after Niccolò Machiavelli, a sixteenth-century Italian political philosopher. In his book
power and controlling the behavior of others. Research suggests that Machiavellianism
is a personality trait that varies from person to person. Individuals who are more
locus of control
Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
Machiavellian tend to be rational and nonemotional, may be willing to lie to attain
their personal goals, may put little weight on loyalty and friendship, and may enjoy
manipulating others’ behavior. Individuals who are less Machiavellian are more emotional,
are less willing to lie to succeed, value loyalty and friendship highly, and get little personal
pleasure from manipulating others.
Self-esteem
is the extent to which a person believes that she is a worthwhile and
deserving individual.
12
A person with high self-esteem is more likely to seek high-
status jobs, be more confident in her ability to achieve higher levels of performance,
and derive greater intrinsic satisfaction from her accomplishments. In contrast, a per-
son with less self-esteem may be more content to remain in a lower-level job, be less
confident of his ability, and focus more on extrinsic rewards. Among the major per-
sonality dimensions, self-esteem is the one that has been most widely studied in
other countries. Although more research is clearly needed, the published evidence
suggests that self-esteem as a personality trait does indeed exist in a variety of coun-
tries and that its role in organizations is reasonably important across different
cultures.
13
Risk propensity
is the degree to which an individual is willing to take chances and
make risky decisions. A manager with a high risk propensity, for example, might be
expected to experiment with new ideas and gamble on new products. She might also
lead the organization in new and different directions. This manager might also be a cat-
alyst for innovation. On the other hand, the same individual might also jeopardize the
continued well-being of the organization if the risky decisions prove to be bad ones. A
manager with low risk propensity might lead to a stagnant and overly conservative orga-
nization or help the organization successfully weather turbulent and unpredictable times
by maintaining stability and calm. Thus, the potential consequences of risk propensity to
an organization are heavily dependent on that organization’s environment.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: