Personality Traits in the New Reality:
Changes in the Selection & Assessment of
Management and Leadership Potential
Final thesis EMBA6, 2008 – 2009 by
Nynke Doorenbos & Maarten Paul Eurelings
Thesis Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Lidewey E.C. van der Sluis
Second Reader
Dr. Rob Blomme
Nyenrode Business Universiteit, December 2009
Table of Contents
The Preface ........................................................................................................................ 3
Managerial summary .......................................................................................................... 4
Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 6
Immediate causes ........................................................................................................................ 6
Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 7
Structure of this thesis................................................................................................................ 7
1. Theoretical Background ................................................................................................. 9
1.1. Definitions ............................................................................................................ 9
1.2. Literature Research .............................................................................................. 12
1.2.1. Big Five Personality Traits ................................................................................ 12
1.2.2. Big Five Personality Traits & Leadership .......................................................... 18
1.2.3. Derailing Personality Traits ............................................................................... 21
1.2.4. Derailing Personality Traits & Leadership ......................................................... 28
1.3. Research question ................................................................................................ 29
1.4. Conceptual Model ............................................................................................... 30
1.5. Expectations of research...................................................................................... 31
2. Methodology ................................................................................................................ 34
2.1. Sample ................................................................................................................. 34
2.2. Sample Results..................................................................................................... 34
2.3. Means .................................................................................................................. 35
Literature Research .................................................................................................... 35
Survey Design & Measurement .................................................................................. 35
Procedure................................................................................................................... 38
3. Results.......................................................................................................................... 39
4. Discussion .................................................................................................................... 47
4.1. Results Research Questions ................................................................................. 47
4.2. Linking Results to expectations ........................................................................... 53
4.3. Recommendations for Further Research.............................................................. 54
4.4. Limitations .......................................................................................................... 55
5. Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 58
5.1. Research Results .................................................................................................. 58
5.2. Managerial Implications ....................................................................................... 61
6. References .................................................................................................................... 62
7. Appendices .................................................................................................................. 66
Appendix A: Questionnaire and Results ..................................................................... 66
Appendix B: List of Participating Organizations ........................................................ 94
2
The Preface
When writing a thesis for the second time, you think that you are wiser and better equipped
to do the job. So, taking lessons from the first time around, you start well ahead of time
and live under the impression that all will be fine. And then suddenly you wake up and time
has run out. And the whole “it is thesis time” repeats itself. Oh joy…
We have had sharp discussions, meaningful exchanges of ideas, painstaking library search
days, happy moments, moments of sheer frustration and some moments with plenty of
wine. Yet, we believed in our idea and the usefulness of our study and we kept faith in
ourselves as individuals and as a team. It has been a great and interesting journey
researching a very contemporary topic, of which we are sure, more shall be heard of in the
future.
First and foremost, we would like thank Lidewey van der Sluis for her guidance, time,
wisdom and sternness. To our second reader and safe haven in times of stress, Rob
Blomme, thank you. Furthermore we would like to show our appreciation to our parents,
Jan en Betty Doorenbos and Martin and Paula Eurelings, as they always stood by us, even
in difficult and “grumpy” times.
We are done. Not just with the thesis but also with our MBA of which the thesis was a last
but nonetheless challenging assignment. O, and have we mentioned that we are loving it.?
Bubbles, here we come!
Nynke Doorenbos & Maarten Paul Eurelings
“It has been wisely said that the world is not interested in the storms you encountered,
but in whether you brought the ship in safely”
(Norman Augustine in Managing the crisis you tried to prevent, HBR, Nov-Dec 1995).
3
Managerial summary
The objective of this research is to acquire insight into the possible effects of the New
Reality on those Talent Management processes which deal with selecting and assessing
(potential) management and leadership talent based on certain personality traits, within
organizations in the Netherlands. Related questions are to which extent personality traits
used in these selection and assessment processes are recognized as desirable in
organizations and if the use of the personality traits has altered over the past two years.
And also, do organizations use these personality traits in the design of management- and
leadership profiles and have these profiles and other Talent Management processes
changed recently or are the excepted to change.
In order to acquire insight into these questions, an empirical study was designed. We
designed the questionnaire with the theory about personality traits and the New Reality in
mind. It must be noted that the questionnaire is not based on existing validated
questionnaires. The overall survey was executed to acquire insight in the perception of
respondents regarding the current situation regarding the selection and assessment of
(potential) management and leadership talent within organizations, therefore a practical
study. It was decided to conduct the study among Dutch organizations in the segments forprofit, not-for-profit, and government.
Important to consider is that the economic crisis and emerging New Reality shook many
organizations to their foundations. We have observed that in many organizations this
upheaval has lead to less than desirable effects. To name a few: a procrastinating attitude
while waiting for things to come, ego-centered behavior combined with keeping the cards
close to ones chest, decrease of (true) teamwork and even sabotaging others to get ahead.
This is not totally illogical as employees, and managers to no lesser extent, feel uncertain
about their position within the organization.
Results of our research show that The New reality has indeed had an impact on the way
management and leadership profiles are designed and the talents are assessed. Evaluations
and assessments have become stricter. Much to our surprise, the Big Five seem to have
become more important in light of the New Reality, whereas Derailing Traits, in spite of
4
many researches and support for this theory, are not yet incorporated in Talent
Management processes.
Keywords: Personality, Big Five, Derailing Traits, Talent Management, Talent
Management Effectiveness, Talent Profiles, Talent Management Processes.
5
Introduction
Introduction
Immediate causes
“The history of the world is the biography of great men” according to historian Th. Carlyle
in 1907. He claimed history is shaped by the forces of good leadership. The same applies to
organizational history. Businesses are lead by people and it is people who make decisions
and therefore create value. The better the leader and people an organization employs, the
better it will perform.
This is where Talent Management can and should play a meaningful role. Talent
Management means different things to different people. Nevertheless, it certainly contains
the following elements: attract, indentify, develop, deploy and retain talents within an
organization. Whilst Talent Management is of key importance, from an organizational
point of view, it often suffers from “short-termism” e.g. the obsession with short term
performance. And while many companies may have Talent Management processes in place,
those practices may well have failed to adapt to the changing needs of organizations in the
rapid changing world of today. And there will be changes. HR professionals in general and
Talent Management specialists in particular are facing challenging times. There are massive
demographic shifts: the Baby Boomers will start to retire en mass in 2011 and
organizations will have to prepare for the wishes of the workforce of tomorrow: generation
Y. Furthermore, organizations in the West will have to cope with the enormous growth of
the Eastern markets and the associated consequences. And last but not least, the talent
process to identify the future leaders has become a much more strategic process (Harvard
Business Review, 2007).
Important aspects within Talent Management are the process of selecting, assessing,
engaging and developing the organizations‟ management and leadership talent. Currently
there is much debate on the issues of integrity, bonus culture, the huge ego of (top)
managers at the expense of the organization, sustainability of today‟s business models and
risk management. It would seem that, in order to accommodate a transition to face the
challenges ahead, the profile of tomorrow‟s managers and future leaders will have to
change.
6
Introduction
Objectives
If we take a closer look at Talent Development as such, we see that character, personality
traits, skills, knowledge and context all contribute to the development of an individual. In
the study, Stand in het Land 2009, which researched the state of affairs concerning Talent
Management in the Netherlands (Van der Sluis, 2009), it is stated that professionals in the
Netherlands believe that personality traits, ambition, intelligence, skills, and knowledge of
an individual together determine if an individual is considered to be a talent. The study
specifically notes that of the aforementioned factors, personality traits weigh the heaviest.
Also in literature, personality and character traits of managers and leaders within
organizations are of growing importance compared to the more traditional functional and
technical competencies. This is a trend that has also been picked up by academic research
with a focus on the positive personality traits, the “Big Five” and the negative personality
traits, the “Derailing Traits”.
Therefore, it would be interesting to discover if, due to the current economic situation, also
referred to as the „New Reality‟, the rise of scandals, and questionable ethical behavior of
managers in the recent past, the processes that deal with talent selection and assessment
have changed.
as to be able to address the challenges ahead accordingly. Have
organizations thought about what kind of management and leadership talents they need in
the future? Have organizations adjusted the profile for their (potential) management and
leadership talents? Have specific personality traits increased in importance if they are
deemed necessary for the survival of the organization in the (near) future? Is there a
strategy in place for these long term issues based on new insights provided by recent
discussions in relation to the economic meltdown? These are the questions we would like
to research in this thesis.
Structure of this thesis
Over the years, much has been written and researched with regard to personality traits. Our
first step therefore is to conduct an extensive literature research in Chapter 1 „Theoretical
Background‟. We will explore the evolution and current insights of scientists on personality
traits e.g. the Big Five and Derailing Traits; their development, their relationship to
leadership, and their usefulness in the selection and assessment of management and
leadership talent. Our findings of the literature research together will lead to the Research
7
Introduction
Question, stated in section 1.3. The purpose of these research questions is to find answers
to the objectives raised in the introduction. The Conceptual Model and Expectations of
Research will be explained in the remainder of this first chapter. In the beginning of
Chapter 1 we will start with a set of definitions of concepts used in this thesis.
In order to gather data in support of our research objective, a questionnaire consisting of
75 questions has been sent out to Talent Management / HR professionals, line- and (top-)
managers in the Netherlands. .In Chapter 2 „Methodology‟, we will present our sample
choice. In 2.2 the Means will be discussed e.g. which tools were used to conduct our
survey, and why specifically these constructs were chosen. In 2.3 „Procedure‟ it will be
explained which sources were consulted, how data was analyzed en by which methods.
The research findings of our survey will be discussed in Chapter 3 „Results‟. We will answer
the research questions in Chapter 4 „Discussion‟, based on these findings and the literature
research findings as described in Chapter 2. Subsequently Recommendations for Future
Research will be given as will the Limitation to the current research be explained.
Finally we will conclude this thesis with Chapter 5 „Conclusion‟. Managerial Implications
will be included in this chapter.
8
Theoretical Background
1. Theoretical Background
1.1. Definitions
In this first section we briefly explain some of the concepts and definitions used in our
thesis. The Big Five and Derailing Traits are not included in this first section as we will
devote extensive attention to both concepts in the following sections.
Assessment: according to Britannica assessment is the process of gathering and
documenting information about the achievement, skills, abilities, and personality variables
of an individual in light of a certain function or job profile. An assessment can include
interviews, physiological tests, role playing exercises and the observation of behavior. The
objectives of an assessment include:

to learn more about the competencies and deficiencies of the individual being tested;

to identify specific problem areas and/or needs;

to evaluate the individual's performance in relation to others;

to evaluate the individual's performance in relation to a set of standards or goals;

to provide organizations with feedback on vocational and organizational fit;

to evaluate the impact of psychological or neurological abnormalities on learning and
behavior;

to predict an individual's aptitudes or future capabilities.
On the validity of assessment tools used in organizations we would like to say the
following. Research on personality within organizational settings has established that
personality measurements which focus on occupational criteria such as, but not limited to
management potential scales, are fine predictors of organizational standards such as
training proficiency and knowledge acquisition, job performance, counterproductive
behavior, organizational commitment, and management and leadership potential.
Personality measures can be based on the Big Five, criterion focused, occupational
personality questionnaire or alternative models (Ones & Viswesyaran, 2001, Salgado, 2005).
Personality measures have been widely used in organizational decisions of professionals.
Primarily these measures are used in personnel selection but also in training processes,
personnel development programs, and establishing competence profiles. The use of
9
Theoretical Background
assessments and assessment centers are specifically very popular in the Netherlands when
compared to other European and western societies (Van Muijen, 2008).
Career Success: the real or perceived achievements individuals have accumulated as a
result of their work experience (Judge et al., 1995). Intrinsic career success is the
individuals‟ own subjective reaction to his or her career. Extrinsic career success is
objective and observable in terms of salary, number of promotions and / or occupational
status. Both intrinsic and extrinsic career success are only moderately correlated.
Human Resource Development (HRD): the development of human recourses and
therefore the development process of individuals within organizations. This increase of
human capital can be viewed from the organizational level or the individual level. If one
looks at HRD from a responsibility point of view, there are the corporate HRD programs,
including Talent Management programs that facilitate this development of employees.
There is also a growing tendency to hold employees responsible for their own personal
development and growth, and therefore their own employability (Van der Sluis, 2007).
Leadership: “Leadership involves persuading other people to set aside for a period of time
their individual concerns and to pursue a common goal that is important for the
responsibilities and welfare of a group” (Hogan, Curphy & Hogan, 1994).

Leadership emergence: whether, or to what degree an individual is viewed as a
leader by others (Hogan et al., 1999). A “within the group” phenomenon – the leader will
usually emerge from within a group (Mann, 1959).

Leadership effectiveness: how well a leader facilitates “the movement of a
group of people toward a common goal or objective” (subjective rating) as well as the
consequences of the leaders‟ actions i.e., team outcomes, achievements (more objective)
(Hendricks & Payne, 2007). A “between groups” phenomenon.
Note that both these concepts tend to become blurred in practice, especially when
measured perceptually.

Transactional leadership: a leadership style characterized by the fact that
leaders like to maintain the status quo, reward effort and emphasize commitment. Based on
reinforcement and exchange (“if you work well I shall reward you well”).
10
Theoretical Background

Transformational leaders: a charismatic leadership style characterized by the
fact that leaders like to alter the status quo, energize and delegate responsibilities and tasks
to followers and or employees. Based on responding effectively to the (changing)
environment and intrinsic motivation (De Hoogh, Den Hartog & Koopman, 2004).
New Reality: the economic crisis as we have experienced the last two years is creating new
realities for people and financial management. In popular literature this is referred to with
the term New Reality. The challenge for organizations lies in successfully adjusting to this
new economic situation. Economists are debating the question of recovery. But what will
this recovery look like? There seems to be some consensus on the fact that this recovery
will be modest and the economy will not return to the robust but illusionary economy of
around 2005. In the short run, recovery is likely to be weak and it seems that both
consumers and businesses are changing their spending patterns only to adjust to a new and
more realistic picture of their wealth (Roubini, 2009, New York University).
Personality, Character and Intelligence

Personality traits: traits that an individual is born with but that can still be
somewhat tweaked as his/her life progresses and grows in maturity. Examples include:
introvertedness, extrovertedness, seriousness, agreeableness, etc.

Character: is something an individual develops throughout his or her entire life
through moral and immoral decisions. Examples include: integrity, honesty, loyalty,
politeness, etc.

