Effects of employee occupational self rejections on talent

EFFECTS OF EMPLOYEE OCCUPATIONAL SELF-REJECTIONS ON TALENT
MANAGEMENT: A STUDY OF PERSONALITY FACTOR ROLE IN PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION ISSUES
G. V. CHANDRA MOULI & JUTURU VISWANATH
Research Scholar, Department of Business Management, Yogi Vemana University, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, India
ABSTRACT
Talented employees are the precious gift to any organization. Identifying, developing and sustaining those talents
are the exigent task to every Human Resource Management Practitioners. Talent means natural aptitude or skill.
Talent management is a system of moving the organization with right people. Personality dynamics possess higher rate of
affectivity on the individual talent mechanisms. Whenever the employee starts self-rejecting i.e. self-disapproval,
self-disparagement, self-distrust feelings of being unworthy then it negatively effects on their creative contributions
towards job and organization. These effects on performance evaluation issues are obviously highly influencing in nature.
This state presents many issues and concerns with regard to managing talents. The current paper is an endeavor to explore
various factors affecting the employee occupational self-rejections and to assess the impact and influence of personality
factor in performance evaluation concerns with respect to managing talented human resources.
KEYWORDS: Talent, Personality, Self, Rejections, Creative Contributions, Performance Evaluation
INTRODUCTION
Talent Management concerned with the typical activities of hiring, developing and sustaining individuals whose
activities are highly influencing in nature on organizational progressions. Evans, P., Pucik, V. & Björkman, I. (2002)
defines the term talent management as “Deliberate actions to attract, recruit, develop, and retain those individuals who,
individually or collectively, have the capability to make a significant impact on the results of the firm, and whose skills are
firm-specific”. Personality is a unique composition of behavioral attitudes, values, approach, feelings, perceptions and
thinking process of an individual with consistent display. The human resource management practices are mainly targeted
on retaining talented employees in the firm. Managing those talents rests with understanding the psychological aspects of
the individuals. In short it is about managing behaviors. Self-rejection factor disturbs the individual’s mind-set. The worst
part of it is developing unrealistic expectations, unfavorable social attitudes, personal limitations, severe emotional strain,
repeated failures etc. If these elements collectively work on individual thinking and behaving then it results in declined
performance, disturbed workplace activities, lack of perspective and motivation towards job fulfillments. This is
considered as a dangerous concern towards organizational progression and advancements.
Corporate manpower strategies will be materialized by assessing the influence of personality factor on individual
issues in particular on talent management. The performance of the individual’s assessment done based on many job related
variables. In explicit every employee has to cope-up with many known and unknown workplace situations. Talent retention
is always a million dollar question to the organizations. Reasons may be unlimited. In fact it involves formulating typical
human resource strategies which are subject to change i.e. business dynamics. Naturally managing non human resources
requires minimum level of attention than the human resources. Understanding behaviors presents many occupational
International Journal of Human Resource
Management and Research (IJHRMR)
ISSN(P): 2249-6874; ISSN(E): 2249-7986
Vol. 4, Issue 1, Feb 2014, 31-44
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

