The copyright © of this thesis belongs to its rightful author and/or other copyright owner. Copies can be accessed and downloaded for non-commercial or learning purposes without any charge and permission. The thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted as a whole without the permission from its rightful owner. No alteration or changes in format is allowed without permission from its rightful owner.
BIG-FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSION TOWARDS JOB
PERFORMANCE: A CASE STUDY AMONG OPERATORS IN AEROSPACE COMPOSITES MALAYSIA BERHAD
BY
QUTREEN NADIA MOHD HANAFI 823198
Thesis submitted to
Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School Of Business Universiti Utara Malaysia
In Partial Fulfillment Of The Requirement For The Master Of Human Resource Management
i
PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this dissertation/project paper in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Post Graduate degree from the Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM). I agree that the Library of this university may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying this project paper in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by my supervisor in their absence, by the Dean of Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business where I did my project paper. It was understood that any copying or publication or use of this project paper or parts of it for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It was also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the UUM in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my dissertation/project paper.
Request for permission to copy or to make other use of materials in this dissertation/project paper in whole or in part should be addressed to:
Dean of Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business Universiti Utara Malaysia 06010 UUM Sintok Kedah Darul Aman
ii ABSTRACT
Individual traits directly and undirectly reflects employee’s action and performance.
The purpose of this study was to examine about Big-Five Personality dimension towards job performance among operators Aerospace Composites Malaysia Sdn Bhd (ACM). The independent variable was Big-Five Personality traits while the dependent variable was job performance. This study also determines the level of employee performance at workplace. A total of 227 employees participated in survey questionnaires with 5 Likert scale. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package Social Science version 25 which involve descriptive and inferential statistical. The study also revealed that the mean for job performance among employee was at moderate level 3.61 which scale 1 to 5. Correlation analysis reveal no significant relationship between Big-Five personality traits and job performance. Thus, to conduct any activity or program related towards job performance, employees characteristics not play the main barriers among operators.
Keywords: Big-Five Personality, Five-Factor Model, Job Performance. Individual Work Performance Questions.
iii ABSTRAK
Sifat individu secara langsung dan tidak langsung menggambarkan tindakan dan prestasi pekerja. Tujuan kajian ini adalah untuk mengkaji tentang dimensi Personaliti Big-Five terhadap prestasi kerja di kalangan pengendali Aerospace Composites Malaysia Sdn Bhd (ACM). Pemboleh ubah bebas adalah sifat Keperibadian Big-Five manakala pemboleh ubah bersandar adalah prestasi kerja. Kajian ini juga menentukan tahap prestasi pekerja di ACM. Seramai 227 pekerja mengambil bahagian dalam soal selidik tinjauan dengan menggunakan 5 skala likert. Data dianalisis menggunakan Statistical Package Social Science versi 25 yang melibatkan statistik deskriptif dan inferensi. Kajian ini juga menunjukkan bahawa min untuk prestasi kerja di kalangan pekerja berada pada tahap sederhana 3.61 dari skala 1 hingga 5. Analisis korelasi tidak menunjukkan hubungan yang signifikan antara sifat keperibadian Big-Five dengan prestasi kerja. Oleh itu, untuk menjalankan sebarang aktiviti atau program yang berkaitan dengan prestasi kerja, ciri-ciri pekerja atau keperibadian Big-five tidak menjadi penghalang utama di kalangan operator pengeluaran.
Kata kunci: Keperibadian Big-Five, Model Lima Faktor, Prestasi Kerja. Soalan Prestasi Kerja Individu.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the name of Allah, the most gracious and most merciful
“Alhamdulilah”, all the praise to Allah S.W.T the Almighty for the strength and endurance provided to me to finish the research paper. Working with this research paper was no doubt a challenging and enduring journey. First and foremost, my deepest gratitude and sincere thanks to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Fadzli Shah bin Abd Aziz who had agreed to be my supervisor and advisor. His knowledge and guidance have greatly helped me at all steps in the process of preparing and submitting this research paper.
Without his comments and untiring advice, this thesis would not have been completed successfully.
