Ken uzelven: Relationele persoonlijkheid op en om het werk | Amsterdam University Press Journals Online
2004
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Gedrag & Organisatie
  4. Volume 35, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 35, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 0921-5077
  • E-ISSN: 1875-7235

Abstract

Samenvatting

Onderzoek laat zien dat ongeveer de helft van de verschillen in persoonlijkheid erfelijk is, terwijl de andere helft door de omgeving bepaald wordt. Onze kennis over het ‘vaste’ – erfelijke – deel van de persoonlijkheid is aanzienlijk, maar onze kennis over de invloed van de omgeving is betrekkelijk gering. Op basis van HEXACO-persoonlijkheidsonderzoek met het ‘Social Relations Model’ wordt gesteld dat de omgevingsinvloeden voornamelijk relationeel van aard zijn en bepaald worden door de unieke relaties die iemand met anderen heeft. Er worden twee verschillende inhoudelijke interpretaties gegeven aan deze ‘relationele persoonlijkheid’: (1) mensen gedragen zich daadwerkelijk anders in vergelijkbare relaties (vertonen ‘’ en persoonlijke variabiliteit in gedrag) en (2) elke relatie is een unieke en fundamenteel andere situatie die ander gedrag oproept (d.w.z., een ‘’ gekenmerkt door persoonlijke variabiliteit in gedrag). Het relationele-persoonlijkheidsmodel heeft belangrijke consequenties voor selectie en assessment (inclusief het gebruik van persoonlijkheidsalgoritmes hierbij), werkrelaties, leiderschap en persoonlijkheidsverandering. Als mensen zich verschillend gedragen in verschillende relaties, dan betekent dit ook dat het functioneren van medewerkers en assessmentkandidaten in elke relatie anders is. De belangrijkste implicatie is dat er meer aandacht moet worden besteed aan de mate waarin medewerkers zichzelf optimaal kunnen uiten in hun relaties op het werk.

