task structure and leader position power were used as situational

variables to determine whether a group is favorable or unfavorable to a leader The null

hypothesis of this study was accepted and it was concluded that the success of military leaders is

not primarily because they are placed in positions that cater towards their leadership style

Fiedlerrsquos contingency model failed to accurately predict successful leaders which poses the

question what factors can be used to predict successful military leadership

Kell et al (2010) investigated 13 volunteer subject matter experts(SMEs) and 11 human

factors professionals (HFP) SMEs to findassociations between Big Five expressions and

behavioral effectiveness judgments in the context of job performance Motowidlo (2003) defines

job performance asldquothe value to the organization of a workerrsquos behaviors that are performed

while on the jobrdquoThrough their research Kell et al found that for both HFP and volunteer jobs

Openness and Agreeableness had more of an effect in interpersonal situations while Expressions



of Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability had more effectiveness in task oriented situations

These findings strongly implicate that certain job characteristics effect the correlation between

behavioral trait expressions and ratings in job performance

Brown and ODonnell (2011) studied 438 undergraduate seniors enrolled in a Strategic

Management capstone course to find if learning goal orientation combined with the Big Five in

any way has a direct correlation to job performance They measured conscientiousness

neuroticism learning goal orientation proactive personality and effort A total of six

hypothesisrsquos were analyzed and hypothesis 1 and 2 solidified research done in the past by

proving that Conscientiousness positively related to learning goal orientation while neuroticism

had a negative relationship

DESIGNMETHODOLOGYAPPROACH

The present study surveyed 869 soldiers from the United States Military (461 men 383

women 25 missing in the system) Their ages range from 18 ndash 55 with the mean age being 21

The surveyed individuals included enlisted military personnel as well as officers Results of this

research where gathered in a peacetime environment

The primary instruments used were Fred Fiedlerrsquos Contingency Model of Leadership

more specifically the Least Preferred Coworker Scale (LPC) as well as Goal Orientation and the

Five Factor Model (FFM) which consists of extraversion openness conscientiousness

agreeableness and emotional stability The data analyzes each of these different areas in order to

show what effect goal orientation and the FFM have on job performance within the military

FINDINGS

The average standard coefficient beta for Goal Orientation LPC and FFM is 071 with 4

of the 7 having a negative effect on the dependent variable job performance Conscientiousness



has the greatest effect on job performance in the military with a 441 standard coefficient beta It

is a trait that is proven to be more effective in work-related task situations which could be

explained by the fact that task situations are more relevant to the expression of conscientiousness

than the other traits (Kell Rittmayer Crook amp Motowidlo 2010)

1 =

Male 2 = Females

Results are from a peacetime environment


1 Population

Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative

PercentValid 1 461 530 546 546

2 383 441 454 1000Missing System 25 29Total 869 971 1000

2 Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviationage 810 18 55 2109 4807Valid N (listwise) 810

3 ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig1 Regression 84468 7 12067 100538 000a

Residual 51850 432 120Total 136318 439

a Predictors (Constant) REGR FACTOR SCORE 5 FOR ANALYSIS 1 REGR FACTOR SCORE 4 FOR ANALYSIS 1 lpctot REGR FACTOR SCORE 3 FOR ANALYSIS 1 REGR FACTOR SCORE 2 FOR ANALYSIS 1 goalor REGR FACTOR SCORE 1 FOR ANALYSIS 1b Dependent Variable perform

4 Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R SquareStd Error of the Estimate

1 787a 620 613 34644a Predictors (Constant) REGR FACTOR SCORE 5 FOR ANALYSIS 1 REGR FACTOR SCORE 4 FOR ANALYSIS 1 lpctot REGR FACTOR SCORE 3 FOR ANALYSIS 1 REGR FACTOR SCORE 2 FOR ANALYSIS 1 goalor REGR FACTOR SCORE 1 FOR ANALYSIS 1