I would like to express my grateful appreciation to my mother, Nor Aziyah Aziz and my father Mohd Hanafi Bahadon as well as my others family members for giving me moral support and encouragement to finish this research paper. They also supporting me to go through this challenging and tough journey. Thank you to my uncle Ahmad Affendi Shabdin and family for the endless support and sharing tips for this research paper. My sincere gratitude also goes to my friends Ms Sumaiyah, Ms Asmaa’
Zulaikha, Mrs Mariya, Mrs Mahanim, and HR team at ACM who have given me motivation, advice and support in preparing and submitting this research paper. Last but not least, thank you to my fiance, Mohamad Ammar for always reminding me about this research paper and motivate me to completing my master journey.
Finally, I would like to express my sincere and utmost appreciation to my other lecturers and UUM staffs whom have inputted me valuable knowledge during my studies and also not forgetting to all those involved in making this paper a reality.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PERMISSION TO USE ... i
ABSTRACT ... ii
ABSTRAK ... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ... iv
LIST OF TABLES ... viii
LIST OF FIGURE ... ix
CHAPTER ONE ... 1
INTRODUCTION ... 1
1.0 Introduction ... 1
1.1 Background of the Study ... 1
1.2 Background of Aerospace Composites Malaysia Sdn Bhd ... 4
1.3 Problem statement ... 6
1.4 Research Questions ... 8
1.5 Research Objectives ... 9
1.6 Significant of the Study ... 9
1.7 Scope ... 10
1.8 Definition of Key Terms ... 10
1.8.1 Big five personality ... 10
1.8.2 Job Performance ... 12
1.9 Organization of the Thesis ... 14
CHAPTER TWO ... 16
LITERATURE REVIEW ... 16
2.0 Introduction ... 16
2.1 Job Performance ... 16
2.1 The Big Five Personality Traits ... 17
2.2.1 Neuroticism/Emotional Stability ... 17
2.2.2 Extroversion The Extroversion ... 21
2.2.3 Agreeableness ... 22
vi
2.2.4 Openness to Experience ... 26
2.2.5 Conscientiousness ... 28
2.3 Big-five personality traits towards job performance ... 29
2.4 Conclusion ... 32
CHAPTER THREE ... 34
METHODOLOGY ... 34
3.0 Introduction ... 34
3.1 Research Framework ... 34
3.2 The hypothesis of the study ... 35
3.3 Research design ... 35
3.4 Measurement of variables/ Instrumentation ... 36
3.4.1 Big Five Personality ... 38
3.4.2 Job Performance ... 39
3.5 Data collection ... 40
3.6 Population and Sampling ... 42
3.7 Pilot Test ... 44
3.8 Data collection procedure ... 45
3.9 Conclusion ... 45
CHAPTER FOUR ... 47
RESEARCH FINDINGS ... 47
4.0 Introduction ... 47
4.1 Data overview ... 47
4.1.1 Data Screening ... 48
4.1.2 Normality test ... 48
4.1.3 Linearity Test ... 54
4.1.4 Multicolenearity Test ... 56
4.2 Reliability test ... 58
4.3 Respondance Demographic ... 59
4.3.1 Respondance Demographic Analysis ... 59
4.4 Inference Statistic Analysis. ... 61
4.4.1 Correlation Analysis... 61
vii
4.4.2 Regression Analysis ... 63
4.5 Conclusion ... 64
CHAPTER FIVE ... 65
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ... 65
5.0 Introduction ... 65
5.1 Discuss the findings ... 65
5.1.1 To determine the level of job performance among ACM direct staff. . 66
5.1.2 To determine the effect of emotional stability personality on job performance in ACM. ... 66
5.1.3 To determine the effect of conscientiousness personality on job performance in ACM. ... 67
5.1.4 To determine the effect of openness to experience personality on job performance in ACM. ... 67
5.1.5 To determine the effect of agreeableness personality on job performance in ACM……… ... 68
5.1.6 To determine the effect of extroversion personality on job performance in ACM……… ... 68
5.2 Practical implication ... 69
5.3 Limitation of the study ... 69
5.4 Recommendation for future research ... 70
5.5 Recommendation for the organization ... 71
5.6 Conclusion ... 72
REFERENCE ... 73
APPENDICIES ... 77
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Item
Table 3.1: Big five personality instrument………... 38
Table 3.2: Job performance……….. 39
