Role Of Personality And Individual Differences In Motivating Employees In Organizations

The Importance of Personality and Individual Differences in Motivating Employees

Discuss About The Personality Differences In Organisational.

In today’s competitive business world, highly productive and skilled employees provide a competitive advantage to organisations. The corporations focus on motivating their workers in order to improve their performance and achieve desired targets. While implementing motivational strategies, personality and individuals differences play a crucial role in the effectiveness of the motivational policies. Personality is referred to a combination of characteristics or a set of habitual behaviour that forms a person’s distinctive character. It involves cognition, emotional and behavioural patterns that evolve from environmental and biological factors. Individual differences are referred to the deviations and variation among people based on a specific trait or a number of characteristics. It referred to such differences which in totality separates a person from another (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2016). In other words, individual differences are the dissimilarities between the characteristics of people that separate them from one another. Managers should implement policies according to the personality and individual differences of employees in order to improve the effectiveness of a motivational strategy. Organisations which have highly motivated employees are more likely succeed in the industry because they are able to align corporate objectives with employees’ personal goals which assist them in improve their performance and generate a competitive advantage over their competitors (Deci and Ryan, 2012). This report will focus on analysing the role of personality and individuals differences in a company. This report will discuss the relationship between motivation at work and personality and individual difference by analysing different motivational theories. Further, various recommendations will be given in the report for managers to effectively implement motivational strategies after analysing personality and individual differences.

The personality of an employee is referred to a set of characteristics or traits which contributes to a person’s distinct character. Individual differences are referred to differences which separate a person from another based on a set of emotional, behavioural and cognitive traits that are influenced by various biological and environmental factors. Personality is characterised by psychological factors along with behaviour, thoughts, and emotions factors has its merits and limitations while dealing with individual differences (Henle and Gross, 2014). The five-factor model (FFM) or the Big Five personality traits model divides personalities into five fundamental dimensions which include Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism (Emotional stability) and Openness (Figure 1). The acronyms OCEAN often represents this model. Many experts argue that this model is not based on any theoretical evidence or why there are only five personalities. However, a number of studies have supported the evidence that people’s personalities can be categorised into five key factors. Studies indicate a strong relationship between personality and behaviour of employees (Cobb-Clark and Schurer, 2012). Therefore, in order to motivate an employee, managers are requiring implementing policies according to his/her personality which results in improving the effectiveness of motivational strategies.

The Relationship Between Motivation at Work and Personality and Individual Differences

The personality and individual differences matter in a workplace because they affect physical and mental abilities of an individual. Human behaviour is complex in nature, and each individual is different from another. It is necessary that while implementing human resource management (HRM) policies, managers take into consideration personality and individual differences among employees since it affects the effectiveness of their strategies. The organisational behaviour theory assists managers in understanding an employee’s needs and personality which improve the effectiveness of motivational strategy (Wood et al., 2012). Organisational behaviour is referred to the study of human behaviour in a company; it analysis how individual act in an organisation. The success of an organisation depends upon the performance of its employees. In recent years, the demand for highly qualified and skilled workers has increased, especially in the technology field. However, companies face difficulty in hiring or retaining talented employees due to lack of effective HRM practices. The working generation has grown, and now employees include people from Generation Z and Millennial. The HR department finds it difficult to manage these employees because they prefer to work in supportive and positive working environment (Yidong and Xinxin, 2013). They also face difficulty in motivating these employees through traditional methods; therefore, they are required to assess personality and individual differences of employees before implementing motivational policies.

Traditionally, corporations only used monetary incentives to help uplift their employees’ spirits and motivating them to achieve common organisational goals, which are still a good source of motivation. However, research has shown that if companies know what type of projects or working environment is linked to the innate drive of employees, that will result in improving the effectiveness of motivation and it will result in long-term happiness (Gillet et al., 2013). Highly motivated employees are encouraged to achieve organisational objectives, and they perform at their highest capacity. Generally, motivated employees are satisfied with their job because they are able to fulfil their needs through their work. However, the personality of an individual plays a significant role in his/her motivation. Monetary incentives can not motivate each person; it is necessary that managers analyse personality and individual differences of employees in order to motivate them effectively (Santhi, and Menaka, 2017). It also becomes easier for managers to retain motivated employees because their needs are satisfied. Abraham Maslow divided employees’ needs into five categories in ‘Hierarchy of needs theory’ which include physiological, safety, belonging, esteem and self-actualisation (Figure 2). Managers can implement this theory to identify the needs of workers and fulfil them in order to motivate them. Maslow provided that people did not move on down in the list, an employee cannot be motivated by next set of needs until his/her current needs are not satisfied (Jerome, 2013).

