Predicting job performance using FFM and non‐FFM personality measures

TLDR

The study compares the criterion validity of Big Five personality dimensions assessed with FFM‑based versus non‑FFM‑based inventories. The authors meta‑analysed a large database of American and European validity studies. FFM‑based inventories showed higher criterion validity than non‑FFM inventories for conscientiousness (.28 vs .18) and emotional stability (.16 vs .05), with no differences for extraversion, openness, or agreeableness, suggesting practitioners should use FFM‑based inventories for personnel selection.

Abstract

This study compares the criterion validity of the Big Five personality dimensions when assessed using Five‐Factor Model (FFM)‐based inventories and non‐FFM‐based inventories. A large database consisting of American as well as European validity studies was meta‐analysed. The results showed that for conscientiousness and emotional stability, the FFM‐based inventories had greater criterion validity than the non FFM‐based inventories. Conscientiousness showed an operational validity of .28 ( N = 19,460, 90% CV = .07) for FFM‐based inventories and .18 ( N =5,874, 90% CV = ‐.04) for non‐FFM inventories. Emotional stability showed an operational validity of .16 ( N = 10,786, 90% CV = .04) versus .05 ( N = 4,541, 90% CV = ‐.05) for FFM and non‐FFM‐based inventories, respectively. No relevant differences emerged for extraversion, openness, and agreeableness. From a practical point of view, these findings suggest that practitioners should use inventories based on the FFM in order to make personnel selection decisions.