Table 3.3: Krejie Morgan table for deternining sample size from given population……….. 43
Table 3.4: Random sampling table………... 44
Table 3.5: Cronbach alpha for pilot test………... 45
Table 4.1: Response rate……….. 47
Table 4.2: Descriptive Variable Analysis………. 49
Table 4.3: Kolmogorov-Smirnov………. 49
Table 4.4: Tolerance and Variance Inflated Factor (VIF)……… 57
Table 4.5: Realibility Test……… 58
Table 4.6: Demographic profile of the respondents (N=227)……….. 59
Table 4.7: Pearson Correlation Analysis Findings………... 62
Table 4.8: Regression Analysis if Big-Five and Job Performance…... 64
ix
LIST OF FIGURE
Figure Item
Figure 3.1: Research framework……….. 34
Figure 4.1: Histogram for Independent Variables………... 51
Figure 4.2: Histogram for Dependent Variable………... 53
Figure 4.3: P.P Plot……….. 54
1
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
For introduction of this study, the researcher was clarifies background of the study, problem statement of the study and details the matter according to the prescribed method. Researchers also include the objectives, questions and significance of the study, as well as the definition of terms, was used through this research. The researcher also highlighted the scope of the study, which explained the population and target of the selected respondents.
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Performance was a term widely used in various public management discussions in Malaysia and in the world. Job performance in some organizations was often associated with achievement aspects or achievement according to the performance shown by employers and organization. A high organization’s goal depends on the job performance of workers, whether it was low, medium, or high levels. Noel (2009) defines performance as a process where a manager responsible for ensuring activity and employee productivity was parallel to the organization.
Therefore, a personality traits study had been done to identify the employee work performance. The relationship between personality and job performance has been a subject often studied in the field of industrial psychology (Barrick, Mount & Judge, 2001). Personality can affected compatibility when a person intends to perform a task given by an organization. Personalities are variables that influence the behaviour of an
73 REFERENCE
Aranoff, G., Barlas, S., Figgie, E., Kirk, R., Leitner, P., Wilfer, T. (2005). Marketing to your employees. Strategic Finance, 87(4), 25.
Andreas Klang. (2012). The relationship between personality and job performance in sales: A replication of past research and an extension to a Swedish context.
Unpublished journal.
Askarian, N., &Eslami, H. (2013). The Relationship between Personality Traits and Job Performance (Case Study: Employees of the Ministry of Education of Kerman. Interdisciplinary Journal Yahaya of Contemporary Research in Business, 5(8), 322-335.
Azizi, Noordin Yahaya, Jasmi Ismail, Zainudin Sharif, Muhammad Sukri Saud, Azlina Mohd Kosinin, Noraffandy Yahaya & Fairol Abbas. (2011). Effects of personality trait, motivation factors on performance of customer service personnel (CSP): A case of MPH bookstores. African Journal of Business Management, 5(11), 4519-4530.
Barrick, M.R. & Mount, M.K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
Barrick, M.R. & Mount, M.K. (1993). Autonomy as A Moderator Of The Relationships Between The Big Five Personality Dimensions And Job Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 111-118.
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9, 9-30.
Bing, M. N., &Lounsbury, J. W. (2000).Openness and job performance in U.S.-based
Japanese manufacturing companies. Journal Business
and,14(3),Psychology 515-522.
Borman, W.C., & Motowidlo, S.J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. W.Bor.Schmittman & Associate.
Boshoff, C. & Arnolds, C. (1995). Some antecedents of employee commitment and their influence on job performance. South African Journal of Business Management, 26 (4), 125-135.
