A recent meta-analytical study by Sackett et al. (2021) suggests that personality, as a covert measure of integrity, is just as predictive of job performance as cognitive ability. Sackett et al. (2021) ranked personality in the fifth position in terms of criterion validity when compared to 24 other selection procedures. Meta-analytical studies conducted on the criterion validity of personality in South Africa similarly suggest that personality variables are important predictors of work performance (Van Aarde et al., 2017). However, Van Aarde et al. (2017) highlighted shortcomings in the way performance is conceptualised and measured in South Africa. For example, the analysis of the studies sampled for the meta-analysis by Van Aarde et al. (2017) demonstrated that performance evaluations (outcome variables) are mostly conducted for administrative purposes (promotion or remuneration), which negatively skews the performance scores. Counter to expectations, the Big Five trait Conscientiousness was found to display negligible validity in determining overall performance. Van Aarde et al. (2017) also discovered that the range of performance dimensions assessed in the studies was limited. Van Aarde et al. (2017) concluded that industrial psychology’s future credibility as a science in South Africa, especially studies of the validity of personality, will depend on the careful construction and judicious use of measures of individual work performance.

All the studies cited in the meta-analytical study conducted by Van Aarde et al. (2017) focussed on the Big Five factors of personality, namely Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Emotional stability. A recent study conducted by Van Lill and Taylor (2021) replicated a hierarchical level of personality between the Big Five factors and personality facets according to the 10 personality aspects. DeYoung et al. (2007) and DeYoung (2015) were the first to provide theoretical arguments and empirical evidence for the existence of the 10 personality aspects, while Stanek and Ones (2018) highlighted its relevance for the workplace. A meta-analysis by Judge et al. (2013) revealed that the 10 personality aspects explained 10% more variance in overall job performance when compared to the Big Five factors. Judge et al. (2013) argue that the 10 personality aspects might more coherently represent the inter-factor correlations at the personality facet level, and better capture the nuanced relationships between personality and performance. Personality aspects might better represent the phenotypical patterns of thought, emotion, and behaviour than personality facets. The phenotypical patterns sprout from evidence from neurobiology and therefore reflect adaptive personality substructures that evolved in human beings because of environmental challenges (DeYoung, 2015; DeYoung et al., 2021).

Personality is predictive of performance and has a lower rate of adverse impact against previously disadvantaged groups in selection when compared to variables with similar criterion validity, such as cognitive ability (Outtz, 2002; Sackett et al., 2021; Van Lill & Coetzee, 2021). Consequently, personality assessments could be critical in helping South African employers make accurate and morally fair selection decisions. However, as alluded to by Van Aarde et al. (2017) and Van Lill and Taylor (2021), more nuanced measurement at the predictor level (personality) and the criterion level (work performance) could help professionals apply personality assessment results in a more judicious manner for selection and development purposes in the workplace. Given the current shortcomings regarding research on criterion validity with regard to personality in South Africa, the objective of the current study was to explore the relative weights that each of the 10 personality aspects explains with regard to five broad performance dimensions, namely In-role-, Extra-role-, Adaptive-, Leadership-, and Counterproductive performance, in the South African context.

The manifestation of the 10 personality aspects based on the Work Personality Index (WPI) (Macnab & Bakker, 2014) had to be established. The WPI is a work-related personality measure that has been validated for the South African context (Macnab & Bakker, 2014). However, no prior studies have inspected the prevalence of the 10 personality aspects among the facets of the WPI.

DeYoung (2015) argues that the 10 personality aspects better account for a personality substructure below the Big Five factors when compared to personality facets, where less consensus exists on the number and types of facets that make up personality. Personality aspects appear to have a stronger neurobiological foundation compared to personality facets and, as evolved human characteristics, are more self-evident adaptations to environmental challenges (DeYoung, 2015; DeYoung et al., 2021). The construction of the 10 aspects, as manifested in the facets of the WPI (Macnab & Bakker, 2014), were based on the Cybernetic Big Five Theory (CB5T) of DeYoung (2015) and empirical evidence of other personality measures (DeYoung et al., 2007; Judge et al., 2013; Van Lill & Taylor, 2021). The 10 aspects of personality, as a taxonomy of personality, can be seen as a ‘periodic table’ of individual differences, which could help build consensus regarding ‘first principles’ in the measurement of personality and its utility as a predictor of work-related outcomes (Woods & Anderson, 2016). An overview of the breakdown of the 10 personality aspects in relation to the WPI facets is provided in Figure 1.

