Authors : Dr. Anuradha Singh

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 7 - July

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/62tshukb

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25jul396

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : This exploratory research paper delves into the evolving landscape of personality measurement within organizational settings. Traditional models, such as the Big Five personality traits, have been instrumental in understanding employee behaviour and predicting job performance. However, these models often fall short in capturing the dynamic and multifaceted nature of personality in the workplace. This paper aims to expand the boundaries of personality measurement by introducing innovative conceptual frameworks that address the limitations of traditional methods. Through a comprehensive review of existing literature and qualitative interviews with organizational psychologists and HR professionals, this study identifies key areas for improvement and proposes new approaches, including dynamic personality models and the integration of advanced technologies like AI and machine learning. The findings suggest that these innovations can enhance the accuracy and applicability of personality assessments, ultimately leading to better organizational outcomes and more effective employee management strategies.

References :

1. Ashton, M. C. (1998). Personality and job performance: The importance of narrow traits. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 289-303.
2. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
3. Hough, L. M., & Oswald, F. L. (2008). Personality Testing and Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, and Prospects. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(3), 272-290.
4. Ryan, A. M., & Sackett, P. R. (2012). Individual Differences: Challenging Our Assumptions. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology.
5. Ashton, M. C. (1998). Personality and job performance: The importance of narrow traits. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 289-303.
6. Cheung, F. M. (2012). The Cultural Perspective in Personality Assessment. Oxford Handbook of Personality Assessment.
7. Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2012). The validity of interpersonal skills assessment via situational judgment tests: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 460-471.
8. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Winsborough, D., Sherman, R. A., & Hogan, R. (2016). New Talent Signals: Shiny New Objects or a Brave New World? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(3), 621-640.
9. Marsella, A. J., Dubanoski, J., Hamada, W. C., & Morse, H. (2000). The measurement of personality across cultures: Historical conceptual, and methodological issues and considerations. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(1), 41-62.
10. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26. :
11. Hough, L. M., & Oswald, F. L. (2008). Personality Testing and Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, and Prospects. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(3), 272-290. 
12. Ryan, A. M., & Sackett, P. R. (2012). Individual Differences: Challenging Our Assumptions. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology.
13. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Winsborough, D., Sherman, R. A., & Hogan, R. (2016). New Talent Signals: Shiny New Objects or a Brave New World? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(3), 621-640.
14. Alexander, L., Mulfinger, E., & Oswald, F. L. (2020). Using Big Data and Machine Learning in Personality Measurement: Opportunities and Challenges. European Journal of Personality, 34(5), 632-648. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2305
15. Bleidorn, W., & Hopwood, C. J. (2019). Using Machine Learning to Advance Personality Assessment and Theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 23(2), 190-203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868318772990