If individuals are products of biology, life would have no higher meaning and pur- pose. It is personality that gives individuals meaning and purpose. Personality is what makes individuals different.
Steve Pinker, Author, The Blank Slate
seem to have a strong genetic component, whereas other traits seem to be largely learned (based on experiences).4
Heredity sets limits on the range of development of characteristics, and within this range environmental forces influence personality characteristics. However, recent research on the personalities of twins who have been raised apart indicates that genetics may play a larger role than many experts had believed. Some studies of twins suggest that as much as 50 to 55 percent of personality traits may be inherited.
Further, inherited personality traits seem to explain about 50 percent of the variance in occupational choice. In other words, you probably inherited some traits that will influence your career choices. Furthermore, there is not one single gene that deter- mines a person’s personality but a combination of genes.5
Environment
Other individuals think that the environment plays a large role in shaping per- sonality; in fact, the environment may have a more important role than inherited characteristics. That is, beyond what genes are inherited from your parents, the environment a person experiences as a child has an important role in molding one’s personality development. How a child is treated by adults and playmates and others influences the child’s personality. A person growing up in a warm and nurturing household is much more likely to be a well-adjusted person than a child growing up in a cold and sterile environment. Aspects of the environment that influence personality formation include culture, family, group membership, and life experiences.
Culture
Anthropologists have clearly demonstrated the important role that culture plays in personality development.6 A culture is not a symbolic pattern, but evolves under the stress of competing goals and other cultures. Cultures do not exist as simply static differences to be celebrated, but compete with one another as better or worse ways of getting things done. Individuals born into a particular society are exposed to family and societal values and to norms of acceptable or unacceptable behavior—the cul- ture of that society. Culture also defines how various roles in that society are to be performed. For example, U.S. culture generally rewards individuals for being inde- pendent and competitive, whereas Japanese culture generally rewards individuals for being cooperative and group oriented.7
Culture helps determine broad patterns of behavioral similarity among indi- viduals. However, differences in behavior—which at times can be extreme—usually are seen among individuals within a society. Most societies aren’t homogeneous (although some are more homogeneous than others). For example, one charac- teristic of Western cultures is that people often follow a work ethic in which hard work is valued and an unwillingness to work is sinful. But this value doesn’t influ- ence everyone within Western cultures to the same degree. Although culture has an impact on the development of employees’ personalities, not all individuals respond to cultural influences equally. Indeed, one of the most serious errors that leaders can make is to assume that their subordinates are just like themselves in terms of societal values, personality, or any other individual characteristic.
Cultural Values. A number of cultural values impact a person’s behavior at work.
We believe that is particularly helpful in understanding individual and societal dif- ferences. To determine your cultural value profile, please go to the first Experiential Exercise at the end of this chapter on page 97 and complete the questionnaire. These values in combination influence the behaviors and decisions of employees in many organizations.8 Figure 3.2 shows how the five cultural dimensions covered in the Experiential Exercise vary between France, the United States, Canada, and Japan.
Let’s explore each of these five cultural dimensions more closely.
Individualism versus collectivism is a fundamental work-related value that leaders must thoroughly understand to be effective in today’s global world.
Individualism is the tendency of individuals to look after themselves and their immediate families. A culture high on individualism emphasizes individual initiative, decision making, and achievement. Everybody is believed to have the right to privacy and personal freedom of expression. Individuals in these countries generally do not believe that they share a common fate with others. They view themselves as inde- pendent, unique, and special. They are less likely to conform to the expectations of others. When group goals conflict with personal goals, individuals commonly pursue their own goals. In addition, seeking personal identity is highly valued in individualistic cultures. Personal achievement, pleasure, and competition are all highly valued. Countries characterized by an emphasis on individualism include the United States, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and Australia.
At the other end of the continuum, collectivism is the tendency of individuals to emphasize their belonging to groups and to look after each other in exchange for loy- alty. Groups (relatives, communities, and organizations) focus on their common welfare. Collectivism usually involves emotional dependence of the individual on groups, organizations, and institutions. The sense of belonging and “we” versus “I”
in relationships is fundamental. Individuals’ private lives are shaped by the groups and organizations to which they belong. Group goals are generally thought to be more important than the individual’s personal goals. Individuals in China, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea care about whether their behavior would be considered shameful by the other members of their groups. They also avoid pointing out other individuals’ mistakes in public so that the others won’t lose face and harmony is maintained. Face-saving is important in these cultures because it allows individuals to retain their dignity and status.
