The current study integrates available findings on the relationship between the Big Five personality traits and collaborative problem solving (CPS), as a specific type of teamwork. Based on a systematic search and screening of the literature, 47 papers were reviewed. Having separately analyzed how individual and group-level traits relate to the processes and outcomes of CPS, we found several meaningful associations. Both individual-level and group-level Conscientiousness and Agreeableness were positively related to the quality of CPS. The former trait contributed more to the enactment of task roles/behaviors in CPS, to task-related team processes and team performance; the latter was dominantly related to the enactment of social roles/behaviors, and to relationship-related team processes and emergent states. The role of the remaining traits in CPS depended on the level of analysis, with individual Extraversion being particularly important for within-group positioning, and group Emotional Stability affecting team cohesion. Unsurprisingly, the effects of group-level traits on CPS also depended on the method of aggregating individual trait scores. The hypothesis that some traits would relate more to CPS processes and others to its outcomes was partially confirmed, while the assumption that team processes would mediate the effects of group-level traits on CPS outcomes received substantial support.
AshtonM. C.LeeK. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(4), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890902935878
2.
BaduraK. L.GalvinB. M.LeeM. Y. (2021). Leadership emergence: An integrative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 2069–2100. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000997
3.
BaerM.OldhamG. R.JacobsohnG. C.HollingsheadA. B. (2008). The personality composition of teams and creativity: The moderating role of team creative confidence. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 42(4), 255–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.2008.tb01299.x
4.
BarrickM. R.StewartG. L.NeubertM. J.MountM. K. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(3), 377–391. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.377
5.
BellS. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 595–615. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.595
6.
BolinA. U.NeumanG. A. (2006). Personality, process, and performance in interactive brainstorming groups. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20(4), 565–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-005-9000-7
7.
BradleyB. H.BaurJ. E.BanfordC. G.PostlethwaiteB. E. (2013a). Team players and collective performance: How agreeableness affects team performance over time. Small Group Research, 44(6), 680–711. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496413507609
8.
BradleyB. H.KlotzA. C.PostlethwaiteB. E.BrownK. G. (2013b). Ready to rumble: How team personality composition and task conflict interact to improve performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(2), 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029845
9.
ByrneJ. C.DominickP. G.SmitherJ. W.ReillyR. R. (2007). Examination of the discriminant, convergent, and criterion-related validity of self-ratings on the Emotional Competence Inventory. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15(3), 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00393.x
10.
ChenH. J.ChangW. T. (2021). Influence of team personality and composition on team communication in interdisciplinary design courses. International Journal of Educational Research, 109, 101836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101836
11.
ChiocchioF.EssiembreH. (2009). Cohesion and performance: A meta-analytic review of disparities between project teams, production teams, and service teams. Small Group Research, 40(4), 382–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496409335103
12.
CogliserC. C.GardnerW. L.GavinM. B.BrobergJ. C. (2012). Big Five personality factors and leader emergence in virtual teams: Relationships with team trustworthiness, member performance contributions, and team performance. Group and Organization Management, 37(6), 752–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601112464266
13.
CostaP. T.McCraeR. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO personality inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5
14.
CourtrightS. H.McCormickB. W.MistryS.WangJ. (2017). Quality charters or quality members? A control theory perspective on team charters and team performance. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(10), 1462–1470. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000229
15.
Cullen-LesterK. L.LeroyH.GerbasiA.NishiiL. (2016). Energy’s role in the extraversion (dis)advantage: How energy ties and task conflict help clarify the relationship between extraversion and proactive performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(7), 1003–1022. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2087
16.
CurşeuP. L.IliesR.VîrgăD.MaricuţoiuL.SavaF. A. (2019). Personality characteristics that are valued in teams: Not always “more is better”?International Journal of Psychology, 54(5), 638–649. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12511
17.
den HartogS. C.RungeJ. M.ReindlG.LangJ. W. B. (2020). Linking personality trait variance in self-managed teams to team innovation. Small Group Research, 51(2), 265–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496419865325
18.
