Beyond the Big Five: Personality and Job Performance in an E-Commerce Firm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper was to investigate of the relationship between personality and job performance with employees of a rapidly expanding Swedish e-commerce firm. Two studies were carried out with the UPPTM test of personality. In Study 1, seventy persons took the test on an Internet site. Three groups at NN AB participated: a group of top performers, selected by management, a group of employees selected at random, and 8 members of NN AB's top management. In Study 2, the validity of the UPPTM test was investigated with relation to supervisor assessments in a group of employees in customer service at NN AB. In Study 1, large and significant differences were found between the group of employees selected at random, and the other two groups. In terms of correlations, validity was = 0.44. In Study 2, the tested subjects were assessed by supervisors using a comprehensive assessment form (40 variables), which could reduced to three criterion dimensions. The validities for the three criterion dimensions of value for the company (halo), efficiency and social functioning were 0.66, 0.52 and 0.40. Analysis of proxy criteria (work motivation and similar attitude scales) gave similar results
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".