Another reason that conscientiousness correlates more directly to positive job

performance is that as an individual gets older Conscientiousness continuously increases in

rank-order stability whereas the other traits Extraversion (-079) Openness (-045)

Agreeableness (-110) and Emotional stability (-006) reach a peak before digressing in rank-

order stability (Specht Schmukle amp Egloff 2011) This means that over time individuals tend to

become more conscientious which in return increases the significance it has on onersquos job

performance

A study done by Kell RittmayerCrook amp Motowidlo 2010 showed that

Conscientiousness and emotional stability prove to be effective in task oriented leadership styles

For the purpose of this study emotional stability will be not be acknowledged as it does not hold


Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t SigB Std Error Beta1 (Constant) 2649 138 19140 000

goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000

Openness to Experience

-045 015 -093 -2988 003

Conscientiousness 219 020 441 10928 000

Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

Emotional Stability -006 014 -014 -439 661

a Dependent Variable perform


a proper amount of significance in the data This lack of significance can be explained by the fact

the military has strong restrictions on who they recruit Individuals who are emotionally unstable

are usually weeded out during the recruiting process

The United States Military has sought after and nurtured proactive people who are goal

oriented ever since the military began A proactive person is someone who takes personal

initiative to be influential no matter what the situation is They display initiative set goals push

through improvise and overcome all obstacles (Bateman amp Crant 1993) These types of leaders

are known for exceptional job performance and that explains why goal orientation has a strong

correlation with a standard coefficient beta of 398 Leaderswho set goals where they see

themselves as able to progress successfully or as more of an asset instead where they see

themselves as stuck or unimportant will be much more effective (Hannah amp Avolio 2010)It has

been discovered that conscientiousness is positively related to onersquos desire to learn goal

orientation while emotional stability was found to be negatively related (Colquitt LePine amp

Noe 2000)

The LPC holds a standard coefficient beta of 109 which seems to play less of an affect

on job performance than Conscientiousness or Goal Orientation However both

Conscientiousness and Goal Orientation relate heavily to task oriented leadership Task oriented

leaders receive low scores on the LPC Those low scores translate into a smaller standard

coefficient beta in this data set A smaller standard coefficient beta for the LPC proves that traits

that pertain to task oriented leadership improve job performance more so than interpersonal

leadership traits because if interpersonal leadership traits where more important to job

performance they would score higher on the LPC thus causing it to have a higher standard

coefficient



ORIGNINALITYVALUECONTRIBUTION

The recent study is original due to its attempt to show that Fiedlers LPC is directly

related to certain dimensions of the FFM The study also reveals that the FFM trait of


determinant of a successful leader in military operations In his doctorate dissertation for the

Indiana University of Pennsylvania Dr Keith Alan Francoeur conducted a study on the

relationship between the FFM and preferred leadership styles in initiating structure He

concluded that Conscientiousness was positively correlated to initiating structure (2008) which

is a component vital to military leadership

As well as tying together multiple personality theories the wide variety of test subjects

adds further validity to the FFM and LPC The test subjects consisted of peacetime armed service

members serving across all military branches and across a wide variety of military occupational

specialties and LPC task structures Despite the diversity of the test population

Conscientiousness and Goal-Orientation was consistently rated higher than all other personality

and leadership traits This only adds credibility to the FFM and also reveals that leaders rated

most highly in the area of performance tend to display traits consistent with a low LPC score

The data collected from the study also reveals a unique perspective as it relates to the

FFM Since the military does not recruit emotionally unstable individuals into the armed forces

the FFM trait of Emotional Stability can be disregarded since it is irrelevant to this test group

This allows the data to provide more accurate results on the differentiating traits of successful

military leadership Therefore the absence of the Emotional Stability factor only provides a

clearer understanding of which FFM traits are present in successful military leaders



