Abstracts
Abstract
This study examines the links between personality and the relative attraction of various total rewards components. A survey approach is adopted, with 967 individuals completing a questionnaire. These individuals are currently employed. Results show that, after controlling for the effects of several demographic variables, “Big-Five” personality traits do affect individuals’ attraction to the following total rewards components: quality of work and of social relationships, development and career opportunities, variable pay, indirect pay, flexibility of working conditions, and prestige. Among Big-Five personality traits, openness to experience best predicts the relative importance employees give to the various total rewards components.
Résumé
L’attraction du personnel représente un défi croissant pour les employeurs en raison des multiples changements environnementaux. Dans un tel contexte de concurrence sur le marché de l’emploi, la gestion de la rémunération constitue un levier important d’attraction des employés (Ermel et Bohl, 1997). En effet, pour mieux concurrencer sur le marché de l’emploi, les employeurs doivent proposer des conditions de travail plus compétitives, plus distinctives et plus susceptibles de répondre aux attentes du personnel recherché. Pour relever le défi de l’attraction du personnel, un nombre croissant d’employeurs cherchent a identifier, déployer et communiquer une stratégie ou une philosophie de « rémunération totale » (total rewards) prenant en considération une diversité de composantes comme le salaire, les avantages sociaux, les possibilités de formation et de carricre, les aménagements flexibles, etc. (Mercer, 2007). Du coté des employés, des enquztes confirment que les personnes prennent leurs décisions d’emploi en considérant diverses composantes de la rémunération totale : salaire, défis, développement des compétences, conciliation travail-famille, contenu du travail, avantages sociaux, climat de travail, qualité de supervision, etc. (p. ex., Feldman et Arnold, 1978; Foote, 1998; IPSOS-Reid, 2000).
S’appuyant sur la perspective des dispositions personnelles, la présente recherche innove en explorant les liens entre la personnalité et l’attrait de diverses composantes de la rémunération totale. Plus précisément, cette recherche a pour objectif de répondre a la question de recherche suivante : Comment les traits de personnalité des individus influencent-ils l’importance qu’ils accordent a diverses composantes de la rémunération totale lors du choix d’un emploi ? Au cours des dernicres années, les études ont confirmé des liens entres les traits de personnalité des employés et leurs attitudes et comportements, particulicrement la performance au travail (Mount et Barrick, 1995). Ainsi, et tel qu’exprimé par Barber et Bretz (2000), étant donné l’importance de cibler les différences individuelles qui ont un effet sur les organisations, il apparait approprié d’en savoir plus sur la manicre dont différentes composantes de la rémunération peuvent faciliter ou empzcher l’attraction de personnes ayant des traits de personnalité particuliers. Plusieurs auteurs ont précisément exprimé le besoin d’analyser l’incidence des traits de personnalité sur les préférences a l’égard des caractéristiques des emplois (p. ex., Schneider, 1987; Schneider, Goldstein et Smith, 1995).
Une enquzte en ligne comprenant les items de l’étude a eu lieu en mai et juin 2006 auprcs d’un échantillon aléatoire représentant 50 % des affiliés de l’Ordre des conseillers en ressources humaines et en relations industrielles agréés du Québec, soit 2 945 personnes. Au total, 967 personnes ont complété le questionnaire, soit un taux de réponse de 32,84 %. Les participants étaient invités a indiquer jusqu’a quel point les différentes caractéristiques présentées avaient joué un role dans leur décision d’accepter l’emploi qu’ils occupaient actuellement. Une analyse factorielle sur l’importance accordée a 30 composantes de la rémunération a permis de regrouper ces dernicres en huit grands facteurs : la qualité du travail et des relations, la rémunération variable, la rémunération indirecte, les possibilités de développement et de carricre, la flexibilité des conditions de travail, le prestige de l’emploi, les gratifications et la charge de travail. Le modcle du Big-Five a été utilisé pour mesurer les cinq traits de personnalité fondamentaux : méticulosité (conscientiousness), extraversion, conscience des autres (agreeableness), équilibre émotionnel (emotional stability) vs. névrotisme, et ouverture a l’expérience (openness to experience).