DriskellJ. E.GoodwinG. F.SalasE.O’SheaP. G. (2006). What makes a good team player? Personality and team effectiveness. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(4), 249–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.10.4.249
19.
EmeryC.CalvardT. S.PierceM. E. (2013). Leadership as an emergent group process: A social network study of personality and leadership. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 16(1), 28–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430212461835
20.
FioreS. M.GraesserA.GreiffS. (2018). Collaborative problem-solving education for the twenty-first-century workforce. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(6), 367–369. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0363-y
21.
FrenchK. A.KottkeJ. L. (2013). Teamwork satisfaction: Exploring the multilevel interaction of teamwork interest and group extraversion. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(3), 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787413498034
22.
GeversJ. M. P.PeetersA. G. M. (2009). A pleasure working together? The effects of dissimilarity in team member conscientiousness on team temporal processes and individual satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(3), 379–400. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.544
23.
GillC.MetzI.TekleabA. G.WilliamsonI. O. (2020). The combined role of conscientiousness, social networks, and gender diversity in explaining individual performance in self-managed teams. Journal of Business Research, 106(January), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.09.003
24.
GraesserA. C.FioreS. M.GreiffS.Andrews-ToddJ.FoltzP. W.HesseF. W. (2018). Advancing the science of collaborative problem solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(2), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618808244
25.
HakkinenP.JarvelaS.Makitalo-SieglK.AhonenA.NaykkiP.ValtonenT. (2017). Preparing teacher-students for twenty-first-century learning practices (PREP 21): A framework for enhancing collaborative problem-solving and strategic learning skills. Teachers and Teaching, 23(1), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1203772
26.
HalfhillT.SundstromE.LahnerJ.CalderoneW.NielsenT. M. (2005). Group personality composition and group effectiveness. Small Group Research, 36(1), 83–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404268538
27.
HeY.DonnellanM. B.MendozaA. M. (2019). Five-factor personality domains and job performance: A second order meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 82(October), 103848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.103848
28.
HesseF.CareE.BuderJ.SassenbergK.GriffinP. (2015). A framework for teachable collaborative problem-solving skills. In GriffinP.CareE. (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach (pp. 37–56). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9395-7_2
29.
HomanA. C.van KleefG. A. (2022). Managing team conscientiousness diversity: The role of leader emotion-Regulation knowledge. Small Group Research, 53(4), 532–562. https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964211045015
30.
HumphreyS. E.HollenbeckJ. R.MeyerC. J.IlgenD. R. (2011). Personality configurations in self-managed teams: A natural experiment on the effects of maximizing and minimizing variance in traits. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(7), 1701–1732. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00778.x
31.
JohnO. P.SrivastavaS. (1999). The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In PervinL. A.JohnO. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138). Guilford Press.
32.
KaufmanS. B.GregoireC. (2015). Wired to create: Unraveling the mysteries of the creative mind (1st edn.). Perigee, an imprint of Penguin Random House LLC.
33.
KelsenB. A.LiangH.-Y. (2019). Role of the Big Five personality traits and motivation in predicting performance in collaborative presentations. Psychological Reports, 122(5), 1907–1924. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118795139
34.
KongD. T.KonczakL. J.BottomW. P. (2015). Team performance as a joint function of team member satisfaction and agreeableness. Small Group Research, 46(2), 160–178. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496414567684
LauK. H.JinQ. (2019). Chinese students’ group work performance: Does team personality composition matter?Education and Training, 61(3), 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-06-2018-0141
37.
LePineJ. A.BuckmanB. R.CrawfordE. R.MethotJ. R. (2011). A review of research on personality in teams: Accounting for pathways spanning levels of theory and analysis. Human Resource Management Review, 21(4), 311–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.10.004
38.
