See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315798577

Big Five personality traits and job satisfaction: Evidence from a national
sample

Article in Journal of General Management · April 2017

DOI: 10.1177/0306307016687990

CITATIONS READS

96 27,465

1 author:

Hong Bui
Birmingham City University
77 PUBLICATIONS 1,220 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Hong Bui on 08 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Article
Journal of General Management
2017, Vol. 42(3) 21–30
Big Five personality traits ª The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permission:

and job satisfaction: Evidence sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0306307016687990
journals.sagepub.com/home/gem
from a national sample

Hong TM Bui
University of Bath, UK

Abstract
Employing the dispositional approach and a national sample, this study reexamines the relationship between the Big Five
personality traits and job satisfaction to establish whether its findings may challenge the current literature. To achieve this,
a large national sample of 7662 respondents from the United Kingdom was used. Hierarchical regressions were employed
to investigate the impact of the Big Five traits on job satisfaction among male, female, young, middle-aged and elderly
subsamples. The results show that extraversion has no significant impact on job satisfaction in any group of employees,
while up to four other traits are significantly linked to job satisfaction in subgroups. The younger the employees are, the
larger the number of traits they display that have a significant impact (both positively and negatively) on job satisfaction.
This study also shows differences in this relationship between male and female employees. These findings imply that the
relationships among the Big Five traits and job satisfaction are more complex than shown in the literature. Therefore,
using the dispositional approach to job satisfaction, managers should take different approaches to age and gender because
job satisfaction is likely to vary among different ages and genders.

Keywords
Big Five traits, dispositional approach, job satisfaction, UK employees

Introduction Thousands of traits have been proposed in the history of

personality research, and scores of traits have been studied
Job satisfaction, on the one hand, has attracted a great deal
in relation to job satisfaction (Judge et al., 2002). When
of attention from both human resource practitioners and
scholars have investigated the relationship between person-
scholars (Coyne et al., 2016; Holland et al., 2011; Mihaj-
ality and job satisfaction, the findings have been interpreted
lovic et al., 2008; Rad and De Moraes, 2009; Riza et al.,
in a variety of ways. For example, Furnham and Zacherl
2016; Rogelberg et al., 2010). The dispositional approach
(1986) examined the relationship between the dimensions
to job satisfaction has been the focus of major research
of extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism, and job
effort (House et al., 1996; Judge et al., 2008; Li et al. satisfaction. They found that only extraversion signifi-
2010). Judge and Hulin (1993) and Judge and Locke
cantly correlates with job satisfaction. Judge et al. (2000)
(1993) found that affective disposition, measured as a
investigated the relationship between core self-evaluation
response to a series of neutral objects common to everyday
with dimensions of self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy,
life, is related to job satisfaction.
locus of control and neuroticism, and job satisfaction. In
On the other hand, personality is under-researched in
one case study, they found core self-evaluation is positively
general management (e.g. Higgs and Lichtenstein, 2010,
associated with job satisfaction, while in another study, it is
is one of very few). Higgs and Lichtenstein’s (2010) study
not. In each of their two studies, neuroticism is negatively
investigated the relationship between personality and val- associated with core self-evaluation, while self-esteem,
ues that play an important role in underpinning sustained
self-efficacy and locus of control are often positively linked
organizational performance and growth. It shows that the
with core self-evaluation. Ilies et al. (2009) studied the
relationship is much more complex and interactive than has
been previously suggested. It seems to be true for most of the
studies conducted relating to personality. This is why it is
Corresponding author:
important for the general management audience to better Hong TM Bui, Associate Professor, School of Management, University of
understand the impacts of personality on organizations as Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK.
people are the most valuable asset to an organization. Email: [email protected]
22 Journal of General Management 42(3)