Intelligence: general mental ability, falls in neither of the above two categories.
Talent Management and Talent Management processes: the process of attracting,
identifying, developing, deploying and retaining talents within an organization. Laying off
employees is sometimes also part of the definition, but that is disregarded for the purpose
of this research. Talent Management is usually a part of the larger HRD department or HR
practices within an organization. Talent Management practices and processes include
performance management schemes, the area of leadership development, workforce
planning including identifying talent gabs, and at times it will also include recruiting new
talents.
11
Theoretical Background
1.2. Literature Research
The obvious fact that people have personalities has actually been acknowledged and
documented in past research. Furthermore, this personality matters as it has a predictive
and explanatory value when related to work behavior (Goldberg, 1993). Research has also
shown that, next to the importance of general mental ability (intellect), managers, when
hiring new talent, value individual personality traits almost at the same level as the
intellectual abilities (Dunn et al., 1995). This seems completely logical as no manager would
like to hire someone who does not care about the results (low on Conscientiousness), or is
insecure and acts hostile (high on Neuroticism). Because of this advancement in the
research and improved ways of assessing personality traits, there exists a lot of evidence
that personality traits as such can be positively or negatively related to job performance,
and, more specifically, to management- and leadership performance. In the remainder of
this chapter we will first examine the literature that deals with the positive side of
personality, the Big Five personality traits and their relationship to leadership within
organizations. In the second part we take a closer look into the dark side of personality
traits, the Derailing Traits, and their relationship to leadership.
1.2.1. Big Five Personality Traits
Background
The first model, that later would grow into what is now called the Big Five, has been
around since 1936. Allport and Adbert‟s classifications provided an initial structure
regarding a personality traits lexicon. The Big Five as such, which originally was discovered
in analysis of English personality adjectives (Goldberg, 1990) has since then also been
supported by studies in several other cultures (racial and ethnic groups) and languages
including German, Czech, Italian, Filipino and Dutch (Hofstee & De Raad, 1991). The
latter being of specific importance for our research, since questionnaire will be conducted
in the Netherlands. The title, the “Big Five” was chosen to emphasize that each of these
factors is extremely broad. All traits cover several but distinct lower level and more specific
traits
as
can
be
seen
12
in
table
Theoretical Background
below.
Factor
Scale
People high on scale
People low on scale
Extraversion
Warmth
Gregariousness
Assertiveness
Activity
friendly; affectionate
prefer company of others forceful;
tends to lead energetic
crave stimulation
formal; reserved
prefer to be alone lets others lead
laid back
little need for thrills less exuberant
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Neuroticism
Openness
Excitement Seeking
cheerful; optimistic
Positive Emotions
Trust
disposed to trust others frank;
Straightforwardness
ingenuous
Altruism
generous, considerate deferential in
Compliance
conflicts humble; self-effacing
Modesty
Tender sympathetic
mindedness
Competence
feels capable, effective
Order
neat
Dutifulness
principled; scrupulous diligent;
Achievement
purposeful
Self-Discipline
ability to motivate self cautious
Deliberation
Anxiety Angry
tense; apprehensive frustrated;
Hostility
angry
Depression
hopeless
Self-Consciousness
sensitive to ridicule
Impulsiveness
low self-control
Vulnerability
poor coping with stress
Fantasy
vivid imagination
Open to Aesthetics
likes art and beauty
Open to Feelings
many emotional states willing to try
Open to Actions
new things intellectually curious;
Open to Ideas
open-minded
Open to Values
skeptical of others
not candid
guarded self-centered prefers
competing conceited; arrogant
hardheaded
feels inept
unorganized
casual about duties lackadaisical
procrastinates; quits
hasty
calm; relaxed
easygoing
not easily dejected
rarely feels inferior
resists temptations
feels immune to stress
prosaic
dislikes art and beauty blunt affect
change is difficult
narrow range of ideas dogmatic
Table 1: Descriptions of People High and Low on the Five Factor Scales (Costa and Widiger, 1994 )
The scales in table 1 represent more specific personality traits, which Costa and other
researchers commonly refer to as facets. Each facet is in its own determined by another
eight items (not mentioned in the table). Therefore each trait (or „construct‟ in research
language) is measured with 48 items, and the combinations of items are endless. As can be
expected in any hierarchical representation, information gets lost as one moves up the
hierarchical levels.
Critics of the model state that it does not provide a complete theory of personality (Block,
1995; Eysenck, 1997). This criticism is correct as the Big Five model was never intended to
be an „answer to all‟ theory. It is an empirically based phenomenon, not a psychological
theory of personality. These five dimensions where derived after conducting thousands of
surveys, each consisting of hundreds of questions. The five traits emerged when the data
on how various personality traits are correlated within people were analyzed using the
statistical method factor analysis. The underlying correlations are probabilistic and
therefore exceptions are of course possible. Rather than being a complete theory, the Big
13
Theoretical Background
Five model has been developed to account for the structural relations among personality
traits. The model is primarily descriptive, emphasizes regularities in behavior and focuses
on variables rather than on individuals. It is not based on one particular theory but simply
on a common language. One has to be aware that there are many aspects of personality
that are not included to fall within the Big Five as personality trait in the language of
psychologists has a much narrower meaning than in every day usage. Motivation, emotions,
self-concepts, autobiographical memories, and life stories are a few of the other elements
that may have theoretical or empirical relationships with the Big Five traits, but they are
conceptually distinct. For this reason, even a very comprehensive profile of an individual‟s
personality traits can only be considered a partial description of their personality
(Srivastava, 2009).
Keeping the above in mind, the Big Five have been generally and internationally accepted
by now as a useful hierarchical representation of personality traits (Saucier & Goldberg,
1998; John & Srivastava, 1999). The model established a common taxonomy in the field of
personality trait research. Its enthusiasts go as far as to consider the Big Five the “Rosetta
Stone of character”, the solution to a scientific problem whose roots date back to antiquity
(Mohberg, 1999).
It must be noted that the Big Five (lexically based) is not exactly the same as the “Five
Factor Model” (FFM), a model that has been build around a questionnaire assessing the
Big Five called the NEO-PI-R, developed by Costa and McCrae in 1992. However, even
researchers agree (Goldberg, 1993; Mohberg, 1999) that since the findings of the FFM and
the Big Five are virtually identical and both sets of five factors are almost similar, these two
terms can be used interchangeably. We will consequently refer in this thesis to the more
colloquial term, the Big Five, at all times.
Big Five
In literature many different names have been used for the factors which make up the Big
Five. The first one, Openness to experience is also referred to as intellect, imagination and
culture. Other descriptions for Conscientiousness include ambition, need for achievement,
dependability, task interest and constraint. Extraversion has also been labeled surgency,
14
Theoretical Background
dominance, assertiveness, capacity for status, social presence, and sociability. The
Agreeableness factor may appear as likable, friendly compliance, need for affiliation, and
love. Finally, other terms used for Emotional Stability include self-acceptance, selfconfidence, achievement via independence, satisfaction and (in reverse) neuroticism
(Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994; Salgado, 2005).
When considering the bright side of personality, a popular way of referring to the Big Five
personality factors is the anagram OCEAN (Costa & McCrae, 1992), which stands for:
E.
Extraversion (energy and enthusiasm)
A
Agreeableness (altruism and affection)
C
Conscientiousness (control and constraint)
N
Neuroticism (negative affectivity and nervousness)
O
Openness (originality and open-mindedness)
The factor N is also commonly referred to as Emotional Stability.
At this point we have a list of traits that make up the Big Five of which one appears socially
neutral: Extraversion, three that seem praiseworthy: Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and
Openness, and the last one that which looks more like a vice then a virtue: Neuroticism.
When looking at the assessment of the Big Five traits the following should be taken into
account. Under normal circumstances, it holds when testing general mental abilities
(intellect), the higher the test score the better. However, the same rule does not apply to
test scores regarding personality. For example, it may very well be possible that both very
high and very low scores are contra-indications for success as a manager. This applies to
both the Big Five as to the Derailing Traits to be discussed in 1.2.3. To take it one step
further, extreme ends of each scale are associated with psychological disorders (Widiger et
al., 1992). Below we will take a closer look at the Big Five including the implications of
high and low scores.
Extraversion
Extraversion is characterized by positive emotions, and the tendency to seek out
stimulation and the company of others. Extravert individuals are often perceived as full of
energy and having a high engagement with the external world. They tend to be enthusiastic,
action-oriented individuals who like to talk when in groups, assert themselves, and draw
15
Theoretical Background
attention to themselves. However, they tend to be bad listeners. Those individuals with
lower scores tend to be quiet, low-key, deliberate, less involved in the social world, and
withdrawn. Introverts simply need less stimulation than extraverts and prefer to spend
more time alone. These individuals do not have the ambition to be in a prominent position.
They find it hard to get started and need some persuasion.
Agreeableness
Agreeableness is the tendency to be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious
towards others. People with high scores on Agreeableness have an optimistic view of
human nature. They value getting along with others and are generally considerate, friendly,
generous, helpful, and willing to compromise their interests with others. On the other side
they tend to avoid conflicts, are compliant, obedient, and find it difficult to determine their
own boundaries. Individuals with low scores are strongly focused on their own interest, can
be difficult to work with, show little empathy, and might be distrustful. They find selfinterest more important than getting along with others. They can be skeptic, suspicious,
and uncooperative.
Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness is a tendency to show self-discipline, act dutifully and be persistent, to
have high standards, to be well organized and to aim for achievement. The trait shows a
preference for planned rather than spontaneous behavior. In addition, individuals with high
scores are regarded positively by others as intelligent and reliable. The flipside is that they
tend to be very stringent and work strictly according to (own) rules, are inflexible and rigid.
Individuals with low scores do not attend to details and are not so well organized and
therefore seen as chaotic. They may take their responsibilities somewhat lightly, careless
and are generally unreliable. Yet, they will also be flexible and adaptive.
Emotional Stability (Neuroticism)
Individuals with high scores on Emotional Stability can be described as secure and
generally relaxed even under stressful conditions. They will act on facts, not on feelings, are
usually not personally affected or responsible, might come across as insensitive, and work
strictly on the basis of rationality. They are less emotional reactive. Those who score low
on Emotional Stability tend to be insecure and may act impulsively on their emotions. They
tend to be more perceptive of the feelings of others. At the same time they feel less able to
16
Theoretical Background
cope with stress, are less capable of handling themselves in difficult situations, they are
vulnerable and can be moody. Note that Emotional Stability and Neuroticism will be used
interchangeable in this thesis as quotes from research findings will be leading and
researchers use these terms interchangeable. The reader is advised to be aware that both are
opposing in the personality spectrum (this means that a high score on Emotional Stability
equals a low score on Neuroticism)
Openness to Experience
Individuals who score high on openness in general have an appreciation for art, emotion,
adventure, unusual ideas, imagination, curiosity, and variety of experience. The trait
distinguishes imaginative people from down-to-earth, conventional people. Furthermore,
they have broad interests and are very imaginative and insightful. They tend to be,
compared to closed people, more creative, more aware of their feelings and are more likely
to hold unconventional beliefs. People with low scores on Openness tend to have more
conventional, traditional interests. They prefer the plain, straightforward, and prefer
familiarity over novelty. They are conservative and not open to change. (Costa & McCrae,
1988, 1990, 1992; Goldberg 1990; LTP extracts1).
Personality changes and differences
Various studies which compared personality traits across different age groups and
correlated tests scores over time illustrated that people‟s traits hardly change. In other
words, people‟s personality traits remain quite stable during their adult years (McCrae &
Costa, 1990). However, this has been rebutted by more recent meta-studies that showed
that change actually does occur in all five traits at various points during a person‟s life; this
is referred to as the maturation effect. This is an important finding for this thesis, as it is
shown that in fact one can change if one is willing or forced to change (major life event).
Levels of Agreeableness and Conscientiousness will usually increase over time. On the
other hand the levels of Extraversion, Neuroticism and Openness tend to decrease
(Srivastava et al., 2003). In a different research, Agreeableness was found to be the least
stable trait while Conscientiousness was the most stable (Judge et all, 1999). It is important
to keep in mind however, that these studies describe group effects which are affirmed by
the individual. Individuals can and do change their patterns of behavior as a result of
intervention programs (Heatherton & Weinberger, 1994), yet the latter (focusing on the
1
Large and well know assessment company in the Netherlands.
17
Theoretical Background
individual versus commonalities within groups) falls out of the scope of this thesis. Last
but not least are the sexual differences. Research shows that women time and time again
report higher on Agreeableness and Neuroticism whereas men repeatedly score higher on
Extraversion and Conscientiousness. What is interesting is that these differences between
the sexes increase in wealthy, healthy and mostly egalitarian cultures, such as the
Netherlands (Costa, Terracciano & McCrae, 2001; Schmidt et al., 2008).
1.2.2. Big Five Personality Traits & Leadership
Big Five and job performance
The ability to predict leadership effectiveness has intrigued many scientists and numerous
research studies have focused on leadership as a phenomenon. As leaders often perform
well in their jobs a connection can be made here with job performance which was the first
domain to be studied by researchers in combination with the Big Five. Do any of the traits
of the Big Five enhance job performance? The answers are both affirmative and mixed
(Moberg, 1999). It was found that Conscientiousness is overall important and relates
positive to all performance criteria and therefore being the only general predictor of job
performance. Extraversion on the other hand was only a valid predictor for jobs that
required social interaction like sales or management; interaction geared towards influencing
others and obtaining status and power. Additionally, Agreeableness and Openness to
Experience were found to be good predictors of mentoring on the job, working well in
teams, influencing, the ability to adapt to change, and learning new skills (Barrick & Mount,
1991) (see table 2).
Extraversion
Stability
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Openness
Professionals
-.09
-.13
.02
.20
-.08
Police Officers
.09
.10
.10
.22
.00
Managers
.18
.08
.10
.22
.08
Sales people
.015
.07
.00
.23
-.02
Skilled workers
.01
.12
.06
.21
.01
Table 2; personality and job performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991).
A different study done in the same year came to slightly different results where
Agreeableness followed by Openness to Experience were found to be most strongly related
to job performance (Tett, Jackson & Rothstein, 1991). Other scholars agree that both
Conscientiousness and Agreeableness are the most important to succeed at one‟s job
18
Theoretical Background
(Moberg, 1999; Williams et al., 1995). Later research has focused on Emotional Stability (or
Neuroticism) where this trait was found to be one of the two “general predictors”, next to
Conscientiousness, a trait that all scholars seem to agree upon. The other three personality
traits, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Openness to Experience are in their own right also
valid predictors for job performance but only under certain conditions; so for specific jobs
or specific qualifications (Barrick et al., 2001) which support the facts stated above
concerning Extraversion and sales/ managerial roles. Therefore matching traits with certain
job criteria can add significant value to an organization.
Big Five and career success
Continuing on this line of thought are the studies which look at the Big Five in relation to
career success, and specifically extrinsic success: income and occupational status. Here the
general findings are that Conscientiousness positively predicts extrinsic career success. Low
Agreeableness and Neuroticism, and high Extraversion and Openness also relate positively
to extrinsic career success (Judge et al., 1999). When turning this around it means that a
high score on Agreeableness negatively influences extrinsic success and therefore is
negatively related to management potential. Or as Hogan and Hogan (2003) note: in the
“getting along” performance, the personality traits Emotional Stability (low on
Neuroticism), Conscientiousness and Agreeableness are the best predictors. But more
interesting, when looking at “getting ahead”, the best indicators are a facet of Extraversion,
Ambition, the trait Emotional Stability and again, Conscientiousness.
Big Five and Leadership
A more recent meta-analysis study supported the trait theory of leadership (Judge et al.,
2002) and stated when using the Big Five to predict leadership emergence the multiple
correlation was .53 and with leadership effectiveness this was .39. Overall, Extraversion
was the most consistent correlate of leadership, both to leadership effectiveness as
leadership emergence, although the latter showed the strongest relationship. This seems
logical as dominant and sociable people are likely to attract attention to themselves within
groups. Second in correlation strength were Conscientiousness and Openness.
Conscientiousness was most strongly related to leadership emergence. The explanation can
be found in the organizing and facilitating activities by these individuals, which may allow
them to emerge. As for Openness, this trait is the least understood of all Big Five as it has
19
Theoretical Background
not related to many criteria used in research so far. Only the facets creativity and social
attitudes which belong to Openness stand out as relations have been found between these
facets and research criteria. Yet the trait Openness as such did correlate with leadership, the
reason is unknown. On the whole, Agreeableness was the least relevant Big Five trait to
relate to leadership. Again, this would make sense since agreeable individuals tend to be
passive and obedient which makes them less likely to surface in a group as a leader. Finally,
Neuroticism showed no significant relation to leadership emergence nor to leadership
effectiveness, and therefore serves as a poor predictor of leadership. The study concludes
with the warning that many situational or context factors can moderate the validity of
personality traits in predicting leadership. Because as to the why and how personality affects
leadership, this remains unanswered.
Big Five and Leadership in Context
A study that in fact incorporated the context into their research has been executed by De
Hoogh, Den Hartog and Koopman in 2004. In this research they examined the
relationships between the Big Five and leadership behavior and whether the work
environment (dynamic or stable) moderates this relationship. A distinction was made
between Transactional leaders (maintain status quo, rewarding effort and commitment)
versus Transformational leaders (or charismatic leaders; set to change the status quo,
energize and delegate to followers, to respond effectively to the environment). Conclusion
of the researchers was that Agreeableness and Conscientiousness were both positively
related to both types of leadership (especially transactional) in a stable environment.
However, in a more dynamic work environment both traits were rated less to transactional
and transformational leadership styles. The latter conclusion could be contributed to the
fact that sticking to regulations and being compliant rather than grasping opportunities
reflect negatively on the perception of leadership in dynamic environments. Openness was
found to correlate positively only in the combination transformational leaders in a dynamic
work environment. In a stable environment transformational leaders who question the
status quo and try to find new opportunities to reach goals are perceived as too unsettling.
The same result applied to Neuroticism. Leaders who scored relatively high on
Neuroticism were rated more charismatic in dynamic work environments compared to
stable environments. A more emotionally charged individual might take a stand to change
the status quo and by doing so inspire others to follow (Cable & Judge, 2003). Note that as
20
Theoretical Background
stated above, previous research that did not take the context into account did not find a
relationship between Neuroticism and leadership (Judge et al., 2002). This implies that
context is an important variable in assessing leadership. Extraversion is the last trait to be