The study contributed to the field of psychology in regards to Goal-Orientation FFM

and the LPC By collecting data from a wide population of armed service members we were able

to see that high performing military leaders had certain traits in common By analyzing the data

we determined that these successful leaders were Goal-Oriented and held traits consistent with

the Conscientiousness trait of the FFM We also noticed that these traits from the FFM are

consistent with a low LPC score Therefore we concluded that the highest performing leaders in

the United States military are task-oriented

DISCUSSION AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

Utecht and Heier used the Contingency Model to study whether or not the successfulness

of military leaders could be directly related to their positions being complimentary to their

leadership styles The two researchers found that the Contingency Model was no better than

pure chance at predicting successful military leaders (Utecht Heier 1976) There are varying

degrees of situational favorableness that are identified by dissecting the LPC They are

dichotomized into three different factors (leader-member relations task structure and position

power) that make up eight specific leadership situations (Peters Hartke amp Pohlmann 1985)

One of Utecht and Heierrsquos main points was that position power should not always be used as a

variable depending on the situation

Their research should not lead to the belief that contingency model is not a practical tool

Fiedler would not have spent significant time developing the theory if there was no solid basis

Furthermore other studies have proven the model effective in different settings However there

is a need to create a new model that is more accurate After analyzing our results we predict that

if FFM and Goal-Orientation were used coherently to create a new model the resulting tool



would have the ability to effectively predict successful leaders in both military and non-military

organizations

Future research would gain from additional data sets and performance measurements From the

results of the data it is noteworthy to observe the relationship between task oriented leadership

and performance Similar future studies could focus on the comparison wartime and peacetime

military personnel as well as other population factors We were limited to gathering data from

soldiers in the United States Military in a peacetime environment It would be suggested to

gather data from several different militaries in both peacetime and wartime settings For

example future sample sizes could be segregated by amount of time served deployment

location military rank military occupation active duty status or reservist status Also it would

be beneficial to incorporate other variables such as expanded personality factors or locusrsquos of

control This would give researchers the most well rounded data This information would benefit

militaries and researchers alike by being helping determine and suggest how leaders should adapt

from environment to environment and when working on a global platform with foreign

militaries Still the scope of future research is not limited only to the military

Perhaps the most interesting research would come from examining the effects of task

oriented leadership goal orientation and conscientiousness on performance in environments

with structured tasks and poor leader-member relations environments that generally call for

leaders with a high LPC score (Fiedler 1968) By testing these areas current conceptions of

certain work environments could successfully be challenged

In regards to future research the relationship between these three variables should be examined

in other industries and environments It would be beneficial to run similar studies in

environments traditionally associated with an emphasis on task oriented leadership areas such as



construction information technology (Petrides 2000) and engineering Still there are other

areas for potential research as well

As an example in the area of customer service it has been determined that transactional

or transformational leadership has no effect on the quality of customer service (Gerhardt 2006)

However potential research could be conducted on the effects of goal orientation and the FFM

in customer other service Besides customer service there are many other business environments

commonly thought to be congruent with a relational leadership style in which the FFM task

oriented leadership and goal orientation could be tested

CONCLUSION

In conclusion there are numerous issues involved in defining successful military

leadership and the extent that certain leadership styles have on job performance The vast amount

of responsibilities combined with the complexity of military operations make it difficult to

clearly predict with absoluteness a specific leadership theory that encompasses all possible

scenarios Although further investigation within this field of research is clearly necessary this

paper contributes in that it shows decidedly that Conscientiousness and Learning Goal

Orientation play a large part in successful job performance It is essential that as the military

trains leaders to function in highly volatile and fast paced environment that they indoctrinate

Conscientiousness and Learning Goal Orientation into the core of their leadership development

The instrument used in this paper can also make a contribution into future research into

developing a leadership theory that takes into account the vast amount of performance measures

that define successful military leadership We recommend that additional research be done on the

various aspects that make up job performance within military leadership in hopes of the



development of a multi-functioning leadership theory that can predict successful leaders in an

environment that contains so many variants

Resources

Bateman T S amp Crant J M (1993) The proactive component of organizational behavior Journal of Organizational Behavior 14 103ndash118

