What We Know about Non-Cognitive Constructs and

Workplace Outcomes

Paul Sackett

Question: what non-cognitive constructs are valued in the workplace?

Sources of information:

1) The research literature on the use of non-cognitive constructs to predict work behaviors

2) Literature on constructs employers seek in job applicants

3) Job-analytic data on constructs important for various occupations

Approach 1: The literature on non-cognitive constructs predicting work outcomes

• The predictor side of the equation– Confounding of constructs and methods is

common• Many predictors are methods that can be used to

measure various constructs (e.g., interviews, situational judgment tests)

– Focus on constructs in the personality domain• The “Big 5” as a broad general framework• Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Openness,

Emotional Stability, Extraversion as the highest level aggregates

The “Big 5”

• Conscientiousness– Dependable, achievement-striving, hardworking,

persevering, orderly• Agreeableness

– Cooperative, flexible, tolerant, forgiving• Emotional Stability

– Calm, self-confident, resilient• Extraversion

– Sociable, talkative, assertive, active• Openness to experience

– Curious, broad-minded, intelligent, cultured

Approach 1: Non-cognitive constructs and work outcomes (continued)

• The criterion side of the equation– Current frameworks focus on three

components of overall job performance

• Task performance

• Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

• Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB)

Approach 1: Non-cognitive constructs and work outcomes (continued)

• Strategy: examine the Big 5 as predictors of Task Performance, OCB, and CWB

• Focus on “landmark” studies and meta-analyses

• Analysis is “impressionistic”, looking for general patterns

• Analysis represents grand average across jobs

Big 5 Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

Mean Min Max Mean

Rank

Conscientiousness 0.21 0.18 0.30 1.5

Agreeableness 0.14 0.10 0.20 2

Emotional Stability0.16 0.14 0.17 2.5

Extraversion 0.08 0.05 0.11 4

Openness 0.03 0.01 0.05 5

Big 5 Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

Mean Min Max Mean

Rank

Conscientiousness 0.21 0.18 0.30 1.5

Agreeableness 0.14 0.10 0.20 2

Emotional Stability0.16 0.14 0.17 2.5

Extraversion 0.08 0.05 0.11 4

Openness 0.03 0.01 0.05 5

Big 5 Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

Mean Min Max Mean

Rank

Conscientiousness 0.21 0.18 0.30 1.5

Agreeableness 0.14 0.10 0.20 2

Emotional Stability0.16 0.14 0.17 2.5

Extraversion 0.08 0.05 0.11 4

Openness 0.03 0.01 0.05 5

Big 5 Predicting Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

Mean Min Max Mean

RankConscientiousness 0.21 0.18 0.30 1.5

Agreeableness 0.14 0.10 0.20 2

Emotional Stability 0.16 0.14 0.17 2.5

Extraversion 0.08 0.05 0.11 4

Openness 0.03 0.01 0.05 5

Big 5 Predicting Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB)

Mean Min Max Mean RankConscientiousness 0.30 0.23 0.46 1.67Agreeableness 0.27 0.08 0.46 1.67Emotional Stability 0.16 0.06 0.24 3Extraversion 0.02 -0.02 0.09 5Openness 0.00 -0.14 0.09 3.67

***CWB is reverse scored: interpret as “avoiding CWB”

Big 5 Predicting Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB)

Mean Min Max Mean RankConscientiousness 0.30 0.23 0.46 1.67Agreeableness 0.27 0.08 0.46 1.67Emotional Stability 0.16 0.06 0.24 3Extraversion 0.02 -0.02 0.09 5Openness 0.00 -0.14 0.09 3.67

***CWB is reverse scored: interpret as “avoiding CWB”

Big 5 Predicting Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB)

Mean Min Max Mean RankConscientiousness 0.30 0.23 0.46 1.67Agreeableness 0.27 0.08 0.46 1.67Emotional Stability 0.16 0.06 0.24 3Extraversion 0.02 -0.02 0.09 5Openness 0.00 -0.14 0.09 3.67

***CWB is reverse scored: interpret as “avoiding CWB”

Big 5 Predicting Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB)

Mean Min Max Mean RankConscientiousness 0.30 0.23 0.46 1.67Agreeableness 0.27 0.08 0.46 1.67Emotional Stability 0.16 0.06 0.24 3Extraversion 0.02 -0.02 0.09 5Openness 0.00 -0.14 0.09 3.67