Nos résultats montrent qu’une fois l’effet des huit variables de controle pris en compte (age, sexe, nombre de personnes a charge, expérience de travail, le niveau de scolarité ou le dernier diplome, salaire, ancienneté dans l’organisation, taille de l’organisation), les traits de personnalité des individus contribuent a expliquer une partie significative supplémentaire de la variance de l’importance accordée a six des huit composantes de la rémunération totale étudiées et ce, dans les proportions suivantes : le contenu du travail et les relations interpersonnelles (Δ R2 = 7 %), les possibilités de développement et de carricre (Δ R2 = 4 %), la rémunération variable (Δ R2 = 2 %), la rémunération indirecte (Δ R2 = 2 %), la flexibilité des conditions de travail (Δ R2 = 2 %), et le prestige (Δ R2 = 2 %).
Notre étude montre que l’ouverture a l’expérience est le trait de personnalité le plus (positivement) lié a l’importance accordée aux diverses composantes de la rémunération totale, soit la flexibilité des conditions de travail, les possibilités de développement et de carricre, la rémunération variable, le contenu du travail et les relations interpersonnelles, et les gratifications. La « conscience des autres » comme trait de personnalité est significativement liée a l’importance accordée a deux composantes de la rémunération totale : la qualité du travail et des relations et la rémunération indirecte. Les trois autres traits de personnalité ne sont liés chacun qu’a l’importance d’une seule composante de la rémunération totale : la « méticulosité » avec la rémunération indirecte, l’« extraversion » avec la qualité du travail et des relations et le « névrotisme » avec le prestige de l’emploi.
Finalement, la faible contribution des traits de personnalité a l’attractivité pereue des composantes de la rémunération totale alimente le débat actuel sur l’usage des tests de personnalité, certains auteurs doutant de leurs retombées pratiques dans la prédiction de la performance au travail, alors que d’autres persistent a les considérer pertinents a cette fin. Aprcs avoir traité des limites de l’étude, des avenues de recherche sont proposées aux chercheurs désireux de mieux comprendre l’attrait envers les composantes de la rémunération totale ou encore, de mieux gérer les composantes de la rémunération pour attirer les meilleurs talents.
Resumen
Este estudio innova al analizar los vínculos entre la personalidad de los individuos y su respectivo interés por los diferentes componentes de la remuneración total. Los datos compilados por cuestionario aplicado a 976 personas muestran que, después haber controlado por el efecto de varias variables demográficas, los rasgos de personalidad del “Big-Five” contribuyen a explicar una parte significativa de la varianza de la importancia acordada a los componentes de la remuneración total : calidad del trabajo y de las relaciones, posibilidades de desarrollo y de carrera, remuneración variable, remuneración indirecta, flexibilidad de las condiciones de trabajo y prestigio. La abertura a experimentar constituye el rasgo de personalidad du “Big-Five” que permite de predecir mejor la importancia acordada a los componentes de la remuneración total estudiados.
