Relating within-person personality variability to organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior: A resource-based perspective
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online July, 2021
Relating within-person personality variability to organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior: A resource-based perspective
Research on the effects of within-person personality variability has mainly focused on the consequences for subjective well-being. Drawing on a resource-based approach, we extend this field to the work domain, expecting that since deviating from one’s average trait level is resource intensive, it should relate negatively to behaviors that require the investment of additional resources, such as organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), while it should relate positively to behaviors that replenish one’s resources, such as counterproductive work behavior. Using two personality dimensions that are predictive for work-performance (conscientiousness and core self-evaluations), and a new variability index that is not confounded by the mean, we find an effect of personality variability on negative performance outcomes (counterproductive work behavior), while no relation is found with positive forms of extra-role performance (organizational citizenship behavior). These results were replicated across three separate experience sampling studies, confirming that, while within-person personality variability is related to performance, those relationships are relatively weak and they do not hold for every performance facet.
BairdB. M.LeK.LucasR. E. (2006).
On the nature of intraindividual within-person personality variability: Reliability, validity, and associations with well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
90(3), 512.
2.
BairdB. M.LucasR. E.DonnellanM. B. (2017).
The role of response styles in the assessment of intraindividual personality variability. Journal of Research in Personality,
69, 170–179.
3.
BarrickM. R.MountM. K. (1991).
The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology,
44(1), 1–26.
4.
BeckmannN.BirneyD. P.BeckmannJ. F.WoodR. E.SojoV.BowmanD. (2020).
Inter-individual differences in intra-individual variability in personality within and across contexts. Journal of Research in Personality,
85, 103909.
5.
BerryC. M.OnesD. S.SackettP. R. (2007).
Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
92(2), 410.
6.
BleidornW.KöddingC. (2013).
The divided self and psychological (mal) adjustment – A meta-analytic review. Journal of Research in Personality,
47(5), 547–552.
7.
Bliese, P. D., & Wang, M. (2020). Results provide information about cumulative probabilities of finding significance: Let's report this information. Journal of Management, 46(7), 1275--1288.
8.
BolinoM. C.HsiungH.-H.HarveyJ.LePineJ. A. (2015).
“Well, I’m tired of tryin’!” Organizational citizenship behaviour and citizenship fatigue. Journal of Applied Psychology,
100, 56–74.
9.
BoltonL. R.HarveyR. D.GrawitchM. J.BarberL. K. (2012).
Counterproductive work behaviours in response to emotional exhaustion: A moderated mediational approach. Stress and Health,
28(3), 222–233.
10.
CantyA.RipleyB. D. (2019). boot: Bootstrap R (S-Plus) functions. R package version 1.3-24. R Core Team.
11.
DalalR. S. (2005).
A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology,
90(6), 1241.
12.
DalalR. S.LamH.WeissH. M.WelchE. R.HulinC. L. (2009).
A within-person approach to work behavior and performance: Concurrent and lagged citizenship-counterproductivity associations, and dynamic relationships with affect and overall job performance. Academy of Management Journal,
52(5), 1051–1066.
13.
DalalR. S.MeyerR. D.BradshawR. P.GreenJ. P.KellyE. D.ZhuM. (2015).
Personality strength and situational influences on behavior: A conceptual review and research agenda. Journal of Management,
41(1), 261–287.
14.
DebusscherJ.HofmansJ.De FruytF. (2016).
The effect of state core self-evaluations on task performance, organizational citizenship behaviour, and counterproductive work behaviour. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
25(2), 301–315.
15.
DejonckheereE.MestdaghM.HoubenM.RuttenI.SelsL.KuppensP.TuerlinckxF. (2019).
Complex affect dynamics add limited information to the prediction of psychological well-being. Nature Human Behaviour,
3(5), 478–491.
16.
DóciE.HofmansJ. (2015).
Task complexity and transformational leadership: The mediating role of leaders' state core self-evaluations. The Leadership Quarterly,
26(3), 436–447.
17.
DonahueE. M.RobinsR. W.RobertsB. W.JohnO. P. (1993).
The divided self: Concurrent and longitudinal effects of psychological adjustment and social roles on self-concept differentiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
64(5), 834.
18.
DudleyN. M.OrvisK. A.LebieckiJ. E.CortinaJ. M. (2006).
A meta-analytic investigation of conscientiousness in the prediction of job performance: Examining the intercorrelations and the incremental validity of narrow traits. Journal of Applied Psychology,
91(1), 40.
19.
EdwardsB. D.WoehrD. J. (2007).
An examination and evaluation of frequency-based personality measurement. Personality and Individual Differences,
43, 803–814.
20.
EidM.DienerE. (1999).
Intraindividual variability in affect: Reliability, validity, and personality correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
76(4), 662–676.
21.
EysenckH. J.EysenckM. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences.
Plenum.
22.
FleesonW. (2001).
Toward a structure-and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
80(6), 1011.
23.
FleesonW.JayawickremeE. (2015).
Whole trait theory. Journal of Research in Personality,
56, 82–92.
24.
FoxS.SpectorP. E.GohA.BruursemaK.KesslerS. R. (2012).
The deviant citizen: Measuring potential positive relations between counterproductive work behaviour and organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,
85(1), 199–220.
25.
GallagherP.FleesonW.HoyleR. H. (2011).
A self-regulatory mechanism for personality trait stability: Contra-trait effort. Social Psychological and Personality Science,
2(4), 335–342.
26.
GeldhofG. J.PreacherK. J.ZyphurM. J. (2014).
Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework. Psychological Methods,
19(1), 72.
27.
GeukesK.NestlerS.HuttemanR.KüfnerA. C.BackM. D. (2017).