Boyce, C.J.,Wood, A.M., Brown, G.D.A. (2010). The dark side of conscientiousness:
Conscientious people experience greater drops in life satisfaction following unemployment. Journal of Research in Personality 44, 535–539.
Campbell, J.P. (1990). Modeling the performance prediction in industrial and organizational psychology. In M.Dunnete & L.M Hough.
74
Cappelli, P. (1995). Was the „skills gap‟ really about attitudes? California Management Review, 37, 108- 124.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison. (2000). Research Methods in Education (5thed.).
London: Routledge Falmer.
Cook, V. D. (2005). An Investigation of the Construct Validity of the Big Five Construct of Emotional Stability in Relation to Job Performance, Job Satisfaction, and Career Satisfaction. University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange, 23-28.
Costa, P.T. & McCrae, R.R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of self- reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 853-863.
Cooper, D.R. & Schindler, P.S. (2006). Business Research Methods with CD (9th Ed).
McGraw-Hill.
Chockalingam Viswesvaran, Deniz S. Ones. (Dec 2000. Volume 8, Number 4).
Perpectives on models of job performance. International Journal of Selection and
Assesment, 216-226.
Digman, J.M. (1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility.
Journal of Personality, 57, 195-214.
Fraenkel, J. & Wallen, N. (2000). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, Fourth Edition. Boston. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Goldberg, L.R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The big five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229.
Griffin, Barbara, Hesketh & Beryl. (2004). Why Openness to Experience was not a Good Predictor of Job Performance. International Journal of Selection and
Assessment, 12(3), 243-251.
Gregory M. Hurtz, John J. Donovan. (2000, Vol 85. No 6). Personality and Job Performance: The Big Five Revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 869- 879.
Hamill, D., & Bartle, S. (1998, April). Applicant perceptions of selection procedures and future job seeking behaviors. Paper presented at the 13th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
Huffcutt, A. I., Conway, J. M., Roth, P. L., & Stone, N. J. (2001). Identification and meta analytic assessment of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 897–913.
75
Jensen-Campbell, L. A. & Graziano, W. G. (2001).Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict. Journal of Personality, 69, 323–361.
Jang, K.L., Livesley, W.J. & Vernon, P.A. (1996). Hereditability of the big five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study. Journal of Personality, 64, 577-591.
McCrae, R.R. & Costa, P.T. (1997). Personality trait structure as human universal.
American Psychologist, 52, 509-516.
McCloy, R. A., Campbell, J. P., & Cudeck, R. (1994). A confirmatory test of a model of performance determinants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 493-505.
Ono, M., Sachau, D.A., Deal, W.P., Englert, D.R., Taylor, M.D. (2011). Cognitive Ability, Emotional Intelligence, And The Big Five Personality Dimensions As Predictors Of Criminal Investigator Performance. Criminal Justice And Behaviour, 38(5), 473.
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401-421.
Plano Clark, V. L. & Creswell, J. W. (2010) Understanding research: a consumer's guide. Boston: Merrill.
Razak, A.A., Jaafar, M., Abdullah, S. & Muhammad, S. (n.d.). Work Environment Factors and Job Performance: The Construction Project Manager’s Perspective
(Degree Thesis, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia). Retrieved from eprints.usm.my/16071/1/Arman_Abdul_Razak.pdf
Saadé, R.G., Kira, D, Nebebe, F., Otrakji, C. (2006). Openness to Experience: An HCI Experiment. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 3, 541- 550.
Sekaran, U., &Bougie, R. (2010).Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach (5th edition). New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons.
S Rothmann, E P Coetzer. (2003, 29(1)). The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance. Journal of Industrial Psychology, 68-74.
Smither, J. W., Reilly, R. R., Millsap, R. E., Pearlman, K., & Stoffey, R. W. (1993).
Applicant reactions to selection procedures. Personnel Psychology, 46, 49–76.
Sorana-Daniela & Lorentz. (2006). Pearson versus Spearman, Kendall‟s Tau Correlation Analysis on Structure-Activity Relationships of Biologic Active Compunds. Leonanrdo Journal of Sciences, 9, 179-200.