Appendices
References
-
Aiman-Smith, Lynda, Talya N. Bauer and Daniel M. Cable. 2001. “Are you Attracted? Do you Intend to Pursue? A Recruiting Policy-Capturing Study.” Journal of Business and Psychology, 16 (2), 219–237.10.1023/A:1011157116322 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Barber, Alison E. 1998. Recruiting Employees: Individual and Organizational Perspectives. Thousand Oaks: Sage.10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.845 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Barber, Alison E. and Mark V. Roehling. 1993. “Job Postings and the Decision to Interview: A Verbal Protocol Analysis.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (5), 845–856.10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.845 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Barber, Alison E. and Robert D. Bretz Jr. 2000. “Compensation, Attraction, and Retention.” Compensation in Organizations. S. L. Rynes and B. Gerhart, eds. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 32–55.10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.43 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Barrick, Murray R. and Michael K. Mount. 1991. “The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A Meta-Analysis.” Personnel Psychology, 44 (1), 1–26.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Barrick, Murray R., Greg L. Stewart and Mike Piotrowski. 2002. “Personality and Job Performance: Test of the Mediating Effects of Motivation among Sales Representatives.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (1), 43–51.10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.43 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Barrick, Murray R., Michael K. Mount and Rashmi Gupta. 2003. “Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between the Five-Factor Model of Personality and Holland’s Occupational Types.” Personnel Psychology, 56 (1), 45–74.10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00143.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Bartol, Kathryn M. 1999. “Reframing Salesforce Compensation System: An Agency Theory-Based Performance Management Perspective.” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 19 (3), 1–16.10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Behling, Orlando and Kenneth Law. 2000. Translating Questionnaires and other Research Instruments. Thousand Oaks: Sage.10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00101-6 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Bell, Nancy E. and Barry M. Staw. 1989. “People as Sculptors versus Sculpture: The Roles of Personality and Personal Control in Organizations.” Handbook of Career Theory. M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall and B. S. Lawrence, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 232–251.10.1017/CBO9780511625459.014 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Benet-Martinez, Veronica and Oliver P. John. 1998. “Los Cincos Grandes across Cultures and Ethnic Groups: Multitrait-Multimethod Analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 729–750.10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.729 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Bentler, Peter M. 1990. “Comparative Fit Indexes in Structural Models.” Psychological Bulletin, 107 (2), 238–246.10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Berings, Dries, Filip de Fruyt and René Bouwen. 2004. “Work Values and Personality Traits as Predictors of Enterprising and Social Vocational Interests.” Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 349–364.10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00101-6 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Bretz, Robert D., Ronald A. Ash and George F. Dreher. 1989. “Do People Make the Place? An Examination of the Attraction-Selection-Attrition Hypothesis.” Personnel Psychology, 42 (3), 561–581.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1989.tb00669.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Bretz, Robert D. Jr. and Timothy A. Judge. 1994. “The Role of Human Resource Systems in Job Applicant Decision Processes.” Journal of Management, 20 (3), 531–551.10.1037/0022-3514.55.2.258 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Cable, Daniel M. and Timothy A. Judge. 1994. “Pay Preferences and Job Search Decisions: A Person-Organization Fit Perspective.” Personnel Psychology, 47 (2), 317–348.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1994.tb01727.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Clugston, Michael, Jon P. Howell and Peter W. Dorfman. 2000. “Dispositional Influences on Pay Preferences.” Journal of Business and Psychology, 15 (2), 311–320.10.1023/A:1007824118977 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Colquitt, Jason A. and Marcia J. Simmering. 1998. “Conscientiousness, Goal Orientation, and Motivation to Learn During the Learning Process: A Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 (4), 654–665.10.1037/0021-9010.83.4.654 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Colquitt, Jason A., Jeffrey A. Lepine and Raymond A. Noe. 2000. “Toward an Integrative Theory of Training Motivation: A Meta-Analytic Path Analysis of 20 Years of Research.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 85 (5), 678–707.10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.678 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Costa, Paul T. and Robert R. McCrae. 1988. “From Catalog to Classification: Murray’s Needs and Five-Factor Model.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55 (2), 258–265.10.1037/0022-3514.55.2.258 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