discussed here. Contrary to the researchers‟ expectations they found no relationship
between Extraversion and Transformational leadership, regardless of the context.
This finding contrasts other research findings that certainly do link Extraversion to
charismatic leadership and most strongly in challenging environments (Ployhart et al., 2001;
Bono & Judge, 2004). It seems useful to add here that research moreover found that the
relative “strength” or “weakness” of an environment plays a role in personality and
behavior. When situations are perceived as exceptionally strong, people will react in the
same way, irrespective of their individual personality trait make-up. Thus the relationship
between personality and actual behavior decreases in strong situations. Continuing this line
of reasoning, the validity of personality traits in predicting behavior or performance has
found to be stronger when a situation or environment is labeled as “weak” (Barrick &
Mount, 2005).
To conclude the literature search on leadership and the Big Five, a natural leader, defined
in Big Five terms (yet old style or transactional) is resilient (thus low on Neuroticism),
outgoing, persuasive and energetic (high on Extraversion), a visionair (high on Openness),
dedicated to the goal (high on Conscientiousness) and competitive (low on Agreeableness).
Nevertheless, by now we know that it is a game of trade offs and that the environment or
work context plays a substantial role as well in determining which leadership style fits with
a particular organization. In the next paragraph we move on to examine the literature on
Derailing Traits and their connection to leadership.
1.2.3. Derailing Personality Traits
Background
The crisis did not just happen to us, it was caused by people. Businesses are run by people.
The better theses people are, the better an organization will perform. With the rise of
corporate scandals and ethical breaches and due to the global recession much attention has
been given to the mistakes that contributed to this financial and economic crisis. Giving
attention to these faux pas may help in preventing them in the future. Yet a lingering
leadership crisis continues to haunt the corporations of today. An old saying in the
21
Theoretical Background
executive world is that an executive is hired on competence but fired on personality
(Fernandez Araoz, 1999). In the last decade, one-third of Fortune 500 CEOs lasted fewer
than three years. Failure rates among top executives range from 30 to 75 percent. Over half
of first-time general managers stumble, some never to recover (Kornferry Institute, 2009).
Freud was one of the first people to think and write about self-defeating behaviors, but his
exclusive focus on understanding these behaviors from a purely intra-psychic viewpoint
limits the applicability to leadership (Benson & Campbell, 2007). In this research, the
definition of Derailing Traits given by Lombardo, Ruderman & McCauley (1988) will be
used. Derailment in a managerial or executive role is defined as being involuntarily
plateaud, demoted, or fired below the level of anticipated achievement or reaching that
level only to fail unexpectedly. Derailing or dark side characteristics of personality are
personality manifestations that are between the range of normal personality and more
severe mental disorders (Benson & Campbell, 2007). However, derailment should not be
confused with the fact that chances of managers to be promoted to a next level role, while
climbing the organizational pyramid, declines. This situation also leads managers to reach
their peak below the top level in the organization, but this is not a form of management
derailment (Van Zyl, 2000). To better understand dark side personality traits and reasons
for derailment, it is useful to look at these factors in their own right rather than simply as
low scores on the indicators of success like for instance the Big Five model does
(Lombardo, Ruderman & McCauley, 1988).
Historically, research on the cutting face of psychology and (talent) management was
focused on abilities, skills and positive character traits as predicting factors of professional
achievement in general and specifically managerial achievement (Lombardo et al., 1988).
The before mentioned Big Five assumes that high scores on indicators of success will be a
predictor of behavior. Even though the Big Five is not seen by everyone the most
comprehensive representation of personality, it has been the model of choice for the vast
majority of personality related research (Benson & Campbell, 2007). In the first half of the
1980‟s a common belief arose that Derailing Traits should have to be studied separately
and in their own right in order to get a better understanding of reasons for derailment
(Lombardo et al., 1988).
22
Theoretical Background
One of the pioneers in this area was Bentz (1985), who conducted in depth interviews with
derailed managers. His conclusion was that many executive level failures lacked one or
more of the managerial skills needed at these levels (e.g. administrative skills, disciplined
judgment, ability to deal with a large scale organization), and that derailed managers were
highly skilled individuals who possessed one overriding personality characteristic that
flawed their careers (see table 3). In a different study, two groups of managers were
compared, who all looked very promising at the start of their careers, but of which only
half proved to be successful, and the other half derailed. From this comparative study, they
concluded that three factors play a role in derailment: 1) an early strength that has turned
into a weakness, 2) a deficiency such as an inability to work with peers, and 3) plain bad
luck (McCall & Lombardo, 1983).
Some believe that failed leaders posses bad judgment, cannot build teams, have troubled
relationships, and cannot manage themselves or learn from their mistakes (Hogan, Hogan
& Kaiser, in press). However, other sources are less definite and proclaim that derailment is
not necessarily the end of a manager‟s career. After derailing in one organization, managers
are able to become successful in other organizations, or in their own startups (Morrison,
White & Van Velsor, 1992).
More recent studies have shed light on the reasons that underlie managerial derailment.
They claim that derailors tend to cling to past habits and resist change. The reason for the
fact that they rely on their greatest strengths from the past is that they have been visibly
rewarded for doing things their way (Denton & Van Lill, 2006). Therefore, they also
conclude that the organization plays an important role in the derailment of managers in the
form of target settings and reward systems.
23
Theoretical Background
Reasons for Executive Failure & Derailment
Bentz
McCall & Lombardo
1. Lack of administrative skill,
often masked by a strong
personality
1. Specific performance problems
with the business
2. Failure to shape events (e.g.
Being reactive and tactical
2. Insensitivity to others: an abrasive,
intimidating, bullying style
3. Cold, aloof, arrogant
3. Inability to deal with the scope
and scale of large organizations
4. Failure of leadership (e.g.
didn't face up to subordinate
performance problems; couldn't
build cohesion
5. Lack of disciplined judgment
(e.g. Overly emotional;
intellectually limited)
4. Betrayal of trust
5. Overmanaging - failing to delegate,
or build a team
6. Overly ambitious – thinking of the
next job, playing politics
7. Failing to staff effectively
8. Unable to think strategically
6. Lack of knowledge of the
business
9. Unable to adapt to a boss with a
different style
7. Overriding personality defect
10. Overdependent on an advocate
or a mentor
11. Miscellaneous skill deficiencies
12. Burned out
Table 3: Reasons for executive failure & derailment (Lombardo et al., 1988).
The very elements that made the organization successful, and that promoted the managers‟
behavior, unfortunately also become a part of the problem. As can be seen in table 4, not
only the character and behavior of the derailed manager is analyzed, but also the role of the
organization, thus the context in which individuals derail. In the situation, in which the
organization requires different capabilities of the manager or executive, behavior can be
labeled as derailment (Denton & Van Lill, 2006).
A striking difference between men and female derailors was revealed by research of
Morrison et al. They concluded that men have significantly greater problems with
relationships than women. Also, men are more sensitive to poor performance as a cause of
derailment. Yet, women are more often than men overly ambitious and want too much,
possibly in order to prove that they can make it in a “man‟s world” (Morrison et al., 1992).
24
Theoretical Background
Table 4: The Derailment process: from early strengths towards eventual derailment (Denton & van
Lill, 2006).
Why are Derailing Traits important?
The primary reason for the interest in derailing traits is the associated cost of a derailing
manager. The cost of a derailed manager, in the form of recruiting, selecting and training
new ones, „golden parachutes‟, lost intellectual and social capital, missed business objectives
and destroyed employee morale, can mount to figures of around $500,000 (ed. Adjusted for
inflation this equals around $1 million these days) (Lombardo et al., 1988; Hogan, Hogan &
Kaiser, in press; Gentry, Mondore & Cox, 2007). Stated in another way, derailment of
managers or executives can cost an organization more than 20 times an executives‟ salary,
in some cases amounting to millions of dollars (Gentry et al., 2007). Especially lowered
25
Theoretical Background
moral and organizational reputation loss is a phenomenon of today‟s recession. And since
approximately 30 to 50% of high potential managers and executives derail at least once
during their career, organizations should really take this threat serious (Lombardo &
Eichinger, 1995).
Management derailment on all levels is as important a characteristic as the ones for
managerial success, since management derailment can be detrimental to managers‟ work or
welfare, their company, as well as those around the managers (Gentry et al., 2007). This is
supported by Hogan, who claims that in organizational climate surveys, about 75 percent
of working adults report their immediate boss as the cause of most of their work-related
stress (Hogan, 2007). Also, bad leaders are seen as a major health hazard since they impose
enormous medical costs on society, and degrade the quality of life of many people (Gentry
et al., 2007).
Derailing Traits
Different dimensions were used by researchers in the field of derailing traits. As early as
1983 McCall and Lombardo summarized the ten most common causes of leadership
derailment (see table 3). Other dark side personality traits mentioned in literature are for
instance Excitability (under pressure managers become volatile and unpredictable),
Skepticism (managers are suspicious, argumentative, and full of distrust), Cautiousness
(managers will drag their feet and resist change and innovation even when it is clear things
need to change), Reserved (insensitive to others, tactless and cold), and Arrogance (refusal
to acknowledge failure, errors or mistakes; self centered) (Najar, Holland & Van Landuyt,
2004), but this is by no means an exhaustive summary. For the purpose of our research, we
chose to use the five derailing trait dimension, as defined by Benson & Campbell (2007).
Benson & Campbell have made a comprehensible overview of the most important
dimensions that have been used over the years (see table 5).
26
Theoretical Background
Table 5: Summary of HDS dimensions, DSM-IV themes, and GPI derailing leadership dimensions
(Benson & Campbell, 2007).
The five Derailing Traits from GPI, Ego-centered, Intimidating, Manipulation, Micro-managing,
and Passive-aggressive, can be viewed as leadership performance determinants that may result
in short-term business successes, but ultimately erode trust and support from those around
the manager and lead to long-term interpersonal problems that make it difficult to achieve
organizational goals through the collective effort of the group, becoming dysfunctional in
the long-term (Benson & Campbell, 2007). The derailing dimensions are explained below.
Ego-centered
An ego-centered manager sees himself as the center of all, and forms the object and norm
of all experience. He or she is primarily concerned with his or her own needs and
advantage to the exclusion of colleagues. The behavior of these managers is often labeled
as selfish and self absorbed. The needs, feelings and achievements of others are ignored,
and the manager‟s personal agenda is disguised as the organizational agenda. Decisions are
based on what is best for the ego-centered manager, his or her favorite subordinates,
friends and business partners. (“I often wonder how others would manage without me”).
Intimidating
An intimidating manager manages people based on fear. As a result, employees feel
insecure and inhibited to express ideas and ask questions. This will prevent employees from
acting in the organization's best interests. Intimidating managers tend to unbalance people
around them by making innuendos, not too subtle remarks, and non-playful teasing. They
respond to perceived threats by losing control and feel that their outbursts work for them.
They tend to use threats, censor communications, dislike accountability and transparency,
act by double standards, and criticize others openly and publicly for their poor
performance.
27
Theoretical Background
Manipulation
A manager that manipulates has a tendency to deceive and manipulate peers, subordinates
or management for personal gain. He or she has, and uses, the ability to change others‟
feelings and behaviors to get them to think, feel and act as desired. “People can serve as
excellent tools for getting what is wanted or needed”.
Micro-managing
A micro-managing manager seems not to trust his subordinate staff and wants to check
and control each and every aspect of a person‟s task or a situation by paying extreme
attention to small details, resulting in decrease of productivity. The micromanager monitors
and assesses every step and avoids delegation of decisions. Micromanagers see this
management style as structured and/or organizational. “Delegation weakens the power of a
leader”.
Passive-aggressive
A passive-aggressive manager tends to show passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to
following through with expectations in work situations. This can manifest itself as learned
helplessness, ambiguity, procrastination, stubbornness, resentment, sullenness, sulking or
deliberate/repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly)
responsible. It is a defense mechanism coming from an (often suppressed) inability to
express anger, and is more often than not only partly conscious. It is a form of covert
behavior and veiled or disguised by actions that appear to be normal. Due to their own lack
of insight into their feelings the passive aggressive manager often feels that others
misunderstand him or, are holding him to unreasonable standards if he is confronted about
his behavior. “There are times when I say I will cooperate when I know I will not”.
(Robie, Brown & Bly, 2008)
1.2.4. Derailing Personality Traits & Leadership
Lately there is quite some coverage of scandals due to leadership failure in the media.
Therefore, one would assume that the topic of management/ leadership derailment has a
long history of study. However, this is not the case (Benson & Campbell, 2007). As
derailment is hard to see separate from leadership, in the afore section much references
were already made to the Derailing Traits in relation to leadership.
28
Theoretical Background
Derailing characteristics are magnified through the lens of leadership. Everyone has a
bright side and a dark side. Yet, derailors are often noted in advance, but frequently
overlooked or forgiven because of the individual‟s high potential or because their strengths
were highly valued (Denton et. al., 2006). Interpersonal flaws coexist with an individual‟s
well developed set of social skills. Managers that Michael Jackson, Chairman and CEO of
AutoNation, describes as “High-performing money-makers whose risk profile would keep
you up at night”. A study from 2008 shows the dilemma very clearly. The results suggested
that high scores on Derailing Traits will typically lead to higher predicted levels of
performance (Robie, Brown & Bly, 2008).
Most assessments and evaluations of good leadership focus only on successes and positive
attributes. The problem is that derailed executives are also usually described as being smart
and ambitious individuals, often with outstanding track records and possessing few flaws.
Of course only up to the point they fail. Failure is less about lacking the “right stuff” but
more about also having the “wrong stuff”. Failed managers usually have what it takes for
success but also possess something that potentially can sabotage or derail their careers.
Successful managers will however try to mask their derailing traits and others only notice
these tendencies after extended exposure to the manager (Hogan, 2001).
There is hope though, since management derailment is not a permanent curse. Managers
can better their lives and get themselves off the path that causes derailment. They can do
so by becoming aware of triggers of potential derailment, such as too much work, major
life/ career transition, or boredom. And they should also try and find out whether there is a
fit between their personal type or preferences and their current environment (Gentry at al.,
2007). It is also suggested that Human Resource professionals will be playing a more
prominent role in guiding managers to maintain the correct balance in their livers and
thereby preventing the causes of derailment (Denton & Van Lill, 2006).
1.3. Research question
Based on the literature research and the evolution and current insights of scientists on the
Big Five and Derailing personality traits section in 1.2 we have come to the following
research question.
29
Theoretical Background
The research objective of this thesis is to acquire insight into possible effects of the New Reality on those
Talent Management processes which deal with selecting and assessing (potential) management and
leadership talent, based on certain personality traits, within organizations in the Netherlands.
In order to realize this objective, we consider the following related research questions:
(1)
To what extent are the Big Five personality traits deemed desirable, stimulated, and
recognized in organizations? Has the significance of these traits in organizations
changed due to the New Reality, and is their significance expected to change in the
future?
(2)
To what extent are Derailing Traits deemed undesirable, stimulated, and recognized
in organizations? Has the significance of these traits in organizations changed due to
the New Reality, and is their significance expected to change in the future?
(3)
In light of the new reality, have organizations altered the design of their management
and leadership profile, and have they changed the selection and assessment processes
accordingly?
(4)
Have Talent Management processes in general been aligned with the New Reality?
1.4. Conceptual Model
The following simple and combined conceptual model frames the research objective stated
in the previous section (see figure 1). In the top part we examine the perceived importance
and use of both the positive personality traits (Big Five) and the negative personality traits
(Derailing Traits) in organizations. Also we examine the perceived changes in importance
of these traits in light of the New Reality. For the purpose of this research we will refer to
the New Reality meaning the new financial reality that emerged due to the recent financial
crisis.
In the second part, we examine if the financial crisis and the subsequently emerged New
Reality have had an influence on the way (potential) management and leadership talents are
being selected and assessed. We would like to find out whether the design of management
and leadership profiles and the assessments have changed at all.
30
Theoretical Background
Figure 1; Conceptual Model
1.5. Expectations of research
We hope that the research will at least render a response rate of 10 percent (average
response on surveys is 4 to 6 percent). As we are sending the questionnaire to professionals
mostly within the HR practice we expect them to be somewhat acquainted with the
personality trait theories. Most probably they are familiar with the Big Five and we also
expect respondents to have heard of Derailing Traits. Due to their line of work we assume
that all respondents have insight in Talent Management processes within their own
organization, and therefore insight into any alterations that might have taken place over the
last two years.
31
Theoretical Background
Important to consider is that the economic crisis and emerging New Reality shook many
organizations to their foundations. We have observed that in many organizations this
upheaval has lead to less than desirable effects. To name a few: a procrastinating attitude
while waiting for things to come, ego-centered behavior combined with keeping the cards
close to ones chest, decrease of (true) teamwork and even sabotaging others to get ahead.
This is not totally illogical as employees, and managers to no lesser extent, feel uncertain
about their position within the organization. Overall, trust is low and the atmosphere
daunting. Of course this does not apply to all companies but it is a strong reality at many
organizations, even if (top) management does not (want) to see or even deny these
developments. We believe the current reality within organization to be important when
considering the personality traits.
Big Five
We expect these five traits being; Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion,
Agreeableness and Openness to Experience, to be well entrenched in the processes relation
to selection and assessment in organizations. The traits represent standards of behavior
that we believe will be shared by respondents and be affirmed on organizational level. Due
to the situation many organizations find themselves in, we expect to encounter a significant
difference between the value that respondents attach to the Big Five personality traits and
the actual situation within their organization (the actual level that managers show these
traits). Furthermore we anticipate that organizations will find high levels of Big Five
personality traits of increased importance in the future as a result of the New Reality in
which organizations find themselves. Finally, we assume that the financial crisis has had no
significant influence on the importance of the Big Five within organization. This due to the
fact that we believe that these traits are already entrenched in organizations and in widely
used their selection and assessment procedures.
Derailing Traits
As stated before, we believe that most respondents will be acquainted with the existence of
the theory regarding the Derailing Traits. In this second part of the survey we expect to
find a bigger discrepancy between desired behavior and the actual situation. We believe that
most organizations will not find many of the five Derailing Traits, that we chose to
investigate, desirable. Yet, the low scores on desirability of the Derailing Traits that we
32
Theoretical Background
expect to receive might not correspond with the actual situation due to the organizational