Motivational Theories Based on Personality

However, critiques have argued that the hierarchy of needs theory is out-dated, pessimistic and biased towards western cultures and values. Critiques argue that no single motivational theory can motivate each employee because needs of all people are not uninformed and personality and individual differences also influence people’s needs. The theory is not supported by any scientific evidence (Kaur, 2013). Another issue is that Maslow stated that after fulfilling of one need, a person progresses to another. However, once a need is met, it did not simply disappear, rather, there are a number of environmental factors that can make them come back again. Rutledge (2011) criticised the hierarchy of needs theory in her study by stating that people’s needs are not hierarchical, they are rewired due to social media and change in environment. She further stated that Maslow’s did not take into consideration the significance of social collaboration and dependency which are viewed as basic requirements for human survival. The theory neglects to illustrate and expand upon many intellectual and social needs of people which have risen in individualistic and collectivist societies. Rutledge (2011) provided a rewired model of hierarchy of needs theory that is which emphasis on social collaboration and dependency (Figure 3). However, the theory is substantially popular, and it enables large organisations such as Tesco PLC and Kellogg’s to effectively motivate their employees and generate a competitive business advantage.

Many experts and theorists have provided different theories based on personality of employees which assists managers while motivating their employees. Eysenck’s Theory of Personality and Motivation is a good example. The theory divides employee personality into three biological traits which include psychoticism, extroversion and neuroticism. Eysenck provided that a personality is affected by a person’s brain and it is influenced by his/her experiences and interactions (Eysenck, 2013). Eysenck stated that individual differences between different people are result of their brain functions. People who are extroverts are motivated by low arousal level whereas introverts did not seek extra stimulation since they are already satisfied with their situation. While dealing with employees, HR managers should identify their personalities and implement motivational strategies based on their personality traits. It also assists them fulfil their needs which increases the effectiveness of motivational strategies. However, experts have criticised the strategy by stating that it is out-dated and cannot be used in modern organisation. A number of environmental and social factors have influenced the personality of people and managers cannot determine an employee’s personality traits by dealing with them (Verhulst, Eaves and Hatemi, 2012). Managers also face difficulties while implementing this strategy in a large organisation because it is difficult for them to interact with each individual.

Effective Strategies for Implementing Motivational Policies Based on Personality and Individual Differences

In order to effectively motivate employees, managers can also utilise the principles of the five-factor model of personality. While hiring new candidates, HR executives should take note of each employee’s personality traits. Before recruitment and selection process, companies create a job description which helps them understand what kind of person they are looking for and what skills and qualification required (Gardner et al., 2012). By using big five personality traits model, HR department can create a blueprint of the personality that they are looking for in job candidates. For example, they should analyse whether they required a confident manager, programmer or a supervisor for a small team. The HR managers should also match personality traits of current team members to the job applicant in order to ensure the best fit which assists in establishing a positive working environment in the firm. The HR department should also look for personalities that complement and fit into a company’s current culture. It also assists managers in keeping an eye out for people who are suitable for the company’s culture (Judge and Zapata, 2015). By using this theory, employees can pair team members who suit each other’s personality types which enable them to implement one motivational strategy to encourage each one of them to perform better.

