Content area
Full Text
Despite a proliferation in the number of instruments for assessing the Big 5 traits, extant measures are beset with limitations that render their use problematic in the workplace; that is, they contain generic as opposed to occupationally relevant items, couched in idiosyncratic, culturally specific language, demanding high reading ability levels, and are overly cumbersome. The 5 Factor Model Questionnaire (FFMQ) was devised to address these concerns. Five studies, spanning multiple samples and organizational contexts, demonstrate that the FFMQ is suitable for use with individuals drawn from the widest possible range of ability levels and cultural and socioeconomic groupings. The findings of exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses are in line with the hypothesized factor structure, and the resulting new scales exhibit acceptable reliability (internal consistency and temporal stability) and convergent and discriminant validity in respect of Costa and McCrae's (1992) NEO-PI-R scales. Furthermore, the new FFMQ scales are differentially correlated with independent ratings of overall job proficiency across three occupationally distinct samples.
It is now almost universally accepted that five traits-Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Openness to Experience-are fundamental to human personality (see, e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1992; Digman, 1990; Goldberg, 1992) and in recent years these traits, commonly referred to as the Big Five (Wiggins & Trapnell, 1997), have received much scholarly attention within the field of selection and assessment (see, e.g., Hough, 1998; Matthews, 1997; Salgado & de Fruyt, 2005; Salgado, Viswesvaran, & Ones, 2001). The Big Five have been implicated as predictors of success in a variety of occupations, ranging from sales and customer service to managerial and semiskilled roles (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Barrick, Mount, & Judge, 2001; Hurtz & Donovan, 2000; Mount, Barrick, & Stewart, 1998; Salgado, 1997, 1998, 2003; Tett, Jackson, & Rothstein, 1991).
The five-factor model (FFM) underpinning the Big Five has been recovered in factor analytic studies of instruments as diverse as the Personality Research Form (Jackson, 1984) by Borkenau and Ostendorf (1989), the Adjective Checklist (Gough & Heilbrun, 1983) by Piedmont, McCrae, and Costa (1991), the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule (Edwards, 1959) by Piedmont, McCrae, and Costa (1992), the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Myers, Briggs, & McCaulley, 1985) by McCrae and Costa (1989), the California Psychological Inventory (Gough, 1987) by McCrae, Costa, and Piedmont (1993), the Comrey...