CRITICAL ARTICLE REVIEW

Ankara University of Social Sciences, Department of management and Organization, Turkey.

Topic: Individual, Person vs. Situation

Week #8
Subject:
Organizational Behavior Studies (OB)
Prof. Dr. Selin ERDIL
selin.erdil@asbu.edu.tr

PhD student: Sihem Djidjik

Student number: 195453203
sihem.djidjik@student.asbu.edu.tr

Synopsis of,
Article: Personality traits, individual innovativeness and satisfaction with life (EMPRICIAL PAPER)
Author(s): Imran Ali
Source: Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. Volume 4, Issue 1, January–March 2019, Pages 38-46
Published by: Elsevier Espana, ˜ S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-NC-ND/4.0/)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2017.11.002

(*) Key words: Big-Five personality traits, Individual innovativeness, Satisfaction with life.

Think about your personality as an individual,

Do you always act the same way, or do you change depending on the social, work behavior situation?
In what situation individuals change their behavior?

As we saw in last week topic about „individual‟ we noticed the existence of plenty of research
on personality traits that explains its impact on human behaviors in different situations. Nevertheless,
there is sparse research available in the literature that explains how a personality trait affects
innovativeness among individuals and satisfaction with life perceptions (subjective wellbeing).

This article empirically examines a conceptual model that addresses this important gap in the body of
knowledge. Famous Big-Five personality traits theory is used to explain this phenomenon in this
research. From a management perspective, information about an individual‟s personality can provide
valuable information relating to what is the best method of communicating with them and what types

1
CRITICAL ARTICLE REVIEW

of jobs and tasks they are most suitable for. However, personality traits may also be key indicators of
other sides of an individual‟s life, including innovativeness (Ahmed, 1998; Eastman, Eastman, &
Tolson, 2001; Hsieh, Hsieh, & Wang, 2011) and satisfaction with life (Judge, Higgins, Thoresen, &
Barrick, 1999).

Existing literature on the influence of personality traits on innovativeness focuses primarily on

employees‟ innovation performance (Buchanan, 1998; Hsieh et al., 2011) or an individual‟s
propensity to accept innovative new products (Yi, Fiedler, & Park, 2006). However, very few studies
have studied innovativeness in the context of an individual‟s willingness develop new ideas and
experience new things. Even fewer studies have addressed its influence on satisfaction with life.

By investigating the role of innovativeness in an individual‟s perception of satisfaction with life, this
research aims to expand existing understanding beyond „what‟ personality traits are associated with
life satisfaction to „why‟ individuals possessing these personality traits perceive their lives as more
satisfying.

Big five personality traits are: Extraversion1: extent to which individuals engage with the external
world and experience enthusiasm and other positive emotions. Agreeableness2: extent to which
individuals value cooperation and social harmony, honesty, decency, and trustworthiness. They tend
to have an optimistic view of human nature. Conscientiousness3: extent to which individuals value
planning, possess the quality of persistence, and are achievement-oriented. Neuroticism4: extent to
which individuals experience negative feelings and their tendency to emotionally overreact. Openness
to Experience5: extent to which individuals exhibit intellectual curiosity, self-awareness, and
individualism/nonconformance.

Individual Innovativeness may be defined as “the degree to which an individual is relatively earlier in
adopting an innovation than other members of his system” (Rogers & Shoemaker, 1971) Individual
innovativeness is a persistent trait or disposition that determines how an individual perceives and
reacts to an innovation (Yi et al., 2006), where a high level of individual innovativeness would yield a
more positive reaction.

Whereas, satisfaction with life typically diverges into two streams: the „bottom-up‟ and „top-down‟
approaches (Loewe et al., 2014). The „bottom-up‟ perspective views an individual‟s overall
satisfaction with life as the culmination of satisfaction in various other domains of life, including
family, career, and leisure (Pavot & Diener, 2008). In contrast, the „top-down‟ perspective posits that
individuals‟ personality and other stable traits affect their disposition to be satisfied with their lives (P.
Steel, Schmidt, & Shultz, 2008).

Consequently, the implementation of hypotheses was divided to three parts; there were in total three
fragments of analysis:

2
CRITICAL ARTICLE REVIEW

i. Individual innovativeness according to the big five personality traits.

ii. Satisfaction with life according to the big five personality traits.
iii. Individual Innovativeness & Satisfaction with Life.

Accordingly, the first part contains 5 hypotheses proposed as follow: (i)

 H1a. Extraversion positively affects the level of Individual Innovativeness.
 H1b. Agreeableness positively affects the level of Individual Innovativeness.
 H1c. Conscientiousness positively affects the level of Individual Innovativeness.
 H1d. Neuroticism negatively affects the level of Individual Innovativeness.
 H1e. Openness to Experience positively affects the level of Individual Innovativeness.

Conversely, the second part contains 5 hypotheses proposed as follow: (ii)

 H2a. Extraversion positively affects the level of Satisfaction with Life.
 H2b. Agreeableness positively affects the level of Satisfaction with Life.
 H2c. Conscientiousness positively affects the level of Satisfaction with Life.
 H2d. Neuroticism negatively affects the level of Satisfaction with Life.
 H2e. Openness to Experience positively affects the level of Satisfaction with Life.

Finally, the third part of the hypnosis proposed as follow: (iii)

 H3. Individual Innovativeness positively affects Satisfaction with Life

Reflecting back to the methodology (Sample and data collection): A conceptual model is proposed
and tested empirically through statistical analysis. The unit of analysis of the study is individuals, thus
data is collected from students studying in different universities of Pakistan (eg. students enrolled in
executive programs, post graduate programs including MS, M. Phil & PhD are also considered in data
collection so that to incorporate the viewpoints of respondents exposed to practical and professional
life.

 The data is collected through personally administered survey questionnaire.

 A total of 800 individuals were contacted for data collection.
 613 survey questionnaires are received back.
 18 questionnaires were incomplete leaving 595 usable questionnaires.

For the procedure, the data analysis techniques used in this study includes:1

 Reliability and validity testing, correlation analysis and regression analysis.

 The statistical techniques are applied through SPSS and AMOS software.
 Cronbach alpha, Confirmatory Factor Analysis & Structural equation model.

1
Notes:

Correlation is used to examine the association between two variables.

Correlation and regression analysis are related in the sense that both deal with relationships among variables.
(CFA) is applied through AMOS to examine the validity of measurement scales used in this study.
Cronbach alpha is calculated to analyze reliability through SPSS.
(SEM) technique is also performed to analyze data.

3
CRITICAL ARTICLE REVIEW

The research shows that employees are most neglected by organizations among all stakeholders,
therefore, paying close attentions to employees and their personality types can result in increase of
innovativeness among employees and a strong competitive advantage to the organizations.

Overall, the study examined the influence of personality traits on individual innovativeness and
satisfaction with life perception. Wellbeing and satisfaction of employees as individuals is considered
to be very important by organizations these days. Organizations are spending generous resources to
promote wellbeing among its employees in order to ensure yield more innovation and productivity
from employees. Management scholars are also striving to find ways to increase employee‟s
wellbeing and satisfaction with life. This study extends the theory of personality traits which propose
that human beings have different personality traits and that they behave in different environments in
dissimilar ways. The study found positive influence of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness,
and openness to experience on individual innovativeness and satisfaction with life perceptions.
Neuroticism is found to be negatively related to individual innovativeness and satisfaction with life
perceptions. Finally, the study noted a positive association between individual innovativeness and
perception with life (See Fig 1 to get a better understanding about the relation between the variables).

What I have gained from reading this article is that that all four personality traits including
extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience encourages
innovativeness among individuals while neuroticism discourages innovativeness among individuals.
The management and HR practitioners can use the findings of this study to promote individual
innovativeness and wellbeing among employees in the organizations. For that organizations should
introduce training programs that promote personality traits to enhance their innovative capabilities
and train employees to avoid neuroticism as it discourage innovativeness.