Power distance is the extent to which individuals in a society accept status and power inequalities as a normal and functional aspect of life. Countries that are “high
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Power Distance
Uncertainty Avoidance
Individualism Gender Role Orientation
Long-term Orientation France
United States
Canada Japan
FIGU RE 3.2 Cultural Values in Four Countries
in power distance” are those whose citizens generally accept status and power inequalities; those “low in power distance” are those whose citizens generally do not. Countries that are high in power distance include Argentina, India, Malaysia, Mexico, the Philippines, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. At the opposite extreme, countries that are low in power distance include Finland, Israel, Norway, and Sweden. (The United States is moderately low.)
Individuals who are raised in a high power distance culture behave submissively with leaders and avoid disagreements with them. High power distance employees are more likely to take orders without question and follow the instructions of their leaders. In high power distance societies, subordinates consider bypassing their leaders to be an act of insubordination. In low power distance countries, employees are expected to bypass a leader if necessary in order to get their work done. When negotiating in high power distance countries, companies find it necessary to send representatives with titles equivalent to or higher than those of their bargaining partners. Titles, status, and formality are of less importance in low power distance countries.
Uncertainty avoidance is the extent to which individuals rely on procedures and orga- nizations (including government) to avoid ambiguity, unpredictability, and risk. With “high”
uncertainty avoidance, individuals seek orderliness, consistency, structure, formalized procedures, and laws to cover situations in their daily lives. Societies that are high on uncertainty avoidance, such as Japan, Sweden, and Germany, have a strong tendency toward orderliness and consistency, structured lifestyles, clear specification of social expectations, and many rules and laws. In contrast, in countries such as the United States and Canada and in Hong Kong, there is strong tolerance of ambiguity and uncertainty. More secure and long-term employment is common in “high” uncer- tainty avoidance countries. In contrast, job mobility and layoffs are more commonly accepted in “low” uncertainty avoidance countries.
Gender role orientation is the extent to which a society reinforces, or does not rein- force, traditional notions of masculinity versus femininity. A society is called masculine when gender roles are clearly distinct. Men are supposed to be assertive, tough, and focused on material success. Women are supposed to be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life. In masculine-dominated cultures, gender roles are clearly distinct. Japan, Austria, Italy, Mexico, and Ireland are a few of the countries ranked as high in masculinity. Dominant values are material success and progress and money. A society is called feminine when gender roles overlap: Both men and women are supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned with the qual- ity of life. In feminine-dominated societies, roles are often merged or overlap for sexes. A few of the countries ranked high on femininity are Denmark, Costa Rica, Finland, and Portugal. Dominant values include caring for others, emphasizing the importance of individuals and relationships, accepting that both men and women can be gentle, stressing the quality of work life, and resolving conflict by compro- mise and negotiation.
Long-term orientation is the extent to which the society embraces the virtues oriented toward future rewards. A long-term orientation ranking indicates that the society prescribes to the values of sustained commitments, perseverance, and thrift. This is thought to support a strong work ethic in which long-term rewards are expected as a result of today’s hard work. A few of the countries with a long-term orientation are China, Japan, India, and the Netherlands. These countries include characteristics such as adaptation of traditions to the modern context, respect for tradition and obligation within limits, thrift (saving resources), perseverance toward slow results, willingness to subordinate oneself for a purpose, and concern with virtue.
A short-term orientation is seen in those societies that expect and reward quick results, view leisure time as important, have little respect for old-time traditions, and reward the risk taking and adaptability required of entrepreneurs. A few of the societ- ies with a short-term orientation include Canada, Czech Republic, Pakistan, Spain,
and the United States. From a business perspective, several of the features of a strong short-term orientation include the following:
The main work values are freedom, individual rights, achievement,
•
and thinking for oneself.
The focus is on the bottom line with an emphasis on the importance of
•
this year’s profits.
Leaders and workers view themselves as highly distinct groups.
•
Personal loyalties vary with business needs (versus investment in life-
•
long personal networks).9
After reading this section and examining your Experiential Exercise scores on these five dimensions, some of you are probably questioning whether you have the ability to work in a foreign setting. We hope that we have given you some information about how key cultural differences can shape one’s personality. Understanding the role of culture can make you a better leader even if you never leave your home country. How do you believe that the culture of the United States impacted the development of Steve Jobs’
personality?
Family
The primary vehicle for socializing an individual into a particular culture is the person’s immediate family. Both parents and siblings play important roles in the personality development of most individuals. Members of an extended family—grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins—also can influ- ence personality formation. In particular, parents (or a single parent) influ- ence their children’s development in three important ways:
Through their own behaviors, they present situations that bring out
•
certain behaviors in children.
