Validity of observer ratings of the big five personality factors.

The authors examined the validity of observer ratings (supervisor, coworker, and customer) and selfratings of personality measures. Results based on a sample of 105 sales representatives supported the 2 hypotheses tested. First, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings of the 2 job-relevant personality dimensions—conscientiousness and extraversion—were valid predictors of performance ratings, and the magnitude of the validities were at least as large as for self-ratings. Second, supervisor, coworker, and customer ratings accounted for significant variance in the criterion measure beyond self-ratings alone for the relevant dimensions. Overall, the results suggest that validities of personality measures based on self-assessme nts alone may underestimate the true validity of personality constructs. In the past 10 years, the views of many personality psychologists have converged regarding the structure and concepts of personality. Generally, researchers agree that there are five robust factors of personality that can serve as a meaningful taxonomy for classifying personality attributes (Digman, 1990). This taxonomy has consistently emerged in longitudinal studies; across different sources (e.g., ratings by self, spouse, acquaintances, and friends); with numerous personality inventories and theoretical systems; and in different age, sex, race, and language groups. It also has some biological basis, as suggested by evidence of heritability (e.g., Costa Digman, 1990). Although the names for these factors differ across researchers, the following labels and prototypical characteristics are representative: (a) extraversion (sociable, talkative, assertive, ambitious, and active), (b) agreeableness (good-natured, cooperative, and trusting), (c) conscientiousness (responsible, dependable, able to plan, organized, persistent, and achievement oriented), (d) emotional stability (calm, secure, and not nervous), and (e) openness to experience (imaginative, artistically sensitive, and intellectual). The emergence of the five-factor model has enabled researchers to conduct construct-oriented meta-analytic reviews of the predictive validity of personality (Barrick Hough, Eaton, Dunnette, Kamp, Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991). Although these reviews have adopted slightly different personality frameworks, the conclusions can be summarized in terms of the Big Five taxonomy. The Barrick and Mount (1991) and Hough et al. (1990) reviews demonstrated that only one dimension of the Big Five, conscientiousness (achievement and dependability in the Hough et al. frame