32 G. V. Chandra Mouli & Juturu Viswanath
issues. The workplace consists of different environments and situations, these are ever changing which possess high impact
on individual job efficiencies. Here personality fit concept occupies the prominent position. ‘Personality at workplace’ is
an evergreen topic, which is intended to address typical behavioral modifications as per the job-organization concern.
Job satisfaction and performance are interlinked concepts. There are different facets which influences these two,
when it comes to point of performance evaluations. The occupational performance measurement systems give only a
briefing of strengths and weaknesses of an individual. Thus, such a simple analysis may not sufficient to address critical
manpower issues. Even proved motivational mechanics could not fetch expected results on individual performances due to
self-rejections. Conducting of personality tests at the time of interviews doesn’t mean judging personality match; it is only
a first level in personality assessments. There are determinants acts on individual personality, purely a psycho-social
element. Change management is correlated with personality factor. Unmatched job outcomes require attention on
behavioral patterns of the individuals. Managing these situations rests with conducting personality research. It’s time to
move from best practices to next i.e. being proactive. Individual unfavorable attitudes, expectations, emotions combination
tends to misjudgments and loss of enthusiasm towards maximizing occupational contributions.
Personal experiences towards job play a vital role at workplace. Self-rejections may starts at point of time.
These rejections direct the individual from developing constructing attitude to destructive. Personality is a true degree of
variability towards performance evaluations. Shaping personalities alone brings changes under these circumstances.
Talent development and utilization comes in reality when the above mentioned issues are rightly answered. Social attitudes
of the employee decide the state of integration with the job-organization. Decisions related to occupational concerns are
hyper-active in nature. Environmental obstacles and other employee problems can be managed through understanding the
role of personality factor. Thinking out of the box, situational acting and right lining behavioral deviations are the
considerate variables for managing personalities. Performance evaluations reflect the existing manpower potentialities and
weaknesses in different job areas. Here, deciding the best criteria for judging performances serves the purpose of managing
talents. Personality contemplations definitely create unique impressions which are positively associated with the
organizational successful moves. Employee personality attributes encapsulates vital play on their occupational
contributions. The way how individual thinks reflects in the form of their actions. It is called as a paradigm shift in
managing manpower. In this regard, this study is premeditated to address above mentioned issue. It goes with all those
profound discussions, analysis and practical implications.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Talent management has become as a business casual because of emerging global challenges towards manpower
planning. International human resource management practices received a prominent role in shaping talents
(Schuler, R.S., Jackson, S. E, & Tarique, I., 2011). The concept of talent management insists the organizations to formulate
proactive strategies to tackle critical business tribulations. Talent comprises of psychological, social and economic
variables interplay (Tansley, C., 2011). The organizational norms and roles accepted and played by the employees define
the extent of utilization of human talent. The corporate norms can be considered as a metric to understand the people
integration with their jobs (Jackson, J., 1966). The personal factors like interests, physiological conditions, self-esteem
enlarges the area of organizational identification (Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., & Nygren, H. T., 1970).
The personality issues including self-rejections have negative impressions on the performance of the individuals.
Situations have a significant level of influence on the individual actions and reactions towards shaping behaviors
(Bowers, K., 1973). Controversial situations fetch right results if they are managed through personality concerns.

