İş Performansının Yordayıcıları Olarak Kişisel İyi Oluş ve Kişilik Özellikleri

Author :  

Year-Number: 2022-46
Yayımlanma Tarihi: 2022-10-21 18:22:37.0
Language : Türkçe
Konu : Psikoloji
Number of pages: 697-707
Mendeley EndNote Alıntı Yap


Bu çalışmada sektör ayırımı yapılmadan çalışanlarda iş performansı, kişilik özellikleri (Beş Faktör Kişilik Modeli çerçevesinde) ve kişisel iyi oluş arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda kişisel iyi oluş, kişilik özellikleri ve iş performansı arasındaki ilişkilerin farklı ilişkisel modellerle incelenmesi planlanmıştır. Çalışmaya 18-60 yaşları arasında (ort. = 31,70; s = 8,97) 216 erkek (% 47,4), 240 kadın (% 52,6) olmak üzere toplam 456 çalışan katılmıştır. Çalışmada Kişisel İyi Oluş İndeksi, Büyük Beş-50 Kişilik Testi ve Osgood tipi ölçümle iş performansı ölçümü alınmıştır. Veriler yol analizi kullanılarak değişkenler arasında kurulan beş farklı ilişkisel modelle incelenmiştir. Birinci modelde kişisel iyi oluşla iş performansı yordanmıştır. Bu modelde R2 = 0,05 olarak hesaplanmış ve model uyumu görülmemiştir. İkinci modelde kişilik özellikleriyle iş performansı yordanmış ancak kişisel iyi oluş aracı değişken olarak alınmıştır. Bu modelde de R2 = 0,05 olarak hesaplanmış ama zayıf model uyumu görülmüştür. Üçüncü modelde sadece kişilik özellikleriyle iş performansı yordanmıştır. Bu modelde R2 = 0,12 olarak hesaplanmış ve iyi model uyumu görülmüştür. Dördüncü modelde kişilik özellikleri aracı değişken olarak alınmış, bu modelde de R2 = 0,11 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Son model de ise kişisel iyi oluş kişilik özellikleriyle birlikte alınarak iş performansı yordanmıştır. Bu modelde iş performansı için en yüksek açıklama oranı (R2 = 0,14) elde edilmiştir. Çalışmada oluşturulan farklı modeller ve sonuçları birbiriyle karşılaştırılmış ve elde edilen sonuçlar ilgili literatür doğrultusunda tartışılmıştır.



In this study, it is aimed to examine the relationships between job performance, personality traits (within the framework of the Five Factor Personality Model) and subjective well-being in employees without making any sectoral segmentation. In this direction, it is planned to examine the relationships between subjective well-being, personality traits and job performance with different relational models. A total of 456 employees, 216 male (47.4 %) and 240 female (52.6 %) between the ages of 18-60 (M = 31.70; s = 8.97), participated in the study. In the study, job performance measurement was taken with Subjective Well-Being Index, Big Five-50 Personality Test and Osgood type measurement. The data were analyzed with five different relational models established between the variables using path analysis. In the first model, subjective well-being and job performance were predicted. In this model, R2 has been calculated as 0.05 but model fit was not observed. In the second model, job performance was predicted by personality traits, and the subjective well-being was taken as a mediating variable. In this model, R2 was calculated as 0.05, and weak model fit was observed. In the third model, job performance was predicted only by personality traits, R2 was calculated as 0.12 and good model fit was observed. In the fourth model, personality traits were taken as mediating variable, R2 was calculated as 0.11. In the last model, job performance was predicted by taking subjective well-being together with personality traits. In this model, the highest explanation score (R2 = 0.14) for job performance was obtained. In this study, different models has been created and their results were compared with each other to establish linkages between subjective well-being and personality traits on job performance and the results were discussed in line with the relevant literature.


  • 1. Adetula, G. A. (2016). Emotional, social, and cognitive intelligence as predictors of job performance among law enforcement agency personnel. Journal of Applied Security Research, 11(2), 149-165.

  • 2. Alessandri, G., & Vecchione, M. (2012). The higher-order factors of the Big Five as predictors of job performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(6), 779-784.

  • 3. Al‐Hamdan, Z., Oweidat, I. A., Al‐Faouri, I., & Codier, E. (2017). Correlating Emotional intelligence and job performance among jordanian hospitals’ registered nurses. In Nursing Forum, 52(1), 12-20.

  • 4. Anglim, J., Horwood, S., Smillie, L. D., Marrero, R. J., & Wood, J. K. (2020). Predicting psychological and subjective well-being from personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146(4), 279-323.

  • 5. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta‐ analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.

  • 6. 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(1‐2), 9-30.

  • 7. Borman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99-109.