They serve as role models with which children often strongly identify.
•
They selectively reward and punish certain behaviors.
• 10
The family’s situation also is an important source of personality differences.
Situational influences include the family’s size, socioeconomic level, race, religion, and geographic location; birth order within the family; and parents’ educational level. A firstborn usually has the undivided parental attention for some time without siblings around. And because they identify with their parents, they tend to grow up more conservative and conscientious. Laterborns, in contrast, are often more conciliatory and open to new ideas and experiences. Also, a person raised in a poor family from China simply has different experiences and opportunities than does a person raised in a wealthy family. Children do not spend their waking hours trying to become more like their parents, but are also influenced by the culture in which they were raised.
Cultural norms inform children what it takes to survive in that society.
Group Membership
The first group to which most individuals belong is the family. Individuals also participate in various groups during their lives, beginning with their childhood playmates and continuing through teenaged schoolmate groupings and sports teams to adult work and social groups. The numerous roles and experiences that individuals have as members of groups represent another important source of per- sonality differences. Although playmates and school groups early in life may have the strongest influences on personality formation, social and group experiences in later life continue to influence and shape personality. Understanding someone’s personality requires understanding the groups to which that person belongs or has belonged in the past.
▲
Family is the primary vehicle for socializing an individual into a particular culture.
JUSTIN HORROCKS/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
Life Experiences
Each person’s life also is unique in terms of specific events and experiences, which can serve as important bases of personality. For example, the development of self-esteem (a personality dimension that we discuss shortly) depends on a series of experiences that include the opportunity to achieve goals and meet expectations, evidence of the ability to influence others, and a clear sense of being valued by others. A complex series of life experiences with others helps shape the adult’s level of self-esteem.
As we weave an understanding of personality and other individual differences into our exploration of a variety of topics in organizational behavior, we hope that you will come to understand the crucial role that personality plays in explaining behavior.
Individuals clearly pay a great deal of attention to the attributes of the personalities of the coworkers with whom they interact. The following Self Competency feature shows how JetBlue’s former CEO David Neeleman’s personality was shaped by vari- ous forces and how these affected his leadership at JetBlue.11
If you want to understand the culture of a com- pany that is led by its founder, it helps to under- stand the personality of that founder. Neeleman spent the first five years of his life in Brazil where his father was a journalist. His family moved from Brazil, but he visited every summer. Brazil is a country that is divided between the haves and have-nots. He grew up in the rich part of the country and enjoyed a big house, a membership in country clubs, and so forth. During his junior year in Utah, he decided to return to Brazil to go on a mission for his church and ended up liv- ing in the slums or favelas of Brazil. The slums are where the desperately poor individuals live behind barbed wire fences in cardboard shacks.
He was struck by a few things living in the slums. First, most wealthy individuals have a sense of entitlement. They thought that they were better than the individuals in the slums. This both- ered him tremendously. Second, most of the poor individuals were happier than the rich individuals and they generously shared what little they had.
He experienced enormous pleasures and satisfac- tions from working with these individuals.
These experiences had a tremendous impact on the formation of his personality and his drive to manage JetBlue differently when he was CEO.
When he traveled on a business trip, he flew coach class. There was no Lincoln Town Car waiting for
him at the airport. At JetBlue, there are no reserved parking places. The coffee in the kitchen down the hall from his office was the same brand as that in the employee lounge at J. F. Kennedy airport.
There is only one class on JetBlue planes. The seats at the back have slightly more legroom, so individuals who get off the plane last actually have roomier seats in-flight. The desk and other furniture in his office were the same as that used by every- one else. He told pilots: “There are individuals who make more money at this company than others, but that doesn’t mean they should flaunt it.”
He was seen frequently on flights from Florida to New York City. Once the plane settled into its cruising altitude, Neeleman walked to the front of the cabin, grabbed the microphone, and intro- duced himself. He explained that he would be coming through the cabin serving drinks and snacks along with the crew. He took out the garbage when the flight was over just like the cabin attendants.
It was his chance to speak directly to JetBlue’s customers. JetBlue also started a Crewmember Crisis fund when he was CEO. Everyone donated to it and it was used to help employees in crisis. If someone at JetBlue gets cancer, they have health benefits, but they might tap the fund to pay a babysitter while at chemotherapy.
Employees and customers both continue to like the “touchy-feely” aspect of JetBlue.