Well, this study has been conducted in Pakistan. If I was designing the same research study and
conducting it in my home country „Algeria‟ or even in Turkey I would like to examine whether the
negative effects of neuroticism on individual innovativeness and satisfaction with life can be reduced
or giving more importance to the understanding of neuroticism this can probably lead to some other
personality trait (eg. openness to experience through training programs). Furthermore, a study with

4
CRITICAL ARTICLE REVIEW

longitudinal research design may also provide more reliable findings to determine how personality
traits might affect one‟s vitality and to establish the direction of causality. Besides, some contextual
factors can also be combined to better explain this relationship. Some other moderating variables can
also be introduced in model in order to explain the associations proposed by this study.

Also, I noticed that the data were collected from university students studying in universities in
Pakistan at a single point in time. Therefore, generalizability of the findings is limited. I suggest,
random sampling can be used to allow a cohort effect in different countries. Furthermore, cross-
cultural studies can be conducted in order to determine the relationship between personality traits and
vitality among individuals regarding innovativeness and life satisfaction factors.

Future studies may use multiple assessment methods such as observations, peer-assessments and
interviews to strengthen the validity of the findings. Therefore, giving incentives would be sensible to
enhance their motivation to participate the study.

Future directions in OB studies to understand more individuals at work within an organization by

using the big five personal traits are tremendous; I cite some of them in the following paragraph:

 The examination of a wide range of personality variables and integrate findings across different
domains such as ( Psychological vulnerabiltiy) 2.
 Taking a broader and more integrative view on social outcomes, including different relationship types,
phases and transitions.
 Analysing personality effects on social outcomes from different social perspectives (e.g. self)
 search for processes that explain the associations between personality and social outcomes; collect rich,
multi‐method, longitudinal, behavioral datasets with large samples.
 Evaluation of the implications of personality effects on social outcomes.

This kind of studies seem like a good follow up study for researchers to embrace a more collaborative
and slower scientific approach to answer the many open questions about the social consequences of
personality.

***

Notes:

2
Psychological vulnerability refers to cognitive structures which make individuals more fragile to stress and described it as a “pattern of
cognitive beliefs reflecting a dependence on achievement or external sources of affirmation for one's sense of self-worth”.

5
CRITICAL ARTICLE REVIEW

 References

1. Ahmed, P. K. (1998). Culture and climate for innovation. European Journal of Innovation
Management, 1(1), 30–43.

2. Buchanan, (1998) L.B. Buchanan. The impact of big five personality characteristics on group
cohesion and creative task performance.

3. Eastman et al., (2001) J.K. Eastman, K.L. Eastman, M.A. Tolson. The relationship between
ethical ideology and ethical behavior intentions: An exploratory look at physicians‟ responses
to managed care dilemmas. Journal of Business Ethics, 31 (3), pp. 20

4. Hsieh et al., (2011) H.-L. Hsieh, J.-R. Hsieh, I.-L. Wang. Linking personality and innovation:
The role of knowledge management. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology
Education, 9 (1) (2011), pp. 38-44

5. Judge et al., (1999) T.A. Judge, C.A. Higgins, C.J. Thoresen, M.R. Barrick. The big five
personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel
Psychology, 52 (3), pp. 621-652

6. Loewe et al., 2014 N. Loewe, M. Bagherzadeh, L. Araya-Castillo, C. Thieme, J.M. Batista-

Foguet Life domain satisfactions as predictors of overall life satisfaction among workers:
Evidence from Chile Social Indicators Research, 118 (1) (2014), pp. 71-86

7. Pavot and Diener, (2008) W. Pavot, E. Diener. The satisfaction with life scale and the
emerging construct of life satisfaction.Journal of Positive Psychology, 3 (2), pp. 137-152
8. Rogers and Shoemaker, (1971) E.M. Rogers, F.F. Shoemaker. Communication of
innovations: A cross-cultural approach.

9. Steel et al., (2008) P. Steel, J. Schmidt, J. Shultz. Refining the relationship between
personality and subjective well-being Psychological Bulletin, 134 (1), p. 138

10. Yi et al., (2006) M.Y. Yi, K.D. Fiedler, J.S. Park. Understanding the role of individual
innovativeness in the acceptance of it-based innovations: Comparative analyses of models and
measures. Decision Sciences, 37 (3), pp. 393-426