© Reinout de Vries
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/GO2022.2.003.VRIE
2022-06-01
2024-04-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2016). Age trends in HEXACO-PI-R self-reports. Journal of Research in Personality, 64, 102-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.08.008
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2019). How well do Big Five measures capture HEXACO scale variance?Journal of Personality Assessment, 101(6), 567-573. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2018.1448986
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2020). Objections to the HEXACO model of personality structure – And why those objections fail. European Journal of Personality, 34(4), 492-510. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2242
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., De Vries, R. E., Di Blas, L., Boies, K, & De Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 356-366. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.2.356
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Barends, A. J., De Vries, R. E., & Van Vugt, M. (2019). Power influences the expression of Honesty-Humility: The Power-Exploitation Affordances Hypothesis. Journal of Research in Personality, 82, 103856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.103856
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 901-910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.901
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chauhan, R. S. (2019). Unstructured interviews: Are they really all that bad?Human Resource Development International, 22(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2019.1603019
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Connelly, B. S. & Ones, D. S. (2010). An other perspective on personality: Meta-analytic integration of observers’ accuracy and predictive validity. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1092-1122. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021212
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Dansereau, F., Jr, Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13(1), 46-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(75)90005-7
     [Google Scholar]
  10. De Raad, B., Barelds, D. P., Timmerman, M. E., De Roover, K., Mlačić, B., & Church, A. T. (2014). Towards a pan-cultural personality structure: Input from 11 psycholexical studies. European Journal of Personality, 28(5), 497-510. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1953
     [Google Scholar]
  11. De Vries, A., De Vries, R. E., Born, M. Ph., & Van den Berg, R. H. (2014). Persoonlijkheid als voorspeller van werkprestatie en contraproductief werkgedrag: Het belang van specifieke persoonlijkheidsmetingen. Gedrag & Organisatie, 27(4), 407-427. https://doi.org/10.5553/GenO/092150772014027004003
     [Google Scholar]
  12. De Vries, R.E. (2010). Lots of target variance: An update of SRM using the HEXACO Personality Inventory. European Journal of Personality, 24(3), 169-188. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.764
     [Google Scholar]
  13. De Vries, R. E. (2012). Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self-other agreement problem. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 809-821. https://doi.org/1016/j.leaqua.2012.03.002
     [Google Scholar]
  14. De Vries, R. E. (2016). De nachtmerrie van elke werkgever: Het explosieve mengsel van lage Integriteit, lage Consciëntieusheid en lage Verdraagzaamheid. Gedrag & Organisatie, 29(4), 316-346. https://doi.org/10.5117/2016.029.004.002
     [Google Scholar]
  15. De Vries, R. E. (2018). Three nightmare traits in leaders. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 871. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00871
     [Google Scholar]
  16. De Vries, R. E., Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). De zes belangrijkste persoonlijkheidsdimensies en de HEXACO Persoonlijkheidsvragenlijst. Gedrag & Organisatie, 22(3), 232-274. https://doi.org/10.5117/2009.022.003.004
     [Google Scholar]
  17. De Vries, R. E., Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2008). The Dutch HEXACO Personality Inventory: Psychometric properties, self-other agreement and relations with psychopathy among low and high acquaintanceship dyads. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90(2), 142-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701845195
     [Google Scholar]
  18. De Vries, R. E., Tybur, J. M., Pollet, T. V., & Van Vugt, M. (2016). Evolution, situational affordances, and the HEXACO model of personality. Evolution & Human Behavior, 37(5), 407-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.04.001
     [Google Scholar]
  19. De Vries, R. E., Wesseldijk, L., Karinen, A., Jern, P., & Tybur, J. M. (2022). Relations between HEXACO personality and ideology variables are mostly genetic in nature. European Journal of Personality, 36(2), 200-2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070211014035
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Fleeson, W. (2001). Toward a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), 1011-1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.1011
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Galton, F. (1884). The measurement of character. Fortnightly Review, 42, 179-185.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Hickman, L., Bosch, N., Ng, V., Saef, R., Tay, L., & Woo, S. E. (in press). Automated video interview personality assessments: Reliability, validity, and generalizability investigations. Journal of Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000695
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Hudson, N. W., Briley, D. A., Chopik, W. J., & Derringer, J. (2019). You have to follow through: Attaining behavioral change goals predicts volitional personality change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(4), 839-857. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000221
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hudson, N. W., & Roberts, B. W. (2014). Goals to change personality traits: Concurrent links between personality traits, daily behavior, and goals to change oneself. Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 68-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.08.008
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Janis, I., & Mann, L. (1977). Victims of groupthink: A psychological analysis of conflict. New York: FreePress.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Johnson, A. M., Vernon, P. A., & Feiler, A. R. (2008). Behavioral genetic studies of personality: An introduction and review of the results of 50+ years of research. The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment, 1, 145-173.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Joseph, D. L., & Newman, D. A. (2010). Emotional intelligence: An integrative meta-analysis and cascading model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 54-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017286
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Kandler, C., Bratko, D., Butković, A., Hlupić, T. V., Tybur, J. M., Wesseldijk, L. W., De Vries, R. E., Jern, P., & Lewis, G. J. (2021). How genetic and environmental variance in personality traits shift across the life span: Evidence from a cross-national twin study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121(5), 1079-1094. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000366
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. Guilford Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Kristof, A.L. (1996). Person-Organization Fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49, 1-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Kuhn, M. H., & McPartland, T. S. (1954). An empirical investigation of self-attitudes. American Sociological Review, 19(1), 68-76. https://doi.org/10.2307/2088175
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Lakey, B., Hubbard, S. A., Brummans, J., Obreiter, A., & Perrin, P. B. (2022). The relational regulation of within-person variation in personality expression. Journal of Personality, 90(2), 152-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12659