mediating role of job satisfaction on the relationship of this study challenge the results of previous studies by show-
personality and citizenship behaviour in a meta-analysis. ing that extraversion has no significant impact on job satis-
These reviewed studies have covered one or more aspects faction in any group of employees, while up to four other
of the Big Five personality traits, the most recognized way traits significantly predict job satisfaction for some sub-
of interpreting personality in psychology, comprising groups; the younger the employees are, the more traits they
extroversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, openness to have that significantly impact (both positively and nega-
experience and conscientiousness (Goldberg, 1992). The tively) on their job satisfaction.
Big Five structure does not imply that personality differ- The next section continues with a theoretical framework
ences can be reduced to only five traits, but these five traits of the dispositional approach prior to reviewing the rela-
represent personality at the broadest level of abstraction, tionships between the five personality traits with job satis-
and each dimension summarizes a large number of distinct, faction. Then it is followed by a description of the research
more specific personality characteristics (John and Srivas- methods and analysis. The discussion reflects contributions
tava, 1999). in theory as well as practical implications, and closes with
Judge et al. (2002) and Saari and Judge (2004) recom- limitations and suggestions for future research direction.
mended that future research should focus on a greater
understanding of the relationship between the Big Five
traits and job satisfaction. In fact, there are hardly any Theoretical development
cross-sectional or longitudinal studies that have examined Dispositional approach to job satisfaction
the relationship between all Big Five traits and job satisfac-
tion simultaneously, except some meta-analysis studies that Although there is a strong debate between situational and
identify separate factors used in various studies (Ilies and dispositional approaches to job satisfaction in the literature
Judge, 2003; Judge et al., 2002). However, these studies do (Staw and Cohen-Charach, 2005), both approaches can be
not distinguish their impact on job satisfaction according to relevant in examining job satisfaction. In addition, because
gender or different age groups. the situational approach to job satisfaction has flourished
In addition, Donnellan and Lucas (2008) pointed out a (Staw and Cohen-Charach, 2005), more research should be
consistent relationship between age trends and the Big Five focused on the dispositional approach to understand more
Inventory (BFI) in two large data sets from Britain and about the other perspectives of job satisfaction. Many orga-
Germany. They found that extraversion and openness were nizational psychologists state that dispositions can be a
negatively associated with age, whereas agreeableness was vital determinant of people’s job attitudes (Judge and
positively associated with age; average levels of conscien- Locke, 1993; Watson and Slack, 1993).
tiousness were highest for participants in middle age. The dispositional approach ‘involves the measurement
Thus, the purpose of this study is to investigate the of personal characteristics and the assumption that such
relationship between the five-factor model of personality measures can aid in explaining individual attitudes and
and job satisfaction with nationwide data from the British behaviour’ (Staw and Ross, 1985: 470). This approach
Household Panel Survey (BHPS). It examines to what shows a strong link to job attitudes, including job satisfac-
extent the Big Five traits impact on job satisfaction among tion (Staw and Cohen-Charach, 2005; Staw et al., 1986). In
men and women and also among different age groups. This other words, job satisfaction is, in part, dispositionally
is very important for two key reasons. First, in terms of based (Judge and Larsen, 2001). There tend to be three
psychology, males and females are different due to their popular personality taxonomies used in the dispositional
traditional prescribed masculine and feminine roles approach to job satisfaction: positive affectivity, negative
(Deaux, 1976, 1977). Furnham (2005) found evidence of affectivity and the Big Five traits (Judge et al., 2008; Judge
the impacts of Big Five personality trait differences and Larsen, 2001). In their study, Judge and Larsen (2001)
between men and women, while Mason (1997) showed concluded that two traits (neuroticism and extraversion)
gender differences in job satisfaction, but neither consid- and two dimensions of affect (positive affectivity and neg-
ered all these factors together. Second, psychosocial aging ative affectivity) appear to be best suited to predicting job
refers to systematic changes in personality, needs, expec- satisfaction. In another study, Judge et al (2002: 536) stated
tations and behaviour as well as performance in a sequence that ‘the five-factor model is a fruitful basis to examine the
of socially prescribed roles and accumulation of experi- dispositional source of job satisfaction’. There seems to be
ences (Rhodes, 1983). These psychological aspects have no contradiction between these statements, because emo-
been becoming more and more important for practitioners tions (positive affectivity and negative affectivity) partly
and managers when soft skills and emotional intelligence reflect personality traits (Izard et al., 1993). As a conse-
have exceeded the importance of intellectual intelligence. quence, the next section reviews the dispositional relation-
Therefore, the main contribution of this study is to pro- ships of the Big Five traits with job satisfaction.
vide a different understanding of the dispositional approach
to job satisfaction in the context of gender and age using a Relationships of the Big Five traits with job satisfaction
nationwide sample, rather than making generalized state- Neuroticism. Neuroticism generally refers to a lack of pos-
ments based on small samples or meta-analyses of small- itive psychological adjustment and emotional stability
sample studies (Judge et al., 2002). Importantly, findings in (Judge et al., 1999). Neurotic individuals might experience
Bui 23

too much or too little external stimulation (Gardner and However, openness to experience sometimes can be seen
Cummings, 1988). People with a high level of neuroticism as a ‘double-edged sword’ in careers for those who have a
are likely to experience negative emotions, including anxi- high level of openness, as open people tend to be prone to
ety, depression, hostility and vulnerability (Costa and job switching or unhappy in conventional occupations
McCrea, 1992) because they tend to put themselves into (Judge et al., 2002). Both meta-analysis and primary anal-
situations that foster negative impact (Emmons et al., ysis show that openness to experience has no significant
1985). Noticeably, implicit self-concept of neuroticism impact on job satisfaction (Furnham et al., 2009; Ilies and
tends to have a stronger association in women than in men Judge, 2003; Judge et al., 2002).
(Donges et al., 2015).
In relation to job satisfaction, neuroticism is found to be Agreeableness. Agreeableness indicates cooperation (trust-
negatively associated with job satisfaction (Furnham and ing of others and caring) and likeableness (good-natured,
Zacherl, 1986; Ilies and Judge, 2003; Judge et al., 2002). In cheerful and gentle) (Judge et al., 1999). Agreeableness
Judge et al.’s (2002) meta-analysis, neuroticism is most involves pleasant and satisfying relationships with others
strongly correlated with job satisfaction, but in a negative (Organ and Lingl, 1995). Furnham and Cheng (2015) have
manner. Ilies and Judge (2003) in another meta-analysis recently identified early indicators of the adult trait of
found that emotional stability – the reverse of neuroticism agreeableness; these include parental social status, child-
– is also strongly associated with job satisfaction. In con- hood intelligence, education, occupation and gender. Par-
trast, Furnham et al. (2009), in a study of 202 full-time ticularly, females appear to score higher in the trait of
workers in the United Kingdom, found that the relationship agreeableness than males do.
between neuroticism and job satisfaction is positive but The current literature shows an unclear relationship
insignificant. Thus the results of an examination of the between agreeableness and job satisfaction. For example,
impact of neuroticism on job satisfaction are controversial agreeableness is found to be positively and significantly
and further investigation into this relationship is necessary. associated with job satisfaction in a meta-analytic path
analysis (Ilies et al., 2009), in a tight and collective Asian
Extraversion. Extraversion describes the extent to which society (Templer, 2012) and in the public sector (Cooper
individuals are assertive, active, enthusiastic, energetic and et al., 2014). At the same time, it is insignificant in other
dominant (Costa and McCrea, 1992). Judge et al. (1999) studies (Furnham et al., 2009; Ilies and Judge, 2003; Judge
pointed out that extraverts tend to be socially oriented (out- et al., 2002). Thus the results are not consistent, which
going and gregarious), but also are ‘surgent’ (dominant and invites further investigation with large-scale studies.
ambitious) and active (adventurous and assertive). On the
one hand, social orientation can be viewed as an advantage Conscientiousness. Conscientiousness refers to people’s
of employees in most job environments. On the other, dom- level of organization, hard work and motivation in the pur-
inance and ambition can be seen as ambiguous. suit of established goals (Zhao and Seibert, 2006). Furnham
In relation to job satisfaction, there appears to be a very and Cheng (2015) showed that parental social status, child-
strong correlation between extraversion and job satisfac- hood intelligence, education and occupation are all mod-
tion. For example, in a study of farmers by Brayfield and estly but significantly associated with conscientiousness.
Marsh (1957) and a small but diverse sample study by Particularly, they also indicated that females tend to score
Furnham and Zacherl (1986), extraversion is found to be higher in conscientiousness than males do. Conscientious-
strongly correlated with job satisfaction. In the meta- ness is the most consistent personality predictor of success
analysis of 163 independent samples and 334 correlations at work across all types of employment and occupations
by Judge et al. (2002), there is a strong connection between (Barrick et al., 2001; Judge et al., 1999). This may well
extraversion and job satisfaction. In another meta-analysis, explain why conscientiousness is positively related to job
Ilies and Judge (2003) also found significant association satisfaction (see more in Furnham et al., 2009; Ilies and
between extraversion and job satisfaction. However, in a Judge, 2003; Ilies et al., 2009; Judge et al., 2002).
recent study of 202 full-time employees, Furnham et al. In summary, the literature shows conscientiousness to
(2009) found that extraversion does not strongly correlate have a consistently significant impact on job satisfaction,
or provide evidence of an association with job satisfaction. while openness to experience has a consistently insignif-
It can be seen that although the relationship between extra- icant impact. Three out of the Big Five traits – neuroticism,
version and job satisfaction is inconsistent, the coefficient extraversion and agreeableness – have been indicated to
values tend to be significant. have inconsistent relationships with job satisfaction. In
addition, none of the studies have investigated the relation-
Openness to experience. Openness to experience is charac- ship in a more disaggregate context, such as differences by
terized by ‘intellectance’ (philosophical and intellectual) gender or age, despite the evidence in the psychology lit-
and unconventionality (imaginative, autonomous and erature that shows major divisions between the behaviour
non-conforming) (Judge et al., 1999). In many contexts, of men and women and young and old. For example,
openness to experience can be seen as a positive quality women score higher than men in conscientiousness and
of an employee (Desimoni and Leone, 2014); openness to neuroticism (Costa et al., 2001). Therefore, this study seeks
experience is also seen as an important factor for active to understand the relationship between the Big Five traits
older adults’ life satisfaction (Gregory et al., 2010). with job satisfaction further in various subgroups of age
24 Journal of General Management 42(3)

