Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited.
verifiedrich profile · Journal of Applied Psychology · 2000
Hurtz, Gregory M.; Donovan, John J.
How this was studied
A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.
What this article reports
The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.
agreeableness → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
conscientiousness → task performance
neuroticism → overall job performance
conscientiousness → task performance
conscientiousness → overall job performance
extraversion → overall job performance
Models this article informs
The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.
agreeableness predicts organizational citizenship behavior ocb
conscientiousness predicts organizational citizenship behavior ocb
conscientiousness predicts overall job performance
conscientiousness predicts task performance
extraversion predicts overall job performance
neuroticism predicts overall job performance
In the authors’ words
The article’s own abstract.
Prior meta-analyses investigating the relation between the Big 5 personality dimensions and job performance have all contained a threat to construct validity, in that much of the data included within these analyses was not derived from actual Big 5 measures. In addition, these reviews did not address the relations between the Big 5 and contextual performance. Therefore, the present study sought to provide a meta-analytic estimate of the criterion-related validity of explicit Big 5 measures for predicting job performance and contextual performance. The results for job performance closely paralleled 2 of the previous meta-analyses, whereas analyses with contextual performance showed more complex relations among the Big 5 and performance. A more critical interpretation of the Big 5-performance relationship is presented, and suggestions for future research aimed at enhancing the validity of personality predictors are provided.
What the literature says about it
Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.
supports “…tendent plutôt à révéler que l’extraversion et la stabilité émotionnelle sont corrélées positivement à la performance dans les emplois des domaines de la gestion et de la vente, professions qui nécessitent souvent un contact direct avec la clientèle (Ashton, 2013; Hurtz et Donovan, 2000).”
supports “In general, conscientiousness has a positive correlation with job performance (Barrick and Mount 1991; Hurtz and Donovan 2000).”
supports “For example, Conscientiousness was modestly associated with overall job performance across occupations [9,10].”
supports “In theMacrobian group, the predictions of Conscientiousness and its facetDutifulness for Family andMarriage, Self‐Discipline for CareerAchievement, andCompetence forDes‐ tiny inGeneral were supported by the negative influence of low conscientiousness on inter‐ generational relationships [46] and by the positive associations betweenConscientiousness and occupational performance [10], longevity [11], etc.”
supports “…of Psychology 2019, Vol. 15(2), 380–403 https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v15i2.1518 like with organizational identification (Ashforth et al., 2008), literature cites a positive association between agreeableness and compliance (Organ & Ryan, 1995) or interpersonal facilitation (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000).”
supports “…be explained either by the meta-analyses regarding the “Neuroticism” and especially “Conscientiousness” traits as general indicators of job performance (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000; Judge et al., 2013) or through a combination of different social or cognitive biases manifested by experts during the…”
supports “Conscientiousness makes people act in a thoughtful and organized way that leads to better job performance (Barrick and Mount 1991; Hurtz and Donovan 2000).”
supports “In a study by Hurts and colleagues on the relationship between personality and occupational performance, it was found that individuals with personality factors of conscientiousness, and extraversion showed better job performance, as well as those with a high emotional stability or low levels of neuroticism [56].”
supports “Higher neuroticism has been associated with more experienced stress and higher stress reactivity, less acceptance and problem solving, more avoidance, more mental problems [23,25], lower vigor and determination [24], and poorer job performance [26], as the capacity to allocate resources to accomplish tasks tends to be impeded in those individuals.”
supports “For instance, high conscientiousness and low neuroticism (emotional stability) have been found to be consistently related to job performance and other organisational outcomes (Wood, Lievens, Fruyt & Wille, 2013; Judge, Heller & Mount, 2002; Hurtz & Donovan, 2000).”
supports “For instance, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, openness to experience, and emotional stability are valid predictors of performance in customer service jobs; in skilled and semiskilled positions without a significant interpersonal component, conscientiousness is often the only consistent predictor from the FFM (Hurtz & Donovan, 2000).”
supports “In a study by Hurts and colleagues on the relationship between personality and occupational performance, it was found that individuals with personality factors of conscientiousness, and extraversion showed better job performance, as well as those with a high emotional stability or low levels of neuroticism [56].”
Ancillary research
Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.
- 10.1522/radm.no3.1098
- 10.1007/s11156-025-01391-8
- 10.3390/psychiatryint4010006
- 10.5964/ejop.v15i2.1518
- 10.1177/2167702618783733
- 10.24837/pru.v19i1.484
- 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00789
- 10.15640/jmpp.v6n2a2
- 10.3390/ijerph17176240
- 10.15388/omee.2013.4.2.14249
- 10.1177/2332858416684764
Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.