76
Stephen P. Robbins, Timoth A. Judge. (2015). Organizational Behavior. England:
Pearson.
Strümpfer, D.J.W., Danana, N., Gouws, J.F. &Viviers, M.R.(1998). Personality dispositions and job satisfaction. South African Journal of Psychology, 28, 92- 100.
Shane, S.A., & Herold, D.M. (1996). Rumours of the death of dispositional research are vastly exaggerated. Academy of Management Review, 21, 203-224.
Tarantino, D. (2005). Measuring return on your most valuable asset. Physician Executive, 31(6), 72-73.
Taylor, N. (2009). Personality-5 Factor Structure. Retrieved from http://www.nevintaylor.com/category/self-awareness/personality/
Tett, R.P., Jackson, D.N. & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703- 742.
Viswesvaran , C., & Ones, D. S. (2000). Perspectives on models of job performance.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 216-226.
Zhang, M & Wei, J. (2011). Eastern Ways of Thinking: Relationships with Cognitive, Motivational and Personality Variables. Ambiguity and Decision Making in Chinese Organization, 1-27
77
APPENDICIES
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE,
SCHOOL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT COLLEGE OF BUSINESS
UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
Dear Sir / Madam:
I am pleased to inform you that I am currently conducting a survey entitled Big-Five Personality Dimension Towards Job Performance: A Case Study Among Direct Staffs in Aerospace Composite Malaysia (ACM), Bukit Kayu Hitam, Kedah. The study intends to explore about relationship between big five personality towards job performance. In endeavouring to conduct this research, the data will be collected among direct staff in Aerospace Composite Malaysia.
Hence, I would be very grateful if you could answer all of the questions in the survey. The survey should take about 30 minutes to complete. Please answer all questions and return the completed questionnaires promptly.
Please note that your response is private and confidential. Individual respondents will not be identified in any data or reports. If you have any enquires about the survey, kindly contact or SMS me at 0134255704 and email qutreennadia92@yahoo.com
Thank you very much for considering your involvement, time and cooperation in this survey.
Yours sincerely,
Qutreen Nadia Binti Mohd Hanafi School of Business Management College of Business,
Universiti Utara Malaysia 06010 Sintok,
Kedah.
SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
78
The following questions deals with the basic information about yourself.
1. Please specify your gender:
Male Male Female
2. Please specify your age group:
Less than 21 years old 21-30 years old 31-40 years old 41-50 years old Above 50 years old
3. Please specify your race:
Malay Chinese Indian
Others (please specify) :………
4. Please specify your highest level qualification:
SPM / O-level
STPM / UEC / A-level / Pre-U LCCI / Diploma / Certificate Bachelor degree
5. Please indicate your duration of service with your organization Less than 1 year
1 to 2 years 3 to 5 years 6 to 10 years Above 10 years
6. Please indicate your individual monthly income
79 RM1100 - RM 1600
RM1601 - RM2101 RM2102 - RM2602 RM2303 – RM3103 Above RM3104
7. Please justify your job position Machinist
Manufacturing technician Process leader 1
Process leader 2 Production operator Tool cleaning operator
8. Please state your marital status:
Single Married Divorced Separated Widowed
80 SECTION B: BIG-FIVE PERSONALITY
Based to the provided scale, please tick the appropriate box to indicate your level of agreement toward the statement.
Strongly agree (SA)
Agree (A) Neutral (N) Disagree (D) Strongly disagree (SD)
1 2 3 4 5
SA A N D SD
1 I see myself as someone who is original and comes up with new ideas.
1 2 3 4 5
2 I see myself as someone who is curious about many different things.
1 2 3 4 5
3 I see myself as someone who is inspired and a deep thinker.
1 2 3 4 5
4 I see myself as someone who has an active imagination.
1 2 3 4 5
5 I see myself as someone who is creative and inventive. 1 2 3 4 5 6 I see myself as someone who like art, music, or
literature
1 2 3 4 5
7 I see myself as someone who does a thorough job. 1 2 3 4 5 8 I see myself as someone who is a reliable worker. 1 2 3 4 5 9 I see myself as someone who tends to be disorganized. 1 2 3 4 5 10 I see myself as someone who tends to be lazy. 1 2 3 4 5 11 I see myself as someone who does things efficiently. 1 2 3 4 5 12 I see myself as someone who makes plans and follows
through with them.