and gender in a cross-sectional research in the United Taylor, 2014; Donnellan and Lucas, 2008; Heineck, 2011;
Kingdom. Yap et al., 2012).
The dependent variable is job satisfaction, which is also
generated by standardizing the average score from items
that capture employees’ satisfaction with the following four
Research methods
aspects of work: the nature of the work itself, pay, job
Sample security and hours worked. The answers to these items
range from 1 (‘not satisfied at all’) to 7 (‘completely satis-
The data is from the British Household Panel Survey
fied’). Cronbach’s a is 0.86 for job satisfaction.
(BHPS), which is a nationally representative sample of
All the above items are included in a factor analysis for
more than 5000 households in the United Kingdom (Tay-
factor retention decision (Hayton et al., 2004). Principle
lor et al., 2007). The final sample consists of 7635
component analysis with varimax rotation is used to sim-
employees, in which 3622 are male; 4040 are female;
plify factors by maximizing the variance of the loadings
2878 are aged under 36; 3725 between 36 and 50; and
within factors, across variables (Tabachnick and Fidell,
1032 above 50. The division of these age groups is equiv-
2001). Table 1 shows the factor loadings of all measures
alent to three common age groups in social research: the
in the rotated component matrix. Six factors are included,
young, middle aged and older of both genders. The
and there is no cross loading, suggesting significant
respondents work for various types of organizations,
orthogonality among the factors.
namely private firms, central government, local govern-
ment, the National Health Service (NHS), higher educa-
tion, nationalized industries, non-profit organizations,
Analytical techniques
armed forces and others. However, the variable of sectors Three control variables – age, gender and present legal
and industries was excluded because they are too marital status – are taken into consideration. Gender is
fragmented. coded 1 for male and 2 for female. Marital status is coded
As the BHPS has been a UK-wide research survey from 1 for married, 2 for separated, 3 for divorced, 4 for
1991, it is well managed to reduce non-response bias. The widowed and 5 for never married.
first and foremost measure that has been done to deal with Table 2 reports the correlations between the Big Five
this issue is face-to-face survey (Lynn and Clarke, 2002). traits and job satisfaction scores. Job satisfaction is posi-
tively correlated with agreeableness, conscientiousness
Measures and extraversion (all p < 0.01). It is negatively corre-
lated with neuroticism (p < 0.01). There is almost no
In 2005, the BHPS included 15 psychological items related
correlation between openness to experience and job
to the Big Five traits, namely neuroticism, extraversion,
satisfaction.
agreeableness, openness to experience and conscientious-
Hierarchical regressions are used to investigate the
ness. As extensive psychological questioning is not practic-
impact of the Big Five traits on job satisfaction. The three
able in large-scale survey, particularly BHPS, three items
control variables are entered in step 1, and the indepen-
are used to capture each personality trait. These 15 items,
dent variables representing the five personality traits are
called the Big Five Inventory – Short (BFI-S), are derived
entered in step 2. For clarity and ease of comparison, the
from the well-established John et al. (1991) 44-item BFI by
results are reported in two tables. Table 3 presents
German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP) researchers.
the results of the regressions of the total sample and male
Answers range from 1 (‘does not apply’) to 7 (‘applies
and female subsamples and Table 4 presents the results of
perfectly’). The measures used in the analysis are generated
the age cohort subsamples.
by standardizing the average score from the dimension-
specific items. Cronbach’s a values were 0.56 for agree-
ableness, 0.54 for conscientiousness, 0.59 for extraversion,
0.69 for neuroticism and 0.66 for openness to experience. Analysis and findings
Although the internal consistency of the five trait scales in Table 3 shows that gender has a significant impact on job
the BHPS is not robust, they are valid for the following satisfaction. The standardized coefficient (b) is 0.112 (p <
reasons. First, ‘short instruments like BFI-S are meant to 0.01), showing that female employees are more likely to
optimise validity rather than reliability’ (Tavares, 2010: have a higher level of job satisfaction than male employees.
14). Second, the BFI-S is derived from the well- Marital status seems to seriously affect job satisfaction
established instrument that has been validated in several amongst female employees. The standardized coefficient
hundreds of studies. Third, although short scales are not is 0.061 (p < 0.01) for women and 0.001 (p ¼ 0.973)
often preferable, larger numbers of respondents can be for men. Age does not appear to have any significant
obtained, and this is the dominant advantage of this instru- impact on job satisfaction.
ment. In addition, Hahn et al. (2012) have noted that in The first two columns of Table 3 present the coefficients
research settings with a pronounced need for parsimony, of the Big Five traits among the whole UK sample. Job
the BFI short version offers a sufficient level of utility. This satisfaction is positive and significantly associated with
instrument and Big Five data from the BHPS have been agreeableness, conscientiousness and extraversion with the
used in a large number of studies before (e.g. Brown and standardized coefficients (b) that are 0.068 (p < 0.01),
Bui 25