Effects of Employee Occupational Self-Rejections on Talent Management: 33
A Study of Personality Factor Role in Performance Evaluation Issues
Deriving benefits out of problems rests with the person-situation debate (Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C., 1988).
Personality and job performance are closely linked; the impressions of personality traits on performance aspects are always
visible (Hurtz, G.M., & Donovan, J.J., 2000). Employee proactiveness results in self-management and effective role-play,
has become modern performance evaluation measurement with regard to organizational fulfillments. The personality type
affects on individual creativity, there are many interrelated personality dimensions which reflects the attitudes toward
learning (Moulaye, A, Taher M, Chen J, and Wei Yao, 2011). Managing Talents is combined with many occupational
factors; the job security improvises occupational contributions of the employees. There is direct relationship between the
job security and performance in most cases (Probst, T. M., 2003). Attitude towards Organizational culture and change of
the individuals defines the area of performance improvements (Weiner, Y., 1988). Performance reviews are reported
correctly with regard to balancing employee efficiency and training programs. Performance evaluation reports designed in
such a way to tackle various socio-economic issues of the firm (Sigelman, L., 1975).
Job attitudes of individuals are always dynamic and an integrated dispositional approach is needed to explore the
talents of them at workplace. Change management initiatives play a moderating role in developing positive attitudes on
performing the assigned job duties (Staw, B. M., & Ross, J., 1985). Talent recognition should start at the interview stage
itself. Personnel interview sessions planned to assess the level of occupational expertise of the incumbents. Decision
makings after these sessions are decisive in performance evaluations (Rothstein, M., & Jackson, D., 1980).
The commitment element presents among all employees but varies at different phases of employment. Decisions related to
the trainings, job assignments and job performances directly influences in managing potential manpower
(O'Reilly, C. A., & Caldwell, D. F., 1981). Team working environment demands the better understanding of personality
variables. Most of the organizations started focusing on personality dimensions with regard to developing proactive teams
(Jackson, E.S., Joshi, A., & Erhardt, L.N., 2003). Appraisal mechanisms are the subject to bias the self-impressions. All
these led to creating misleading opinions and assumptions on performance issues (Humphrey, R.H, & Berthiaume, R.D,
1993). Managing talents have a big concern with the emergence of diverse workforce. The multinational corporate culture
opened gates for the discussions on performance evaluations based on socio-cultural factors. There is connection between
the job performance and autonomy. Work autonomy degree increases the individual interests on job and also prepares them
to apply creative ideas on performing tasks (Patillo, E.J., Moran, B.B., & Morgan, J., 2009). The job effectiveness can be
measured based on personality – performance analysis. Personality fit enhances the job worth in terms of productivity and
organizational contributions (Westerman, J.W. & Simmons, B.L., 2007). Innovative teams exist because of the continuous
efforts put by the personnel department on human resource development programs. Knowledge combined with experience
helps the organizations and individuals in assessing exactly what a job required and show ways to fulfill the occupational
commitments (Taylor, A, & Greve H.R., 2006). Employee job satisfaction lies with the performance evaluation system
adopted by the organization. Talent sustenance and personality development proximity determines the level of effective
utilization of manpower (Agho A.O., Mueller C.W. & Price J.L., 1993).
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Attainment of the organizational objectives with fewer deviations will be considered as the most complex bustle
in the market dynamics. Organizational excellence can be achieved through the optimum use of manpower talents.
Employee is the subject to the behavioral issues of personality. There may be many reasons for the unmatched results of
the organization with regard to the existing talents among those self-rejections which is of psychological in nature affects
more on occupational issues. Hence, this study focuses on one of the ever typical workplace predicament called managing
employee occupational self-rejection concerns.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The present study is designed to address many critical organizational tribulations allied with the managing talents.
Performance evaluations can’t be observed as a routine. It carries huge value in terms of addressing human resource
management uncertainties and risks. Individual efficiencies can be maximized through the managing occupational
self-rejections at the right time through proactively designed performance evaluations which are based on personality
inklings. This study is intended to create a better understanding on the above said psychological issues of managing talents.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The following are the objectives of the study:
 To assess the impact of employee occupational self-rejections on performance issues;
 To ascertain the influence of personality factor on managing talents;
 To examine the impressions of personality psychodynamics in employee performance evaluations and
 To study the interaction effect of managed employee Self-rejections and optimizing performance positive
affectivities.
HYPOTHESES
The following hypotheses are formulated in order to achieve the above objectives:
 Employee occupational self-rejections are negatively associated with performance improvements.
 Managed personality factor will results in developing and sustaining talented manpower.
 There is a significant relationship between the managed employee self-rejections and talent-performance
management practices.
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study is to examine the personality factor role on performance evaluations with regard to the
effects of employee occupational self-rejections on talent management concerns. A descriptive research design taking a
survey approach is used. Data is collected from the respondents by using the interview schedule specifically designed for
the purpose. Population consists of IT (Information Technology) employees belongs to different companies exists in the
Electronics City (popularly known as Electronic City), Bangalore. The population includes various categories of IT
Employees like Software Engineers, Senior Software Engineers and Project Managers. Employees from Twelve IT
companies were participated in the survey. A total number of 300 questionnaires were distributed for this study. Of this
number, 246 were returned and 228 were found usable. A non-probabilistic sampling method, namely convenience
sampling is used in drawing samples for this study. The sample included 129 males (56.6%) and 99 females (43.4%).
The range of ages of the respondents is from 20 to 55 years. The educational level of the respondents is high with 87%
holding bachelors or postgraduate degrees. Slightly more than half (52.8%) of the respondents reported that they hold the
position of Software Engineers; whereas 29.4% are Senior Software Engineers cadre; and 17.8% Project Managers.
The Experience of the respondents is ranged from five to twenty three years. The respondents were kept naive as to the
exact nature of the research purpose; being told only that the study instigated to know the employee’s perception about
talent management issues and concerns. The questionnaire consists of 35 items related to the personality psychodynamics
aimed to get respondents perception related to the occupational influentials of human resources on performance concerns.

