INTRODUCTION

Personality is defined as the characteristic set of behaviour cognitions

and emotional patterns that evolve from biological and environmental factors. While there
is no generally agreed upon definition of personality, most theories focus on motivation and
psychological interactions with one's environment. Trait-based personality theories, such as
those defined personality as the traits that predict a person's behaviour. On the other hand,
more behaviourally based approaches define personality through learning and habits.
Nevertheless, most theories view personality as relatively stable.
The study of the psychology of personality, called personality psychology, attempts to
explain the tendencies that underlie differences in behaviour. Many approaches have been
taken on to study personality, including biological, cognitive, learning and trait based
theories, as well as psychodynamic, and humanistic approaches

Nature of Personality
There are various characteristics which throw light on the nature of Personality. Let me
understand some of them to you:
Personality is a dynamic whole: The definition of Personality given by Allport reveals that
the personality is the dynamic whole. The constituents of Personality are organised into
units which are not static but active.
Personality measures behavior: Personality of an individual is more or less stable. It can be
predicted by ones behavior.
Outcome interaction of heredity and environment: Most of the psychologists review that
Personality is the net result of the interaction of heredity characters and environment
factors. The growth and the development of physical, social, emotional and moral are
affected by environmental factors.
Motive Force: There are many theories of motivation which contributes to the
understanding of the dynamics of personality. Behavior is affected overall by motives, ego
involvement, incentives, etc.

Characteristics of Personality in OB
Personality is the total sum of traits defining the characteristics of individual. It
represents the enduring behavior of person. Personality has the following
characteristics.
1. Unique set
Personality refer the unique set of characteristics of individual. It is different from one
personal to other.
2. Relatively stable
Personality is relatively stable as it is found almost same look, interaction or behave
throughout the period.
3. Whole person
Personality is composed with physical as well as mental qualities. It is the concept of
complete i.e. whole individual defining total concept.
4. Describing person
Personality is concerned with factors within people that causes to behave to do. It explains
the structure of person. It expresses the ways of reacting and interacting with others.
5. Situation specific
Personality is situation specific as it can be varied with environmental settings. It is
concerned with person-situation interaction.

6. Partially inherited
Personality is partially inherited and is partially shaped with environment. This can be
developed with interacting, with environment i.e. experience of individual.
7. Goal oriented
Personality is goal oriented behavior. People react or interact in order to satisfy their goals.

Determinants of Personality
Several factors influence the shaping of our personality. Major among these are

1. Heredity,

2. Culture,

3. Family Background,

4. Our Experiences through Life,

5. And The People we interact with.

There are some genetic factors that play a part in determining certain aspects of what we
tend to become. Whether we are tall or short, experience good health or ill health, are
quickly irritable or patient, are all characteristics which can, in many cases, be traced to
heredity. How we learn to handle others' reactions to us (eg.our appearance) and
the inherited traits can also influence how our personality is shaped.

Culture:

The culture and the values we are surrounded by significantly tend to shape our personal
values and inclination. Thus, people born in different cultures tend to develop different
types of personalities which in turn significantly influence their behaviours. India being a
vast country with a rich diversity of cultural background provides a good study on this. For
example, we have seen that people in Gujarat are more enterprising than people from
other states, Punjabees are more diligent and hardworking, people from Bengal are more
creative and with an intellectual bend and the likes.

Family Background:
The socio-economic status of the family, the number of children in the family and birth
order, and the background and education of the parents and extended members of
the family such as uncles and aunts, influence the shaping of personality to a considerable
extent.

First-borns usually have different experiences, during childhood than those born later;
Members in the family mould the character of all children, almost from birth, in several
ways -by expressing and expecting their children to conform to their own values, through
role modeling, and through various reinforcement strategies such as rewards and
punishments which are judiciously dispensed. Think of how your own personality has
been shaped by your family background and parental or sibling influences!