Table 1. Rotated component matrix.a

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6
Job satisfaction: total pay 0.683
Job satisfaction: security 0.611
Job satisfaction: work itself 0.781
Job satisfaction: hours worked 0.707
Job satisfaction: overall 0.885
Respondent has a forgiving nature 0.658
Respondent considerate and kind 0.676
Respondent is rude to others (R) 0.741
Respondent tend to be lazy (R) 0.510
Respondent does a thorough job 0.782
Respondent does things efficiently 0.762
Respondent is talkative 0.739
Respondent is outgoing, sociable 0.694
Respondent is reserved (R) 0.723
Respondent feels relaxed, handles stress well (R) 0.680
Respondent worries a lot 0.825
Respondent gets nervous easily 0.779
Respondent is original, comes up with ideas 0.713
Respondent values artistic, aesthetic experience 0.666
Respondent has an active imagination 0.734
Note: R: Reversed; Extraction method: principal component analysis; Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization.
a
Rotation converged in six iterations.

Table 2. Correlation matrix.

Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5
1. Agreeableness 5.264 1.084
2. Conscientiousness 5.482 1.058 0.401**
3. Extraversion 4.859 1.238 0.136** 0.175**
4. Neuroticism 3.676 1.346 0.061** 0.149** 0.146**
5. Openness 4.572 1.091 0.191** 0.244** 0.303** 0.084**
6. Job satisfaction 5.358 0.985 0.132** 0.122** 0.059** 0.137** 0.000
Note: *p < .05; **p < .01.

Table 3. Big Five and job satisfaction among the total sample, male employee and female employees.

Total sample (N ¼ 7662) Male (N ¼ 3622) Female (N ¼ 4040)

Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

Age 0.011 0.009 0.023 0.006 0.010 0.012
Gender 0.098** 0.112**
Marital status 0.021* 0.032* 0.008 0.001 0.064** 0.061**
Agreeableness 0.068** 0.046* 0.090**
Conscientiousness 0.060** 0.066** 0.051*
Extraversion 0.033 0.014 0.049
Neuroticism 0.143** 0.155** 0.126**
Openness 0.033* 0.037* 0.028
R2 change 0.036 0.033 0.035
Fchange 52.201** 25.351** 29.062**
Durbin–Watson 1.909 1.992 1.953
Note: standardized coefficients reported.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

0.060 (p < 0.01) and 0.033 (p < 0.05), respectively. In The results of the regression of job satisfaction on the
contrast, it is significantly negatively associated with neu- Big Five traits among male employees and female employ-
roticism, and openness to experience with the standardized ees are slightly different. Among male employees, job
coefficients is 0.143 (p < 0.01) and 0.036 (p < 0.05), satisfaction is significantly positively associated with
respectively. agreeableness (b ¼ 0.046, p < 0.05) and conscientiousness
26 Journal of General Management 42(3)

Table 4. Big Five and job Satisfaction among the young, middle-aged and elder employees.

Young employees Middle-aged employees Elder employees

(under 36) (N ¼ 2878) (36–50) (N ¼ 3725) (above 50) (N ¼ 1032)

Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

Gender 0.077** 0.083** 0.120** 137** 0.102* 0.117*
Marital status 0.022 0.011 0.059** 0.054* 0.074* 0.073*
Agreeableness 0.051* 0.087** 0.069
Conscientiousness 0.088** 0.049* 0.035
Extraversion 0.032 0.020 0.046
Neuroticism 0.130** 0.167** 0.092*
Openness 0.075** 0.006 0.031
R2 change 0.037 0.041 0.019
Fchange 19.563** 32.437** 4.072*
Durbin–Watson 1.990 1.880 1.913
Note: standardized coefficients reported.
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01.

Table 5. Summary of the findings of the relationships between the Big Five traits and job satisfaction.