Respondent’s opinions are carefully recorded and tabulated. The Survey was conducted from November to December
2013. The tabulated data is analyzed with various statistical tools like Mean, Standard Error, Median, Standard Deviation,
Sample Variance, Kurtosis, Skewness, Range, Minimum, Maximum, Simple Percentages, Weighted Averages
(Descriptive Statistics), Pearson Correlation Coefficients (Associative Statistics), Hurwicz Criterion for Various Acts
(Decision Theory) and Chi-square Test (Frequency Statistics).
ANALYSIS
Table 1: Impact of Employee Occupational Self-Rejections on Performance Issues
1.1. Personality Notion: Unrealistic Expectations
Mean S.E Median Mode S.D S.V Kurtosis Skewness Range Min Max
45.6 6.76 54 N/A 15.13 228.8 1.464 -1.454 36 21 57
1.2. Personality Notion: Repeated Failures
44.2 4.81 45 N/A 10.76 115.7 -2.9792 0.017 22 34 56
1.3. Personality Notion: Identification Error
39.4 5.474 44 N/A 12.24 149.8 -0.2196 -0.505 32 22 54
1.4. Personality Notion: Lack of Self-Perspective
40.0 5.009 44 N/A 11.20 125.5 -0.7022 -0.251 29 25 54
1.5. Personality Notion: Lack of Motivation
42.0 3.755 44 N/A 8.39 70.5 -0.5230 0.473 21 33 54
Source: Primary Data from Field Survey
Note: S.E – Standard Error; S.D – Standard Deviation; S.V – Sample Variance;
Table 1.1 shows the following values for the Unrealistic Expectations variable of the Personality Notion:
The mean Value is 45.6. The standard deviation is 15.13. Variance is square of standard deviation which is 228.8.
The value of kurtosis and skewness are 1.464 and -1.454 respectively which shows data is not normally distributed. Range
which is defined as the highest minus lowest is 36. The minimum value in this data set is 21 while maximum value is 57.
Table 1.2 shows the following values for the Repeated Failures variable of the Personality Notion: The mean
Value is 44.2. The standard deviation is 10.76. Variance is square of standard deviation which is 228.8. The value of
kurtosis and skewness are -2.9792 and 0.017 respectively which shows data is not normally distributed. Range which is
defined as the highest minus lowest is 22. The minimum value in this data set is 34 while maximum value is 56.
Table 1.3 shows the following values for the Identification Error variable of the Personality Notion: The mean
Value is 39.4. The standard deviation is 12.24. Variance is square of standard deviation which is 228.8. The value of
kurtosis and skewness are -0.2196 and -0.505 respectively which shows data is not normally distributed. Range which is
Table 1.4 shows the following values for the Lack of Self-Perspective variable of the Personality Notion:
The mean Value is 40.0. The standard deviation is 11.20. Variance is square of standard deviation which is 125.5.
The value of kurtosis and skewness are -0.7022 and -0.251 respectively which shows data is not normally distributed.

Range which is defined as the highest minus lowest is 29. The minimum value in this data set is 25 while maximum value
is 54.
Table 1.5 shows the following values for the Lack of Self- Motivation variable of the Personality Notion:
The mean Value is 42.0. The standard deviation is 8.39. Variance is square of standard deviation which is 70.5. The value
of kurtosis and skewness are -0.5230 and 0.473 respectively which shows data is not normally distributed. Range which is
Table 2: Influence of Personality Factor on Managing Talents
Area
Yes No Weighted
χ2
Value
[2] [1] Average
Learning Attitude 191 37 1.84 5.41818
Self-Adjustment 187 41 1.82 7.24538
Individual
Differences
193 35 1.85 4.98736
Self-Concept 197 31 1.86 4.43445
Self-Esteem 202 26 1.89 5.21308
Leadership
Effectiveness
207 21 1.91 6.31495
Self-Realizations 194 34 1.85 8.24102
Adaptability 186 42 1.82 4.09215
Acceptance 191 37 1.84 7.29524
Supervision Style 199 29 1.87 5.12871
Source: Primary Data from Field Survey df = 1, χ2
at 0.05 Level of Significance = 3.841
After analyzing the above ten factors of personality dynamics, from table 2 it can be easily depicted that these ten
personality factors equally contributes on critical issues related to talent management. The weighted average for all the
factors is almost equivalent. However, on the basis of weights personality factors possess the following sequence of
leadership effectiveness (1.91), self-esteem (1.89), supervision style (1.87), self-concept (1.86), individual differences
(1.85), self-realizations (1.85), learning attitude (1.84), acceptance (1.84), self-adjustment (1.82) and adaptability
(1.82).The calculated values of Chi-squares are greater than tabulated value of Chi-square at 5% level of significance.
Hence, it can be concluded that there is a significant relationship between the managed personality factor and
performance-talent concerns.
Table 3: Impressions of Personality Psychodynamics in Performance Evaluation
Concerns Hurwicz Criterion for Various Acts
Act Max Min
Criterion Value = α (Max
Value) + (1-α) (Min Value)
A1 228 209 0.6X228 + 0.4X209 = 220.4
A2 228 196 0.6X228 + 0.4X196 = 215.2
A3 228 167 0.6X228 + 0.4X167 = 203.6
A4 228 145 0.6X228 + 0.4X145 = 194.8
A5 228 155 0.6X228 + 0.4X155 = 198.8
A6 228 141 0.6X228 + 0.4X141 = 193.2
Note: A1 = Readiness to Change; A2 = Proactive Personality; A3 = Self-confidence; A4 = Commitment;
A5 = Creativity; A6 = Social Approval;
Hurwicz principle of decision-making stipulates the decision-maker view may fall somewhere between the extreme
pessimism of the maximin principle and the extreme optimism and pessimism may be shown. Table 3 clearly shows value
associated with the A1 (Readiness to change) is the maximum; therefore change factor possess higher impact on