Experiences in Life:
Whether one trusts or mistrusts others, is miserly or generous, have a high or low self
esteem and the like, is at least partially related to the past experiences the individual has had.
Imagine if someone came to you and pleaded with you to lend him Rs. 100 which he
promised to return in a week's time, and you gave it to him even though it was the last note
you had in your pocket to cover the expenses for the rest of that month. Suppose that the
individual never again showed his face to you and you have not been able to get hold of him
for the past three months. Suppose also that three such incidents happened to you with
three different individuals in the past few months. What is the probability that you would
trust another person who comes and asks you for a loan tomorrow? Rather low, one would
think. Thus, certain personality characteristics are moulded by frequently occurring
positive or negative experiences in life.

People We Interact With

"A Person is known by the company he or she keeps" is a common adage. The
implication is that people persuade each other and tends to associate with members who are
more like them in their attitudes and values. Beginning childhood, the people we
interact with influence us. Primarily our, parents and siblings, then our teachers and class
mates, later our friends and colleagues, and so on. The influence of these various
individuals and groups shapes our personality. For. Instance, if we are to be accepted as
members of our work group, we have to conform to the values of that group which mayor
may not always be palatable to us; if we don't, we will not be treated as valued members of
the group. Our desire to be a part of the group and belong to it as its member, will compel
many of us to change certain aspects of our personality (for instance, we may have to
become less aggressive, more cooperative, etc.). Thus, our personality becomes shaped
throughout our lives by at least some of the people and groups we interact with

PERSONALITY TRAITS
The Myers–Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is an introspective self-report questionnaire
with the purpose of indicating differing psychological preferences in how people
perceive the world around them and make decisions.
The MBTI was constructed by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs
Myers. It is based on the conceptual theory proposed by Carl Jung, who had
speculated that humans experience the world using four principal psychological
functions – sensation, intuition, feeling, and thinking – and that one of these four
functions is dominant for a person most of the time.
The MBTI was constructed for normal populations and emphasizes the value of
naturally occurring differences. "The underlying assumption of the MBTI is that we all
have specific preferences in the way we construe our experiences, and these
preferences underlie our interests, needs, values, and motivation.
Although popular in the business sector, the MBTI exhibits significant psychometric
deficiencies, notably including poor validity (i.e. not measuring what it purports to
measure, not having predictive power or not having items that can be generalized),
poor reliability(giving different results for the same person on different occasions),
measuring categories that are not independent (some dichotomous traits have been
noted to correlate with each other), and not being comprehensive (due to
missing neuroticism). The four scales used in the MBTI have some correlation with
four of the Big Five personality traits, which are a more commonly accepted
framework.
Four dichotomies