Trait personality and state variability: Predicting individual differences in within-and cross-context fluctuations in affect, self-evaluations, and behavior in everyday life. Journal of Research in Personality,
69, 124–138.
28.
HardyJ.SegerstromS. C. (2017).
Intra-individual variability and psychological flexibility: Affect and health in a National US sample. Journal of Research in Personality,
69, 13–21.
29.
HofmansJ.De ClercqB.KuppensP.VerbekeL.WidigerT. (2019).
Testing the structure and process of personality using ambulatory assessment data: An overview of within-person and person-specific techniques. Psychological Assessment,
31(4), 432–443.
30.
JudgeT. A.BonoJ. E. (2001).
Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
86(1), 80–92.
31.
JudgeT. A.ErezA.BonoJ. E. (1998).
The power of being positive: The relation between positive self-concept and job performance. Human Performance,
11(2–3), 167–187.
32.
KalokerinosE. K.MurphyS. C.KovalP.BailenN. H.CrombezG.HollensteinT., . . . & BastianB. (2020).
Neuroticism may not reflect emotional variability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
117(17), 9270–9276.
33.
KaneJ. S.WoehrD. J. (2006). Performance measurement reconsidered: An examination of frequency estimation as a basis for assessment. In W. Bennett, Jr., C. E. Lance, & D. J. Woehr (Eds.), Performance measurement: Current perspectives and future challenges. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
KrischerM. M.PenneyL. M.HunterE. M. (2010).
Can counterproductive work behaviours be productive? CWB as emotion-focused coping. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
15, 154.
35.
LangJ. W. B.LievensF.De FruytF.ZettlerI.TackettJ. L. (2019).
Assessing meaningful within-person variability in Likert-scale rated personality descriptions: An IRT tree approach. Psychological Assessment,
31(4), 474–487. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000600
36.
LeeK.AllenN. J. (2002).
Organizational citizenship behavior and workplace deviance: The role of affect and cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology,
87(1), 131.
37.
LievensF.LangJ. W.De FruytF.CorstjensJ.Van de VijverM.BledowR. (2018).
The predictive power of people’s intraindividual variability across situations: Implementing whole trait theory in assessment. Journal of Applied Psychology,
103(7), 753.
38.
MageeC.BuchtelE. E.HumanL. J.MurrayD. R.BiesanzJ. C. (2018).
Is personality variability associated with adjustment?Journal of Research in Personality,
72, 22–43.
39.
MairP.WilcoxR. (2020).
Robust statistical methods in R using the WRS2 package. Behavior Research Methods,
52, 464–488.
40.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr. (1995).
Trait explanations in personality psychology. European Journal of Personality,
9(4), 231–252.
41.
MestdaghM.PeM.PestmanW.VerdonckS.KuppensP.TuerlinckxF. (2018).
Sidelining the mean: The relative variability index as a generic mean-corrected variability measure for bounded variables. Psychological Methods,
23(4), 690.
42.
OrganD. W.RyanK. (1995).
A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology,
48(4), 775–802.
43.
PernetC. R.WilcoxR. R.RousseletG. A. (2013).
Robust correlation analyses: False positive and power validation using a new open source matlab toolbox. Frontiers in Psychology,
3, 606.
44.
PickettJ.HofmansJ.De FruytF. (2019).
Extraversion and performance approach goal orientation: An integrative approach to personality. Journal of Research in Personality,
82, 103846.
45.
PickettJ.HofmansJ.FeldtT.De FruytF. (2020).
Concurrent and lagged effects of counterdispositional extraversion on vitality. Journal of Research in Personality,
103965.
46.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B. (1997).
Impact of organizational citizenship behaviour on organizational performance: A review and suggestion for future research. Human Performance,
10, 133–151.
47.
PodsakoffN. P.WhitingS. W.PodsakoffP. M.BlumeB. D. (2009).
Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviours: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,
94(1), 122--141.
48.
ReddockC. M.BidermanM. D.NguyenN. T. (2011).
The relationship of reliability and validity of personality tests to frame-of-reference instructions and within-person inconsistency. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,
19(2), 119–131.
49.
RobertsB. W. (2009).
Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. Journal of Research in Personality,
43(2), 137–145.
50.
RobertsB. W.JacksonJ. J.FayardJ. V.EdmondsG.MeintsJ.ConscientiousnessM. L.HoyleR. (2009). Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 369–381).
Guilford Press.
51.
SackettP. R. (2002).
The structure of counterproductive work behaviors: Dimensionality and relationships with facets of job performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,
10(1–2), 5–11.
52.
SaucierG. (1994).
Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg's unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment,
63(3), 506–516.
53.
SosnowskaJ.HofmansJ.LievensF. (2021). Assessing personality dynamics in personnel selection. In J. F. Rauthmann (Ed.), The handbook of personality dynamics and processes. Academic Press.
54.
SosnowskaJ.KuppensP.De FruytF.HofmansJ. (2019).
A dynamic systems approach to personality: The Personality Dynamics (PersDyn) model. Personality and Individual Differences,
144, 11–18.
55.
SpanouliA.HofmansJ. (2020).
A resource-based perspective on organizational citizenship and counterproductive work behavior: The role of vitality and core self-evaluations. Applied Psychology: An International Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12281
56.
Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2002). An emotion-centered model of voluntary work behavior: Some parallels between counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior. Human resource management review, 12(2), 269--292.
57.
SpectorP. E.FoxS.PenneyL. M.BruursemaK.GohA.KesslerS. (2006).
The dimensionality of counterproductivity: Are all counterproductive behaviors created equal?Journal of vocational behavior,
68(3), 446–460.