Total sample Male Female Young age Middle age Elder age
Agreeableness Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Non-significant
Conscientiousness Positive Positive Positive Positive Positive Non-significant
Extraversion Non-significant Non-significant Non-significant Non-significant Non-significant Non-significant
Neuroticism Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative Negative
Openness Negative Negative Non-significant Negative Non-significant Non-significant

(b ¼ 0.066, p < 0.01). It is significantly negatively associ- extraversion and openness to experience do not appear to
ated with neuroticism (b ¼ 0.155, p < 0.01) and openness be significant determinants of job satisfaction among older
to experience (b ¼ 0.037, p < 0.05). Extraversion is not a employees of both genders.
significant determinant of job satisfaction among male Table 5 summarizes the findings from the above analy-
employees. Among female employees, job satisfaction is sis. There are 10 positive relationships, 9 negative relation-
significantly positively associated with agreeableness ships and 11 non-significant relationships among the Big
(b ¼ 0.090, p < 0.01) and conscientiousness (b ¼ 0.051, Five traits and job satisfaction among different subsamples.
p < 0.05). It is negative and significantly associated with
neuroticism (b ¼ 0.126, p < 0.01). Extraversion and
openness to experience do not show any significant con- Discussion and conclusion
nection with job satisfaction among female employees.
Table 4 reports the regression results for different age With the exception of meta-analyses, the current study is
groups. The results in the younger group are similar to one of a few that focus on the relationships of the Big Five
those in the subsample of male employees of all ages. Job personality traits and job satisfaction. By employing a
satisfaction is positive and significantly associated with very large nationwide sample, the findings of this study
agreeableness (b ¼ 0.051, p < 0.05) and conscientiousness allow a high level of generalization, at least for a nation
(b ¼ 0.088, p < 0.01). It is significantly negatively associ- with similar contexts like the UK. The results of this study
ated with neuroticism (b ¼ 0.130, p < 0.01) and openness confirm that the Big Five traits are fruitful for examining
to experience (b ¼ 0.075, p < 0.01). Extraversion does the dispositional source of job satisfaction (Judge et al.,
not appear to be a significant determinant of job satisfac- 2002). Findings from this study bring some new and inter-
tion among young employees. esting perspectives on the relationship of Big Five traits
The regression results of the middle-aged group are with job satisfaction.
similar to those for the female group of all ages. Job satis-
faction is significantly positively associated with agree- Theoretical implications
ableness (b ¼ 0.087, p < 0.01) and conscientiousness First, unlike the findings in the two major meta-analyses on
(b ¼ 0.049, p < 0.05). It is significantly negatively associ- the relationship between the Big Five traits and job satis-
ated with neuroticism (b ¼ 0.167, p < 0.01). Extraversion faction by Judge et al. (2002) and Ilies and Judge (2003),
and openness to experience do not appear to be significant which show that three traits (neuroticism, extraversion and
determinants of job satisfaction among middle-aged conscientiousness) display medium correlations with job
employees. In the elder group, job satisfaction is only satisfaction, this study generally finds up to four traits (neu-
significantly negatively associated with neuroticism roticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to
(b ¼ 0.092, p < 0.05). Agreeableness, conscientiousness, experience) to be important predictors of job satisfaction.
Bui 27

This article is the first to use an extensive national sample responsibilities which are likely to allow fewer choices for
to show that apart from the importance of neuroticism and them. Therefore, they tend to appreciate job stability more
conscientiousness, agreeableness is an important predictor than men and consequently be less risky in job hopping.
of job satisfaction. Openness to experience is also impor- Sixth, with respect to age, the findings show interesting
tant, but in a negative direction. This is the first contribu- results for the different cohorts. There are more traits that
tion of this article. predict young employees’ job satisfaction than that of older
Second, this study also provides evidence of the signif- employees. Among young employees, agreeableness and
icant impact of agreeableness on job satisfaction. This find- conscientiousness tend to predict high levels of job satis-
ing is different from those of Judge et al. (2002) and Ilies faction, while neuroticism and openness tend to predict low
and Judge (2003) but supports that of Ilies et al. (2009). It levels of job satisfaction. This finding confirms the nega-
appears from this sample that in a new working environ- tive side of openness to experience as young open people
ment, where changes are continuous, teamwork is more tend to be prone to frequent job switching (Judge et al.,
popular than individual effort, and collaboration and com- 1999).
petition exist in parallel; agreeableness is becoming impor- Among middle-aged employees, openness to experi-
tant at work. In other words, people who find it easy to ence no longer has a significant impact on job satisfaction.
reach an agreement with colleagues at work tend to have a This might be that middle-aged open people tend to be
high level of job satisfaction. This finding is in line with our more mature and can achieve a work–life balance. At this
massive literature on the relationships among emotional age, they tend to settle down with their own family and
intelligence, teamwork, performance and job satisfaction. feel reluctant to change their job. The other three traits of
Third, although it is shown in a number of primary and neuroticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness still
meta-analyses that extraversion is strongly correlated with play an important role in job satisfaction. However, in this
job satisfaction (Brayfield and Marsh, 1957; Furnham and age group, agreeableness has a stronger impact on job
Zacherl, 1986; Ilies and Judge, 2003; Judge et al., 2002) or satisfaction than conscientiousness compared to younger
that extraversion best predicts job satisfaction (Judge and employees.
Larsen, 2001), this large-sample study shows that it has no The impact of conscientiousness is neutralized when we
significant impact on job satisfaction. Evidence indicates consider the relationship among employees over 50. It
that extraverts have more friends and spend more time on seems that when people get older, hard work and goal-
socializing, and because of their social facility, they are oriented motivation do not really work with job satisfac-
likely to find interpersonal interactions that occur at work tion. This really challenges the findings in other studies that
more rewarding (Watson and Clark, 1997). However, conscientiousness is the most consistent personality predic-
among UK employees, extraversion has no relationship tor of success at work across sectors and occupation (Bar-
with job satisfaction. This third theoretical contribution of rick et al., 2001; Judge et al., 1999). This study shows that
the current study is important as it challenges the current age can significantly moderate the relationships between
literature and urges for further research in this area. the Big Five traits and job satisfaction. With elder employ-
Fourth, the findings in this study are also different from ees, only neuroticism negatively affects their job satisfac-
those of Furnham et al. (2009) that suggested that only tion; nothing else does.
conscientiousness is strongly associated with job satisfac- The findings of differences among age groups show
tion. This study shows that conscientiousness is not the that the younger the employee, the greater the number
strongest predictor of job satisfaction, but rather that neu- of traits that have a significant impact (both positively
roticism plays a larger role. A lack of positive psychologi- and negatively) on job satisfaction. This is one of the most
cal adjustment and emotional stability are bad for job important contributions of the current study, because it
satisfaction. These literature-challenging findings also contributes to the debate between the dispositional and
imply some hidden mysteries in these research areas that situational approach to job satisfaction. Young people
need more attentions from researchers and practitioners. who do not have much work and life experience tend to
Fifth, the next contribution is the disaggregate analysis be more intuitive in occupation, in which personality traits
that considers gender and age cohorts separately. This play important role in their work attitudes, including job
study finds that among male employees, neuroticism, satisfaction. In this case, the dispositional approach to job
agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness are strong satisfaction can be more appropriate. The older age cohort
predictors of job satisfaction, whereas among women, neu- has more experience and their work attitudes tend to
roticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness are major depend on contexts or situations rather than dispositions.
factors, with openness excluded. This is an important dif- In such cases, the situational approach to job satisfaction
ference between male and female employees. The implica- might be more suitable.
tion of this is that tenure in any job is shorter for men and Seventh, in this large-scale study, on the one hand the
they become dissatisfied in their current position and move results relate to wide literature: neuroticism always plays a
to a new job much sooner. In contrast, openness to experi- significantly negative impact on job satisfaction (Furnham
ence is not likely to affect job satisfaction among women. and Zacherl, 1986; Ilies and Judge, 2003; Judge et al.,
The reason may be that many women are less mobile in 2000; Judge et al., 2002). On the other hand, it challenges
terms of job switching than men due to family previous studies. That is, it is not conscientiousness but
28 Journal of General Management 42(3)