climate as described earlier. The importance of assessing for the presence of Derailing
Traits in (potential) management and leadership talent might be clear to the respondents.
Yet on the same notion we expect respondents to reject the very existence of the Derailing
Traits within their organizations, which might not reflect the brutal reality. Therefore we
expect managers to show relative high levels of the Derailing Traits and we do not really
expect HR professionals to already work with the knowledge they have or have recently
acquired concerning Derailing Traits, not even after all the media attention on the various
causes of the financial crisis. Or in other words, the concepts of Derailing Traits will not
yet be used in the selection and assessment of (potential) management and leadership
talent. Finally, we anticipate that organizations will find low levels of derailing personality
traits of increased importance in the future, and we believe that the financial crisis has had
a significant influence on the attention for negative effects of Derailing Traits within
organizations.
Changes in Talent Management Processes
The question that remains is whether companies have altered their Talent Management
processes as a result of the financial crisis and / or the New Reality they find themselves in.
We expect that only a small amount of organizations will actually have implemented any
practical changes. Also, we expect that few organizations have altered their selection or
assessment process to include reviews for Derailing Traits: a grim basic assumption. We
make this grim assumption because we believe that most organizations are not ready yet for
this kind of action concerning their selection and assessment processes for several reasons.
Organizations live in a time of survival and in times of survival, development of employees
does not have the highest priority. It is as simple as that. In many articles written about
Talent Management in the last year it can be read that the crisis is a perfect time to
reevaluate a company‟s Talent Management processes and work on increasing job
performance. However, we believe that the reality is generally less clear and that many
organizations direct their attention and investments elsewhere. There might be a new
consciousness concerning Talent Management and its importance, but we do not believe
that organizations have put this into practice by altering or aligning their Talent
Management processes and/or the personality profiles of their desired (future) leaders to
match the New Reality. If anything, we believe that Talent Management is generally
neglected at the expense of other activities within organizations in the current New Reality.
33
2. Methodology
2.1. Sample
For the research a group of 347 client contacts of the Powerhouse Competing for Talent
of the Nyenrode Business Universiteit were sent an invitation to participate in the research
by email. In the email, there was a link to the digital questionnaire. The invited contacts all
work in an HR/ Talent Management role or general management role. The organizations
contacted are in the segments for-profit, not-for-profit, and government, and in all
different sectors. Although all companies are Netherlands-based, some are daughter
companies of American companies. A list of some of the companies can be seen in
Appendix B. A link to the survey was also posted on the website LinkedIn, on two
communities of HR professionals.
2.2. Sample Results
Of the group of professionals that were approached, 64 filled out the questionnaire,
resulting in a response rate of 18.4 percent. An additional 26 responses were rendered
through the link to the questionnaire on the website of LinkedIn, bringing the total number
of responses to 90. Of these 90 responses, 67 surveys were filled out completely. The
remaining 23 responses will be excluded from the data analysis.
Concerning the functions of the respondents within their organizations, we can say that
more than half (55.2%) are HR/ Talent Management professionals. Just under a quarter
(23.9%) of the respondents has a general management role. Most respondents (44.8%)
were between 36 and 45 years of age. Almost 70 percent (68.7%) of the respondents has
attained a University degree or higher. And the split between male and female respondents
was almost fifty-fifty, with a gravitation towards males (58.2%).
Most of the organizations the respondents work at belong to the category Business
Services (43.3%), followed by Financial Services (14.9%) and Government (11.9%). What
is striking is that 23% of the organizations have less than 50 employees and 32 percent
more than 5000. These are big numbers at the extremes. This is also reflected in the yearly
revenue: 18.9% has less than €1 million, and 46.7 percent over €50 million.
34
Methodology
None of the respondents was younger than 25 years of age. The years between 25 till 35
are represented by18%. Most respondents are between 36 and 45 years, followed by 25%
in the age of 46 to 55. Only 12 percent was older than 55 years of age.
Regarding education, one respondent typifies him or herself as a Chartered Accountant. Of
the other respondents 30% has a higher vocational education, 50 percent has completed
higher education and 19% has completes a post higher education course.
2.3. Means
Literature Research
For Chapter 1 „Theoretical Background‟ the databases of the Nyenrode Library were used
for the process of locating suitable empirical studies. Searches were performed by using
search terms such as “Big Five”, “Five Factor Model”, “Leadership Assessment”,
“Derailing Traits”, “Personality Traits”, “Dark side traits” and “Management Derailment”.
Further, we specifically looked up researches that were quoted in articles by Barrick,
Benson, Costa, Goldberg, Hogan, Judge, McCrae, Robie and Saucier.
Survey Design & Measurement
The objective of this research is to acquire insight into the possible effects of the New
Reality on those Talent Management processes which deal with selecting and assessing
(potential) management and leadership talent based on certain personality traits, within
organizations in the Netherlands. Related questions are to which extent personality traits
used in these selection and assessment processes are recognized as desirable in
organizations and if the use of the personality traits has altered over the past two years.
And also, do organizations use these personality traits in the design of management- and
leadership profiles and have these profiles and other Talent Management processes
changed recently or are the excepted to change.
In order to acquire insight into these questions, an empirical study was designed. We
designed the questionnaire with the theory about personality traits and the New Reality in
mind. It must be noted that the questionnaire is not based on existing validated
questionnaires. The overall survey was executed to acquire insight in the perception of
respondents regarding the current situation regarding the selection and assessment of
(potential) management and leadership talent within organizations, therefore a practical
study. It was decided to conduct the study among Dutch organizations in the segments for35
Methodology
profit, not-for-profit, and government. The reason for this is that a cross-section of Dutch
industry will most likely suppress any industry specific trends that would bias the data.
In the creation of the questionnaire, attention was paid to the sequence of questions and
the overall layout. The former to make sure that the most important information was
retrieved in case the respondents would stop filling out the questionnaire; the latter, to
lower the error chances. The questionnaire was constructed in the online program
Surveymonkey. This enabled us to send it in digital format to possible respondents. The
original survey was stated in the Dutch language, a translation can be found in Appendix A.
The questionnaire consists of a total of 75 questions divided over four parts:
I.
Introduction Questions
II.
Positive Personality Traits; Big Five
III.
Negative personality traits; Derailing Traits
IV.
Organization & Policy
In part one, respondents are asked to give some information about the company they work
for, such as the sector, the amount of employees and an estimation of yearly revenue. Also
some personal information was asked, such as gender, age, and role within their
organization. Here the Sample group is defined.
For part two and three the questionnaire is based on personality traits theory and
specifically the theory around the Big Five and Derailing Traits. We used the OCEAN
model of the Big Five as defined by Costa and McCrae in 1992. Looking at the Derailing
Traits the GPI derailing leadership dimensions theory of Benson and Campbell (2007) was
used as reference. Six statements relating to each of the ten personality traits are presented
to the respondents:
1. Within my organization the personality trait is seen as desirable / undesirable
2. Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
3. Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality trait
4. Within my organization it will be increasingly important that managers and executives
show high / low levels of the personality
36
Methodology
Due to the financial crisis:
5. the personality trait has increased in importance within my organization / the attention
for the negative effects of the personality trait has increased within my organization
(according to me)
6. the personality trait has increased in importance within my organization / the attention
for the negative effects of the personality trait has increased within my organization
(according to my organization)
These questions are framed using a seven-point Likert scale. The seven points on the
Likert scale are stated as Totally disagree, Disagree, Somewhat disagree, Neutral, Somewhat
agree, Agree, and Totally agree.
The statements that precede the seven-point Likert scales are deliberately stated very
positively to provoke the respondents into giving their true opinion. We use the same
positive approach in the part about derailing traits. While constructing the questionnaire,
we discussed extensively whether this would stimulate socially desirable answers. However,
our conclusion was that since the questions concerned the respondents‟ organizations and
not themselves or their own personal behavior, the chance of stimulating socially desirable
answers was minimal.
Finally, part four focuses on the design, organization and recent alterations in policies and
Talent management processes within the respondents‟ organizations. Some of the
statements in this section are stated as open questions and some by means of the sevenpoint Likert scale. Questions regarding the strategic importance of Talent Management,
whether or not the importance has increased over the last two years, on which basis
management and leadership talent is identified, whether the Big Five and Derailing Traits
are used in selection and assessment processes, who within the organization bears the
responsibility of Talent Management, whether profiles and the assessment of management
and leadership potential have altered due to the financial crisis and if so, what changes have
occurred. Section four ends with the two open questions about what aspects concerning
personality traits are underexposed and what extra information respondents would like to
share with their organization in order to optimize Talent Management.
37
Methodology
Procedure
An email was sent to a sample of 347 client contacts of the Powerhouse Competing for
Talent containing a link to the online questionnaire. Also, the questionnaire was posted on
LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com) on two communities of HR professionals. Instructions for
filling out the survey were provided and it was clearly explained what the purpose of the
study was. In an introductory letter, signed by Professor doctor Lidewey van der Sluis, it
was explained that the Powerhouse Competing for Talent of the Business Universiteit
Nyenrode was conducting a research in the field of Talent Management. It was explained
that results would enable us to have a better understanding of current state of Talent
Management processes in relation the New Reality.
The program Surveymonkey kept track of the amount of responses and monitored that
respondents filled out the questionnaire only once. This ruled out the possibility of
sabotage. Respondents were asked to fill out the questionnaire within three working days
after receiving it. After three days a reminder was sent out to those people in the sample
that had not yet filled it out.
Using SPSS 15.0, the received data was analyzed in several ways. First of all an exploratory
factor analysis was conducted. An inventory was made of all answers. Of the statements
with a seven-point Likert scale, the mean and standard deviation were calculated.
Subsequently, frequency-based tables were developed using ordinal variables (the distance
between the scales is not set), as the data consisted of measured perceptions.
38
Results
3. Results
In this chapter, the results of the questionnaire will be presented. A total of 90
questionnaires were received after a period of two weeks from the mailing of the initial
invitation to participate. Of these, 67 were completed and therefore useful in statistical
processing.
The results that can be seen in Appendix A, the results should be interpreted as follows.
Look for example at the results of question 8. Here it says: N = 67, Minimum = 2,
Maximum = 7, Mean = 6.04 and Standard Deviation = 0.960. This means that 67 people
filled out the question; the lowest score was 2, tantamount with „Disagree‟; the highest
score was 7, tantamount with „Totally agree‟; the average score was 6.04, which means that
on average people „Agreed‟ with this statement; and finally, a Standard Deviation below 1
indicates that the responses were quite uniform. In other words, the respondents chose
similar answers.
Table 6 shows the mean scores of the questions relating to the Big Five and the Derailing
Traits in our survey (questions 8 till 57, see appendix A).
Desirability
Stimulated
Show
Future
Crisis 'respondent' Crisis 'organization'
Big Five
Openness
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Emotional Stability
6,04
5.96
5,19
5,10
5,76
5,31
5,66
4,93
4,85
5,12
4,72
4,96
5,10
5,16
4,87
6,27
5,91
4,96
4,67
5,69
4,55
4,70
3,99
3,76
4,66
4,57
4,78
4,15
3,93
4,66
Derailing Traits
Ego-centeredness
Intimidation
Manipulation
Micro-managing
Passive-aggressive
5,45
5,97
5,10
5,18
5,96
2,67
2,12
2,57
2,94
2,27
3,82
2,87
3,57
4,09
2,99
5,54
5,97
5,45
5,75
5,70
4,06
3,45
3,61
3,55
3,72
4,10
3,52
3,69
3,60
3,72
Table 6: Mean scores
All other tables used in the following section discussing the personality traits are frequency
based and the variables are ordinal (the distance between the scales is not set). The
responses „totally disagree‟, „disagree‟ and „somewhat disagree‟ are grouped together as
„disagree‟. The responses „somewhat agree‟, „agree‟ and „totally agree‟ are grouped together
as „agree‟. The answer „neutral‟ is mentioned separately. The total sum of „disagree‟,
„neutral‟, and „agree‟ make a hundred percent.
39
Results
Positive Personality Traits: “Big Five”
Openness
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as desirable.
4
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
9
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
23
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show high
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the personality trait has increased in importance within
my organization;
According to individual respondent
28
At organizational level
17
Neutral
3
9
9
Agree
93
82
68
3
97
22
32
50
51
Conscientiousness
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as desirable.
4
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
6
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
16
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show high
2
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the personality trait has increased in importance within
my organization;
According to individual respondent
17
At organizational level
14
Neutral
2
11
12
Agree
94
83
72
9
89
22
27
61
59
Extraversion
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as desirable.
8
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
16
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
17
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show high
83
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the personality trait has increased in importance within
my organization;
According to individual respondent
29
At organizational level
24
Neutral
15
24
9
Agree
77
60
74
15
68
41
46
30
30
Agreeableness
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as desirable.
88
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
12
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
9
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show high
32
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the personality trait has increased in importance within
my organization;
According to individual respondent
37
At organizational level
28
Neutral
12
15
15
Agree
76
73
76
28
50
37
45
26
27
40
Results
Emotional Stability
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as desirable.
3
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
12
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
17
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show high
4
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the personality trait has increased in importance within
my organization;
According to individual respondent
18
At organizational level
13
Neutral
11
19
24
Agree
87
69
62
12
84
26
29
66
58
Ego-centeredness
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as undesirable.
12
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
76
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
49
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show low
11
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the attention for the negative effects of the personality
trait has increased in importance within my organization;
According to individual respondent
32
At organizational level
25
Neutral
5
14
10
Agree
83
10
41
12
77
30
37
38
38
Intimidating
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as undesirable.
12
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
85
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
69
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show low
4
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the attention for the negative effects of the personality
trait has increased in importance within my organization;
According to individual respondent
45
At organizational level
39
Neutral
3
6
9
Agree
85
9
22
9
87
32
49
23
22
Manipulating
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as undesirable.
23
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
73
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
46
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show low
10
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the attention for the negative effects of the personality
trait has increased in importance within my organization;
According to individual respondent
36
At organizational level
33
Neutral
7
12
15
Agree
70
15
39
11
79
40
39
24
28
Negative Personality Traits: “Derailing Traits”
41
Results
Micro-managing
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as undesirable.
14
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
62
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
36
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show low
3
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the attention for the negative effects of the personality
trait has increased in importance within my organization;
According to individual respondent
41
At organizational level
39
Neutral
15
15
17
Agree
71
23
47
15
82
34
40
25
21
Passive-aggressive
Disagree
Within my organization the personality trait is seen as undesirable.
3
Within my organization the personality trait is stimulated
83
Within my organization managers and executives show high levels of the personality
64
trait
Within my organization it will be increasingly important for managers to show low
5
levels of the personality trait in the future.
Due to the financial crisis the attention for the negative effects of the personality
trait has increased in importance within my organization;
According to individual respondent
36
At organizational level
36
Neutral
7
7
10
Agree
90
10
26
15
80
40
40
24
24
Organization & Policy
In this section we will touch upon those results that are of influence on, or directly related
to the research objective. The remaining results can be found in Appendix A.
(Q58) Respondents find Talent Management of great strategic importance.
6,4
6,21
6,2
6,19
6
5,82
5,8
5,6
5,42
5,4
5,2
5
According to me
According to Talent
Management/ HR
According to
Linemanagement
42
According to
Topmanagement
Results
(Q59) The majortiy of respondents believe that the importance of Talent Management in
their organization has increased over the last two years.
70,0
59,7
60,0
61,2
58,2
50,0
44,8
47,8
38,8
40,0
34,3
32,8
30,0
20,0
7,5
10,0
7,5
4,5
3,0
Accourding to me
According to Talent
Management/ HR
According to
Linemanagement
increased
styed the
same
decreased
increased
styed the
same
decreased
increased
styed the
same
decreased
increased
styed the
same
decreased
0,0
According to
Topmanagement
(Q61) Within 66 percent of the organizations the Big Five personality traits are not used
while assessing management and leadership potential. If organziations do pay attention to
the Big Five personality traits, Emotional Stability receives the most attention (40%) and
Agreeableness the least (23%).
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
Em
ot
io
43
No
na
lS
ta
bi
lit
y
en
es
s
Ag
re
ea
bl
on
Ex
tra
ve
rs
i
en
t io
us
ne
ss
Co
ns
ci
O
pe
nn
es
s
0,0%
Results
(Q62) Within 78 percent of the organizations the Derailing Personality Traits are not used
while assessing management and leadership potential. Within organziations that do pay
attention to the Derailing Traits, Passive-aggressive behavior receives the least attention
(11%).
om
No
e
Pa
ss
i
icr
ve
-a
gg
re
ss
iv
an
ag
in
g
n
M
M
an
ip
ul
at
io
id
at
io
n
In
tim
Eg
oce
nt
er
ed
ne
ss
90,0%
80,0%
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
(Q 68) Within 80.6 percent of the organizations the profile of management and leadership
talents have been altered to reflect a more desirable profile due to the financial crisis.
(Q69) The most important changes included the adjustment of; competencies, leadership
accountability, decision making, focus on positive personality traits and more business
sense eg. business development.
(Q 70) Within 79.1 percent of the organizations the evaluation of management and
leadership talents have been changed since de the start of the financial crisis.
(Q71) The most important changes in the evaluation included; stronger task orientation,
more focus on performance and results, and stricter profiles.
44
Results
(Q72) Within organizations the following alterations to Talent Management processes have
taken place due to the financial crisis:
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
Other
Budgets have
been adjusted
Content of
leadership
programs
Number of
assessments
of managers
Method of
assessment
of current
0,0%
(Q73) Which alterations have taken place? (grouped results)
73.a) The method of assessment of current employees on top functions:

Now assessments are conducted, as opposed to no assessments before

Hiring of an external agency

Stricter review of talents and on results

People stay longer in a certain function

New profile, added competencies and assignment/ work with „must haves‟ on the
basis of experience and competencies
73.b) the number of assessments of new hires:

Amount of assessments has increased enormously

Less new hires / less nr. of assessments

Less assessments (because of the costs / is not standard anymore)
73.c) the number of assessments of managers within the organization:

There were less management roles available

More assessments take place

These decreased because of less new hires

Less people attended leadership programs, those programs did not change though
45
Results
73.d) the requirements of new hires:

Focus on people that make a difference; more attention for leadership qualities

No concessions concerning the desired profile / has become stricter

Added competencies / specific knowledge is demanded versus generic profile
73.e) the content of leadership programs:

Adjusted on finance, risk management, resilience, trust

Focus on management in times of crisis and personal leadership

Are more focused on customer-orientation, both internal and external

More focused on desired behavior, capabilities and decision making

New Management Development program is focused on practice

These trainings have been cancelled
73.f) the content of trainee program:

New trainee program has been developed in preparation of economic recovery
73.g) budgets have been adjusted: more or less budget is available:

Less budget is available (6)

Budget for education, development, and recruitment have diminished to 0 (2)

Less, but leadership programs have more participants

More (2)
46
4. Discussion
4.1. Results Research Questions
In this chapter we will answer the research questions stated in Chapter 1. For this purpose
we have interpreted the results of our research.
Research Question 1: To what extent are the Big Five personality traits deemed desirable,
stimulated, and recognized in organizations? Has the significance of these traits in
organizations changed due to the New Reality, and is their significance expected to change
in the future?
Openness: Respondents agree on the fact that Openness is a desirable personality trait
within their organization (93%) and that in the future this trait will become more and more
important (97%). The trait is stimulated however managers are rated relatively low on the
actual high levels of Openness, 68% of the respondents agree that managers have a high
score. Scores relating an increased importance of Openness due to the financial crisis both
show more or less the same mean (4.55 and 4.57). The financial crisis has led to an overall
increased importance of the personality trait Openness within organizations, 50 percent
„agrees‟ that there is a positive relationship.
Conscientiousness: Respondents agree on the fact that Conscientiousness is not only
desirable (94%) but also highly stimulated (83%) within their organizations. Managers are
rated relatively low on the actual high levels of Conscientious behavior, 72 percent agree
that managers have a high score. At same time respondents reckon that this personality
trait will become increasingly more important in the future, with the highest score of all
personality traits (89%). The financial crisis has led to an increased importance of the trait
Conscientiousness within organizations, 60 percent „agree‟ with the statement.
47
Discussion
Extraversion: Overall, the personality trait Extraversion scores relatively high values on all
six questions, yet scores lower in comparison to traits. A deviation is also found looking at
the Standard Deviation which are more substantial here for all answers and also in
comparison to the other Big Five traits. Thus, respondents are not totally on the same
wavelength where Extraversion is concerned looking at the answers on the first four
statements. Also, when looking at the statement that Extraversion has increased as a result
of the financial crisis the answers are spread. However, overall it can be stated that due to
the financial crisis Extraversion has not increased substantially in importance as only 30
percent agrees with the statement.
Agreeableness: The statements about desirability, stimulation, and managers show high
levels are all rated around a „agree‟ and „somewhat agree‟ (75% overall). However, the
question about the increased importance of Agreeableness in the future stands out with
only 50 percent of the respondents agreeing that the importance will increase in the future.
So do the answers to the statements about the increasing importance of the personality
trait due to the crisis were the center of gravity lies both times at „neutral‟. Overall, as with
Extraversion, it can be stated that due to the financial crisis Agreeableness has not
increased substantially in importance. It seems that there is some discrepancy between what
on one side is deemed important and desired, and on the other hand has changed in
importance.
Emotional Stability: Respondents „agree‟ on all the questions that the trait Emotional
Stability is a desirable (87%), it is stimulated within the organization (69%), and that in the
future this trait will become more and more important (84%). Current managers
demonstrate high levels of Emotional Stability, yet compared to other traits the score is
relatively low, with 62 percent the lowest of all Big Five traits. Scores relating to an
increased importance of Emotional Stability due to the financial crisis both have exactly the
same mean (4.66). However the gravity point differs, as far as the individual responded is
concerned, 66 percent „agrees‟ that due to the crisis Emotional Stability has increased in
significance while looking at the organization level, 58 percent is in agreement.
Overall all Big Five personality traits are deemed desirable within the corporate world with
high scores between 76 and 94 percent.
48
Discussion
All traits are stimulated within organizations (60 – 83%), where Extraversion scores the
lowest (60%).
Managers show high levels of the Big Five (62 – 76%) where Emotional Stability scores the
lowest and Agreeableness the highest.
For all traits it is said that in the future it is important that managers and executives in
organizations show high levels of the Big Five personality traits. Agreeableness stands out
with the lowest scores of only 50 percent and Openness for its high score of 97 percent.
Finally, the attention for the traits Openness, Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability
has increased due to the financial crisis. The attention for the traits Extraversion and
Agreeableness has not altered due to the financial crisis.
Research question 2: To what extent are Derailing Traits deemed undesirable, stimulated,
and recognized in organizations? Has the significance of these traits in organizations
changed due to the New Reality, and is their significance expected to change in the future?
Ego-centeredness: There is quite some support as for the statement that Egocenteredness is seen as an undesirable trait within organizations (83% „agree‟ with an
average mean but high Standard Deviation). Consensus is also found in the answers if Egocenteredness is stimulated by the organization, only 9 percent „agree‟ with this statement.
The statement that within the respondents‟ organizations, managers show high levels of
Ego-centeredness is answered very divers. The minimum score was „totally disagree‟, the
maximum score was „totally agree‟ and the gravity point was „slightly agree‟ with a relatively
high Standard Deviation of 1.714, indicating that the opinions concerning this statement
varied substantially. Consensus again that in the future a low level of Ego-centeredness is
will be of increasing importance, 43% „agree‟ with this statement. We conclude that overall
the financial crisis has not led to a overwhelming increased attention to the negative effects
of Ego-centeredness but scores „neutral‟ with advocates at both sides; 29 percent „disagree‟
and 38 percent „agree‟.
Intimidation: An overwhelming number of respondents agree on the fact that
Intimidation is an undesirable personality trait (85% „totally agree‟ but note that 12%
49
Discussion
disagree is some manner) and that in the future it will become increasingly important that
managers show low levels of Intimidation (87% „agree‟). The results show that 68 percent
of respondents „disagree‟ with the statement that managers in their organizations show high
levels of Intimidation. Respondents do seem to agree on the fact that the attention for the
negative effects of Intimidation has not really grown due to the financial crisis as most have
answered „neutral‟ or on the „disagree‟ side.
Manipulation: More or less the same results as with Intimidation are found here. The
undesirability of the personality trait scores 70 percent on „agree‟. The results show that on
average respondents „disagree‟ with the statement that managers in their organizations
show high levels of Manipulation (46% „disagrees‟ but note that a total of 39 percent
answers between „slightly agree to totally agree‟). High is the support for the statement that
in the future it will become increasingly important that managers show low levels of
Manipulation (79% „agrees‟). Respondents do seem to agree on the fact that the attention
for the negative effects of Manipulation has not really grown due to the financial crisis as
most have answered „neutral‟ or on the „disagree‟ side.
Micro-managing: Again, most support is found for the statements that in the future it will
become increasingly important that managers show low levels of Micro-managing in the
future, 82 percent „agrees‟. The results also show that current managers do actually show
high levels of Micro-management (47% „agree‟). The trait is certainly not encouraged by
organizations (except for 23%). Respondents believe that there is no special attention for
the negative effects of this personality trait due to the financial crisis.
Passive-aggressive: Also for this derailing trait goes that an overwhelming amount of
respondents agree on the fact that Passive-aggressive behavior is undesirable (90%) and
that in the future it becomes increasingly important that managers show low levels of
Passive-aggressive behavior (80%). Of the respondents 64 percent believe that
management in their organization show low levels of Passive-aggressiveness. The influence
of the financial crisis on the attention for the negative effects of this trait is not strong.
Only 24 percent of the respondents believe there exists a relationship whereas 40 percent
answers „neutral‟, and another 36% believe the crisis has had no influence.
50
Discussion
Overall, respondents agree that the five mentioned Derailing Traits are deemed undesirable
within their organizations with high scores on „agree‟ ranging from 70 – 90 percent.
Derailing Traits are hardly to not stimulated at all within organizations, averaging are
around 10 percent. Only Micro-managing stands out with 22 percent.
The answers to the statement if managers show high levels of Derailing Traits vary quite a
bit. According to 24 percent of the respondents, managers in their organizations show high
levels of Intimidation and Passive Aggressiveness. The traits Ego-centeredness,
Manipulation and Micro-managing score substantially higher (respectively 41, 39, and
47%).
Moving on however, respondents believe that for all Derailing Traits it is important that in
the future managers and executives in organizations show low levels of the Big Five
personality traits (77 – 82%).
Overall, the attention for all five mentioned Derailing Traits has not really increased due to
the financial crisis, scores lie between 21 and 25 percent where Ego-centeredness stands
out a little with 38 percent.
In comparison to the Big Five, Derailing Traits evoke more varied responses, as can be
seen from the relative high Standard Deviations. Also 77.6 percent of the respondents
indicate that the assessments of management and leadership potential do not include any
elements of Derailing Traits. The rest indicates that Micro-managing (16.4%), Intimidation,
Manipulation (both 14.%), Ego-centeredness (13.4%), and Passive-aggressive (11.9%) are
indeed tested.
Research Question 3: In light of the new reality, have organizations altered the design of
their management and leadership profile, and have they changed the selection and
assessment processes accordingly?
A mere 19.4 percent of the respondents indicate that their organization has changed the
management and leadership profile in light of the New Reality. This leaves over 80 percent
of the organizations that did not change the profile (yet). Respondents are very unanimous
in their ideas about where the responsibility for decisions about desired management and
51
Discussion
leadership profiles lies: 60 percent say top management, followed by 20 percent that say
HR/ Talent Management. For the group that indicated that their organization have indeed
changed the management and leadership profiles, this is in line with reality, since it was
indicated that the changes had been made indeed mainly by top management, HR and the
Board of Directors.
Respondents that reported that their organization indeed has changed the management and
leadership profiles, indicate that the profiles have become broader, including elements such
as the ability to make decisions, accountability, and performance related measures.
The tools used to monitor and assess management and leadership talents are HR tools and
methods (47,8%), Talent Management system, and Performance Management system (both
37,3%). The final category „Other‟ (23,9%) mainly consisted of personal assessments of HR
professionals or line managers.
Another striking fact is that line management, even though they seem the ones to be in
closest contact with the talents, have very limited responsibility in deciding on the profile
of desired management and leadership talent. The data leads us to conclude that line
management is merely executing what is decided on a higher level.
Research Question 4: Have Talent Management processes in general been aligned with the
New Reality?
Almost 21 percent of the respondents indicate that the evaluation of management and
leadership talent has changed within their organization in light of the New Reality. Again, it
was mainly top management and HR/ Talent Development that altered these evaluations.
The changes consisted mainly of stricter performance related evaluations.
In almost 30 percent of the respondents‟ organizations the budgets for Talent Management
activities have been adjusted. Most respondents indicate that the budgets for education,
development, recruitment, and leadership programs have decreased, and in a couple
instances even totally dissolved. A few respondents indicate though, that budgets have
increased.
52
Discussion
Over 20 percent of the respondents indicate that the requirements for new hires have
changed, and that the content of leadership programs has changed. The selection of new
hires has become stricter, in a sense that they seem only to be hired when they explicitly
contribute to the continuation of the organization. This means they either have to bring
aboard certain specialist knowledge or capabilities in making the organization more lean
and transparent. This is in line with the changes in the leadership programs. The
participants of these programs are also trained on customer-orientation, transparency and
personal leadership.
Only in 10 percent of the respondent organizations has the nature of the assessments of
both new hires and current employees changed. Some organizations nowadays have
become stricter in their assessments, while in other organizations fewer assessments take
place, because of a decreased amount of new hires and movement within the organization,
or because of restricted budgets.
4.2. Linking Results to expectations
First and foremost, we expected the New Reality to have an impact on organizations. More
specifically, on the way management and leadership profiles are designed and the talents are
assessed. From our research we conclude that the vast majority of the respondents agree
that over the past two years the importance of Talent Management in general has
increased. The desired management and leadership profiles have altered due to the financial
crisis. Also, the evaluation of management and leadership talents has changed. Though we
have only limited insight in the exact changes. Overall, assessments have become stricter
and there is more focus on task-related competencies.
Considering the fact that the Big Five is generally seen as a standard for personality trait
tests, we expected that the importance of these traits was not really affected by the New
Reality. It turned out this was not the case. In fact the attention for three of those positive
personality traits has increased. In particular the attention for the traits Openness,
Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability has increased in light of the New Reality. The
attention for the traits Extraversion and Agreeableness has remained neutral. This does not
totally coincide with the literature linking the Big Five to leadership as Extraversion is the
53
Discussion
trait most correlated to leadership and during our research we also found that managers
and executives showed high levels of Extraversion.
In light of the New Reality, we expected the importance of Derailing Traits to have
increased. However, much to our surprise, this was not the case. It seems that these traits
have not yet been incorporated in Talent Management processes, even though the
Derailing Traits theory is quite established. Nevertheless, respondents recognize underline
the importance of Derailing Traits. These traits are seen as highly undesirable, but are not
yet dealt with.
Finally, we expected the Talent Management processes to have changed. In fact, since
organizations seem to be in survival mode, we presented the grim expectation that Talent
Management programs would have to cope with decreased budgets and a lack of interest
from top management, due to more important challenges. The results show that Talent
Management is regarded to be of strategic importance. Nevertheless, theory and practice
are far apart, since in most cases budgets are cut, development programs are killed, and the
expectations of talents have increased.
4.3.
Recommendations for Further Research
Recommendation for further research could be many as so much is still unknown about
personality traits and to the why some individuals show certain behavior and why others do
not. Furthermore the influence of the crisis is still under exposed. We hope that our thesis
and discussion will be noticed and that it may serve as a starting point for further research.
For one, it would be interesting to determine in which situations personality traits become
under pressure. It is known that under stress an individuals‟ behavior can change. Little
research has been done to personality traits and crisis situations. Only some information is
available of the behavior we actually see, the top of the iceberg. However, what kind of
behavior and why is hidden under water is largely unknown. Leadership behavior in crisis
times for instance.
We touched upon it in this thesis but more research into the effects of context and culture
of an organization versus the nurture or disapproval of personality traits is desirable. Do
54
Discussion
organizations practice what they preach? Or do they secretly endorse certain
counterproductive behavior that could be gathered under Derailing Traits. DT. This is
especially import as the culture can enhance or counteract certain behavior as currently the
lion share of most talent development takes place on the job.
A second item we touched on are the differences between the sexes. The reasons for
women to derail are different than those for the men. Women tend to score higher on both
Agreeableness and Neuroticism (Big Five) and tend to be overly ambitious (potential
derailor) and men score high on Extraversion and Conscientiousness (Big Five) and tend to
have greater problems with relationships and handle poor performance badly (potential
derailors). Especially in the Netherlands this is of importance as in this society the
differences tend to be larger. It puts women in a back seat position as the traits
Extraversion, low on Neuroticism and Conscientiousness are the strongest predictors of
career success. Furthermore women are more prone to be overly ambitious to make it in a
“mans world”, a contemporary discussion that has not been solved yet within the