LinQ.LinL.YeD. (2015). Factors influencing knowledge-sharing behaviors and learning effect: A multilevel investigation. Social Behavior and Personality, 43(10), 1683–1698. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2015.43.10.1683
39.
LuksyteA.AveryD. R.ParkerS. K.WangY.JohnsonL. U.CrepeauL. (2022). Age diversity in teams: Examining the impact of the least agreeable member. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(3), 546–565. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2570
40.
LunV. M. C.BondM. H. (2006). Achieving relationship harmony in groups and its consequence for group performance. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9(3), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2006.00197.x
41.
MacDonnellR.O’NeillT.KlineT.HambleyL. (2009). Bringing group-level personality to the electronic realm: A comparison of face-to-face and virtual contexts. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 12(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10887150802371773
42.
MammadovS. (2022). Big Five personality traits and academic performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality, 90(2), 222–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12663
43.
MarksM. A.MathieuJ. E.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4845785
44.
MathieuJ.MaynardT. M.RappT.GilsonL. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34(3), 410–476. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316061
45.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
46.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (2008). Empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. In The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment: Volume 1 - personality theories and models (pp. 273–294). SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849200462.n13
47.
MohammedS.AngellL. C. (2004). Surface- and deep-level diversity in workgroups: Examining the moderating effects of team orientation and team process on relationship conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(8), 1015–1039. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.293
48.
MollemanE.NautaA.JehnK. A. (2004). Person-job fit applied to teamwork: A multilevel approach. Small Group Research, 35(5), 515–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404264361
49.
MüllerA.BellhäuserH.KonertJ.RöpkeR. (2021). Effects of group formation on student satisfaction and performance: A field experiment. Small Group Research, 53(2), 244–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496420988592
50.
MumfordT. V.Van IddekingeC. H.MorgesonF. P.CampionM. A. (2008). The Team Role Test: Development and validation of a team role knowledge situational judgment test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 250–267. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.250
OliveriM. E.LawlessR.MolloyH. (2017). A literature review on collaborative problem solving for college and workforce readiness. ETS Research Report Series, 2017(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12133
54.
O’NeilH. F.ChuangS. H.ChungG. K. W. K. (2003). Issues in the computer-based assessment of collaborative problem solving. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 10(3), 361–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594032000148190
55.
O’NeillT. A.AllenN. J. (2011). Personality and the prediction of team performance. European Journal of Personality, 25(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.769
56.
PageM. J.McKenzieJ. E.BossuytP. M.BoutronI.HoffmannT. C.MulrowC. D.ShamseerL.TetzlaffJ. M.AkiE. A.BrennanS. E.ChouR.GlanvilleJ.GrimshawJ. M.HróbjartssonA.LaluM. M.LiT.LoderE. W.Mayo-WilsonE.McDonaldS.MoherD. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLOS Medicine, 18(3), Article e1003583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583
57.
PeetersM. A. G.RutteC. G.van TuijlH. F. J. M.ReymenI. M. M. J. (2006). The Big Five personality traits and individual satisfaction with the team. Small Group Research, 37(2), 187–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496405285458
58.
PeetersM. A. G.RutteC. G.van TuijlH. F. J. M.ReymenI. M. M. J. (2008). Designing in teams. Small Group Research, 39(4), 438–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408319810
59.
PeetersM. A. G.Van TuijlH. F. J. M.RutteC. G.ReymenI. M. M. J. (2006). Personality and team performance: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Personality, 20(5), 377–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.588
PoropatA. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the Five-Factor Model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014996
62.
PorterC. O. L. H.HollenbeckJ. R.IlgenD. R.EllisA. P. J.WestB. J.MoonH. (2003). Backing up behaviors in teams: The role of personality and legitimacy of need. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.391
63.
PrewettM. S.WalvoordA. A. G.StilsonF. R. B.RossiM. E.BrannickM. T. (2009). The team personality-team performance relationship revisited: The impact of criterion choice, pattern of workflow, and method of aggregation. Human Performance, 22(4), 273–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959280903120253
64.