  • 8. Boyce, C. J., Wood, A. M., & Powdthavee, N. (2013). Is personality fixed? Personality changes as much as “variable” economic factors and more strongly predicts changes to life satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 111, 287-305.

  • 9. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1980). Influence of extraversion and neuroticism on subjective well-being: Happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(4), 668-678.

  • 10. Cropanzano, R., & Wright, T. A. (1999). A 5-year study of change in the relationship between well-being and job performance. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 51(4), 252-265.

  • 11. Darvishmotevali, M., & Ali, F. (2020). Job insecurity, subjective well-being and job performance: The moderating role of psychological capital. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 87, 102462.

  • 12. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542-575.

  • 13. Diener, E. (1994). Assessing subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31(2), 103-157.

  • 14. Diener, E., Heintzelman, S. J., Kushlev, K., Tay, L., Wirtz, D., Lutes, L. D., & Oishi, S. (2017). Findings all psychologists should know from the new science on subjective well-being. Canadian Psychology, 58(2), 87-104.

  • 15. Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Oishi, S. (2018a). Advances and open questions in the science of subjective well-being. Collabra: Psychology, 4(1), Art.15.

  • 16. Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Tay, L. (2018b). Advances in subjective well-being research. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(4), 253-260.

  • 17. Eom, G., Been, S., & Byeon, H. (2022). ICF-Based Job Performance Predictors for South Korean Industrial Accident Workers: Population-Based 3-Year Longitudinal Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(13), 7822.

  • 18. Ferris, D. L., Lian, H., Brown, D. J., Pang, F. X., & Keeping, L. M. (2010). Self‐esteem and job performance: The moderating role of self‐esteem contingencies. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 561-593.

  • 19. Friedman, H. S., & Kern, M. L. (2014). Personality, well-being, and health. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 719-742.

  • 20. Galderisi, S., Heinz, A., Kastrup, M., Beezhold, J., & Sartorius, N. (2015). Toward a new definition of mental health. World Psychiatry, 14(2), 231-233.

  • 21. Gawke, J. C., Gorgievski, M. J., & Bakker, A. B. (2018). Personal costs and benefits of employee intrapreneurship: Disentangling the employee intrapreneurship, well-being, and job performance relationship. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23(4), 508-519.

  • 22. Górnik-Durose, M. E. (2020). Materialism and well-being revisited: The impact of personality. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(1), 305-326.

  • 23. He, Y., Donnellan, M. B., & Mendoza, A. M. (2019). Five-factor personality domains and job performance: A second order meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 82, 103848.

  • 24. Helson, R., & Soto, C. J. (2005). Up and down in middle age: Monotonic and nonmonotonic changes in roles, status, and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 194-204.

  • 25. Hung, W. T. (2020). Revisiting relationships between personality and job performance: working hard and working smart. Total quality management and Business Excellence, 31(7-8), 907-927.

  • 26. Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: the Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 869-879.

  • 27. Iaffaldano, M. T., & Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97(2), 251-273.

  • 28. International Wellbeing Group (2006). Personal wellbeing index-adult. Melbourne: Australian Centre on Quality of Life, Deakin University.

  • 29. Jalali, Z., & Heidari, A. (2016). The relationship between happiness, subjective well-being, creativity and job performance of primary school teachers in Ramhormoz city. International Education Studies, 9(6), 4552.

  • 30. Johnson, M. K., Rowatt, W. C., & Petrini, L. (2011). A new trait on the market: Honesty-Humility as a unique predictor of job performance ratings. Personality and Individual differences, 50(6), 857-862.

  • 31. Judge, T. A., Rodell, J. B., Klinger, R. L., Simon, L. S., & Crawford, E. R. (2013). Hierarchical representations of the five-factor model of personality in predicting job performance: integrating three organizing frameworks with two theoretical perspectives. Journal of applied psychology, 98(6), 875-925.

  • 32. Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E., & Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), 376-407.

  • 33. Lado, M., & Alonso, P. (2017). The Five-Factor model and job performance in low complexity jobs: A quantitative synthesis. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 33(3), 175-182.

  • 34. Lan, J., Wong, C. S., & Zeng, G. (2021). Personality profiles for hospitality employees: Impact on job performance and satisfaction. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 98, 103018.

  • 35. Lee, Y., Berry, C. M., & Gonzalez-Mulé, E. (2019). The importance of being humble: A meta-analysis and incremental validity analysis of the relationship between honesty-humility and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(12), 1535-1546.

  • 36. Lin, Y. C., Yu, C., & Yi, C. C. (2014). The effects of positive affect, person-job fit, and well-being on job performance. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 42(9), 1537-1547.