1 2 3 4 5
13 I see myself as someone who is full of energy. 1 2 3 4 5 14 I see myself as someone who generates a lot of
enthusiasm.
1 2 3 4 5
15 I see myself as someone who has an assertive / confident / aggressive personality.
1 2 3 4 5
16 I see myself as someone who is outgoing and sociable. 1 2 3 4 5 17 I see myself as someone who is shy and
inhibited/depress.
1 2 3 4 5
18 I see myself as someone who tends to be quiet. 1 2 3 4 5 19 I see myself as someone who tends to find fault with
others.
1 2 3 4 5
81
20 I see myself as someone who is helpful and unselfish with others.
1 2 3 4 5
21 I see myself as someone who is generally trusting another person
1 2 3 4 5
22 I see myself as someone who is considerate and kind to almost everyone.
1 2 3 4 5
23 I see myself as someone who likes to cooperate with others.
1 2 3 4 5
24 I see myself as someone who can forgive the mistakes of others.
1 2 3 4 5
25 I see myself as someone who is relaxed and handle stress well.
1 2 3 4 5
26 I see myself as someone who is emotionally stable and not easily upset.
1 2 3 4 5
27 I see myself as someone who remains calm in tense situations.
1 2 3 4 5
28 I see myself as someone who gets nervous easily. 1 2 3 4 5 29 I see myself as someone who worries a lot. 1 2 3 4 5 30 I see myself as someone who can be moody. 1 2 3 4 5
82 SECTION C: JOB PERFORMANCE
Based to the provided scale, please tick the appropriate box to indicate your level of agreement toward the statement.
SELDOM SOMETIMES FREQUENTLY OFTEN ALWAYS
1 2 3 4 5
Job performance
I describe my job performance in the past 3 months:
S S F O A
1 I managed to plan my work so that it was done on time
1 2 3 4 5
2 I did less than expected of me 1 2 3 4 5
3 I kept in mind the result that I had to achieve in my work
1 2 3 4 5
4 I complained about unimportant matters at work 1 2 3 4 5 5 I knew how to set the right priorities 1 2 3 4 5 6 I was able to perform my work well with minimal
time and efforts
1 2 3 4 5
7 I spoke with colleagues about the negative aspects of my works
1 2 3 4 5
8 I made problems greater than they were at work 1 2 3 4 5 9 I started new tasks myself, when my old ones were
finished
1 2 3 4 5
10 I took challenging work tasks, when available 1 2 3 4 5 11 I worked at keeping my job knowledge up-to-date 1 2 3 4 5 12 I spoke with people from outside the organization
about the negative aspects of my work
1 2 3 4 5
13 I came up with creative solutions to new problems 1 2 3 4 5 14 I focused on the negative aspects of a work situation,
instead of on the positive aspects
1 2 3 4 5
15 I did more than was expected of me 1 2 3 4 5
16 I actively participated in work meeting 1 2 3 4 5 17 I managed to get off from a work task easily 1 2 3 4 5 18 I grasped opportunities when they presented
themselves
1 2 3 4 5
83
19 I knew how to solve difficult situations and setbacks quickly
1 2 3 4 5
20 I was able to separated main issues from side issues at work
1 2 3 4 5
21 I took on extra responsibilities 1 2 3 4 5
22 I kept looking for new challenges in my job 1 2 3 4 5 23 Collaboration with others was very productive 1 2 3 4 5 24 I worked at keeping my job skills up-to-date 1 2 3 4 5
25 My planning was optimal 1 2 3 4 5
26 I actively looked for ways to improve my performance at work
1 2 3 4 5
27 I sometimes did nothing, while I should have been working
1 2 3 4 5