DeYoung (2015) proposed the CB5T as an integrative framework to explain the reasons behind the atheoretical and empirically derived Big Five traits and 10 personality aspects. Cybernetic Big Five Theory holds that humans are goal-directed, self-regulating systems who aim to achieve desired future states. It is also argued that humans seek and integrate new information to revise their goals and strategies, enabling them to adapt to environmental changes. The traits Openness and Extraversion reflect the cognitive and behavioural exploration of new information and desirable alternatives, used to adapt existing goals and develop new strategies, and are sometimes collectively referred to as ‘Plasticity’ because of the traits’ shared covariance. The traits Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Emotional stability, jointly referred to as ‘Stability’ or ‘Integrity’, because of their shared covariance, reflect the self-regulation required to achieve current goals and execute the related strategies (DeYoung, 2015; Digman, 1997).

Trait Openness to experience, from a CB5T standpoint, is related to individual tendencies to cognitively explore and engage with new information in the world, prompting human beings to set alternative goals and devise creative and sufficiently complex strategies to achieve new goals (DeYoung, 2015). DeYoung et al. (2007) distinguish between two personality aspects related to trait Openness to experience, namely Openness and Intellect. Openness represents a tendency to make creative connections between new and chaotic information, which helps people gain novel insights. Intellect, by contrast, reflects a more abstract and analytical approach that enables individuals to evaluate the rationality of connections made between different pieces of information (DeYoung, 2015). In the current study, personality aspects Intellect and Openness were limited to the facets Analytical thinking and Innovation of the WPI (Macnab & Bakker, 2014), respectively.

Based on CB5T, the trait Extraversion reflects individual differences in reward sensitivity, which motivates human beings to behaviourally explore and engage with new goals (DeYoung, 2015). Assertiveness and Enthusiasm are distinguished as two aspects of Extraversion (DeYoung et al., 2007). Whereas Assertiveness drives individuals to behaviourally explore things external to themselves, Enthusiasm helps to reinforce their motivation to seek things outside of themselves through the enjoyment of newfound end states (DeYoung, 2015). Assertiveness aspect was inferred from the facets Energy, Leadership, and Persuasion, whereas Enthusiasm was represented by facet Outgoing of the WPI (Macnab & Bakker, 2014).

Based on CB5T, Conscientiousness reflects a tendency to self-regulate current behaviour, which helps individuals prioritise long-term survival goals (DeYoung, 2015). The two aspects related to Conscientiousness are Industriousness and Orderliness (DeYoung et al., 2007). Industriousness reflects the self-discipline to set aside short-term needs and put in the required effort to achieve long-term goals. Orderliness, in contrast, concerns self-set rules or adherence to rules set by others as boundaries that help individuals maintain their focus on socially appropriate and relevant goals (DeYoung, 2015). Industriousness aspect was based on the facets Ambition, Persistence, and Initiative, while Orderliness was derived from the facets Attention to detail, Dependability, and Planning of the WPI (Macnab & Bakker, 2014).

Humans are social, and the achievement of individual goals often needs to be balanced with collective needs. In the interpretive realm of CB5T, tendencies towards empathy and altruism, per the trait Agreeableness, trigger social bonding and reciprocity among human beings (DeYoung, 2015). DeYoung et al. (2007) highlight two personality aspects related to Agreeableness, namely Politeness and Compassion. Politeness aids individuals in cooperating within social groups through self-restraint of norm-violating impulses. Compassion, as a parallel strategy to operate in social groups, reinforces bonding through empathy for others (DeYoung, 2015). Compassion and Politeness were respectively represented by facets Concern for others and Rule following of the WPI (Macnab & Bakker, 2014).

Neuroticism (inversely referred to as Emotional Stability in the present study), according to CB5T (DeYoung, 2015), is a tendency to experience negative emotionality, which serves as a defence system to avoid undesirable end states, especially in the presence of a threat or uncertainty (DeYoung, 2015). Trait Neuroticism, according to DeYoung et al. (2007), can be divided into the aspects Volatility and Withdrawn distress – represented by the positively phrased Even-temperedness and Self-assuredness. Volatility represents an active defence in response to external threats by, for example, displaying aggression. Withdrawn distress also reflects a response to undesirable experiences but is more related to passive avoidance in response to uncertainty by, for example, experiencing anxiety. The behavioural inhibition system in the brain, with specific reference to the hippocampus, appears to be related to Withdrawal (DeYoung, 2015). Aspects Even-temperedness and Self-assuredness were theorised to, respectively, be related to the WPI facets Self-control and Stress tolerance (Macnab & Bakker, 2014).