***CWB is reverse scored: interpret as “avoiding CWB”

Big 5 Predicting Task Performance

Mean Min Max Mean

Rank

Conscientiousness 0.17 0.03 0.23 1.6

Agreeableness 0.09 -0.01 0.28 3

Emotional Stability0.16 0.07 0.28 3

Extraversion 0.11 0.06 0.18 3.6

Openness 0.13 0.04 0.24 3.8

Big 5 Predicting Task Performance

Mean Min Max Mean

RankConscientiousness 0.17 0.03 0.23 1.6

Agreeableness 0.09 -0.01 0.28 3

Emotional Stability 0.16 0.07 0.28 3

Extraversion 0.11 0.06 0.18 3.6

Openness 0.13 0.04 0.24 3.8

Big 5 Predicting Task Performance

Mean Min Max Mean

Rank

Conscientiousness 0.17 0.03 0.23 1.6

Agreeableness 0.09 -0.01 0.28 3

Emotional Stability0.16 0.07 0.28 3

Extraversion 0.11 0.06 0.18 3.6

Openness 0.13 0.04 0.24 3.8

Big 5 Predicting Task Performance

Mean Min Max Mean

RankConscientiousness 0.17 0.03 0.23 1.6

Agreeableness 0.09 -0.01 0.28 3

Emotional Stability 0.16 0.07 0.28 3

Extraversion 0.11 0.06 0.18 3.6

Openness 0.13 0.04 0.24 3.8

Overall pattern of predictors of job performance

• Conscientiousness, agreeableness and emotional stability emerge as the constructs most predictive of various work behaviors

• Also: high level of predictive validity found for widely-used measures of Integrity and Customer Service Orientation

– Research shows these to be “compound traits”, each reflecting a composite of conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability

Approach 2: Constructs employers seek in job applicants

• The interview is virtually always used in hiring• Structured vs. unstructured interviews

– Structured interviews typically specify a set of attributes to be evaluated

• Huffcutt et al (2001) examined 47 studies of structured interviews

– They sorted the 338 rated attributes into categories– This gives us some insight into what employers are

seeking in job candidates

Most frequently evaluated non-cognitive constructs in structured interviews

• Conscientiousness– Dependability, responsibility, need for

achievement, sense of duty, initiative

• Interpersonal skills– Working with others, teamwork , cooperation

• Emotional stability– Stress tolerance, self-control

• Extraversion– Assertiveness, dominance, drive, ambition

Additional issues with interview constructs

• Other constructs rated include cognitive skills (e.g., problem solving, judgment), oral communication skills, and leadership skills

• Caveat: we don’t know whether unstructured interviews focus on similar constructs

Approach 3: Job-analytic data on constructs important for various occupations

• O*Net: a Department of Labor-sponsored occupational analysis system

• Based on a “content model” in which occupations are evaluated in terms of 277 attributes in 6 major categories

• Each of 681 occupations have been evaluated in terms of these attributes, by incumbents, job analysts, or both

Non-cognitive constructs in O*Net

• From the “Work Styles” category:

Achievement/Effort Persistence Initiative Leadership Cooperation Concern for Others Social Orientation Self Control Stress Tolerance Adaptability/Flexibility Dependability Attention to Detail Integrity Independence Innovation

Analytical Thinking

Constructs are rated on importance

• 1 - Not important2 - Somewhat important3 - Important4 - Very important5 - Extremely important

• Examine the mean importance of each construct across occupations

• Weight each occupation by the number of incumbents

– Use Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey

Occupations are rated in terms of educational requirements

• Occupations are assigned to “zones”:– 1: less than high school– 2: high school diploma– 3: high school plus– 4: bachelor’s degree– 5: bachelor’s degree plus

Zone 1: less than high school

CashiersFood Preparation and Serving WorkersWaiters and WaitressesJanitors and Cleaners Maids Landscaping and Groundskeeping WorkersConstruction LaborersFood Preparation WorkersPackers and PackagersCooks, Fast Food

Zone 2: High school diploma

Retail SalespersonsOffice ClerksCustomer Service RepresentativesLaborers and Freight, Stock, and Material MoversSecretariesTruck DriversNursing Aides, Orderlies, and AttendantsFirst-Line Supervisors/Managers of Retail Sales

WorkersReceptionists and Information ClerksSecurity Guards

Zone 3: High school plus

Registered Nurses

Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks

General and Operations Managers

Sales Representatives, Wholesale and Manufacturing

First-Line Supervisors/Managers

Executive Secretaries

Teacher Assistants

Licensed Maintenance and Repair Workers

Practical and Licensed Vocational Nurses

Zone 4: Bachelor’s degree

Elementary School Teachers

Secondary School Teachers

Middle School Teachers

Management Analysts

Computer Systems Analysts

Computer Software Engineers

Sales Representatives (technical)