performance evaluation concerns of the organizations; followed by proactive personality, self-confidence, creativity,
commitment and social approval quotients.
Table 4: Interaction Effect between the Managed Employee Self-Rejections and Optimizing
Performance Positive Affectivities Pearson Correlation Coefficients
Managed Employee
Self-Rejections
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4
Divergent Thinking 0.998323 0.85098 0.967772 0.799787
Functional Behaviors 0.999057 0.886122 0.980966 0.814813
Self-Assessment 0.998353 0.920557 0.993775 0.807653
Working under tuff times 0.997834 0.957979 0.999733 0.922314
Work sharing & loyalty 0.995177 0.968732 0.864141 0.924616
Organizational Bonding 0.994565 0.973667 0.8905 0.958528
Effective Interpersonal
Relations
0.952217 0.952217 0.92883 0.984816
Social Recognition 0.999733 0.982512 0.957626 0.91728
Workplace Ethics 0.907511 0.986364 0.962819 0.840775
Perfectionism 0.970209 0.893121 0.837919 0.924616
Note: Factors refer to the following items: Factor 1 – Personality Match, Factor 2 – Job Sensitivity,
Factor 3 – Proactive HR Practices and Factor 4 – Job Satisfaction.
Table 4 obviously shows the strong correlation between managing employee self-rejections and optimizing
performance positive affectivities. Correlation values are ranged from 0.999057 to 0.807653. All variables exhibited strong
correlation (values) with all the factors. Factor 1 (personality match) displayed a strong relation with all the managed
employee self-rejections. Factor 2 (job sensitivity) presented a positive correlation with all the performance positive
affectivities except with the divergent thinking variable (0.85098) i.e. a slight variation. Factor 3 (proactive HR practices)
demonstrated a strong correlation with all variables and it is high apart from the variable perfectionism (0.837919) i.e. a
slight variation. Factor 4 (job satisfaction) demonstrated positive correlation with all the variables except with the
self-assessment variable (0.807653) i.e. a slight variation.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Majority of the respondents opined that personality factor play vital role on performance issues. The occupational
self-rejections typically includes unrealistic expectations, repeated failures, identification error, lack of self-perspective and
lack of self-motivation are decisive on their job satisfaction and performance. An unrealistic expectation makes them to
underperform and creates disinterest toward job. Repeated failures are also a result of personality misfit with the job.
The negative reflections of employee self-rejections are identification error, lack of self-perspective and lack of motivation.
Talent Management begins with the selection process, it continues till the employee separation from the
organization. During this period there are many personality inklings which influence the talent management arena.
Personality of the leader, self-esteem, supervision style, self-concept, individual differences, self-realizations, learning
attitude, acceptance, self-adjustment and adaptability variables possess high impact on performance evaluations of the
individuals and organizations.
Personality psycho-dynamics like readiness to change, proactiveness, self-confidence, creativity, commitment and
social recognition impressions are imperative on managing talents. Human resources optimum utilization lies with all those
above mentioned concepts. Deriving talent management benefits linked with the various personality variables.
The examinees expressed their responses positively towards managing occupational self-rejections. The personality