Netherlands. Thus when building assessment tools we suggest that these findings should be
incorporated, further researched so assessment tools could be adjusted.
To further on the current research at hand, if organizations have not altered their Talent
Management processes or even cut spending in the area the question can be asked why
organizations have done this. Especially as Talent Management is deemed of strategic
importance to many.
Overall, we have done a research into the „what‟, „how‟ and „perception‟. The Next step
would be looking at the „whys‟. A whole new area of research all together.
4.4.
Limitations
A number of limitations pertain to this study. First of all, we would like to mention that the
time provided for our research was limited. As a result, the used questionnaire is not
validated as is common in scientific studies. We have tapped our own creativity in
constructing a questionnaire.
Secondly, we would like to draw attention to the fact that, though not all-embracing, the
Big Five represents an excepted taxonomy of personality characteristics. The Derailing
55
Discussion
Traits, as defined by McCrae & Costa (1990) that were used in our research to contrast the
Big Five. Though there is more and more support for the legitimacy of Derailing Traits, it
is impossible to treat them as a scientific equal measure of personality traits as the Big Five.
Furthermore, even though we ourselves assessed the chances to be minimal, the research
may be biased by the fact that respondents were inclined to give socially desirable answers.
In our opinion the chances of the latter to happen would increase if the questions would
have inquired about an individual‟s own behavior instead of assessing the perceptions of
respondents.
Since most research in the field of derailing traits has been among management levels, we
might wrongfully have neglected the consequences of derailment among non-management
employees. Logic dictates however a focus on management levels, as the effects of
derailment tend to be bigger and thus costlier. For the purpose of this research, we have
drawn conclusions about the desirability of testing potential managers and executives on
their tendencies to derail.
This research has focused on both positive and negative personality traits as a predictor for
(future) leadership and management potential, and possible derailment. All other factors
that might influence the success of potential managers and executives, such as general
mental ability (intelligence) and personal fit with the organization, lay mostly outside the
scope of this research, although we did touch up them in the thesis for clarification
purposes.
As another limitation, we would like to mention that some manager may be very skilled in
hiding their derailing traits. Especially in the case of a manager or executive that displays
passive-aggressive behavior it can take quite a while before this becomes clear to HR/
Talent Management professionals. It may thus be interesting to further research the extent
to which hidden derailment influences the success of organizations. This study has been
limited as to the „whats‟ and „hows‟ and the perception, not the „why‟s‟. That is a whole new
area of research all together.
Finally, we belief that the focus on organizations only located in the Netherlands may have
influenced the results of the research. Though this influence of national culture may also
56
Discussion
have been slightly mitigated by the fact that the participating organizations are of mixed
origin.
57
Conclusion
5. Conclusion
5.1. Research Results
Big Five and Derailing Traits
The Big Five have become a standard in testing positive personality traits and form a good
starting point to have a closer look at leadership (substantial relation between the Big Five
and leadership). For all traits it is said that in the future it is important that managers and
executives in organizations show high levels of the Big Five personality traits.
Agreeableness stands out with the lowest scores of only 50 percent and Openness for its
high score of 97 percent. It is concluded that the attention for the traits Openness,
Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability has increased due to the financial crisis.
After having reviewed the literature on the Big Five we strongly recommend to keep using
the Big Five in the future when assessing for management and leadership potential. Having
said that, the Big Five as such might be too broad to offer all conclusive answers.
In recent years researchers in the field of personality traits and assessment have recognized
that dark side personality traits deserve attention as well, and should not be regarded as
simply low scores on the Big Five. For instance, traits and facets that are generally seen as
contributors to leadership success include extraversion, conscientiousness (achievement),
agreeableness, self confidence, diplomacy and integrity. A lack of some of these traits or an
extreme preference can be problematic and potentially lead to derailment. Thus, again also
looking at the substantive body of literature evidence, we conclude that assessments on the
basis of the Big Five, can or even better, should be complemented by the Derailing Traits
dimensions. This is not in line with the responses of on questionnaire, where it is stated
that the attention for all five mentioned Derailing Traits has not really increased due to the
financial crisis.
Furthermore, from the results of our survey we learn that in comparison to the Big Five,
Derailing Traits evoke more varied responses, as can be seen from the relative high
Standard Deviations. Even though some derailing personality traits are seen as only slightly
undesirable, there is strong support for the fact that low levels of these derailing traits
become more important in the future.
58
Conclusion
Including the Context
However, complementing management and leadership assessment with Derailing Traits is
not enough. When testing on the presence of personality traits it would be wiser to test at
facet level where the facets are linked to the existing context or the desired context by the
organization ordering the assessments. After all, studies do show that successful managers
are implicated with, and often depend upon organizational structure (do they possess the
right traits to flourish in this particular environment?) and organizational success (are they
able and allowed to flourish in this particular environment?). Context can relate to dynamic
or stable work environments.
Context is also relevant when considering present management and leadership potential in
an organization. Many situational factors exist that may moderate the validity of personality
in predicting leadership or leadership derailment. After all, many performance problems are
related to changed aspirations and goals of the individual or to a change of direction
initiated by the organization or professional circumstances. An example of the latter is the
recent financial crisis. In the past we have seen that the context allowed managers to derail;
the world was their playground and recent crisis was caused by people. Today, in the days
of the New Realty, other contextual changes might cause derailing behavior as these are
challenging times for leaders to live up to the organization‟s expectations.
Personality traits contribute to leadership effectiveness. The estimates range between 45 to
80%, but as to the exact extent researchers disagree. These are very high numbers,
especially when considering that loads of information can be retrieved beforehand by using
well adjusted assessment tests. These are all compelling reasons to test future and present
managers in an organization. This will pay off because, if and when (potential) derailors
understand their behavior and the impact this behavior has on the organizational
effectiveness, this can help them avoiding to derail. There might be limits to what
individuals are able to do about their causes to fail. Nevertheless, if people are made
familiar with their tendencies they are better prepared to counteract these effects. For
instance, the behavior of clinging on to past habits is usually very counterproductive but
the individual will mostly be unaware of the associated negative side effects. People can
actually change if they are willing to. Intervention programs can change behavior patterns.
Thus, the traits one possesses are not carved in stone.
59
Conclusion
But the pendulum also swings the other way. A leaders‟ traits can also change the
situational context! Therefore having a „bad apple‟ working within a team can actually
change the work environment. Moreover, traits that make for successful leaders are likely
to be the same traits that help companies to be successful in reaching their goals.
Therefore, an organization will always be better off assessing and selecting management
and leadership talent that possess the right traits for the context of an organization,
whether these traits should be conscientiousness, openness or high on extraversion. This
makes for more compelling reasons for companies to assess on both sets of personality
traits when individuals join the organization but also when already employed by the
organization. The latter also because managers are quite skillful in hiding their derailing
traits and others (mostly the subordinates are the first to notice!) only notice these
tendencies after extended exposure to such a manager.
Human Resource professionals and especially those working within the field of Talent
Management will have to play a more prominent role in guiding new hires and managers to
maintain the correct balance in their lives. Healthy balanced minds are a prerequisite for
good leadership and therefore organizational success. And it will decrease the potential of
derailment. A very useful tool in doing this successfully is the tool of assessment. This
assessment can be done while entering the company but also for present employees,
managers and leaders. In addition, choice of assessment methods should be aligned with
the overall aims of the assessment and management wishes. This could either be assessing
personality once when joining the organization but can also be used in development
programs (such as critical evaluation or problem solving) and or support the development
of task-related competencies related (such as particular communication or team skills). We
also conclude that the assessment can only be successful when there is a clear description
of the desired management and leadership profile.
However, even a very comprehensive profile of an individual‟s personality traits can only
be considered a partial description of their personality. Therefore we strongly recommend
building in the factor Context and, if possible, the differences between the sexes while
assessing on both the positive and dark side personality traits. Yet at the same time, we
recommend to use other (assessment) tools to evaluate an individual‟s capabilities and fit
with a certain job-role and or organization. In the end, when measuring traits there is really
no way getting around both the Big Five and Derailing Traits anymore.
60
Conclusion
5.2. Managerial Implications
Managers and executives in today‟s organizations should be able to work well with people
across all levels and be willing and able to change their management styles when needed.
Such a leader must have empathy and a high degree of self-management. It is hard though,
to just recognize the ones that have a tendency to derail. Not only should HR/ Talent
Management play an active role in facilitating all their organization‟s employees to have a
good work-life balance, they should also recognize derailment tendencies of managers in an
early stage, preferably before it really happens. Both successful and derailed executives are
bright, are identified early and have outstanding records of achievement, have few faults,
are ambitious and willing to sacrifice. We would therefore recommend organizations to
also test candidates for management- and leadership roles to be subjected to Derailing
Traits tests, such as provided by Hogan Assessment Systems (Hogan, 2007b). Apart from
possible large financial savings, this will also lead to higher levels of employee satisfaction.
Even though discharging managers is the most common way of handling situations of
failure, this may not be the best solution. When recognized early, managers and executives
that are on the path of derailment can still be saved. And with them, all the money the
organization initially invested in the training of the particular executive, and his or her
potential successor. If derailed managers are made aware of their possible derailing
behavior and its triggers, they can learn to live with it, and prevent derailment.
It all goes to say that derailment and its consequences go hand in hand with extreme costs
and is worth avoiding.
61
6. References
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K. (1991). The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job
Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 1 – 26.
Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K., Judge, T.A. (2001). The FFM personality dimensions and job
performance: Meta-Analysis of meta-analyses [Special issue], International Journal of Selection
and Assessment, vol. 9, pp. 9 – 30.
Benson, M.J., Campbell, J.P. (2007). To be or not to be linear: an expanded representation
of personality and its relationship to leadership performance. International Journal of Selection
and Assessment, vol. 15, no.2, pp. 232 – 249.
Bentz, V.J. (1985). A view of the top: a thirty year perspective of research devoted to the
discovery, description and prediction of executive behavior. Paper presented at the annual
convention of the American Psychology Association, Los Angeles, California, 1985.
Costa, P.T., Jr., McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PR-I and EO
Five-Factor Inventory (NEO FFI) Professional Manual, Odessa Florida: Psychological
Assessment Resources, Inc.
Costa, P.T., Jr., Terracciano, A., McCrae, R.R. (2001). Gender Differences in Personality
Traits Across Cultures: Robust and Surprising Finding. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 322 – 331.
Denton, J.M., Van Lill, J.B. (2006). Managerial derailment. Vilakshan, XIMB Journal of
Management, South Africa.
Dunn, W.S., Mount, M.K., Barrick, M.R., Ones, D.S. (August 1995). Relative importance
of personality and general mental ability in managers‟ judgments of applicant qualifications.
Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 500 – 509.
62
References
Gentry, W.A., Mondore, S.P., Cox, B.D. (2007). A study of managerial derailment
characteristics and personality preferences. Journal of Management Development, vol. 26, no. 9,
pp. 857 – 873.
Goldberg, L.R. (December 1993). The Structure of Phenotypic Personality Traits. American
Psychologist, vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 26 – 34.
Hogan, J., Holland, B. (February 2003). Using theory to evaluate personality and job
performance relations: A socio-analytic perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 88, no. 1,
pp. 100 – 112.
Hogan, R. (2007a). Personality and the fate of organizations. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hogan Assessment Systems (2007b). Hogan Development Survey: An inventory of the personality
characteristics that can derail careers, relationships & success in life. Tulsa, Oklahoma.
Hogan, J., Hogan, R., Kaiser, R.B. (in press). Management derailment: personality assessment and
mitigation. Chapters to appear in American Psychological Association Handbook of
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Washington DC.
Hoog, A.H.B, de, Hartog, D.N., den, Koopman, P.L. (2005). Linking the Big Five-Factors
of personality to charismatic and transactional leadership; perceived dynamic work
environment as moderator. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 26, pp. 839 – 865.
John, O.P., Srivastava, S. (1999, March 5). The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy; History, Measurement,
and Theoretical Perspectives, to appear in Pervin and Johns Handbook of Personality; Theory
and Research, 2nd edition, New York.
Judge, T.A., Higgins, C.A., Thoresen, C.J., Barrick, M.R. (Autumn 1999). The Big Five
Personality Traits, General Mental Ability, and Career Success across the Life Span.
Personnel Psychology, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 621 – 652.
63
References
Lombardo, M.M., Eichinger, R.W. (1995). Preventing derailment: what to do before it’s too late?
Greensboro, North Carolina: Centre for Creative Learning.
Lombardo, M.M., Ruderman, M.N., McCauley, D. (1988, March). Explanations of success
and derailment in upper-level management positions. Journal of Business and Psychology, vol. 2,
no. 3, pp. 199 – 216.
McCall, M.W., Lombardo, M.M. (1983). What makes a top executive? Psychology Today, vol.
17, no. 2, pp 26-31.
McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T. Jr. (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York The Guildford Press.
Mohberg, D.J. (April 1999). The Big Five and Organizational Virtue. Business Ethics
Quarterly, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 245 – 272.
Morrison, A.M., White, R.P., Van Velsor, E. (1992). Breaking the glass ceiling: can women reach
the top of America’s largest corporations? Updated edition. Reading, Massachusetts: AddisonWesley.
Najar, M.J, Holland, B.D, Van Landuyt, C.R. (2004). Individual differences in leadership
derailment. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, Chicago, Illinois, April 2, 2004.
Ready, D.A., Conger, J.A. (2007, June). Make Your Company a Talent Factory. Harvard
Business Review, pp. 68 - 77.
Schmitt, D.P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., Allik, J. (2008). Why can't a man be more like a
woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, vol. 94, pp. 168 - 182.
Robie, C., Brown, D.J., Bly, P.R. (2008, March). Relationship Between Major Personality
Traits and Managerial Performance; Moderating Effects of Derailing Traits. International
Journal of Management, vol. 25, no.1, pp. 131 - 139.
64
References
Salgado, J.F. (2005). Personality and Social Desirability in Organizational Settings: Practical
Implications for Work and Organizational Psychology. Papeles del Psicólogo, Special Edition,
vol. 26, pp. 115 – 128 (English translation).
Srivastava, S. (2009). Measuring the Big Five Personality Factors. Retrieved November 2009
from http://www.uoregon.edu/~sanjay/bigfive.html.
Srivastava, S., John, O.P., Gosling, S.D., Potter, J. (2003). Development of personality in
early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, vol. 84, pp. 1041 – 1053.
Tett, R.P., Jackson, D.N., Rothstein, M. (1999). Personality Measures as Predictors of Job
Performance: A Meta-Analytic Review. Personnel Psychology, no. 44, pp. 703 – 742.
Uren, L., Jackson, S., (2007, March / April). From Talent compliance to talent
commitment. Strategic HR Review, vol. 6, issue 3, pp. 32 - 35.
Van der Sluis, L.E.C. (2007, March). Umbrella for Research into Human Resource
Development (HRD). Human Resource Development International, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 99 - 106.
Van der Sluis, L.E.C. (2008, October 27). Talent management in strategisch perspectief. Breukelen:
Nyenrode Business Universiteit.
Van Zyl, J.H.C. (2000). Executive derailment. Unpublished MBA study report, University of
Stellenbosch.
Widiger, A.A., Trull, T.J., Clarkin, J.F., Sanderson C., Costa, P.T., Jr. (1994). A Description of
the DSM-III-R and SDSM-IV Personality Disorders with the Five Factor Model of Personality.
Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Wolfe, I.S., (2008, October). Shedding light on the Dark Side of Personality,
Business2Bussiness.
65
7. Appendices
Appendix A: Questionnaire and Results
Thank you for participating in this research survey concerning the influence of the financial
crisis on Talent Management processes and more specifically, on the criteria involved when
recruiting, selecting and developing management and leadership talent and the associated
desired profile. This survey consists of four parts and will take a maximum of 15 minutes
of your time. Please indicate to which extent you agree with the following statements or to
which degree these statements apply to your organization. In the interest of the research we
ask you to first answer a few general questions. Your answers will be treated with
confidentiality.
I – INTRODUCTION QUESTIONS
Question 1) What type of function do you hold?
Talent management / HR
Linemanagement
Topmanagement
Other
20,9%
6,0%
55,2%
17,9%
„Other‟ consisted of:

Coach


Coach/ Sr. Consultant


Commercial Manager

Corporate Finance Professional 


Top manager

HR Manager France & Benelux 


Line manager and Talent
Management/ HR
66
Manager Management
Development
Organization Consultant
Senior Consultant/ Specialist
Strategy Consultant
Trainer/ Coach/ Consultant
Psychologist
Appendices
Question 2) In what line of business do you work?
50
Percent
40
30
43,3%
20
10
14,9%
11,9%
9,0%
9,0%
6,0%
0
Retailtrade






3,0%
1,5%
Financial
Services
Industry
IT
1,5%
Not for
profit
„Other‟ consisted of:
Energy
Logistics & Transport
Education & Research
Pharmaceutical industry
Transport
„As broad as possible‟
67
Government
Technical
Business
Services
Other
Appendices
Question 3) How many employees does your organization consist of?
Question 4) What is your organization’s yearly turnover?
60
50
Percent
40
30
55,2%
20
10
14,9%
10,4%
6,0%
6,0%
4,5%
3,0%
0
Less than € 1 €1 to €5 million
million
€5 to €10
million
€10 to €20
million
68
€20 to €30
million
€30 to €50
million
More than €50
million
Appendices
Question 5) What age bracket applies to you?
Question 6) What is your highest completed education?
50
Percent
40
30
49,3%
20
29,9%
10
0
19,4%
1,5%
Other
Higher Vocational
Education (HBO)
Higher Education (WO)
„Other‟ consisted of: Chartered Accountant
69
Higher Education (WO+)
Appendices
Question 7) What is your gender?
Male
Female
41,8%
58,2%
70
Appendices
II - POSITIVE PERSONALITY TRAITS ‘THE BIG FIVE’
Questions 8 - 12: OPENNESS
Openness definition: individuals that score high on the personality trait Openness possess a
inquisitive nature / have interests in a broad range of subjects and a lively fantasy, and are
open to new experiences.
Descript ive Statistics
N
Within my organiz ation the
pers onality tr ait
OPENNESS is s een as
des irable.
Within my organiz ation the
pers onality tr ait
OPENNESS is
s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Manager s and Ex ec utives
s how high lev els of
OPENNESS.
Within my organiz ation it
will be inc reasingly
important that Managers
and Ex ec utiv es s how high
lev els of OPENNESS.
Due to the financ ial c risis
the personality trait
OPENNESS has
inc reas ed in importance
within my organiz ation
(acc ording to me) .
Due to the financ ial c risis
the personality trait
OPENNESS has
inc reas ed in importance
within my organiz ation
(acc ording to my
organiz ation).
Valid N (listwise)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. Deviation
67
2
7
6,04
,960
67
2
7
5,31
1,339
67
1
7
4,72
1,277
67
4
7
6,27
,750
67
1
7
4,55
1,743
67
1
7
4,57
1,530
67
Openness
60,00%
50,00%
Totally disagree
40,00%
Disagree
Somewhat disagree
30,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
Agree
20,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
71
Q6
Appendices
Questions 13 - 17: CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
Conscientiousness definition: individuals who score high on the personality trait
Conscientiousness are careful, serious, responsible, orderly and are well organized and want
to achieve set goals.
D escriptive Stat istics
N
Within my or ganiz ation the
pers onality trait
C ON SC IENTIOU SN ESS
is s een as desirable.
Within my or ganiz ation the
pers onality trait
C ON SC IENTIOU SN ESS
is s timulated.
Within my or ganiz ation
Managers and Ex ec utiv es
s how high lev els of
C ON SC IENTIOU SN ESS.
Within my or ganiz ation it
w ill be inc reas ingly
important that Managers
and Ex ec utiv es s how high
levels of
C ON SC IENTIOU SN ESS.
D ue to the financ ial c risis
the pers onality trait
C ON SC IENTIOU SN ESS
has inc reas ed in
importanc e w ithin my
organiz ation (ac c ording to
me) .
D ue to the financ ial c risis
the pers onality trait
C ON SC IENTIOU SN ESS
has inc reas ed in
importanc e w ithin my
organiz ation (ac c ording to
my organization) .
Valid N (lis twis e)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. Dev iation
67
3
7
5,96
,960
67
3
7
5,66
1,095
67
2
7
4,96
1,284
67
3
7
5,91
1,026
67
1
7
4,70
1,528
67
1
7
4,78
1,555
67
Conscientiousness
60,00%
50,00%
Totally disagree
40,00%
Disagree
Somewhat disagree
30,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
Agree
20,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
72
Q6
Appendices
Questions 18 - 22: EXTRAVERSION
Extraversion definition: individuals who score high on the personality trait Extraversion
like to draw attention to themselves, have a dominant presence, are active and energetic.
Descriptive Statist ics
N
Within my organiz ation
the pers onality trait
EXTRAVER SION is s een
as des ir able.
Within my organiz ation
the pers onality trait
EXTRAVER SION is
s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Managers and
Ex ecutiv es show high
lev els of
EXTRAVER SION.
Within my organiz ation it
will be incr eas ingly
important that Managers
and Ex ecutives s how
high lev els of
EXTRAVER SION.
Due to the financ ial c risis
the pers onality trait
EXTRAVER SION has
inc r eas ed in importance
within my or ganiz ation
(ac c ording to me).
Due to the financ ial c risis
the pers onality trait
EXTRAVER SION has
inc r eas ed in importance
within my or ganiz ation
(ac c ording to my
organiz ation).
Valid N ( lis tw is e)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. Dev iation
67
1
7
5,19
1,294
67
1
7
4,93
1,407
67
1
7
5,10
1,383
67
2
7
4,96
1,296
67
1
7
3,99
1,441
67
1
7
4,15
1,438
67
Extraversion
50,00%
45,00%
40,00%
Totally disagree
35,00%
Disagree
30,00%
Somewhat disagree
25,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
20,00%
Agree
15,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
73
Q6
Appendices
Questions 23 - 27: AGREEABLENESS
Agreeableness definition: individuals who score high on the personality trait Agreeableness
are described as trustworthy, compassionate, pleasant to work with, conflict averse and
willing to compromise their interests.
Descriptive Statistics
N
Within my organiz ation the
personality tr ait
AGREEABLENESS is
s een as des irable.
Within my organiz ation the
personality tr ait
AGREEABLENESS is
s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Managers and Ex ecutiv es
s how high lev els of
AGREEABLENESS.
Within my organiz ation it
will be inc reasingly
impor tant that Managers
and Exec utiv es show high
lev els of
AGREEABLENESS.
Due to the financ ial cr is is
the pers onality trait
AGREEABLENESS has
inc reas ed in importanc e
within my organization
(ac cording to me).
Due to the financ ial cr is is
the pers onality trait
AGREEABLENESS has
inc reas ed in importanc e
within my organization
(ac cording to my
organiz ation).
Valid N (lis twise)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. D ev iation
67
2
7
5,10
1,269
67
1
7
4,85
1,317
67
2
7
5,16
1,109
67
2
7
4,67
1,364
67
1
7
3,76
1,538
67
1
7
3,93
1,428
67
Agreeableness
50,00%
45,00%
40,00%
Totally disagree
35,00%
Disagree
30,00%
Somewhat disagree
25,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
20,00%
Agree
15,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
74
Q6
Appendices
Questions 28 - 32: EMOTIONAL STABILITY
Emotional Stability definition: individuals who score high on the personality trait
Emotionally Stability are described as being emotional robust also in stressful situations, act
on the basis of facts and not on the basis of feelings, en have a healthy doses of self
confidence.
D escript ive Statistics
N
Within my organiz ation
the pers onality tr ait
EMOTION AL STABILITY
is s een as des irable.
Within my organiz ation
the pers onality tr ait
EMOTION AL STABILITY
is s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Manager s and
Ex ec utiv es show high
lev els of EMOTION AL
STABILITY.
Within my organiz ation it
w ill be inc r eas ingly
important that Manager s
and Ex ec utives s how
high lev els of
EMOTION AL STABILITY.
D ue to the financ ial cr is is
the pers onality tr ait
EMOTION AL STABILITY
has inc reas ed in
importanc e within my
organiz ation ( ac c ording
to me).
D ue to the financ ial cr is is
the pers onality tr ait
EMOTION AL STABILITY
has inc reas ed in
importanc e within my
organiz ation ( ac c ording
to my or ganiz ation) .
Valid N (lis tw is e)
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Dev iation
67
2
7
5,76
1,074
67
2
7
5,12
1,343
67
2
7
4,87
1,278
67
2
7
5,69
1,157
67
1
7
4,66
1,647
67
1
7
4,66
1,553
67
Emotional Stability
50,00%
45,00%
40,00%
Totally disagree
35,00%
Disagree
30,00%
Somewhat disagree
25,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
20,00%
Agree
15,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
75
Q6
Appendices
III - NEGATIVE PERSONALITY TRAITS ‘DERAILING TRAITS’
Questions 33 - 37: EGO-CENTEREDNESS
Ego-centeredness definition: Ego-centeredness is the decreased ability to sympathize with
feelings or the perspective of others, centralizing one‟s own vision and needs and assuming
that that vision is shared by others.
D escriptive St atist ics
N
W ithin my orga niz ation
the per s onality tra it
EGO-C EN TER ED N ESS
is s een as und es irable.
W ithin my orga niz ation
the per s onality tra it
EGO-C EN TER ED N ESS
is s timulated.
W ithin my orga niz ation
Manag ers and
Ex e c utiv e s s how high
lev els of
EGO-C EN TER ED N ESS.
W ithin my orga niz ation it
w ill be inc re as ingly
important that Man ager s
and Ex ec utiv es s how low
lev els of
EGO-C EN TER ED N ESS.
D ue to the financ ial c ris is
the atte ntion for the
neg ativ e effec ts of the
per s onality tr ait
EGO-C EN TER ED N ESS
has inc r eas ed w ithin my
or ganiz ation (ac c ording
to me).
D ue to the financ ial c ris is
the atte ntion for the
neg ativ e effec ts of the
per s onality tr ait
EGO-C EN TER ED N ESS
has inc r eas ed w ithin my
or ganiz ation (ac c ording
to my o rgan iz a tion) .
Valid N ( lis tw is e)
Minimu m
Max imum
Mean
Std. De v ia tion
67
2
7
5,45
1,407
67
1
7
2,67
1,429
67
1
7
3,82
1,714
67
1
7
5,54
1,374
67
1
7
4,06
1,774
67
1
7
4,10
1,643
67
Ego-centeredness
60,00%
50,00%
Totally disagree
40,00%
Disagree
Somewhat disagree
30,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
Agree
20,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
76
Q6
Appendices
Questions 38 - 42: INTIMIDATING
Intimidating definition: This management style is characterized by fear and the attack is
used to justify one‟s own vision. By using threats others are brought out of balance.
Descript ive Statistics
N
Within my organiz ation the
tendency to INTIMIDATE is
s een as undesirable.
Within my organiz ation the
tendency to INTIMIDATE is
s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Manager s and Ex ec utives
s how high lev els of
INTIMIDATION.
Within my organiz ation it
will be inc reasingly
important that Managers
and Ex ec utiv es s how low
lev els of INTIMIDATION.
Due to the financ ial c risis
the attention for the
negative effec ts of
INTIMIDATION has
inc reas ed within my
organiz ation (ac c ording to
me).
Due to the financ ial c risis
the attention for the
negative effec ts of
INTIMIDATION has
inc reas ed within my
organiz ation (ac c ording to
my organization).
Valid N (listwise)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. Deviation
67
1
7
5,97
1,487
67
1
7
2,12
1,472
67
1
7
2,87
1,705
67
1
7
5,97
1,291
67
1
7
3,45
1,654
67
1
7
3,52
1,599
67
Intimidation
60,00%
50,00%
Totally disagree
40,00%
Disagree
Somewhat disagree
30,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
Agree
20,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
77
Q6
Appendices
Questions 43-47: MANIPULATING
Manipulating definition: This management style is aimed at forcing one‟s own way unto
others, deceive and manipulate individuals and their feelings in order to gain a superior
position and power.
Descriptive Statistics
N
Within my organiz ation the
tendenc y to MAN IPULATE
is s een as undesirable.
Within my organiz ation the
tendenc y to MAN IPULATE
is s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Managers and Ex ecutiv es
s how high lev els of
MANIPULATION .
Within my organiz ation it
will be inc reasingly
impor tant that Managers
and Exec utiv es show low
lev els of MANIPU LATION.
Due to the financ ial cr is is
the attention for the
negativ e effec ts of
MANIPULATION has
inc reas ed within my
organiz ation (ac c ording to
me).
Due to the financ ial cr is is
the attention for the
negativ e effec ts of
MANIPULATION has
inc reas ed within my
organiz ation (ac c ording to
my or ganiz ation).
Valid N (lis twise)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. D ev iation
67
1
7
5,10
1,892
67
1
7
2,57
1,578
67
1
7
3,57
1,708
67
1
7
5,45
1,500
67
1
7
3,61
1,576
67
1
7
3,69
1,607
67
Manipulation
45,00%
40,00%
35,00%
Totally disagree
30,00%
Disagree
Somewhat disagree
25,00%
Neutral
20,00%
Somewhat agree
Agree
15,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
78
Q6
Appendices
Questions 48-52: MICRO-MANAGING
Micro-managing definition: this management style is characterized by the inability to
delegate or trusting a task to someone else, primary force is lack of confidence.
D escriptive St at ist ics
N
Within my organiz ation
the tendenc y to
MIC RO-MANAGE is s een
as undes irable.
Within my organiz ation
the tendenc y to
MIC RO-MANAGE is
s timulated.
Within my organiz ation
Managers and
Ex ec utiv es s how high
levels of
MIC RO-MANAGEMENT.
Within my organiz ation it
w ill be inc reas ingly
important that Managers
and Ex ec utiv es s how low
levels of
MIC RO-MANAGEMENT.
D ue to the financ ial c ris is
the attention for the
negativ e effec ts of
MIC RO-MANAGEMENT
has inc reas ed w ithin my
organization (ac c ording
to me).
D ue to the financ ial c ris is
the attention for the
negativ e effec ts of
MIC RO-MANAGEMENT
has inc reas ed w ithin my
organization (ac c ording
to my organiz ation).
Valid N (lis twis e)
Minimum
Max imum
Mean
Std. Dev iation
67
1
7
5,18
1,651
67
1
6
2,94
1,660
67
1
7
4,09
1,840
67
1
7
5,75
1,295
67
1
7
3,55
1,569
67
1
7
3,60
1,457
67
Micro-managing
50,00%
45,00%
40,00%
Totally disagree
35,00%
Disagree
30,00%
Somewhat disagree
25,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
20,00%
Agree
15,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
5,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
79
Q6
Appendices
Questions 53-57: PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE
Passive-aggressive definition: This management style is characterized by touchy and
stubborn behavior that is shown by means of resistance, procrastinating, putting things off
till later of simply deliberate/repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one
is responsible but feels that these tasks are unreasonable.
D escript ive St atistics
N
Within my orga niz ation
PASSIVE- AGGR ESSIVE
behav ior is s een as
undes ira ble.
Within my orga niz ation
PASSIVE- AGGR ESSIVE
behav ior is s timulated .
Within my orga niz ation
Manager s and Ex ec u tiv es
s how hig h lev els of
PASSIVE- AGGR ESSIVE
behav ior .
Within my orga niz ation it
w ill be inc r eas ingly
imp ortant that Manage rs
and Ex ec utiv es s how low
lev els of
PASSIVE- AGGR ESSIVE
behav ior .
D ue to the financ ial c r is is
the attention for the
negativ e effec ts of
PASSIVE- AGGR ESSIVE
behav ior has inc reas ed
w ithin my or ganiz ation
(ac c ording to me).
D ue to the financ ial c r is is
the attention for the
negativ e effec ts of
PASSIVE- AGGR ESSIVE
behav ior has inc reas ed
w ithin my or ganiz ation
(ac c ording to my
org aniz a tion).
Valid N (lis tw is e)
Min imum
Max imum
Mean
Std. D ev iation
67
1
7
5,96
1,261
67
1
7
2,27
1,523
67
1
6
2,99
1,647
67
1
7
5,70
1,404
67
1
7
3,72
1,650
67
1
7
3,72
1,613
67
Passive-aggressive
60,00%
50,00%
Totally disagree
40,00%
Disagree
Somewhat disagree
30,00%
Neutral
Somewhat agree
Agree
20,00%
Totally agree
10,00%
0,00%
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
IV - ORGANIZATION & POLICY
80
Q6
Appendices
Question 58) Within my organization, Talent Management is of great strategic
importance:
(seven point Likert scale)
6,4
6,21
6,19
6,2
6
5,82
5,8
5,6
5,42
5,4
5,2
5
According to me
According to Talent
Management/ HR
According to
Linemanagement
According to
Topmanagement
Question 59) Over the last two years, the importance of Talent Management in my
organization has:
(Closed question)
70,0
59,7
60,0
61,2
58,2
50,0
44,8
47,8
38,8
40,0
34,3
32,8
30,0
20,0
10,0
7,5
7,5
4,5
3,0
Accourding to me
According to Talent
Management/ HR
According to
Linemanagement
increased
styed the
same
decreased
increased
styed the
same
decreased
increased
styed the
same
decreased
increased
styed the
same
decreased
0,0
According to
Topmanagement
Question 60) My organization identifies management- and leadership potential on
the basis of:
81
Appendices
(Multiple answers possible)
O
th
er
Po
As
te
se
nt
ss
ia
m
l
en
tr
es
Pe
ul
rs
ts
on
al
it y
tra
it s
Am
bi
tio
Se
n
lfkn
ow
le
dg
Pe
e
rs
ev
er
an
Co
ce
m
pe
te
nc
ie
s
Ap
pe
ar
an
ce
Pe
rfo
rm
an
ce
90,0%
80,0%
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
„Other‟ consisted of:

Behavior

Cultural fit

Geographic mobility and the drive and possibility to work long hours

Personal click

Education

Extracurricular activities

For certain performance you need certain skills
Question 61) Does your organization, while assessing management- and leadership
potential pay attention to the personality traits of the Big Five? If so, please indicate
below which traits are used in the assessment?
(Multiple answers possible)
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
Em
ot
io
82
No
na
lS
ta
bi
lit
y
en
es
s
Ag
re
ea
bl
on
Ex
tra
ve
rs
i
en
t io
us
ne
ss
Co
ns
ci
O
pe
nn
es
s
0,0%
Appendices
Question 62) Does your organization while assessing management- and leadership
potential pay attention to the Derailing personality traits? If so, please indicate
below which traits are used in the assessment?
(Multiple answers possible)
om
M
No
e
Pa
ss
i
icr
ve
-a
gg
re
ss
iv
an
ag
in
g
n
at
io
M
an
ip
ul
id
at
io
n
In
tim
Eg
oce
nt
er
ed
ne
ss
90,0%
80,0%
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
Question 63) My organization is actively involved in trying to retain management
and leadership talents.
(seven-point Likert scale)
Descriptive Statistics
N
My organization is
actively involved in the
development of
management and
leadership’s talents.
Valid N (listwise)
67
Minimum
Maximum
1
7
Mean
4,76
Std. Deviation
1,750
67
Question 64) My organization is actively involved in the development of
management and leadership’s talents.
(seven-point Likert scale)
Descriptive Statistics
N
My organization is
actively involved in the
development of
management and
leadership’s talents.
Valid N (listwise)
67
Minimum
Maximum
1
7
67
83
Mean
5,25
Std. Deviation
1,608
Appendices
Question 65) Within my organization the following internal processes and policies
focus on the development of management and leadership talents:
(multiple answers possible)
70,0%
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
„Other‟ consisted of:
Exit policy
Line management
Not applicable
Other
Strategic
management
Talent
Management
& HR policies
Training and
development
policies
Management
development
policies
Moving up &
appointment
processes
Recruitment
& selection
processes
0,0%
Not entirely
Personal preferences
Question 66) Within my organization the following tool(s) is (are) used to monitor
management and leadership talents:
(multiple answers possible)
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
Performance
management
system
Talent management
system
HR tools &
methods
Other
„Other‟ consisted of:

General feeling

Discussion

Individual coaching, assessment interview, performance interview, development
interview
84
Appendices










Inventory of leadership talent through yearly Round Tables
On individual basis
Personal discussion and coaching
Personal assessment
Regular discussions between employee and manager
Via HR discussion cycle
Self assessment and assessment by colleagues
Not applicable
Not (2x)
Unknown
Question 67) Within my organization is the following department(s) is (are)
explicitly responsible to decide on desired management and leadership profiles:
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
0,0%
Talent Management Line management
& HR
Top management
„Other‟ consisted of:

The group, we are all partners

Top management responsible for HR

HR/ TM advises top management, who will eventually decide

Line management and Talent Management together

Not applicable
85
Other
Appendices
Question 68) Within my organization the profile of management and leadership
talents has been altered to reflect a more desirable profile due to the financial crisis.
Yes
No
19,4%
80,6%
Question 69) If you have answered Question 68 affirmative, please fill out the
following questions. Otherwise please proceed to Question 70.
69.a) Who or which department has altered the profile(s) as described in Question 68?




Top management (4 times)
HR (3 times)
Board of Directors and HR (2 times)
Board of Directors and Leadership development
69.b) At which level of the organization have the profile(s) been altered?





Top management (5 times)
Top management and line management (2 times)
Higher and middle management (2 times)
Top 200 level (new leaderships profile under construction which will serve as a
reverence point for all management roles)
More focus on profile middle management, also on influences from environment e.g.
management, market, self reflection
86
Appendices
69.c) What are the most important changes to the profile(s)?













Shift in focus to managing people in the market; processes should be supporting
instead of leading
Ability to make decisions
More focus on ability to make decisions, ability to connect and personal leadership
Competences adjusted
Functional competencies; positive personality traits
Leadership accountability
More conscientiousness, more business sense
More focus on business development / acquisition
More result driven, broader scope (more responsibility within organizational levels)
Addition of competencies
No changes in desirable behavior
Under construction
Unknown
69.d) „Other‟ consisted of:

This is not addressed, I do not know the details
Question 70) Has the evaluation of the management and leadership talent(s) in
your organization changed since the start of the financial crisis?
Yes
No
20,9%
79,1%
87
Appendices
Question 71) If you have answered Question 70 affirmative, please fill out the
following questions. Otherwise please proceed to Question 72.
71.a) Who or which department has altered the evaluation of management and leadership
talent(s) as described in Q70?


Top management (8 times)
Top management in consultation with HR (2 times)
71.b) At which level of the organization have the evaluation(s) been altered?





Top management (5 times)
Middle management (2 times)
Line management
Specialists
Not yet, is being debated
71.c) What are the most important changes to the evaluations(s)?







Stricter as a result less people are seen as exceptionally talented
More focus on results, broader scope (more responsibilities in certain management
levels), more action if people do not perform
Leadership, accountability / consequence management
More critical, more focus on performance and results
Strong task orientation
Able to simplify processes and commercial activities in order to be more transparent
to customers
More entrepreneurship needed
71.d) „Other‟ consisted of:

This is not addressed, I do not know the details
Question 72) Within my organization the following alterations to Talent
Management processes have taken place due to the financial crisis:
The method of assessment of current employees on top functions
The number of assessments of new hires
The number of assessments of managers within the organization
The requirements of new hires
The content of leadership programs
The content of trainee programs
Budgets have been adjusted
No changes
„Other‟
88
Appendices
60,0%
50,0%
40,0%
30,0%
20,0%
10,0%
Other
Budgets have
been adjusted
Content of
leadership
programs
Number of
assessments
of managers
Method of
assessment
of current
0,0%
Question 73) If you have answered Question 72 affirmative, please indicate which
alterations to Talent Management process have taken place. Otherwise please
proceed to Question 74.
73.a) The method of assessment of current employees on top functions.








Now assessments are conducted, as opposed to no assessments before
Hiring of an external agency
Stricter review of talents
People stay longer in a certain function
New profile and assignment/ work with „must haves‟ on the basis of experience and
competencies
Periodical review of management in combination with possible changes in
assignment
Stricter on results and keeping promises
Added competencies
73.b) the number of assessments of new hires





Amount of assessments has increased enormously
Less new hires
Less assessments because of the costs
Changed selection procedure; assessment is not standard anymore
Recruitment targets have decreased, but assessment is the same
73.c) the number of assessments of managers within the organization

There were less management roles available
89
Appendices



More assessments take place
These decreased because of less new hires
Less people attended leadership programs, those programs did not change though
73.d) the requirements of new hires








Focus on people that make a difference; more attention for leadership qualities
No concessions concerning the desired profile: both personal as factual personality
traits
Added competencies
Has become stricter
Demands on new personnel have increased during the crisis
Focus is more on the outside world and the business
Specific knowledge is demanded instead of a more generic profile, which is
„learnable‟
Being able to take task responsibility in the broad field of people management,
operational management concerning personnel policy
73.e) the content of leadership programs









Adjusted on finance, risk management, resilience, trust
Focus on management in times of crisis and personal leadership
Are more focused on customer-orientation, both internal and external
More focused on desired behavior
More focused on learning- and change capabilities
More focused on transparent decision making
New Management Development program is focused on practice
Is under construction
These trainings have been cancelled
73.f) the content of trainee program



New trainee program has been developed in preparation of economic recovery
Is under construction
None
73.g) budgets have been adjusted: more or less budget is available







Less (5)
All budgets have been adjusted downward
Budget for education, development, and recruitment have diminished to 0
Less, but leadership programs have more participants
Budgets for education and recruitment have diminished
Development budget has changed
More (2)
90
Appendices
Question 74) What aspects concerning personality traits of management and
leadership talents are underexposed in your organization (according to you)?





































Empathy
Balance
None, there is already too much being expected
Reciprocal evaluation
Personal attention, friendliness, balance
Result-orientation, decisiveness and guts
Self-knowledge, working in and as a team
People-orientation, situational leadership
Technical knowledge
Visionary leadership
Making the connection with people/ talents, driven by interest in people
Authenticity, trust, listening
Ambition, potential for growth, recognition of talent
Humane traits such as friendliness, sympathy, that make an ordinary manager a
people manager. There is enough formal attention for this, but the informal culture
annuls this.
Authenticity, emotional stability
Emotional stability
Creativity, innovation, and giving constructive feedback
Learning and innovative ability, style-flexibility
Ability to self-reflect, impact of own behavior on others, relationship management,
Responsibility, authenticity.
Ability to handle Power and Politics, people management, being fair and straight
Ability to investigate, creativity
Creativity, extraversion
Balance
Attention for the human being: accept and stimulate out-of-the-box thinking
Make self-regulation by employees possible, personal flexibility of secondary benefit
program, ability to balance work and life, people-orientation of management.
Openness, respect
Communication, individual coaching
The Big Five and Derailing Traits are not recognized and mentioned as such
On a daily basis we stress the importance of character traits and in that sense also all
traits in one team.
Motivation, motivators, energy, vision on relationships and performance, etc.
On the basis of the questionnaire, at least the Big Five
Serving management is in design phase but must still be realized
Ego-centrism
The more soft/ feminine traits are undervalued. I am a supporter of diversity in
leadership styles in the organization.
Make more specific profiles of functions within the organization
Listening
For Talent Management a leadership style of trust is required (not control), forms of
strategy and vision, looking ahead and stating clear goals, team development
91
Appendices



Giving sincere feedback, looking for tension and stretch in development
The role of developer, the role of a leader who doesn‟t mind that his employees will
eventually pass him by
Stimulating exemplary behavior
Question 75) What extra information would you like to provide your organization
with in order for the organization to be able to optimize Talent Management?




















Practice what you preach
More training on the Big Five
More systematic in evaluation and more intervision on difficult courses
Select on the basis of the mentioned traits and training in this field
Make it a USP
Focus on Talent Development of employees
More attention for employee, create more open seats at the top. In the Board of
Directors of our organization there are only external directors. None comes from the
organization itself, which is a bad thing
More focus on medium- to long term thinking (opportunities and threats)
1)The basis of Talent Management should be to really know the talents. 2) Talent
Management should be capable of guiding talent and to stimulate in „surprising
choices‟ 3) Talent Management should be able to advise top management on possible
matches by really knowing the talents.
Engage in discussions and have faith
Consider setting up Talent Management seriously
I would like to formalize and optimize the positions of HR and Talent Management
in order to ban the old boys‟ network
Secure authenticity
Don‟t just talk about talents, but do something with the results. Also when a
pandemic as H1N1 comes by.
Just continue
Give managers the opportunity to serve the market as they see fit: stimulate
innovation and creativity. Manage when necessary, instead of too loose of too tight.
Learning, as managers, that giving constructive feedback is a chance to develop
people. Safe environment: making mistakes is allowed as long as people learn from
them.
Dare to take risks: dare to experiment by place less obvious people in certain
positions.
Top management should take ownership of key talent. Mobility should be increased.
Design frameworks for Talent Management, develop a structure/ policy and career
paths from low to high and from high to low.
Research open and creative among employees. Start for example with an earlier
obtained competence test also for the people who are not openly ambitious. Create
consciousness about talents (also horizontal talents: specialists). Teach people to talk,
listen and research. Do not judge on the basis of clinical competence tests and allow
people their imperfections. The individual can learn and always has imperfections.
Judging someone in an early stage does not allow learning to take place (for example
in strict competence management followed by an evaluation.
92
Appendices




















More attention for concrete behavior of managers
Let attracting, developing and flow of talent be part of the evaluation criteria of line
management.
Look at the self development of employees and stimulate it in favor of the
organization. Throw away all systems and technocracy because the organization can
hide itself behind that.
Reserve jobs for talents on all levels
Start formalizing Talent Management (goals, policy, responsibilities and budget).
Let go of micro-management and do not bring bad experiences from the past
concerning talents into the future.
Select on the basis of personality traits and not on competencies. However, for this it
is necessary to take certain daring steps: ability and drive to evaluate on behavior
instead of function-related criteria.
These days, diversity within the organization is less about the balance male-female,
native-immigrant, but more in the field of background and education. People are still
somewhat suspicious about people that went to university. This makes it hard to
acquire and keep talents within the organization.
Strong focus on top talent for top positions and linking development to strategy of
the company.
More focus on the organization and less on oneself
More diversity, which means more attention and appreciation for soft skills: selfreflection, empathy, friendliness, openness, and serving management.
Spend more time and attention on it
Record agreements, be open about possibilities
Evaluate managers on the attention they give to the coaching and development of
their employees.
More guts in the evaluation and mobility of employees
Talent Management is not just about following a training, it is much broader.
Dare to differentiate
Get to know each other even better!
The role of developer, the role of a leader who doesn‟t mind that his employees will
eventually pass him by
Stimulating example behavior
You have reached the end of the questionnaire. Thank you very much for your
cooperation!
93
Appendices
Appendix B: List of Participating Organizations
(mogen we de bedrijven dan wel noemen in onze thesis)
ABP Investments
ABN Amro (4)
Adstrat
Ahold
AWVN
Bernhoven
Boertien
British Petrol
Cat
Chestnut
Communicum
Compagnon
Courtesty Masters
Ebbinge
Functiemediair
Gemeente Amersfoort
ING (3)
Hofp.nl
In the Picture Communicatie
Koninklijke Landelijke Politie Dienst
KPN Planet
Manpower
MCA
Medimmune
Minitsterie van Defensie
Nederlandse Spoorwegen
Openbaar Ministerie
Ormit (2)
Philips
Price Waterhouse Coopers
Protiviti
Randstad
Rembrandt FO
Royal Dutch Shell
Siemens
Stork
TNT Post
Tracks
Universiteit Twente
Van der Pool
Van Gansewinkel
VGZ IZA
Vitae (2)
Yacht
94