neuroticism that seems to be the most consistent predictor for managers to remember, agreeableness and conscien-
of job satisfaction among the Big Five traits. tiousness tend to do more good for job satisfaction, while
Finally, the results of this study are based on a nation- neuroticism and openness to experience do more harm. In
wide sample of nearly 8000 participants. Even when divid- addition, extraversion seems to have no impact on job
ing by gender or age, the subsamples/cohorts are still large. satisfaction; extraversion and intraversion should not be
Thus, the results are more likely to be generalized and taken into account when measuring or improving employ-
reliable for UK employees. This is another important con- ees’ job satisfaction. Thus, managers are encouraged to
tribution of the study. understand more about stereotypes associated with young
employees as they tend to depend on more dispositions for
job satisfaction compared with the elder age cohort.
Managerial implications Finally, personality traits have been found to link with
This study is one of the first empirical investigations of the many other aspects of work, such as training proficiency
relationship of the Big Five personality traits and job satis- (Vasilopoulos et al., 2007), counterproductive work beha-
faction at the national level and thus provides several viour (Penney et al., 2011), citizenship behaviour (Bjørkelo
important implications for managers and organizations. et al., 2010; Taylor et al., 2010), accident involvement (Clarke
First, personality plays an important role in determin- and Robertson 2005) and so on. Therefore, managers should
ing job satisfaction, and therefore organizations must pay consider each personality trait in relation to not only job
attention to these attributes during the recruitment pro- satisfaction, but also other relevant occupational aspects in
cess. For example, individuals who lack positive psycho- order to obtain the most rounded view of an employee.
logical adjustment and emotional stability may not be
good for most positions. Such employees may not be Limitations and future research
appropriate in a role that require teamwork. Openness to
Some limitations remain in this study, which in turn open
experience is good for those in an entrepreneurial role
doors for future research. First, the self-reported data may
(Zhao and Seibert, 2006) or where there is a high motiva-
raise the question of common method bias. However, as the
tion to learn (Major et al., 2006), but such individuals may
data set is nationally representative, any bias has been mini-
easily be bored and ineffectual in less creative jobs. Open
mized. Other researchers are encouraged to investigate
people, who are normally intellectual, imaginative and
these relationships with other nationally representative data
non-conforming, are likely to be unhappy in manual and
sets, such as the GSOEP. Second, although the data is from
repetitive jobs. Individuals with a high level of openness
the UK national sample, it is difficult to generalize the
to experience tend to be more suitable in a role that
findings internationally as personalities have been found
requires challenges, creativity and innovation. Therefore,
to differ based on climate, culture, region, religion and the
these findings can help managers to make the right
level of development in the society and its institutions
decision in choosing the right personality for jobs.
(Costa et al., 2001). This limitation provides an opportunity
Second, the relationship between personality traits and
for future research to take account of international differ-
job satisfaction varies according to gender and age. For
ences. Third, different dispositional studies on job satisfac-
example, openness to experience does not seem to signif-
tion conducted by Judge et al. show different results of how
icantly impact on female, middle-aged and older employ-
many and which traits best predict job satisfaction. This
ees’ job satisfaction, while it does among male and young
current study shows even more variation. Therefore, future
employees. Therefore, depending on gender, age and cer-
projects could resolve some inconsistencies in the results of
tain types of job, openness to experience should be taken
the relationship between the Big Five traits and job satis-
into consideration.
faction across studies. Fourth, to improve recruitment pro-
Third, agreeableness is clearly important, particularly
cesses, scholars could direct their research efforts into
where more teamwork and collaboration is required,
developing personality trait scales that organizations can
despite some findings that it is not a good personality trait
use as a test similar to IQ or EQ tests for potential employ-
in the context of the ability to learn (Major et al., 2006) or
ees. Last but not least, more studies should be conducted to
to be entrepreneurial (Zhao and Seibert, 2006). Agreeable-
confirm the initial finding that the dispositional approach to
ness is important for most employees, except the elder
job satisfaction might be more suitable among young
group. It is particularly important for middle-aged employ-
employees rather than elder ones.
ees, because at this age many employees are in managerial
or mentoring positions. This trait can flourish where there Acknowledgement
is agreement with their peers and subordinates. Therefore,
I would like to thank Professor Teck Yong Eng and anonymous
organizations should appreciate agreeableness in relation to reviewers who have believed in the contributions of this article,
job satisfaction. and for their useful comments to help in its revision. Any mistakes
Fourth, organizations should pay attention to more per- are my own responsibility.
sonality traits among younger employees than among
older ones because this study indicates that there are four Declaration of Conflicting Interests
traits that significantly influence younger employees’ job The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
satisfaction, three traits among middle-aged employees, respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this
but only one trait among older employees. To make it easy article.
Bui 29