Carl Jung

Subjective Objective

Perception Intuition/Sensing Introversion/Extraversion 1

Judging Feeling/Thinking Introversion/Extraversion 2

Myers–Briggs

Subjective Objective

Deductive Intuition/Sensing Introversion/Extraversion

Inductive Feeling/Thinking Perception/Judging

The four pairs of preferences or "dichotomies" are shown in the adjacent table.
The terms used for each dichotomy have specific technical meanings relating to the
MBTI, which differ from their everyday usage. For example, people who prefer
judgment over perception are not necessarily more "judgmental" or less "perceptive",
nor does the MBTI instrument measure aptitude; it simply indicates for one
preference over another.Someone reporting a high score for extraversion over
introversion cannot be correctly described as more extraverted: they simply have a
clear preference.
Point scores on each of the dichotomies can vary considerably from person to
person, even among those with the same type. However, Isabel Myers considered
the direction of the preference (for example, E vs. I) to be more important than the
degree of the preference (for example, very clear vs. slight). The expression of a
person's psychological type is more than the sum of the four individual preferences.
The preferences interact through type dynamics and type development.
Attitudes: extraversion/introversion
Myers–Briggs literature uses the terms extraversion and introversion as Jung first
used them. Extraversion means literally outward-turning and introversion, inward-
turning.[22] These specific definitions differ somewhat from the popular usage of the
words. Extraversion is the spelling used in MBTI publications.
The preferences for extraversion and introversion are often called "attitudes". Briggs
and Myers recognized that each of the cognitive functions can operate in the
external world of behavior, action, people, and things ("extraverted attitude") or the
internal world of ideas and reflection ("introverted attitude"). The MBTI assessment
sorts for an overall preference for one or the other.
People who prefer extraversion draw energy from action: they tend to act, then
reflect, then act further. If they are inactive, their motivation tends to decline. To
rebuild their energy, extraverts need breaks from time spent in reflection.
Conversely, those who prefer introversion "expend" energy through action: they
prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again. To rebuild their energy, introverts need
quiet time alone, away from activity.[23]
An extravert's flow is directed outward toward people and objects, whereas the
introvert's is directed inward toward concepts and ideas. Contrasting characteristics
between extraverted and introverted people include:
Functions: sensing/intuition and thinking/feeling
Jung identified two pairs of psychological functions:
Two perceiving functions: sensation (usually called sensing in MBTI writings)
and intuition
Two judging functions: thinking and feeling
According to Jung's typology model, each person uses one of these four functions
more dominantly and proficiently than the other three; however, all four functions are
used at different times depending on the circumstances.
Sensing and intuition are the information-gathering (perceiving) functions. They
describe how new information is understood and interpreted. People who prefer
sensing are more likely to trust information that is in the present, tangible, and
concrete: that is, information that can be understood by the five senses. They tend to
distrust hunches, which seem to come "out of nowhere".They prefer to look for
details and facts. For them, the meaning is in the data. On the other hand, those who
prefer intuition tend to trust information that is less dependent upon the senses, that
can be associated with other information (either remembered or discovered by
seeking a wider context or pattern). They may be more interested in future
possibilities. For them, the meaning is in the underlying theory and principles which
are manifested in the data.
Thinking and feeling are the decision-making (judging) functions. The thinking and
feeling functions are both used to make rational decisions, based on the data
received from their information-gathering functions (sensing or intuition). Those who
prefer thinking tend to decide things from a more detached standpoint, measuring
the decision by what seems reasonable, logical, causal, consistent, and matching a
given set of rules. Those who prefer feeling tend to come to decisions by associating
or empathizing with the situation, looking at it 'from the inside' and weighing the
situation to achieve, on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit,
considering the needs of the people involved. Thinkers usually have trouble
interacting with people who are inconsistent or illogical, and tend to give very direct
feedback to others. They are concerned with the truth and view it as more important.
As noted already, people who prefer thinking do not necessarily, in the everyday
sense, "think better" than their feeling counterparts, in the common sense; the
opposite preference is considered an equally rational way of coming to decisions
(and, in any case, the MBTI assessment is a measure of preference, not ability).
Similarly, those who prefer feeling do not necessarily have "better" emotional
reactions than their thinking counterparts. In many cases, however, people who use
thinking functions as either dominant or auxiliary tend to have more underdeveloped
feeling functions, and often have more trouble with regulating and making healthy
and productive decisions based on their feelings.
JUDGING AND PERCEPTION
preference for using either the judging function (thinking or feeling) or
their perceiving function (sensing or intuition) when relating to the outside world
(extraversion).
Myers and Briggs held that types with a preference for judging show the world their
preferred judging function (thinking or feeling). So, TJ types tend to appear to the
world as logical and FJ types as empathetic. According to Myers,[1]:75 judging types
like to "have matters settled".
Those types who prefer perception show the world their preferred perceiving function
(sensing or intuition). So, SP types tend to appear to the world as concrete and NP
types as abstract. According to Myers, perceptive types prefer to "keep decisions
open".
For extraverts, the J or P indicates their dominant function; for introverts, the J or P
indicates their auxiliary functionsIntroverts tend to show their dominant function
outwardly only in matters "important to their inner worlds" For example:
Because the ENTJ type is extraverted, the J indicates that the dominant function is
the preferred judging function (extraverted thinking). The ENTJ type introverts the
auxiliary perceiving function (introverted intuition). The tertiary function is sensing
and the inferior function is introverted feeling.
Because the INTJ type is introverted, however, the J instead indicates that the
auxiliary function is the preferred judging function (extraverted thinking). The INTJ
type introverts the dominant perceiving function (introverted intuition). The tertiary
function is feeling and the inferior function is extraverted sensing.
 THE BIG FIVE MODEL