However, along with many benefits, there are a number of disadvantages of using big five personality traits model for motivation as well. The main disadvantage of this model is that it cannot accurately predict any single specific behaviour of a person. A person’s behaviour is not entirely based on his/her personality; instead, it is affected by a number of factors. In addition, this model is limited to a broad universalism, and it did not take into consideration factors such as culture, gender, age, race and other personality expressions (Barrick, Mount and Li, 2013). Carol Gilligan, a female psychologist, argued that the theory is male-centric and female extraversion, openness and other personality traits are different than men (Kalsoom et al., 2012). A study conducted by Gurven et al. (2013) on 632 Tsimane members in a small tribe provided that a person who is reserved is also tended to be talkative. The study suggests that the concept of extraversion differs based on cultural factors of a person. Similarly, other personality traits can also differ based on cultural, race, age, or gender-related factors. It is also easier for people to read regarding different personality traits which can hamper their test results. For example, ‘I often feel blue’ question test a person’s neuroticism traits and ‘I believe in the importance of art’ analyse a person’s openness. Therefore, it makes it difficult for HR managers to analyse an employee’s personality accurately which negatively affects the effectiveness of the motivational strategy.

In recent years, managers focus on motivating their employees by aligning organisational goals along with their personal objectives. The personality of a worker influences his/her behaviour and actions, and in order to encourage employees to perform better, managers should focus on their personalities. Individual differences separate employees from each other and managers cannot use a single motivational policy to motivate everyone (Taubman-Ben-Ari and Yehiel, 2012). They should focus on analysing personality traits of each employee and create a motivational strategy according to such traits. For example, employees who prefer appreciation or appraisal cannot be motivated by monetary incentives. The HR managers can use different personality theories in order to assess personality traits of their employees such as big five personality trait model. Many critiques argue against this theory by stating that human nature is complex and it cannot be determined by a theory. In addition, the theory did not take into consideration various crucial factors which influence an employee’s personality such as culture, race, gender, age and religion (Raynor, 2013). However, many large organisations use the principles of this strategy to generate a competitive advantage. The evaluation of each individual’s personality can assist managers in establishing a positive working environment and motivating their employees to perform better and achieve organisational goals.

Following recommendations can assist managers in implementing motivational strategies based on personality traits of employees which improve their effectiveness and provide the corporation a competitive advantage.

Managers who are offering intrinsic or extrinsic rewards in order to motivate employees should not use a single strategy to motivate each worker. They should analyse the needs of employees and their personality traits before offering them rewards. For example, a low-level employee might have an extrovert personality, and in such can, extrinsic rewards are not that effective. Managers should use intrinsic rewards in order to motivate such employee by appreciating his/her hard work in front of other workers which will encourage him along with others to improve their performance.

Gaskell (2016) provided different personality types of employees and how managers can evaluate them to implement appropriate motivational strategies.

• The Defender: These employees seek stability and security in the organisation. In order to motivate them, HR managers should assign them clear roles and set routines that avoid any confusion between them. Regular communication with management also motivates them.
• The Friend: This worker seeks friendship and belongingness in the corporation. These employees feel motivated if the top level management supports them along with their team. In order to motivate them, managers should create a positive and supportive working environment which will encourage them to perform better.
• The Star: These employees seek social esteem, respect and recognition in the firm and they can be motivated if top-level management appreciates their work in front of others and if they are promoted for their hard work.
• The Builder: These employees seek monetary incentives, above the average living and material satisfaction from their work. The HR department can motivate them through extrinsic rewards such as bonuses, monetary rewards, incentive schemes and others.
• The Spirit: They seek autonomy, independence and freedom in their work and prefer to work on their own The top-level management should delegate responsibilities to them and allow them to work autonomously which assist in motivating them and encouraging them to improve their performance.

Conclusion

From the above observations, it can be concluded that personality and individual differences have a significant impact on performance and motivational strategy of an organisation. The HR department can use different personality based theories to implement appropriate policies which focus on motivating employees to improve their performance. The personality of an individual affects his behaviour and actions, therefore, in order to motivate or encourage a worker to achieve organisational goals, the HR managers should take into consideration their personality traits. The report critically analysed two different personality based motivational theories and their influence on employees’ performance. Different recommendations are given in the report which assists managers in motivating their employees through intrinsic and extrinsic rewards based on their personality traits. As per Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory, each individual has different needs, and managers are required to fulfil them in order to motivate their employees. Each employee has different personality traits, and managers should take into consideration these traits in order to effectively motivate their employees. Effective motivational strategies assist managers in improving their performance and generate a competitive advantage which sustains their future growth.

References

Barrick, M.R., Mount, M.K. and Li, N. (2013) The theory of purposeful work behavior: The role of personality, higher-order goals, and job characteristics. Academy of management review, 38(1), pp.132-153.

Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2016) Personality and individual differences. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Cobb-Clark, D.A. and Schurer, S. (2012) The stability of big-five personality traits. Economics Letters, 115(1), pp.11-15.

Cooper, B.B. (2014) How The “Big Five” Personality Traits in Science Can Help you Build a More Effective team. [Online] Buffer. Available at: https://blog.bufferapp.com/how-the-big-five-personality-traits-can-help-you-build-a-more-effective-team [Accessed 4 March 2018].

Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (2012) Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. The Oxford handbook of human motivation, pp.85-107.

Denning, S. (2012) What Maslow Missed. [Online] Forbes. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2012/03/29/what-maslow-missed/#494fa0c8661b [Accessed 4 March 2018].

Eysenck, H.J. (2013) Personality structure and measurement (psychology revivals). Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.

Gardner, W.L., Reithel, B.J., Cogliser, C.C., Walumbwa, F.O. and Foley, R.T. (2012) Matching personality and organizational culture: Effects of recruitment strategy and the Five-Factor Model on subjective person–organization fit. Management Communication Quarterly, 26(4), pp.585-622.

Gaskell, C. (2016) The nine types of employees – and how to motivate them. [Online] The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/careers/2016/may/17/the-nine-types-of-employees-and-how-to-motivate-them [Accessed 4 March 2018].

Gillet, N., Gagné, M., Sauvagère, S. and Fouquereau, E. (2013) The role of supervisor autonomy support, organizational support, and autonomous and controlled motivation in predicting employees’ satisfaction and turnover intentions. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(4), pp.450-460.

Gurven, M., Von Rueden, C., Massenkoff, M., Kaplan, H. and Lero Vie, M. (2013) How universal is the Big Five? Testing the five-factor model of personality variation among forager–farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of personality and social psychology, 104(2), p.354.

Henle, C.A. and Gross, M.A. (2014) What have I done to deserve this? Effects of employee personality and emotion on abusive supervision. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(3), pp.461-474.

Jerome, N. (2013) Application of the Maslow’s hierarchy of need theory; impacts and implications on organizational culture, human resource and employee’s performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(3), pp.39-45.

Judge, T.A. and Zapata, C.P. (2015) The person–situation debate revisited: Effect of situation strength and trait activation on the validity of the Big Five personality traits in predicting job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), pp.1149-1179.

Kalsoom, F., Behlol, M.G., Kayani, M.M. and Kaini, A. (2012) The moral reasoning of adolescent boys and girls in the light of Gilligan’s theory. International Education Studies, 5(3), p.15.

Kaur, A. (2013) Maslow’s need hierarchy theory: Applications and criticisms. Global Journal of Management and Business Studies, 3(10), pp.1061-1064.

McLeod, S. (2017) Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. [Online] Simply Psychology. Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html [Accessed 4 March 2018].

Raynor, J.O. (2013) Future orientation and achievement motivation: Toward a theory of personality functioning and change. In Cognition in human motivation and learning (pp. 213-246). Psychology Press.

Rutledge, P.B. (2011) Social Networks: What Maslow Misses. [Online] Psychology Today. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/positively-media/201111/social-networks-what-maslow-misses-0 [Accessed 4 March 2018].

Santhi, V and Menaka, G. (2017) Personality and Individual Differences in Organisational Behaviour. International Journal of Current Research, 9(6), pp.52825-52828. Available at: https://www.journalcra.com/sites/default/files/22698.pdf [Accessed 4 March 2018].

Taubman-Ben-Ari, O. and Yehiel, D. (2012) Driving styles and their associations with personality and motivation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45, pp.416-422.

Verhulst, B., Eaves, L.J. and Hatemi, P.K. (2012) Correlation not causation: The relationship between personality traits and political ideologies. American journal of political science, 56(1), pp.34-51.

Wood, J., Zeffane, R., Fromholtz, M., Wiesner, R., Morrison, R. and Seet, P.S. (2012) Organisational behaviour: Core concepts and applications. Milton QLD: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd..

Yidong, T. and Xinxin, L. (2013) How ethical leadership influence employees’ innovative work behavior: A perspective of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(2), pp.441-455.