concerns like divergent thinking, functional behaviors, self-assessment, working under tuff times, work sharing, job
loyalty, organizational bonding, interpersonal relations, social recognition, workplace ethics and perfectionism intimately
correlated with the factors like personality match, job sensitivity, proactive human resource practices and job satisfaction.
Hence, the Talent management, performance evaluations and personality factor variables are closely associated in
managing employee occupational self-rejections. Their impressions on the employee self-rejections are highly imperative.
Based on these findings the following strategic imperatives are recommended to address various sensitive human
self-rejections i.e. psychological workplace matter.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Human resources become self-rejectant when he/she is incapable to satisfy his needs and wishes because of
personal confines or obstacles presents in the environment. This state leads to dissatisfaction and unhappy. This degree
increases the personality mismatch with the job-organization. Thus, it demands more concentration and proactive human
resource policies which considers psychological issues. The occupational self-rejections can develop at any stage of the
employment. Sometimes the causes may be specific and realistic. In such cases the personnel departments can work out
effectively due to visibility of problems. But the other side of this coin is unknown and unexposed reasons of being
self-rejectant. These two situations present many issues and challenges towards managing talents and performance
evaluations.
Talent management aims at searching, attracting, developing and sustaining potential human resources with an
intention to maximize organizational benefits with regard to the profits and long run survival. Maladjustments with the job
and organization of employees results in under utilization of human resource intellectual capacities. Due to
self-misconceptions on the workplace performance issues the employees are tend to develop inferior complex and finally
results in personality disorders even. Severe emotional strain throws the individuals in a dilemmatic situation, where
self-identity becomes a question. The routine human resource practices may not be in a position to answer those questions.
Thus, this uncommon situate needs special focus and psycho-analytic schema.
Performance evaluation gives the picture of human resource abilities and skills used in task completions. This is
not sufficient to assess the employee talents with regard to organizational advancements. Self-motivated and perspective
employees can manage their role and performances even at critical times. The psychological tribulations like
self-disapproval, vilification, disbelieve, feelings of being contemptible etc. of human resources disconcert the individual
and organizational progressions at large. During this phase the employees may develop unfavorable social attitudes.
This enhances the personal limitations with their daily job routines. It can be termed as personality sickness.
Managing talents depends on many variables of job and organization. Overcoming all those psychological problems
requires a mutual effort and cooperation. Self-acceptance is exactly opposite to the self-rejections state. Self-acceptance
increases the individual capacities through believing self, proper adjustments with job, accepting criticisms, observing from
others etc.
Talent management is a never ending process and performance evaluation becomes a key part of it. Psychological
assessments help the personnel officers to detect many intangible occupational problems. Personality counseling sessions
are needed to be continuously organized with the employees. Any kind of performance deviations can’t be neglected.
Behavioral modifications bring many changes at workplace. The misconceptions developed and framed by the individuals
required to discuss and confronted with positive affirmations. Personality mapping improves the human resource
development climate. The immediate supervisors of the employees should involve in estimating those self-rejection effects