RheeJ.ParentD.BasuA. (2013) The influence of personality and ability on undergraduate teamwork and team performance (2, p. 16). Springer Plus. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-16
65.
RobertC.CheungY. H. (2010). An examination of the relationship between conscientiousness and group performance on a creative task. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(2), 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.01.005
66.
SagerK. L.GastilJ. (2006). The origins and consequences of consensus decision making: A test of the social consensus model. Southern Communication Journal, 71(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10417940500503464
67.
SchilpzandM. C.HeroldD. M.ShalleyC. E. (2011). Members’ openness to experience and teams’ creative performance. Small Group Research, 42(1), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496410377509
68.
SchippersM. C. (2014). Social loafing tendencies and team performance: The compensating effect of agreeableness and conscientiousness. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13(1), 62–81. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0191
69.
SchippersM. C.Den HartogD. N.KoopmanP. L.WienkJ. A. (2003). Diversity and team outcomes: The moderating effects of outcome interdependence and group longevity and the mediating effect of reflexivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(6), 779–802. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.220
70.
SotoC. J. (2018). Big Five personality traits. In BornsteinM. H.ArterberryM. E.FingermanK. L.LansfordJ. E. (Eds.), The SAGE encyclopedia of lifespan human development (pp. 240–241). Sage.
71.
SteinerI. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. Academic Press.
72.
StewartG. L.FulmerI. S.BarrickM. R. (2005). An exploration of member roles as a multilevel linking mechanism for individual traits and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 343–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00480.x
73.
TasaK.SearsG. J.SchatA. C. H. (2011). Personality and teamwork behavior in context: The cross-level moderating role of collective efficacy. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.680
74.
TekleabA. G.QuigleyN. R. (2014). Team deep-level diversity, relationship conflict, and team members’ affective reactions: A cross-level investigation. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 394–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.12.022
75.
TettR. P.BurnettD. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 500–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500
76.
TettR. P.JacksonD. N.RothsteinM.ReddonJ. R. (1999). Meta-analysis of bidirectional relations in personality-job performance research. Human Performance, 12(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1201_1
77.
ThielmannI.MoshagenM.HilbigBenjaminE.ZettlerI. (2022). On the comparability of basic personality models: Meta-analytic correspondence, scope, and orthogonality of the Big Five and HEXACO dimensions. European Journal of Personality, 36(6), 870–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070211026793
van VianenA. E. M.De DreuC. K. W. (2001). Personality in teams: Its relationship to social cohesion, task cohesion, and team performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(2), 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320143000573
80.
VarelaO. E.BurkeM. J.LandisR. S. (2008). A model of emergence and dysfunctional effects of emotional conflict in groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12(2), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.12.2.112
WaldmanD. A.AtwaterL. E.DavidsonR. A. (2004). The role of individualism and the Five-Factor Model in the prediction of performance in a leaderless group discussion. Journal of Personality, 72(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00254.x
83.
WalkerA. (2007). Group work in higher education: Are introverted students disadvantaged?Psychology Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 20–25. https://doi.org/10.2304/plat.2007.6.1.20
84.
WangZ.ChenY. N.TjosvoldD.ShiK. (2010). Cooperative goals and team agreeableness composition for constructive controversy in China. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 27(1), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-009-9175-y
85.
WilsonJ. M.FletcherT. D.PescosolidoT.MajorD. A. (2021). Extraversion and leadership emergence: Differences in virtual and face-to-face teams. Small Group Research, 52(5), 535–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496420986620
86.
WoodleyH. J. R.McLarnonM. J. W.O'NeillT. A. (2019). The emergence of group potency and its implications for team effectiveness. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 992. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00992
87.
ZellE.LesickT. L. (2022). Big Five personality traits and performance: A quantitative synthesis of 50+ meta-analyses. Journal of Personality, 90(4), 559–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12683
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