  • 37. Lindebaum, D. (2013). Does emotional intelligence moderate the relationship between mental health and job performance? An exploratory study. European Management Journal, 31(6), 538-548.

  • 38. Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does happiness lead to success? Psychological bulletin, 131(6), 803-855.

  • 39. Meral, B. F. (2014). Kişisel iyi oluş indeksi-yetişkin Türkçe formunun psikometrik özellikleri. The Journal of Happiness and Well-Being, 2(2), 119-131.

  • 40. Moscoso, S., & Salgado, J. F. (2021). Meta-analytic examination of a suppressor effect on subjective well- being and job performance relationship. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 37(2), 119-131.

  • 41. Mount, M. K., Barrick, M. R., & Stewart, G. L. (1998). Five-factor model of personality and performance in jobs involving interpersonal interactions. Human Performance, 11(2-3), 145-165.

  • 42. Obrenovic, B., Jianguo, D., Khudaykulov, A., & Khan, M. A. S. (2020). Work-family conflict impact on psychological safety and psychological well-being: A job performance model. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Art.475.

  • 43. Parent-Lamarche, A., Marchand, A., & Saade, S. (2021). How do work organization conditions affect job performance? The mediating role of workers’ well-being. Journal of Workplace Behavioral Health, 36(1), 48-76.

  • 44. Rotundo, M., & Sackett, P. R. (2002). The relative importance of task, citizenship, and counterproductive performance to global ratings of job performance: A policy-capturing approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 66-80.

  • 45. Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well- being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069-1081.

  • 46. Salgado, J. F. (1997). The Five Factor Model of personality and job performance in the European Community. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 30-43.

  • 47. Schat, A. C., & Frone, M. R. (2011). Exposure to psychological aggression at work and job performance: The mediating role of job attitudes and personal health. Work and Stress, 25(1), 23-40.

  • 48. Scullen, S. E., Mount, M. K., & Goff, M. (2000). Understanding the latent structure of job performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 956-970.

  • 49. Sonnentag, S (2015). Wellbeing and Burnout in the Workplace: Organizational Causes and Consequences In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (2nd. ed, pp. 537540). Elsevier.

  • 50. Soto, C. J. (2015). Is happiness good for your personality? Concurrent and prospective relations of the big five with subjective well‐being. Journal of Personality, 83(1), 45-55.

  • 51. Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134(1), 138-161.

  • 52. Steptoe, A., Deaton, A., & Stone, A. A. (2015). Subjective wellbeing, health, and ageing. The Lancet, 385(9968), 640-648.

  • 53. Tatar, A. (2017). Büyük Beş-50 Kişilik Testinin Türkçeye çevirisi ve Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri kısa formu ile karşılaştırılması. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi, 18(1), 51-61.

  • 54. Tatar, A., & Çelikbaş, B. (2021). Kişilik özellikleri ve sosyo-demografik faktörler ile yöneticilerde iş doyumu ve iş performansının yordanması. Uluslararası Akademik Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(11), 53-69.

  • 55. Tatar, A., & Özdemir, H. (2019). Profil analiziyle kişilik, iş performası ve iş doyumu arası ilişkilerin incelenmesi. İş'te Davranış Dergisi, 4(1), 11-24.

  • 56. Tatar, A., Saltukoğlu, G., Özdemir, H., Bekiroğlu, B., Çelikbaş, B., & Çamkerten, S. (2019). İş performansı ve iş doyumunun yordayıcıları olarak Altı Faktörlü Kişilik Modeli (HEXACO) yapıları. İş’te Davranış Dergisi, 4(2), 68-77.

  • 57. Van Aarde, N., Meiring, D., & Wiernik, B. M. (2017). The validity of the Big Five personality traits for job performance: Meta‐analyses of South African studies. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,

  • 58. Van Scotter, J. R., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1996). Interpersonal facilitation and job dedication as separate facets of contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 525-531.

  • 59. Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1997). Well-being, satisfaction and job performance: Another look at the happy/productive worker thesis. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1997(1), 364-368.

  • 60. Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (2004). The role of psychological well-being in job performance: A fresh look at an age-old quest. Organizational Dynamics, 33(4), 338-351.

  • 61. Wright, T. A., Cropanzano, R., & Bonett, D. G. (2007). The moderating role of employee positive well being on the relation between job satisfaction and job performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(2), 93-104.

  • 62. Yousefi, A. A., Alipour, A., & Sharif, N. (2011). Reliability and validity of the “personal well-being index- adult” in mothers of mentally retarded students in north of Tehran-Iran. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, 5(2), 106-113.

  • 63. Zhang, R. P., & Tsingan, L. (2014). Extraversion and neuroticism mediate associations between openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness and affective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(6), 13771388.

  • Article Statistics