on job fulfillments. Person-job fit can be achieved through managing the employee occupational self-rejections. It severely
affects on their job performance and satisfaction issues.
Organizations must ensure the ethical implications at workplace. The human resource policies needed to design
with an intention to optimize employee job capabilities. The HR practices should be evaluated on continual basis. Making
the employees to accept change, understanding the significance of self-concept, self-image, self-assessments on job
performance gives an immense amount of gain in relation to the achieving organizational effectiveness. Minimizing
employee self-rejections is possible through the devising proactive personality analysis if it is properly coupled with
personnel administration. Guiding the employees at the most critical periods i.e. continuous failures in job fulfillments,
distrust on themselves, rating themselves as underachievers and identity crisis. Organizational citizenship behavior can be
inculcated through stressing more on acceptable standards of social behavior. Acceptable social behaviors improve the
social approval and recognition in work environment. Balancing emotions at workplace creates an opportunity to adjust
with the self and others. Self-rejections can be considered as anti-social behavior.
Employer-Employee relations rests with the confidence building, it is not only a commercial one. The human
resource departments have to spotlight the improvising ways for employee bonding with a special emphasis on developing
learning attitude, minimizing individual differences, self-adjusting mechanisms, motivating environment and ensuring
work-life balancing facet. The personality variables should be given appropriate value with regard to the performance
evaluations of human resources. The motto of the organization may be yield or survival; here the central element is one and
only ‘talented human resource’. Managed Personality factor takes a major part in developing and sustaining positive
affectivities toward job and organization. Hence, employee self-rejections decide the degree of human resource talent
utilization by the organizations.
SCOPE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
The present exertion is limited to assessing the personality factor role in employee occupational self-rejections
with regard to talent management and performance evaluations. Therefore, there is abundant scope for exploration in this
arena like emotional deprivation, changes in personality, deviant intelligence, intellectual determinants, emotional
catharsis, proactive learning attitude, psychological readiness on job adjustments and job v/s personal satisfaction etc.
REFERENCES
1. Agho A.O., Mueller C.W. & Price J.L., (1993). Determinants of employee job satisfaction: An empirical test of a
casual model. Human Relations, 46, 1007-1027.
2. Bowers, K. (1973) Situationism in psychology: An analysis and critique. Psychological Review, 80, 307-336.
3. Evans, P., Pucik, V. & Björkman, I. (2002). The Global Challenge. International Human Resource Management,
2nd edition. N.Y.: McGraw-Hill.
4. Hall, D. T., Schneider, B., & Nygren, H. T. (1970) Personal factors in organizational identification.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 15, 176-190.
5. Humphrey, R.H, & Berthiaume, R.D. (1993). Job Characteristics and Biases in Subordinates’ Appraisals of
Managers. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 1993, 14(4), 401-420.
6. Hurtz, G.M., & Donovan, J.J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited. Journal of Applied
Psychology, (85), 869-879.

7. Jackson, J. (1966) A conceptual and measurement model for norms and roles. Pacific Sociological Review, 9,
35-47.
8. Jackson, E.S., Joshi, A., & Erhardt, L.N. (2003). Recent research on team and organizational diversity: A SWOT
analysis and implications. Journal of Management, 29(6), 801-830.
9. Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C. (1988) Profiting from contro-versy: Lessons from the person-situation debate.
American Psychologist, 43, 23-35.
10. Moulaye, A, Taher M, Chen J, and Wei Yao, (2011) Key predictors of creative on MBA students’ performance,
Personality type and learning approaches, Journal of Technology Management in China, Vol. 6. No. 1, .pp. 43-68.
11. O'Reilly, C. A., & Caldwell, D. F. (1981). The commitment and job tenure of new employees: Some evidence of
post-decisional justification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 597-616.
12. Patillo, E.J., Moran, B.B., & Morgan, J. (2009). The Job Itself: The Effects of Functional Units on Work
Autonomy among Public and Academic Librarians. Library Trends, 58(2), 276-290.
13. Probst, T. M. (2003). Development and validation of the Job Security Index and the Job Security Satisfaction
scale: A classical test theory and IRT approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76,
451–467.
14. Rothstein, M., & Jackson, D. (1980). Decision making in the employment interview: An experimental approach.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 271-283.
15. Schuler, R.S., Jackson, S. E, & Tarique, I. (2011). Global talent management and global talent challenges:
Strategic opportunities for IHRM. Journal of World Business, 46, 506–516.
16. Sigelman, L. (1975). Reporting the news: An organizational analysis. American Journal of Sociology,
79, 132-151.
17. Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change: A dispositional approach to job attitudes. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 70, 469-480.
18. Tansley, C. (2011). ’’What do we mean by the term "talent" in talent management?’’ Industrial and Commercial
Training. Vol. 43 (5)66 - 274. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
19. Taylor, A, & Greve H.R. (2006). Superman or the Fantast Four? Knowledge Combination and Experience in
Innovative Teams. Academy of Management Journal: 49(4):723-40.
20. Weiner, Y. (1988). Forms of value systems: A focus on organizational effectiveness and culture change
maintenance. Academy of Management Review, 13, 534-545.
21. Westerman, J.W. & Simmons, B.L. (2007). The effects of work environment on the personality-performance
relationship: an exploratory study. Journal of Managerial Issues: pp.339-97.
APPENDICES
Questionnaire
Part 1 – General
 Name (optional):