Bligh Michelle C ldquoPersonality Theories of Leadershiprdquo Encyclopedia of Group Processes amp Intergroup Relations 2009 SAGE Publications 8 Apr 2011

Brown S amp ODonnell E (2011) PROACTIVE PERSONALITY AND GOAL ORIENTATION A MODEL OF DIRECTED EFFORT Journal Of Organizational Culture Communications amp Conflict 15(1) 103-119

Carson CM Mosley DC amp Boyar SL (2004) Goal orientation and supervisory behaviors Impacting SMWT effectiveness Team Performance Management 10(78) 152 1113088162

Colquitt J LePine J amp Noe R (2000) Toward an integrative theory of training motivation A meta-analytic pathanalysis of 20 years of research Journal of Applied Psychology 85



678ndash707

DeRue D Barnes C M amp Morgeson F P (2010) Understanding the Motivational Contingencies of Team Leadership Small Group Research 41(5) 621-651 doi1011771046496410373808

Fiedler F (1971b) Validation and extension of the contingency model of leadership effectiveness A review of empirical findings Psychological Bulletin 76 128ndash148

Fiedler F (1978) The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process In LBerkowitz (Ed) Advances in experimental social psychology (pp 59ndash112) New York Academic Press

Gerhardt P L (2006) Exploring transformational and transactional leadership types and customer service success in retail An effectiveness exploratory case study Capella University) ProQuest Dissertations and Theses 156 p Retrieved from http0-searchproquestcomoakindwesedudocview304909009accountid=6363

Hannah S T amp Avolio B J (2010) Ready or not How do we accelerate the developmental readiness of leaders Journal Of Organizational Behavior 31(8) 1181-1187 doi101002job675

Headquarters Department of the Army (2007) Military Leadership Army Regulations 600ndash100Washington DC Government Printing Office

Judge T A Bono J E Ilies R amp Gerhardt M W (2002) Personality and leadership A qualitative and quantitative review Journal Of Applied Psychology 87(4) 765-780 doi1010370021-9010874765

Kane T D amp Tremble T R (2000) Transformational Leadership Effects at Different Level theArmy Military Psychology 12 137ndash160

Kell H J Rittmayer A D Crook A E amp Motowidlo S J (2010) Situational Content Moderates the Association Between the Big Five Personality Traits and Behavioral Effectiveness Human Performance 23(3) 213-228 doi101080089592852010488458

Motowidlo S J (2003) Job performance In W C Borman D R Ilgen amp R J Klimoski (Eds) Handbook of psychology Industrial and organizational psychology (Vol 12 pp 39ndash53) Hoboken NJ Wiley

Peters L H Hartke D D amp Pohlmann J T (1985) Fiedlers Contingency Theory of Leadership An application of the meta-analysis procedures of Schmidt and Hunter Psychological Bulletin 97(2) 274-285 doi1010370033-2909972274



Petrides L A (2000) Exploring transformational and transactional leadership types and customer service success in retail An effectiveness exploratory case study (1st ed) Hershey PA Idea Group Publishing

Rozčenkova A amp Dimdiņš Ģ (2010) The Relationship between Self-Reported Transformational Leadership and Social Identification in the Military Baltic Journal Of Psychology 11(12) 5-17

Scriffignano R S (2011) Coaching within organisations examining the influence of goal orientation on leaders professional development Coaching An International Journal Of Theory Research amp Practiccae 4(1) 20-31 doi101080175218822010550898

Shamir B amp Ben-Ari E (2000) CHALLENGES OF MILITARY LEADERSHIP IN CHANGING ARMIES Journal Of Political amp Military Sociology 28(1) 43

Specht J Schmukle S C amp Egloff B (2011) Stability and Change of Personality Across the Life Course The Impact of Age and Major Life Events on Mean-Level and Rank-Order Stability of the Big Five Journal Of Personality amp Social Psychology 101(4) 862-882 doi101037a0024950