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Larsen, R., Buss, D., Wismeijer, A., Song, J., & Van den Berg, S. M. (2021). Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature (3d ed.). McGraw-Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Lievens, F., & Patterson, F. (2011). The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, low-fidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advanced-level high-stakes selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 927-940. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023496
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Livi, S., Kenny, D. A., Albright, L., & Pierro, A. (2008). A social relations analysis of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 235-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.003
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lüdtke, O., Roberts, B. W., Trautwein, U., & Nagy, G. (2011). A random walk down university avenue: Life paths, life events, and personality trait change at the transition to university life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 620-637. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023743
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader-member exchange (LMX) and performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12100
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Martinko, M. J., Mackey, J. D., Moss, S. E., Harvey, P., McAllister, C. P., & Brees, J. R. (2018). An exploration of the role of subordinate affect in leader evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(7), 738-752. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000302
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Mount, M. K., Judge, T. A., Scullen, S. E., Sytsma, M. R., & Hezlett, S. A. (1998). Trait, rater, and level effects in 360-degree performance ratings. Personnel Psychology, 51(3), 557-576. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00251.x
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Oh, I.-S., Wang, G., & Mount, M. K. (2011). Validity of observer ratings of the five-factor model of personality traits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), 762-773. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021832
     [Google Scholar]
  41. O’Neill, T. A., McLarnon, M. J., & Carswell, J. J. (2015). Variance components of job performance ratings. Human Performance, 28(1), 66-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2014.974756
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Penke, L., & Jokela, M. (2016). The evolutionary genetics of personality revisited. Current Opinion in Psychology, 7, 104-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.08.021
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Pletzer, J. L., Bentvelzen, M., Oostrom, J. K., & De Vries, R. E. (2019). A meta-analysis of the relations between personality and workplace deviance: Big Five versus HEXACO. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 112, 369-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.04.004
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Pletzer, J. L., Oostrom, J. K., & de Vries, R. E. (2021). HEXACO personality and organizational citizenship behavior: A domain- and facet-level meta-analysis. Human Performance, 34(2), 126-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2021.1891072
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Salgado, J. F. (2015). Estimating coefficients of equivalence and stability for job performance ratings: The importance of controlling for transient error on criterion measurement. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 23(1), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12093
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Salgado, J. F., Moscoso, S., & Lado, M. (2003). Test-retest reliability of job performance dimensions in managers. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11(1), 98-101. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00230
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262-274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Shaffer, J. A., & Postlethwaite, B. E. (2012). A matter of context: A meta-analytic investigation of the relative validity of contextualized and noncontextualized personality measures. Personnel Psychology, 65(3), 445-494. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01250.x
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Specht, J., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (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 and Social Psychology, 101(4), 862-882. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024950
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500-517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Thielmann, I., & De Vries, R. E. (2021). Who wants to change and how? On the trait-specificity of personality change goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121(5), 1112-1139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000304
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Tse, H. H. M., Lam, C. K., Lawrence, S. A., & Huang, X. (2013). When my supervisor dislikes you more than me: The effect of dissimilarity in leader-member exchange on coworkers’ interpersonal emotion and perceived help. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(6), 974-988. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033862
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Van Breukelen, W., Van der Leeden, R., Wesselius, W., & Hoes, M. (2012). Differential treatment within sports teams, leader-member (coach-player) exchange quality, team atmosphere, and team performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(1), 43-63. https://doi.org/10.1002/job735
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Van der Zee, K. I., Bakker, A. B., & Bakker, P. (2002). Why are structured interviews so rarely used in personnel selection?Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 176-184. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.176
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Volmer, J., Niessen, C., Spurk, D., Linz, A., & Abele, A. E. (2011). Reciprocal relationships between leader-member exchange (LMX) and job satisfaction: A cross-lagged analysis. Applied Psychology, 60(4), 522-545. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00446.x
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Yammarino, F. J., Cheong, M., Kim, J., & Tsai, C.-Y. (2020). Is leadership more than “I like my boss”? In M. R.Buckley, A. R.Wheeler, J. E.Baur, & J. R. B.Halbesleben (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management, Vol. 38 (pp. 1-55). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0742-730120200000038003
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Yammarino, F. J., & Dionne, S. D. (2018). Leadership and levels of analysis: clarifications and fixes for what’s wrong. In R. E.Riggio (Ed.), What’s wrong with leadership? (pp. 41-57). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Zayas, V., Shoda, Y., & Ayduk, O. N. (2002). Personality in context: An interpersonal systems perspective. Journal of Personality, 70(6), 851-900. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.05026
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Zettler, I., Thielmann, I., Hilbig, B. E., & Moshagen, M. (2020). The nomological net of the HEXACO model of personality: A large-scale meta-analytic investigation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(3), 723-760. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1745691619895036
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/GO2022.2.003.VRIE
Loading
Ken uzelven: Relationele persoonlijkheid op en om het werk
G&O 35, 167 (2022); https://doi.org/10.5117/GO2022.2.003.VRIE
/content/journals/10.5117/GO2022.2.003.VRIE
/content/journals/10.5117/GO2022.2.003.VRIE
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Keyword(s): HEXACO; leadership; relational personality; selection and assessment; social relations model

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error