Research questions : The impact of personality of an employee on performance management

due to expectency
Authors Discipline Sample Theories Variables Limitations
(Year) Size
MultiDisciplinar N/A
Hannah A. Shared vision Dependent Despite
y/
Valantine, transcends Variables: notable case
Transdisciplinary
Mary C. individual High- studies of
Beckerle, goals. In the performance team
Kathryn L. corporate corporate effectiveness,
Reed, Dena world, both the more
Towner, articulation Independent empirical
Nancy R. and execution Variables: research
Zahniser of strategic team-level is needed to
goals reward better
January 2019 depend on systems; trust delineate the
successful team and effective factors that
functioning; communicatio predict
This article n; successful
emphasizes collaboration collaboration
concepts like skills; in terms of
Shared nimble efficiency
accountability adaptability; and outputs.
and recognition and team
of team leadership
success, and
Emotional management.
intelligence and
trust,
Communicatio
n, technology,
proximity and
adaptability in
the face of
change.
Psychology
Appraising Psychological uncritical
Personality: test methods nature of the
The Use of are introduced exposition,
Psychological by way
Tests in the of the timeworn The use in
Practice of (and clinical
Medicine thoroughly practice of
ARTHUR L. unsound) "X- the Szondi
BENTON, ray test,
1952 analogy," a procedure
wherein they that has not
are conceived met empirical
as being able tests of
somehow to validity,
penetrate to the
 basic is defended
personality on the ground
structure that
and the "nonetheless,
fundamental it
dynamics works and
behind can be
behavior. extraordinaril
y helpful at
times."
But, of
course,
whether the
test "works"
is precisely
the question
wlhich
systematic
validational
study has
attempted to
answer. Here,
an ahalogy is
drawn with
the
Wassermann
test as a
procedure,
the exact
nature
of which is
unk-nown,
but which
nevertheless
"works."
The analogy
is
inappropriate.
Evidence for a Psychology
699 “general Dependent Variables:
could a short
General Intelligence
Collective people, intelligence”— collective
Intelligence workin emerges from inteligence
Independent variable:
Factor in the g in the correlations test predict a
Performance groups among people’s diverse set of sales team’s
of of two performance on simple group or a top
Human to five a wide variety tasks management
Groups of cognitive plus a more team’s long-
Anita tasks.It complex term
Williams examines criterion task effectiveness?
Woolley,1* whether a More
Christopher F. examined importantly,
Chabris,2,3 whether a it would seem
Alex similar kind of to be much
Pentland,3,4 “collective easier to raise
Nada intelligence” the
Hashmi,3,5 exists for intelligence
Thomas W. groups of of a group
Malon, 2010 people. than an
find converging individual.
evidence of a Could
general a group’s
collective collective
intelligence intelligence
factor that be increased
explains a by,
group’s for example,
performance on better
a wide variety electronic
of tasks. collaboration
tools? Future
work has
been stressed
here.
Management 147
ROLE OF Results suggest Independent Because the
Managers
PROTiGI that proteges' Variable: data were
PERSONALI personality amounts of collected at
Y IN characteristics mentoring they one point in
RECEIPT OF are important received by time with
MENTORIN determinants of initiating single
G AND the amount of relationships instrument
CAREER mentoring they with mentors. the results
SUCCESS receive through Internal locus might be
DANIEL B. influencing of control, high confounded
TURBAN their attempts self- due to bias.
THOMAS W. to initiate monitoring,
DOUGHERT mentoring and high
Y University relationships. emotional
of Missouri, stability
1994 enhanced
initiation,
which
mediated the
relationships
between

Dependent
Variable:
personality
characteristics
and mentoring
received. The
latter was
related to
career
attainment and
perceived