Funding Furnham A and Zacherl M (1986) Personality and job satisfaction.

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, Personality and Individual Differences 7(4): 453–459.
authorship and/or publication of this article. Furnham A and Cheng H (2015) Early indicators of adult trait
Agreeableness. Personality and Individual Differences 73:
67–71.
References Furnham A, Eracleous A and Chamorro-Premuzic T (2009) Per-
Barrick MR, Mount MK and Judge TA (2001) Personality and sonality, motivation and job satisfaction: Hertzberg meets the
performance at the beginning of the new millenium: What do Big Five. Journal of Managerial Psychology 24(8): 765–779.
we know and where do we go next? International Journal of Gardner DG and Cummings LL (1988) Activation theory and job
Selection and Assessment 9: 9–30. redesign: Review and reconceptualization. In Staw BM and
Bjørkelo B, Einarsen S and Matthiesen SB (2010) Predicting proac- Cummings LL (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior.
tive behaviour at work: Exploring the role of personality as an Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 81–122.
antecedent of whistleblowing behaviour. Journal of Occupa- Goldberg LR (1992) The development of markers for the
tional and Organizational Psychology 83(2): 371–394. Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment 4(1):
Brayfield AH and Marsh MM (1957) Aptitudes, interests, and 26–42.
personality characteristics of farmers. Journal of Applied Psy- Gregory T, Nettelbeck T and Wilson C (2010) Openness to expe-
chology 41: 98–103. rience, intelligence, and successful ageing. Personality and
Brown S and Taylor K (2014) Household finances and the ‘Big Five’ Individual Differences 48(8): 895–899.
personality traits. Journal of Economic Psychology 45: 197–212. Hahn E, Gottschling J and Spinath FM (2012) Short measure-
Clarke S and Robertson IT (2005) A meta-analytic review of the ments of personality – Validity and reliability of the GSOEP
Big Five personality factors and accident involvement in occu- Big Five Inventory (BFI-S). Journal of Research in Person-
pational and non-occupational settings. Journal of Occupa- ality 46: 355–359.
tional and Organisational Psychology 78: 355–376. Hayton JC, Allen DG and Scarpello V (2004) Factor retention
Cooper CA, Carpenter D, Reiner A, et al. (2014) Personality and job decisions in exploratory factor analysis: A tutorial on parallel
satisfaction: Evidence from a sample of street-level bureaucrats. analysis. Organizational Research Methods 7(2): 191–205.
International Journal of Public Adminstration 37: 155–161. Heineck G (2011) Does it pay to be nice? Personality and earnings
Costa PT Jr and McCrea JJ (1992) Revised NEO Personality in the United Kingdom. Industrial and Labour Review 64(5):
Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory 1020–1038.
(NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Odessa: PAR. Higgs M and Lichtenstein S (2010) Exploring the ‘‘Jingle Fal-
Costa PTJ, Terracciano A and McCrae RR (2001) Gender differ- lacy’’: A study of personality and values. Journal of General
ences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surpris- Management 36(1): 43–61.
ing findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Holland P, Pyman A, Cooper BK, et al. (2011) Employee voice
81(2): 322–331. and job satisfaction in Australia: The centrality of direct voice.
Coyne I, Farley S, Axtell C, et al. (2016) Understanding the Human Resource Management 50(1): 95–111.
relationship between experiencing workplace cyberbullying, House RJ, Shane SA and Herold DM (1996) Rumors of the death
employee mental strain and job satisfaction: A dysempower- of dispositional research are vastly exaggerated. Academy of
ment approach. International Journal of Human Resource Management Review 21: 203–224.
Management. DOI:10.1080/09585192.2015.1116454. Ilies R and Judge TA (2003) On the heritability of job satisfaction:
Deaux K (1976) The Behavior of Men and Women. Monterey, The mediating role of personality. Journal of Applied Psychol-
CA: Brooks/Cole. ogy 88(4): 750–759.
Deaux K (1977) Sex differences. In Blass T (ed.) Personality Ilies R, Fulmer IS, Spitzmuller M, et al. (2009) Personality and
Variables in Social Behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. citizenship behavior: The mediating role of job satisfaction.
357–377. Journal of Applied Psychology 94(4): 945–959.
Desimoni M and Leone L (2014) Openness to experience, hon- Izard CE, Libero DZ, Putnam P, et al. (1993) Stability of emotion
esty–humility and ideological attitudes: A fine-grained analy- experiences and their relations to traits of personality. Journal
sis. Personality and Individual Differences 59: 116–119. of Personality and Social Psychology 64(5): 847–860.
Donges U-S, Jackmann A, Kersting A, et al. (2015) Attachment John OP and Srivastava S (1999) The Big Five trait taxonomy:
anxiety and implicit self-concept of neuroticism: Associations History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In: Pervin
in women but not men. Personality and Individual Differences LA and John OP (eds) Handbook of Personality. New York:
72: 208–213. The Guilford Press, pp. 102–138.
Donnellan MB and Lucas RE (2008) Age differences in the Big John OP, Donahue EM and Kentle RL (1991) The Big Five Inven-
Five across the life span: Evidence from two national samples. tory – Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of Cali-
Psychology and Aging 23(3): 558–566. fornia, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.
Emmons RA, Diener E and Larsen RJ (1985) Choice of situations Judge TA and Hulin CL (1993) Job satisfaction as a reflection of
and congruence models of interactionism. Personality and disposition: A multiple-source causal analysis. Organizational
Individual Differences 6: 693–702. Behavior and Human Decision Processes 56: 388–421.
Furnham A (2005) Gender and personality differences in self- and Judge TA and Larsen RJ (2001) Dispositional affect and job
other ratings of business intelligence. British Journal of Man- satisfaction: A review and theoretical extension. Organiza-
agement 16: 91–103. tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86(1): 67–98.
30 Journal of General Management 42(3)