The big five personality traits

The Big Five personality traits, also known as the five factor model (FFM), is a
taxonomy for personality traits. It is based on common language descriptors.
When factor analysis (a statistical technique) is applied to personality survey data,
some words used to describe aspects of personality are often applied to the same
person. For example, someone described as conscientious is more likely to be
described as "always prepared" rather than "messy". This theory is based therefore
on the association between words but not on neuropsychological experiments. This
theory uses descriptors of common language and therefore suggests five broad
dimensions commonly used to describe the human personality and psyche. The five
factors have been defined as openness to
experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism, often
represented by the acronyms OCEAN or CANOE. Beneath each proposed global
factor, there are a number of correlated and more specific primary factors. For
example, extraversion is said to include such related qualities as gregariousness,
assertiveness, excitement seeking, warmth, activity, and positive emotions
That these underlying factors can be found is consistent with the lexical hypothesis:
personality characteristics that are most important in people's lives will eventually
become a part of their language and, secondly, that more important personality
characteristics are more likely to be encoded into language as a single word.
The five factors are:
Openness to experience (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious). Appreciation for
art, emotion, adventure, unusual ideas, curiosity, and variety of experience.
Openness reflects the degree of intellectual curiosity, creativity and a preference for
novelty and variety a person has. It is also described as the extent to which a person
is imaginative or independent and depicts a personal preference for a variety of
activities over a strict routine. High openness can be perceived as unpredictability or
lack of focus, and more likely to engage in risky behaviour or drug taking Also,
individuals that have high openness tend to lean, in occupation and hobby, towards
the arts, being, typically, creative and appreciative of the significance of intellectual
and artistic pursuits. Moreover, individuals with high openness are said to
pursue self-actualization specifically by seeking out intense, euphoric experiences.
Conversely, those with low openness seek to gain fulfillment through perseverance
and are characterized as pragmatic and data-driven—sometimes even perceived to
be dogmatic and closed-minded. Some disagreement remains about how to interpret
and contextualize the openness factor.
Conscientiousness (efficient/organized vs. easy-going/careless). Tendency to be
organized and dependable, show self-discipline, act dutifully, aim for achievement,
and prefer planned rather than spontaneous behavior. High conscientiousness is
often perceived as stubbornness and obsession. Low conscientiousness is
associated with flexibility and spontaneity, but can also appear as sloppiness and
lack of reliability
Extraversion (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved). Energy, positive
emotions, surgency, assertiveness, sociability and the tendency to
seek stimulation in the company of others, and talkativeness. High extraversion is
often perceived as attention-seeking and domineering. Low extraversion causes a
reserved, reflective personality, which can be perceived as aloof or self-
absorbed.[7] Extroverted people tend to be more dominant in social settings, as
opposed to introverted people who may act more shy and reserved in this setting.
Agreeableness (friendly/compassionate vs. challenging/detached). Tendency to
be compassionate and cooperative rather than suspicious and antagonistic towards
others. It is also a measure of one's trusting and helpful nature, and whether a
person is generally well-tempered or not. High agreeableness is often seen as naive
or submissive. Low agreeableness personalities are often competitive or challenging
people, which can be seen as argumentative or untrustworthy.
Neuroticism (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident). Tendency to be prone to
psychological stress. The tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such
as anger, anxiety, depression, and vulnerability. Neuroticism also refers to the
degree of emotional stability and impulse control and is sometimes referred to by its
low pole, "emotional stability". High stability manifests itself as a stable and calm
personality, but can be seen as uninspiring and unconcerned. Low stability manifests
as the reactive and excitable personality often found in dynamic individuals, but can
be perceived as unstable or insecure. Also, individuals with higher levels of
neuroticism tend to have worse psychological well being
 Major Personality Attributes Influencing OB
In personality psychology, locus of control is the degree to which people believe that