de Fruyt, Filip and Ivan Mervielde. 1999. “RIASEC Types and Big Five Traits as Predictors of Employment Status and Nature of Employment.” Personnel Psychology, 52 (3), 701–727.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00177.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Digman, John M. 1990. “Personality Structure: Emergence of the Five-Factor Model.” Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440.10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Ellingson, Jill E., D. Brent Smith and Paul R. Sackett. 2001. “Investigating the Influence of Social Desirability on Personality Factor Structure.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 122–133.10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.122 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Ermel, Lauren and Don Bohl. 1997. “Responding to a Tight Labor Market: Using Incentives to Attract and Retain Talented Workers.” Compensation and Benefits Review, 29 (6), 25–29.10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.762 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Feldman, Daniel C. and Hugh J. Arnold. 1978. “Position Choice: Comparing the Importance of Organizational and Job Factors.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 63 (6), 706–710.10.1037/0021-9010.63.6.706 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Foote, Daniel. 1998. “Non-Cash Rewards and Incentives: Secret Weapons in the High-Tech Worker Staffing War.” ACA Journal, 7 (4).10.1177/1059601100252002 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Gerhart, Barry and George T. Milkovich. 1992. “Employee Compensation: Research and Practice.” Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 2nd ed. M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough, eds. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, vol. 3, 481–570.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1983.tb01440.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Gerhart, Barry and Sara L. Rynes. 2003. Compensation: Theory, Evidence, and Strategic Implications. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.10.1177/109442810032003 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Goldberg, Lewis R. 1992. “The Development of Markers for the Big-Five Factor Structure.” Psychological Assessment, 4 (1), 26–42.10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Gray, Jeffrey A. 1973. “Causal Theories of Personality and How to Test Them.” Multivariate Analysis and Psychological Theory. J. R. Royce, ed. New York: Academic Press, 409–464.10.2307/257015 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Holland, John L., Joseph A. Johnston, Francis N. Asama and Suzanne M. Polys. 1993. “Validation and Using the Career Beliefs Inventory.” Journal of Career Development, 19 (4), 233–244.10.1006/jvbe.1999.1723 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
IPSOS-Reid. 2000. “Money is Not Enough: University Students Personify New Economic of ‘The Canadian Dream.’” December 8.10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.343 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
James, Lawrence R. and Michelle D. Mazerolle. 2002. Personality in Work Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.10.1037/0022-3514.79.3.452 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
John, Oliver P. and Sanjay Srivastava. 1999. “The Big Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement, and Theoretical Perspectives.” Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. L. A. Pervin and O. P. John, eds. New York: Guilford, 102–138.10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
John, Oliver P., Eileen M. Donahue and Robert J. Kentle. 1991. “The Big Five Inventory – Versions 4a and 5a.” Berkeley: University of California, Institute of Personality and Social Research.10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00089.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Judge, Timothy A. and Daniel M. Cable. 1997. “Applicant Personality, Organization Culture, and Organizational Attraction.” Personnel Psychology, 50 (2), 359–394.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00912.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Judge, Timothy A. and Joyce E. Bono. 2001. “Are Self-Esteem, Generalized Self-Efficacy, Neuroticism, and Locus of Control Indicators of a Common Construct?” Personality Psychology in the Workplace. Roberts and Hogan, eds. Washington: American Psychological Association.10.1016/j.amp.2005.02.002 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Judge, Timothy A. and Remus Ilies. 2002. “Relationship of Personality to Performance Motivation: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (4), 797–807.10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.797 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Judge, Timothy A., Daniel Heller and Michael K. Mount. 2002. “Five-Factor Model of Personality and Job Satisfaction: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (3), 530–541.10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.530 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Judge, Timothy A., Jeffrey A. LePine and Bruce L. Rich. 2006. “Loving Yourself Abundantly: Relationship of the Narcissistic Personality to Self- and Other Perceptions of Workplace Deviance, Leadership, and Task and Contextual Performance.