 Name of the Company:
 Designation:
Software Engineer Senior Software Engineer
Project Manager Project Architect
 Age:
21-30 31-40 41-50
 Gender:
Male Female
 Educational Qualification:
PUC Bachelor’s Degree Post Graduation
(B.Sc., B.Com, B.A, B.Tech) (MCA, MBA, M.Sc. M.Tech)
Others (specify)
 Experience in Years:
Below 5 5 – 10 11 – 15
16 – 20 Above 20
 Monthly Income:
Upto 10000 10001-20000 20001-30000
30001-40000 Above 50000
Part 2 – Effects of Employee Occupational Self-Rejections on Talent Management
Talent Management refers to the deliberate actions to attract, recruit, develop, and retain those individuals who,
individually or collectively, have the capability to make a significant impact on the results of the firm, and whose skills are
firm-specific. You are supposed to give your rating for each of talent related concerns in respect of questions. Your rating
could range from 5 to 1. Low number represents minimum amount of characteristic and high number represents maximum
amount of characteristic.
Note: S.A – Strongly Agree; A – Agree; U.D – Un-Decided; D – Disagree; S.D – Strongly Disagree:
1. I usually feel about my job targets are highly realistic and easy to fulfill.
S.A A U.D D S.D
2. Iam a consistent performer and never warned for my job failures.
S.A A U.D D S.D
3. Iam able to recognize my identity with the job.
S.A A U.D D S.D

4. I have my SWOT analysis and specific regarding my career plans.
S.A A U.D D S.D
5. I see my always as a motivated and enthusiastic job performer.
S.A A U.D D S.D
6. For me ‘change’ is common term in the organizational context.
S.A A U.D D S.D
7. I always accept change, modifications and shows ever ready attitude.
S.A A U.D D S.D
8. Advanced thinking, being ahead is my attitude.
S.A A U.D D S.D
9. I believe in myself, because I can do wonders.
S.A A U.D D S.D
10. I love my job and organization and I feel it is my identity.
S.A A U.D D S.D
11. Every time I want to find new ways to fulfill my job commitments.
S.A A U.D D S.D
Note: S.A – Strongly Agree; A – Agree; U.D – Un-Decided; D – Disagree; S.D – Strongly Disagree:
12. I expect proper recognition and acceptance of occupational performance and acts.
S.A A U.D D S.D
13. Creative thinking improves my job performance and satisfaction.
S.A A U.D D S.D
14. I never behave beyond the acceptable organizational citizenship behavior.
S.A A U.D D S.D
15. Myself believe in self-analysis.
S.A A U.D D S.D
16. Working under critical job times is an opportunity to prove myself.
S.A A U.D D S.D
17. I respect the concept of work sharing and interested to perform not assigned tasks even.
S.A A U.D D S.D
18. I love my organization and have respect being part of it.
S.A A U.D D S.D

19. I believe in better interpersonal relations assists on job cooperation and coordination.
S.A A U.D D S.D
20. I want to behave ethically and expect the same from the organization.
S.A A U.D D S.D
21. Iam able to match my professional attitudes, skills and knowledge with job.
S.A A U.D D S.D
22. My services are effectively delivered with reference to organizational needs.
S.A A U.D D S.D
Part 3 – Impact of Talent Management on Performance Evaluation Issues
Performance Evaluations are common practice of every organization. In simple it is your progress card, in which
your talents are rated. Many factors will influence your performances at workplace, while rating those may be considered
by giving different weights/priorities. Please select any one option for each question i.e. Yes or No.
1. Iam in touch with latest transformations happening in the industry.
Yes No
2. Adjusting with the self enlarges the area of job-workplace understanding.
Yes No
3. Iam unique in this world, hence it has universal applicability
Yes No
4. I have a clear distinction between I and Me.
Yes No
5. I expect social acceptance and recognition for the job acts performed.
Yes No
6. We have a transformational leadership.
Yes No
7. I know about me and my occupational contributions value.
Yes No
8. I can easily adapt to the ever dynamic organizational environment.
Yes No
9. I always accept the occupational constructive criticisms.
Yes No
10. We have a facilitative organizational climate.

Yes No
Miscellaneous
 What are your problems affecting on your talent concerns with respect to occupational self-rejections?
 What are your recommendations to maximize your occupational contributions in the context of performance
evaluation issues?

Effects of employee occupational self rejections on talent

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Effects of employee occupational self rejections on talent

Similar to Effects of employee occupational self rejections on talent (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (8)

Effects of employee occupational self rejections on talent