The paper 'Relationship between Personality and Managerial Performance by Thomas and Pandey " is a great example of a management article. The introduction of the article is bungled up by misspelt words, and phrases that do not quite add up. For example, the introductory paragraph has a few grammatical errors such as “ mangers” instead of “ managers” , and “ are not” instead of “ or not” . This gives the reader the impression that the authors were not keen enough to examine their work before publishing it for a wider audience. As (Kö rner 15) observes, sloppy, colloquial and ungrammatical use of language gives the reader “ a much harder time figuring out what [the writers]. ..are trying to say” The introduction does not quite inform the reader on what the research seeks to attain.
Based on the article title therefore, one reads on expecting that the research would establish the “ relationship between personality and managerial performance” . This expectation is however quickly invalidated when the authors introduce the term ‘ CTPI’ without even giving the meaning or spelling the term. The confusion in understanding, the exact objective of the research is further compounded by the statements that the authors make in different sections of the article.
The quotations below are an example of the contradictory statements that the authors made in the article regarding their real purpose in undertaking the research. “ This study was conducted with an aim to examine the validity of CTPI, a tool created by Central Test International” (p. 1); “ The aim of this research is to identify links between CTPI-Pro scores and managerial performance/success on the job” (p. 13); “ The aim of this study was to identify personality differences amongst the three types of managerial performers i. e.
High, Low, and Average Performers. The researcher wanted to Study what factors differentiate a High Performer from an average and Low Performer” (p. 15). As is evident from these three quotes, the authors were not particular about the real reason why they undertook the research. The consequence of their confused state is evident in the results and conclusion sections since nothing new or significant is offered. If anything, the authors fail to deliver on any of the three objectives, since they do not prove or disapprove CTPI-pro as a research tool.
The attempts to link CTPI-pro score to job performance also fails since no explanation is offered regarding the same, and their attempt to link personality traits to job performance is also questionable since they do not clearly articulate the survey results. The introduction also creates an impression in the reader’ s mind that the authors do not differentiate between management and leadership. This stems from their use of the terms ‘ manager’ and ‘ leader’ interchangeably. As (Drucker 16) argues, an executive or manager does not necessarily have to be a leader. In the Methodology section, the authors reveal that the real aim of the research is to “ identify links between CTPI-Pro scores and managerial/success on the job” (Thomas and Pandey 13).
Since the authors do not define what the CTPI-Pro analysis is, a non-professional reader would have to seek the definition for the same elsewhere in the literature. Creation of Central Test® , the Central Test Personality Inventory for Professionals (CTPI-Pro) is an assessment tool used to gauge the association between personality traits and one’ s job performance.
The psychometric test has a list of 20 personality traits, which are compared against 21 behavioural competencies as a mode of gauging behavioural skills. The authors rightly stated that the entire test would take respondents approximately 25-30 minutes to answer. If indeed the survey produced proof that CTPI-pro was a valid test, which could determine personality traits that contributed to high managerial performance, then the study would have an undeniable impact on organisations. Unfortunately, the conclusion given by the authors is hazy as it does not clearly state whether CTPI-pro was indeed a valid test-tool for linking personality traits and job performance.
Central Test®. “The Art of Assessment- Leader in Online Psychometric Testing.” N.d.
Drucker, Peter F. “What Makes an Effective Executive” Harvard Business Review. (June 2004): 16-21.
Fox, Hellen. Listening to the World: Cultural Issues in Academic Writing. Illinios: National Council of Teachers of English, 1994. Print
Ioannidis, John P.A. “Why Most Published Research Findings are False.” PLOS Med Journal. 2.8 (2005): 0696-0701.
Körner, Ann M. Guide to Publishing a Scientific Paper. New York: Routledge, 2008. Print.
Lertzman, Ken. “Notes on Writing Papers and Theses.” Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 76.2 (Jun. 1995): 86-90.
Slade, Malcom, and Morgan, Douglas L. “Accommodating Philosophical Perspectives: An Imperative for Indigenous Higher Education.” In the proceedings of the Third Pacific Rim Conference: Strategies for Success in Transition Years. Auckland, New Zealand. 1998. Print
Taylor, David. “Writing-Up Research Results as a Critical Component of the Research Process: a Participatory Workshop Aimed at Developing Research Writing Skills.” 23 Mar. 2010.
Thomas, Crescentia and Vijay Pandey. “Relationship Between Personality and Managerial Performance.” N.d. < www.centraltest.com/ct_fr/.../CTPI_Criterion_Validity_study.pdf > 9 Jun. 2011.