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (4), 762–776.10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.762 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Jurgensen, Clifford E. 1978. “Job Preferences: What Makes a Job Good or Bad?” Journal of Applied Psychology, 63 (3), 267–276.10.1037/0021-9010.63.3.267 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Konrad, Alison M., Elizabeth Corrigall, Pamela Lieb and J. Edgar Ritchie Jr. 2000. “Sex Differences in Job Attribute Preferences among Managers and Business Students.” Group & Organization Management, 25 (2), 108–131.10.1177/1059601100252002 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lacy, William B., Janet L. Bokemeier and Jon M. Shepard. 1983. “Job Attribute and Work Commitment of Men and Women in the United States.” PersonnelPsychology, 36 (2), 315–329.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1983.tb01440.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Landis, Ronald S., Daniel J. Beal and Paul E. Tesluk. 2000. “A Comparison of Approaches to Forming Composite Measures in Structural Equations Models.” Organizational Research Methods, 3 (1), 186–207.10.1177/109442810032003 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lawler III, Edward E. 1971. Pay and Organizational Effectiveness: A Psychological View. New York: McGraw Hill.10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.184 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lazear, E. P. 1999. “Personnel Economics: Past Lessons and Future Directions.” Journal of Labor Economics, 17, 199–236.10.1086/209918 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lee, Thomas W., Terence R. Mitchell, Brooks C. Holtom, Linda S. McDaniel and John W. Hill. 1999. “The Unfolding Model of Voluntary Turnover: A Replication and Extension.” Academy of Management Journal, 42 (4), 450–462.10.2307/257015 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lievens, Filip, Christoph Decaesteker, Pol Coetsier and Jo Geirnaert. 2001. “Organizational Attractiveness for Prospective Applicants: A Person-Organisation Fit Perspective.” Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51 (1), 30–51.10.1016/0030-5073(77)90018-6 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lindley, Lori D. and Fred H. Borgen. 2000. “Personal Style Scale of the Strong Interests Inventory: Linking Personality and Interests.” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 22–41.10.1006/jvbe.1999.1723 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Long, Richard J. 2006. Strategic Compensation in Canada. 3rd ed. Toronto: Thomson Nelson.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lucas, Richard E. and Ed Diener. 2001. “Understanding Extraverts’ Enjoyment of Social Situations: The Importance of Pleasantness.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81 (2), 343–356.10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.343 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Lucas, Richard E., Ed Diener, Alexander Grob, Eunkook Suh, and Liang Shao. 2000. “Cross-Cultural Evidence for the Fundamental Features of Extraversion.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (3), 452–468.10.1037/0022-3514.79.3.452 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Mercer Consultants. 2007. Mercer SnapShort Survey, Total Rewards – 2007. North America.10.1177/014920639402000301 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Meyer, John P. and Natalie J. Allen. 1991. “A Three-Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment.” Human Resource Management Review, 1, 61–89.10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Milkovich, George T., Jerry M. Newman and Nina Cole. 2005. Compensation, 1st Canadian ed. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Morgeson, Frederick P., Michael A. Campion, Robert L. Dipboye, John R. Hollenbeck, Kevin R. Murphy and Neal Schmit. 2007. “Reconsidering the Use of Personality Tests in Personnel Selection Contexts.” Personnel Psychology, 60 (3), 683–729.10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00089.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Mount, Michael K. and Murray R. Barrick. 1995. “The Big Five Personality Dimensions: Implications for Research and Practice in Human Resources Management.” Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. G. R. Ferris, ed. Greenwich: JAI Press, 13, 153–200.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Mount, Michael K., Murray R. Barrick, Steve M. Scullen and James Rounds. 2005. “Higher-Order Dimensions of the Big Five Personality Traits and the Big Six Vocational Interest Types.” Personnel Psychology, 58 (2), 447–478.10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00468.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Ntalianis, Filotheos. 2006. “Employment Relationships in Small Firms.” Doctoral Thesis in Administration, John Molson Business School, Concordia University, Montréal.10.1007/BF01354626 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Piedmont, Ralph L. 1998. The Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Clinical and Research Applications. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Plaisant, Odile, Sanjay Srivastava, Gerald A. Mendelsohn, Quentin Debray and Oliver P. John. 2005. “Relations entre le Big-Five Inventory franeais et le manuel diagnostique des troubles mentaux dans un échantillon clinique franeais.” Annales Médico-Psychologiques, 163, 161–167.10.1016/j.amp.2005.02.002 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Posner, Barry Z. 1981. “Comparing Recruiter, Student, and Faculty Perceptions of Important Applicant and Job Characteristics.” Personnel Psychology, 34 (2), 329–339.