Judge TA and Locke EA (1993) Effect of dysfunctional thought Riza SD, Ganzack Y and Liu Y (2016) Time and job satisfaction:
processes on subjective well-being and job satisfaction. Jour- A longitudinal study of the differential roles of age and tenure.
nal of Applied Psychology 78: 475–490. Journal of Management. DOI: 10.1177/0149206315624962.
Judge TA, Bono JE and Locke EA (2000) Personality and job Rogelberg SG, Allen JA, Shanock L, et al. (2010) Employee
satisfaction: The mediating role of job characteristics. Journal satisfaction with meetings: A contemporary facet of job satis-
of Applied Psychology 85(2): 237–249. faction. Human Resource Management 49(2): 149–172.
Judge TA, Heller D and Klinger R (2008) The dispositional Saari LM and Judge TA (2004) Employee attitudes and job satis-
sources of job satisfaction: A comparative test. Applied Psy- faction. Human Resource Management 43(4): 395–407.
chology 57(3): 361–372. Staw BM, Bell NE and Clausen JA (1986) The dispositional
Judge TA, Heller D and Mount MK (2002) Five-factor model of approach to job attitudes: A lifetime longitudinal test. Admin-
personality and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of istrative Science Quarterly 31: 56–77.
Applied Psychology 87(3): 530–541. Staw BM and Cohen-Charach Y (2005) The dispositional
Judge TA, Higgins CA, Thoresen CJ, et al. (1999) The Big approach to job satisfaction: More than a mirage, but not yet
Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career an oasis. Journal of Organizational Behavior 26: 59–78.
success cross the life span. Personnel Psychology 52(3): Staw BM and Ross J (1985) Stability in the midst of change: A
621–652. dispositional approach to job attitudes. Journal of Applied
Li N, Liang J and Crant JM (2010) The role of proactive person- Psychology 70(3): 469–480.
ality in job satisfaction and organizational citizenship beha- Tabachnick BG and Fidell LS (2001), Using Multivariate Statis-
vior: A relational perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology tics, 4th edn. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
95(2): 395–404. Tavares LP (2010) Who delays childbearing? The relationships
Lynn P and Clarke P (2002) Separating refusal bias and non- between fertility, education and personality traits. ISER
contact bias: Evidence from UK national surveys. Journal of Working Paper Series 2010–17. University of Essex, UK.
the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) 51(3): Taylor MF, Brice J, Buck N, et al. (2007) British Household Panel
319–333. Survey User Manual Volume A: Introduction, Technical
Major DA, Turner JE and Fletcher TD (2006) Linking proactive Report and Appendices. Colchester: University of Essex.
personality and the Big Five to motivation to learn and devel- Taylor SG, Kluemper DH and Mossholder KW (2010) Linking
opment activity. Journal of Applied Psychology 91(4): personality to interpersonal citizenship behaviour: The mod-
927–935. erating effect of empathy. Journal of Occupational and Orga-
Mason ES (1997) A case study of gender differences in job satis- nizational Psychology 83(4): 815–834.
faction subsequent to implementation of an employment Templer KJ (2012) Five-factor model of personality and job satis-
equity programme. British Journal of Management 8: faction: The importance of agreeableness in a tight and col-
163–174. lectivistic Asian society. Applied Psychology 61(1): 114–129.
Mihajlovic I, Zivkovic Z, Prvulovic S, et al. (2008) Factors influ- Vasilopoulos NL, Cucina JM and Hunter AE (2007) Personality
encing job satisfaction in transitional economies. Journal of and training proficiency: Issues of bandwidth-fidelity and
General Management 34(2): 71–87. curvilinearity. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Penney LM, Hunter EM and Perry SJ (2011) Personality and Psychology 80(1): 109–131.
counterproductive work behaviour: Using conservation of Watson D and Clark LA (1997) Extraversion and its positive
resources theory to narrow the profile of deviant employees. emotional core. In: Hogan R, Johnson JA and Briggs SR (eds)
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology Handbook of Personality Psychology. San Diego, CA: Aca-
84(1): 58–77. demic Press, pp. 767–793.
Organ DW and Lingl A (1995) Personality, satisfaction, and orga- Watson D and Slack AK (1993) General factors of affective tempera-
nizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Social Psychology ment and their relation to job satisfaction over time. Organiza-
135: 339–350. tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes 54: 181–202.
Rad AMM and De Moraes A (2009) Factors affecting employ- Yap SCY, Anusic I and Lucas RE (2012) Does personality mod-
ees’ job satisfaction in public hospitals: Implications for erate reaction and adaptation to major life events? Evidence
recruitment and retention. Journal of General Management from the British Household Panel Survey. Journal of Research
34(4): 51–66. in Personality 46(5): 477–488.
Rhodes SR (1983) Age-related differences in work attitudes and Zhao H and Seibert SE (2006) The Big Five personality
behavior: A review and conceptual analysis. Psychological dimensions and entrepreneurial status. Journal of Applied
Bulletin 93(2): 328–367. Psychology 91(2): 259–271.

View publication stats