The big five in the USA and Japan
Abstract
Purpose
To examine whether the “big five” personality factors operate similarly from a psychometric perspective across dissimilar cultures.
Design/methodology/approach
Managers from the USA and Japan were administered a work‐oriented measure of the big five and overall assessment ratings were collected. Independent groups t‐tests were used to examine mean differences in personality scores across samples. Factor analysis was used to examine the structure of the big five across samples. Relative importance analyses were used to examine whether assessors across samples differentially weighted the big five in arriving at overall assessment ratings.
Findings
Big five personality dimension scores were significantly higher in the US sample compared to the Japanese sample. Across both samples, relative importance analyses revealed extraversion to be the most important correlate of predicted job performance, whereas conscientiousness was the least important correlate of predicted job performance.
Research limitations/implications
Three limitations existed: relatively small sample size for the Japanese sample (n=410) compared to the US sample (n=3,458); scarcity of Japanese demographic information makes interpretation of results due to culture less certain; and follow‐up data on actual hiring decisions would enable additional interpretations of the data to be made.
Practical implications
Results suggest that: the Five Factor Model of personality is rather robust across cultures, samples, and types of instruments, possible response biases across cultures should be taken into account when developing norms and setting cutoffs.
Originality/value
Although a consistent response bias is evidenced across the USA and Japan, the Five Factor Model of personality remains robust and what makes for an effective manager appears to be consistent across cultures.
Keywords
Citation
Robie, C., Brown, D.J. and Bly, P.R. (2005), "The big five in the USA and Japan", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 24 No. 8, pp. 720-736. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710510613744
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2005, Emerald Group Publishing Limited