Tett R amp Guterman H A (2000) Situation trait relevance trait expression and cross-situational consistency Testing a principle of trait activation Journal of Research in Personality 34 397ndash423

Utecht R E amp Heier W D (1976) The Contingency Model and Successful Military Leadership Academy Of Management Journal 19(4) 606-618 doi102307255794

Wong L Bliese P amp McGurk D (2003) Military leadership A context specific review The Leadership Quarterly 14 657ndash692



Intrinsic Factors Affecting the Job Performance of Military Leaders

ABSTRACT

Purpose ndash This study examines the difference between interpersonal and task oriented leadership

in the military The paper seeks to explain how personality and goal orientation affect these two

styles of leadership and improve job performance

Designmethodologyapproach ndash The study collected data from 869 soldiers comprised of

enlisted personnel and officers All participants were in the age range of 18 to 55 years old The

research was gathered from the United States Military during peacetime efforts The instruments

used for data analysis were Fred Fiedlerrsquos Contingency Model of Leadership the Least Preferred

Coworker Scale (LPC) Goal Orientation and the Five Factor Model (FFM)

Findings ndash Findings concluded that goal orientation and the personality trait of

conscientiousness significantly influenced the job performance of military leaders Both of the

influencing factors are characteristics found in task-oriented leaders The low LPC scores

recorded in the data substantially add to this conclusion

Research limitationsimplications ndash Research was administered only during a peacetime

environment limiting the scope of certain aspects affecting military job performance

Originalityvalue ndash The recent study is original due to its attempt to show that Fiedlers LPC is

directly related to certain dimensions of the FFM The study also reveals that the FFM trait of


determinant of a successful leader in military operations Psychologists may also contribute

from the value added by this study in the analysis of FFM Goal-Orientation and Fred Fiedlerrsquos

Contingency Theory



PURPOSE





military personnel






















LITERATURE REWVIEW

















2003)



















































FINDINGS









1 =

Male 2 = Females



1 Population






3 ANOVAb


Residual 51850 432 120Total 136318 439


4 Model Summary










performance





Coefficientsa

Model




goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000


-045 015 -093 -2988 003


Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

















Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707
























PURPOSE





military personnel






















LITERATURE REWVIEW

















2003)



















































FINDINGS









1 =

Male 2 = Females



1 Population






3 ANOVAb


Residual 51850 432 120Total 136318 439


4 Model Summary










performance





Coefficientsa

Model




goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000


-045 015 -093 -2988 003


Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

















Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707


























LITERATURE REWVIEW

















2003)



















































FINDINGS









1 =

Male 2 = Females



1 Population






3 ANOVAb


Residual 51850 432 120Total 136318 439


4 Model Summary










performance





Coefficientsa

Model




goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000


-045 015 -093 -2988 003


Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

















Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707





































































FINDINGS









1 =

Male 2 = Females



1 Population






3 ANOVAb


Residual 51850 432 120Total 136318 439


4 Model Summary










performance





Coefficientsa

Model




goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000


-045 015 -093 -2988 003


Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

















Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707




























1 =

Male 2 = Females



1 Population






3 ANOVAb


Residual 51850 432 120Total 136318 439


4 Model Summary










performance





Coefficientsa

Model




goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000


-045 015 -093 -2988 003


Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

















Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707






























performance





Coefficientsa

Model




goalor 362 035 398 10304 000

lpctot 002 001 109 3599 000

Extraversion -079 021 -149 -3846 000


-045 015 -093 -2988 003


Agreeableness -110 017 -197 -6453 000

















Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707





































Noe 2000)









coefficient




















































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707









































































organizations
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707
































CONCLUSION


















Resources








678ndash707


























Resources








678ndash707
























678ndash707























intrinsic factos affecting the job performance of … m. ellyson, justin h... · web viewintrinsic...

Documents