they have control over the outcome of events in their lives, as opposed to external
forces beyond their control. Understanding of the concept was developed by Julian
B. Rotter in 1954, and has since become an aspect of personality studies. A person's
"loci" (plural of "locus", Latin for "place" or "location") are conceptualized as internal
(a belief that one's life can be controlled) or external (a belief that life is controlled by
outside factors which they cannot influence, or that chance or fate controls their
lives)
Individuals with a strong internal locus of control believe events in their life derive
primarily from their own actions: for example, when receiving exam results, people
with an internal locus of control tend to praise or blame themselves and their
abilities. People with a strong external locus of control tend to praise or blame
external factors such as the teacher or the exam.
Locus of control generated much research in a variety of areas in psychology. The
construct is applicable to such fields as educational psychology, health
psychology and clinical psychology. Debate continues whether specific or more
global measures of locus of control will prove to be more useful in practical
application. Careful distinctions should also be made between locus of control (a
concept linked with expectancies about the future) and attributional style (a concept
linked with explanations for past outcomes), or between locus of control and
concepts such as self-efficacy.
Locus of control is one of the four dimensions of core self-evaluations – one's
fundamental appraisal of oneself – along with neuroticism, self-efficacy, and self-
esteem.[3] The concept of core self-evaluations was first examined by Judge, Locke,
and Durham (1997), and since has proven to have the ability to predict several work
outcomes, specifically, job satisfaction and job performance.[4] In a follow-up study,
Judge et al. (2002) argued that locus of control, neuroticism, self-efficacy and self-
esteem factors may have a common core
Locus of control's best known application may have been in the area of health
psychology, largely due to the work of Kenneth Wallston. Scales to measure locus of
control in the health domain were reviewed by Furnham and Steele in 1993. The
best-known are the Health Locus of Control Scale and the Multidimensional Health
Locus of Control Scale, or MHLC. The latter scale is based on the idea (echoing
Levenson's earlier work) that health may be attributed to three sources: internal
factors (such as self-determination of a healthy lifestyle), powerful others (such as
one's doctor) or luck (which is very dangerous as lifestyle advice will be ignored –
these people are very difficult to help).
Some of the scales reviewed by Furnham and Steele (1993) relate to health in more
specific domains, such as obesity (for example, Saltzer's (1982) Weight Locus of
Control Scale or Stotland and Zuroff's (1990) Dieting Beliefs Scale), mental health
(such as Wood and Letak's (1982) Mental Health Locus of Control Scale or the
Depression Locus of Control Scale of Whiteman, Desmond and Price, 1987) and
cancer (the Cancer Locus of Control Scale of Pruyn et al., 1988). In discussing
applications of the concept to health psychology Furnham and Steele refer to Claire
Bradley's work, linking locus of control to the management of diabetes mellitus.
Empirical data on health locus of control in a number of fields was reviewed by
Norman and Bennett in 1995; they note that data on whether certain health-related
behaviors are related to internal health locus of control have been ambiguous. They
note that some studies found that internal health locus of control is linked with
increased exercise, but cite other studies which found a weak (or no) relationship
between exercise behaviors (such as jogging) and internal health locus of control. A
similar ambiguity is noted for data on the relationship between internal health locus
of control and other health-related behaviors (such as breast self-examination,
weight control and preventative-health behavior). Of particular interest are the data
cited on the relationship between internal health locus of control and alcohol
consumption.
Norman and Bennett note that some studies that compared alcoholics with non-
alcoholics suggest alcoholism is linked to increased externality for health locus of
control; however, other studies have linked alcoholism with increased internality.
Similar ambiguity has been found in studies of alcohol consumption in the general,
non-alcoholic population. They are more optimistic in reviewing the literature on the
relationship between internal health locus of control and smoking cessation, although
they also point out that there are grounds for supposing that powerful-others and
internal-health loci of control may be linked with this behavior. It is thought that,
rather than being caused by one or the other, that alcoholism is directly related to the
strength of the locus, regardless of type, internal or external.