Computer Programmers

Network and Computer Systems Administrators

Zone 5: Bachelor’s degree plus

Lawyers

Chief Executives

Medical and Health Services Managers

Pharmacists

Vocational, and School Counselors

Education Administrators

Engineering Managers

Physical Therapists

Librarians

Analytic strategy

• For each non-cognitive attribute in O*Net…

• Compute mean importance across occupations…

• Within each of the 5 educational requirement zones

Mean importance: ranked in terms of importance for Zone 2

Zone 1 2 3 4 5

Dependability 4.16 4.37 4.55 4.51 4.6

Integrity 3.83 4.16 4.47 4.46 4.69

Cooperation 4.04 4.15 4.3 4.29 4.34

Self Control 3.99 4.15 4.23 4.17 4.33

Stress Tolerance 3.76 3.93 4.15 4.21 4.31

Concern for Others 3.77 3.87 4.07 3.96 4.23

Adaptability/Flexibility 3.53 3.82 4.05 4.27 4.21

Independence 3.39 3.81 4.03 3.98 4.26

Key facet of Conscientiousness is #1

Zone 1 2 3 4 5

Dependability 4.16 4.37 4.55 4.51 4.6

Integrity 3.83 4.16 4.47 4.46 4.69

Cooperation 4.04 4.15 4.3 4.29 4.34

Self Control 3.99 4.15 4.23 4.17 4.33

Stress Tolerance 3.76 3.93 4.15 4.21 4.31

Concern for Others 3.77 3.87 4.07 3.96 4.23

Adaptability/Flexibility 3.53 3.82 4.05 4.27 4.21

Independence 3.39 3.81 4.03 3.98 4.26

Two key facets of Agreeableness are highly rated

Zone 1 2 3 4 5

Dependability 4.16 4.37 4.55 4.51 4.6

Integrity 3.83 4.16 4.47 4.46 4.69

Cooperation 4.04 4.15 4.3 4.29 4.34

Self Control 3.99 4.15 4.23 4.17 4.33

Stress Tolerance 3.76 3.93 4.15 4.21 4.31

Concern for Others 3.77 3.87 4.07 3.96 4.23

Adaptability/Flexibility 3.53 3.82 4.05 4.27 4.21

Independence 3.39 3.81 4.03 3.98 4.26

Two key facets of Emotional Stability are highly rated

Zone 1 2 3 4 5

Dependability 4.16 4.37 4.55 4.51 4.6

Integrity 3.83 4.16 4.47 4.46 4.69

Cooperation 4.04 4.15 4.3 4.29 4.34

Self Control 3.99 4.15 4.23 4.17 4.33

Stress Tolerance 3.76 3.93 4.15 4.21 4.31

Concern for Others 3.77 3.87 4.07 3.96 4.23

Adaptability/Flexibility 3.53 3.82 4.05 4.27 4.21

Independence 3.39 3.81 4.03 3.98 4.26

Key point: Same constructs are “top rated” across zones

Zone 1 2 3 4 5

Dependability 4.16 4.37 4.55 4.51 4.6

Integrity 3.83 4.16 4.47 4.46 4.69

Cooperation 4.04 4.15 4.3 4.29 4.34

Self Control 3.99 4.15 4.23 4.17 4.33

Stress Tolerance 3.76 3.93 4.15 4.21 4.31

Concern for Others 3.77 3.87 4.07 3.96 4.23

Adaptability/Flexibility 3.53 3.82 4.05 4.27 4.21

Independence 3.39 3.81 4.03 3.98 4.26

More differentiation among zones for constructs less important for Zone 2

Zone 1 2 3 4 5

Initiative 3.36 3.72 4.12 4.25 4.39

Persistence 3.16 3.56 3.95 4.16 4.29

Achievement/Effort 3.22 3.53 3.82 4.08 4.23

Attention to Detail 3.22 3.53 3.82 4.08 4.23

Social Orientation 3.44 3.52 3.68 3.66 3.87

Analytical Thinking 2.79 3.32 3.83 4.15 4.32

Leadership 3.01 3.28 3.78 4.00 4.22

Innovation 2.80 3.26 3.61 3.88 3.89

Summary

• Examined three sources of information:– Studies correlating personality measures with task

performance, citizenship and counterproductive work behavior

– Attributes rated in structured employment interviews– O*Net ratings of the importance of various attributes

• Common findings across sources– Conscientiousness (dependability– Agreeableness (cooperation, teamwork)– Emotional Stability (stress tolerance, self control)

Discussion

• These constructs are broadly relevant– for jobs available to high school graduates– for jobs requiring additional education

• Can one’s standing on these constructs be changed?

– School is a setting with multiple opportunities to develop and reward behaviors relevant to these constructs