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1981.tb00946.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Rothstein, Mitchell G. and Rick D. Goffin. 2006. “The Use of Personality Measures in Personnel Selection: What does Current Research Support?” Human Resource Management Review, 16, 155–180.10.1016/j.hrmr.2006.03.004 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Rynes, Sara L. 1991. “Recruitment, Job Choice, and Post-Hire Consequences: A Call for New Research.” Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 2nd ed. M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough, eds. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, vol. 2, 399–444.10.1037/10434-004 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Rynes, Sara L., Donald P. Schwab and Herbert G. Heneman III. 1983. “The Role of Pay and Market Pay Variability in Job Application Decisions.” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 31 (3), 353–364.10.1016/0030-5073(83)90130-7 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Schneider, Benjamin. 1987. “The People Make the Place.” Personnel Psychology, 40 (3), 437–453.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Schneider, Benjamin and D. Brent Smith. 2004. “Personality and Organizations.” New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Schneider, Benjamin, Harold W. Goldstein and D. Brent Smith. 1995. “The ASA Framework: An Update.” Personnel Psychology, 48 (4), 747–773.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01780.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Schwab, Donald P., Sara L. Rynes and Ramon J. Aldag. 1987. “Theories and Research on Job Search and Choice.” Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management. K. M. Rowland and G. R. Ferris, eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, vol. 5, 129–166.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Spangler, William D., Robert J. House and Rita Palrecha. 2004. “Personality and Leadership.” Personality and Organizations. B. Schneider and D. B. Smith, eds. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
St-Onge, Sylvie and Roland Thériault. 2006. Gestion de la rémunération: théorie et pratique. 2nd ed. Montréal: Gaetan Morin.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Stewart, Greg L. 1996. “Reward Structure as a Moderator of the Relationship between Extraversion and Sales Performance.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 81 (6), 619–627.10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.619 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Stewart, Greg L. and Murray R. Barrick. 2004. “Four Lessons Learned from the Person-Situation Debate: A Review and Research Agenda.” Personality and Organization. B. Schneider and D. B. Smith, eds. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Trank, Christine Q., Sara L. Rynes and Robert D. BretzJr. 2002. “Attracting Applicants in the War for Talent: Differences in Work Preferences among High Achievers.” Journal of Business and Psychology, 16 (3), 331–345.10.1023/A:1012887605708 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Tremblay, Diane Gabrielle. 2003. “Articulation emploi-famille: les usages du temps chez les pcres et les mcres.” Nouvelles pratiques sociales, 16 (1), <http://www.erudit.org/revue/nps/2003/v16/n1/009628ar.pdf>.Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Turban, Daniel B. and Thomas L. Keon. 1993. “Organizational Attractiveness: An Interactionist Perspective.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 78 (2), 184–193.10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.184 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Turban, Daniel B., Alison R. Eyring and James E. Campion. 1993. “Job Attributes: Preferences compared with Reasons given for Accepting and Rejecting Job Offers.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66 (1), 71–81.10.1111/j.2044-8325.1993.tb00517.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Viswesvaran, Chockalingam, Jurgen Deller and Deniz S. Ones. 2007. “Personality Measures in Personnel Selection: Some New Contributions.” International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 354–358.10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00394.x Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Weiss, Howard M. and Seymour Adler. 1984. “Personality and Organizational Behaviour.” Research in Organizational Behaviour. B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings, eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, vol. 6, 1–50.
10.7202/009628ar Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Zedeck, Sheldon. 1977. “An Information Processing Model and Approach to the Study of Motivation.” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18 (1), 47–77.10.1016/0030-5073(77)90018-6 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
-
Ziegert, Jonathan C. and Karen Holcombe Ehrhart. 2004. “A Theoretical Framework and Guide for Future Research on Applicant Attraction.” Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Academy of Management Best Conference Paper.10.5465/ambpp.2004.13863087 Google Scholar Search this bibliographic reference on Google Scholar
