Broadsided by broad traits: How to sink science in five dimensions or less

This paper is a conceptual and methodological critique of arguments advanced by Ones and Viswesvaran (1996, this issue) favoring ‘broad’ over ‘narrow’ personality traits for personnel selection and theoretical explanation. We agree with Ones and Viswesvaran that predictors should match criteria in terms of specificity. We depart from them, however, in our view of how traits should be chosen to obtain the best possible prediction and explanation of a complex overall job performance criterion. We argue that the best criterion-related validities will be attained if researchers use a construct-oriented approach to match specific traits (i.e. traits narrower than the Big Five) to those specific job performance dimensions that have been found to be job relevant. We further argue that researchers should focus on development of theories of job performance that incorporate constructs that are both specific and meaningful. If researchers seek to emphasize only overall job performance and personality traits greater than or equal to the Big Five in breadth, we will fail to acquire a great deal of important knowledge about the nature and causes of important aspects of work behavior.