Example：10.1021/acsami.1c06204 or Chem. Rev., 2007, 107, 2411-2502
Emic vs etic frame of reference personality assessment in the prediction of work-related outcomes Career Development International (IF3.792), Pub Date : 2019-11-11, DOI: 10.1108/cdi-10-2018-0273 Vlad Burtaverde, Dragos Iliescu
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of both work-related and emic contextualization of personality measurement in the prediction of work-related outcomes.,In total, 224 employees completed work-contextualized and non-contextualized Big Five model measures, as well as contextualized emic personality measures, together with a number of measures for work-related outcomes.,Results showed that, after controlling for demographic variables and non-contextualized etic factors, etic contextualized factors predicted occupational stress, work engagement, job satisfaction, work frustration, turnover intention, career satisfaction and organizational citizenship behavior. After controlling for demographic variables, non-contextualized etic factors and contextualized etic factors, emic contextualized personality factors predicted work engagement, job satisfaction, absenteeism, counterproductive workplace behaviors and organizational citizenship behaviors.,The study has a number of limitations. First, the sample contained participants recruited from a low number of professional areas. Second, the sample consisted mostly of women, and relying on unbalanced samples may lead to construct irrelevant variance.,By using a combination of etic personality measures and contextualized emic personality measures, organizations can better predict a number of organizational outcomes related to extra-role performance, such as those considered in the present study.,This research showed that, in the case of personality assessment, using a double form of contextualization – frame of reference and culture – an increment in the prediction of organizational behaviors can be obtained.