 Core self-evaluation
People who have possible core self-evaluation tend to evaluate themselves more
effective, capable, competent and worthy among other. They trust themselves. But,
people with low core self-evaluation tend to be themselves as less capable, low
competent and less important in organization. Core self-evaluation trust on them and
tend to involve in challenging jobs and they attain them.
 Machiavellianism (Mach)
It is the personality dimension measuring the degree to which an individual is
pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes that end can justify means.
An individual high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance,
etc.
 Narcissism
Narcissism is the tendency of an individual thinking self importance. Such persons
are arrogant, require excessive admiration, and have a sense of entitlement. Such
people are found to be more charismatic and hence more likely to emerge as
leaders. But, many studies concluded that narcissism is undesirable. Narcissists
often want to have admiration from others for their jobs and superiority. "Narcissists
also tend to be selfish and exploitive and believe others exist for their benefit".
 Self-Monitoring

This trait of personality is the measure of extent to which an individual adjust his or
her behavior to external situational factors. Person with high self-monitoring tend to
be adaptable in adjusting their behavior to external situational factors at considerable
level. Such people change themselves as per the situational demand i.e. show
different behavior at different situation. Such persons pay close attention to the
behavior of others and they conform their future action. Person with high self-
monitoring tend to be more mobile in their career, receive more promotions and
occupy central positions in organization. But, people with low self-monitoring fail to
do so. They try to display their true dispositions and attitude in every situation
whatever that can be unpleasant.
 Type A and Type B personality hypothesis describes two
contrasting personality types. In this hypothesis, personalities that are more
competitive, highly organized, ambitious, impatient, highly aware of time
management and/or aggressive are labeled Type A, while more relaxed, less
"neurotic", 'frantic', 'explainable', personalities are labeled Type B.
The two cardiologists who developed this theory came to believe that Type A
personalities had a greater chance of developing coronary heart disease.[1] Following
the results of further studies and considerable controversy about the role of
the tobacco industry funding of early research in this area, some reject, either
partially or completely, the link between Type A personality and coronary disease.
Nevertheless, this research had a significant effect on the development of the health
psychology field, in which psychologists look at how an individual's mental state
affects physical health.[2]
 Type A
The hypothesis describes Type A individuals as outgoing, ambitious,
rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, sensitive, impatient, anxious, proactive,
and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often
high-achieving "workaholics". They push themselves with deadlines, and hate both
delays and ambivalence.[7] People with Type A personalities experience more job-
related stress and less job satisfaction.[8]
In his 1996 book dealing with extreme Type A behavior, Type A Behavior: Its
Diagnosis and Treatment, Friedman suggests that dangerous Type A behavior is
expressed through three major symptoms: (1) free-floating hostility, which can be
triggered by even minor incidents; (2) time urgency and impatience, which
causes irritation and exasperation usually described as being "short-fused"; and (3)
a competitive drive, which causes stress and an achievement-driven mentality. The
first of these symptoms is believed to be covert and therefore less observable, while
the other two are more overt.[9]
 Type A people were said to be hasty, impatient, impulsive, hyperalert,
potentially hostile, and angry.Research has also shown that Type A
personalities deal with reality and have certain defenses when it comes to
dealing with problems.
There are two main methods to assessing Type A behaviour. The first being the SI
and the second being the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS)[The SI assessment involves
an interviewer measuring a persons emotional, nonverbal and verbal responses
(your expressive style). The JAS involves a self questionnaire with three main
categories: Speed and Impatience, Job Involvement, and Hard-Driving
Competitiveness.
 Type b
The hypothesis describes Type B individuals as a contrast to those of Type A. Type
B personality, by definition, are noted to live at lower stress levels. They typically
work steadily, and may enjoy achievement, although they have a greater tendency to
disregard physical or mental stress when they do not achieve. When faced with
competition, they may focus less on winning or losing than their Type A counterparts,
and more on enjoying the game regardless of winning or losing. Unlike the Type A
personality's rhythm of multi-tasked careers, Type B individuals are sometimes
attracted to careers of creativity: writer, counselor, therapist, actor or actress.
However, network and computer systems managers, professors, and judges are
more likely to be Type B individuals as well. Their personal character may enjoy
exploring ideas and concepts.