While some researchers argue that personality traits are better predictors of performance than narrower facets (Ones & Viswesvaran, 1996), other scholars hold that narrower measures of personality are better predictors of narrow performance dimensions (Tett et al., 2003). Hough et al. (2015) recommend that the level of personality measured depends on the narrowness of the criteria of interest. Judge et al. (2013) suggest that the 10 personality aspects explain additional variance beyond the Big Five when predicting narrower dimensions of performance, such as task- and contextual performance. The purpose of the current study was to expand existing knowledge of how the 10 aspects, which are argued to more closely represent the phenotypical pattern of personality (DeYoung, 2015), are related to five narrower dimensions of individual work performance. Therefore, the present researchers looked at individual work performance across five dimensions, as proposed by Van Lill and Taylor (2022) in the Individual Work Performance Review, namely In-role performance, Extra-role performance, Adaptive performance, Leadership performance, and Counterproductive performance.

In-role performance, also referred to as ‘Task performance’, reflects the core tasks that employees must complete in their job (Van Lill & Taylor, 2022). Trait Conscientiousness is a consistent predictor of Task performance, independent of occupational characteristics, and is related to the self-restraint required to pursue non-immediate goals (Wilmot & Ones, 2021). Dudley et al. (2006) provided meta-analytical evidence, based on instruments such as the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised, that the facet Achievement striving (mean r = 0.13), which forms part of aspect Industriousness, might be the driving force in the correlation between trait Conscientiousness and Task performance. The meta-analysis of Judge et al. (2013), by contrast, demonstrated that the aspects Industriousness (p = 0.23) and Orderliness (p = 0.19) had the highest correlations with Task performance. Assertiveness (p = 0.15), perhaps because of its association with a behavioural drive to engage in things external to oneself, also appears to have a stronger relationship with In-role performance. Based on the findings of Judge et al. (2013), it was hypothesised that:

Extra-role performance, akin to Contextual performance and Organisational citizenship behaviours, refers to actions that are not part of employees’ jobs, but are performed for the benefit of co-workers or team members (Van Lill & Taylor, 2022). The comparative strength of the predictive validity of personality aspects for Extra-role performance is less differentiated. The results of Judge et al. (2013) suggest a multitude of correlations between Contextual performance and the aspects Industriousness (p = 0.28), Orderliness (p = 0.27), Compassion (p = 0.14), Politeness (p = 0.16), Volatility (p = –0.21), Assertiveness (p = 0.15), and Enthusiasm (p = 0.15). In terms of relative strength, the aspects related to the trait Conscientiousness appear to have more dominant relationships with Contextual performance (Wilmot, 2017). Pletzer et al. (2021), in a meta-analytical study based on HEXACO Inventory, found that the facet Diligence (associated with the aspect Industriousness) appears to have a much stronger relationship with Organisational citizenship behaviour, compared to facets associated with the aspect Orderliness, namely Organisation, Perfection, and Prudence. Higher Industriousness might help individuals to maintain the direction of their focus on longer-term goals, while also increasing the intensity and persistence of their behaviour – reflected in actions beyond what is normally required – to achieve their aspirations (DeYoung, 2015; Judge & Ilies, 2002).

Extra-role performance, as measured by the Individual Work Performance Review (IWPR) (Van Lill & Taylor, 2022), also includes dimensions that go beyond typical conceptualisations of contextual performance, namely Self-development and Innovation (George & Brief, 1992; Podsakoff et al., 2000). Initiating learning and experimenting with new ways of doing things might require a greater tendency to cognitively explore and analyse new information. Consequently, it was hypothesised that:

Adaptive performance reflects an employee’s ability to adapt to crises or deal with novelty and ambiguity (Van Lill & Taylor, 2022). A meta-analysis conducted by Huang et al. (2014) suggested that traits Ambition (p = 0.16) and Adjustment (p = 0.14), related to the traits Extraversion and Neuroticism, respectively (Hogan & Hogan, 2007), have the strongest relationships with Adaptive performance. Employees who score higher on the trait Ambition, with the aspect Assertiveness being the closest representation of the trait (Hogan & Hogan, 2007), might proactively modify their objectives in response to change, to attain greater social status. Higher Adjustment, related to aspect Self-assuredness (Hogan & Hogan, 2007), might assist employees in functionally reacting (a passive response) to the environmental threats posed by change and uncertainty (Huang et al., 2014). Based on the meta-analytical evidence, it was hypothesised that:

Leadership performance refers to the ability to effectively influence co-workers towards the achievement of common goals (Van Lill & Taylor, 2022). The most dominant correlates of Leadership effectiveness appear to be traits Extraversion (Judge et al., 2002; p = 0.24), Openness (Judge et al., 2002; p = 0.24), and Conscientiousness (Judge et al., 2002; p = 0.16). The findings are also corroborated by the meta-analytical evidence of Wilmot (2017) and Wilmot and Ones (2021). DeYoung et al. (2007), based on the work of Saucier et al. (2005), argue that the covariation between the aspects Assertiveness, Intellect, and Industriousness might represent a composite trait, referred to as ‘Heroism’. Heroism is defined as the exceptionality or competence of an employee, which provides signals of the individual’s worthiness of being followed. Based on the concept of heroism and current meta-analytical findings, it was hypothesised that:

Counterproductive performance encompasses those actions that can negatively impact others or prevent teams or organisations from achieving common goals (Van Lill & Taylor, 2022). Personality-based Integrity, also referred to as meta-trait ‘Stability’, appears to be the most dominant meta-analytical predictor of Counterproductive performance (Ones et al., 2007; Pletzer et al., 2020; Wilmot, 2017). Conscientiousness (Wilmot, 2017; p = –0.39), Agreeableness (Wilmot, 2017; p = –0.45), and Emotional stability (Wilmot, 2017; p = –0.30) make up personality-based integrity and are the primary traits that predict Counterproductive performance. Facet-level predictors of Counterproductive performance, as identified by Pletzer et al. (2020) and Morris et al. (2015), reveal a distinctive pattern of relationships with Counterproductive performance. Individuals’ self-regulating or impulse control tendencies, aimed at preventing norm-violating behaviours, might best explain future Counterproductive performance. Regarding more self-regulative (or rule-following) aspects in the CB5T (DeYoung, 2015), it was hypothesised that:

Industriousness and Intellect emerged as the most dominant predictors of positive dimensions related to work performance, independent of the broad performance dimensions studied. The sample of the present study consisted of mainly professionals (n = 77; 39%). However, when considering a broader definition of the term ‘professional’ (not just individuals registered with a professional board, but also those with a high level of education), used in prior meta-analytical studies (Wilmot & Ones, 2021), many of the respondents in the present study classified as skilled employees (n = 60; 31%), and could also be viewed as professionals. Wilmot and Ones (2021) provided meta-analytical evidence to suggest that Openness to experience (p = 0.20; rescaled = 66%) and Conscientiousness (p = 0.14; rescaled = 29%) are the strongest predictors of performance in professional jobs. The present study, while not intended, highlights that Intellect and Industriousness might be the primary drivers behind the criterion validity of Openness to experience and Conscientiousness among a larger cohort of professionals.¹

The evidence points to the importance of uncoupling aspects in traits such as Extraversion, Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, and Emotional stability. Conscientiousness tends to generalise across occupations as a consistent trait-based predictor of work performance (Wilmot & Ones, 2021). In accordance with Van Aarde et al.’s (2017) expectations, an aspect related to Conscientiousness is a consistent predictor of different performance outcomes. However, the present findings suggest that Orderliness, when uncoupled from Industriousness, might, in many cases, have a negative relationship with performance outcomes, except for In-role performance.

Assertiveness, when uncoupled from Enthusiasm, shared greater overlap with Intellect and Industriousness, which replicated the pattern of correlations observed by DeYoung et al. (2007). DeYoung et al. (2007) suggested that the covariation could be explained by a composite trait that captures something related to admirable characteristics in individuals. In the context of the present work-related sample, the proclivity to critically analyse information (Intellect), prioritise long-term goals (Industriousness), and behavioural motivation to pursue new goals (Assertiveness) appear to be markers of high potential. This combination of markers of high potential, as inferred from the aspect level, appears to be particularly salient when predicting Leadership performance.

Even-temperedness and Self-assuredness further highlight the unique relationships that personality aspects have with work performance, compared to the constituent trait Emotional stability. Whereas Self-assuredness appears to be particularly important for Adaptive performance, Even-temperedness appears to have stronger relations with In-role-, Extra-role-, and Counterproductive performance. Even-temperedness, in line with the findings of Judge et al. (2013), appears to be a more generalisable predictor across dimensions of work performance, perhaps because of the proclivity to self-regulate immediate emotional impulses in the pursuit of larger work-related goals.

The present study suggests a fair degree of variability in the degree to which personality aspects predict narrower performance outcomes. In heeding Van Aarde et al.’s (2017) recommendation, it might be sensible for practitioners to be more prudent in their choice of personality dimensions chosen when making decisions about people based on narrower performance criteria. Uncoupling aspects related to broad traits reveal unique relationships with performance that are not always visible at the trait level. Aspects, as more coherent representations of facets (DeYoung, 2015), might be a level of personality measurement that is broad enough to make reliable inferences about future behaviour for selection decisions, based on targeted performance dimensions, and narrow enough to make tailored personality-based development suggestions (Judge et al., 2013).

Few studies, with no identifiable evidence of such studies in South Africa, investigated the criterion validity of the 10 personality aspects for five narrow generic dimensions of performance. The present study highlights the importance of a more nuanced understanding of the work-related impact of personality and the associated implications for selection decisions and development suggestions. Industriousness and Intellect appear to be salient predictors of performance, perhaps because of the overrepresentation of professionals in the sample. Future studies could investigate the predictive validity of the 10 personality aspects for narrower performance dimensions in other contexts.