Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.
The research sought to fill a gap in knowledge and practice about individual differences in how professionals in the financial services industry make decisions. The practical importance of the investigation relates to potentially important effects on both person-job fit and performance. Identifying orientations that relate differentially to decision environments in finance, e.g. functional roles and types of markets, could help guide key placement decisions and developmental discussions at the workplace. The facets of decision style focused upon in this research came from two sources: suggestions arising from the Principal Investigators' previous research and an extensive literature review. The literature reveals a number of different aspects of decision making. Of these, five related closely to the distinctions observed in the previous research and seemed likely to be more generally pertinent to the finance environment: achievement, emotional involvement, risk preferences, structure (vs. autonomy) and spontaneity (vs. deliberation). The research had three objectives. First, to develop an effective measure of several aspects of decision making that were likely to impact upon person-job fit and the performance of individuals in the financial environment (the Decision Making Styles Questionnaire, DMSQ). Second, to develop such a measure would contribute to understanding in decision theory. Third, the application of a measure of decision styles could provide valuable data relevant to individual and organisational performance. The prior research found that in the field the selection, placement and advancement of people in finance decision-making tends to be unsystematic without any attention to non-technical criteria such as psychological profile. In the finance industry, the cumulative effect of even a small mismatch between an individual and their job requirements could lead to preventable losses. Hence a measure that provided individual profiles that could be matched to job characteristics would be likely to prove useful in many organisations.
Main Topics:
The dataset includes the following information: biographical data, e.g. age, gender, tenure, seniority, number of employers. NEO PI-R (Costa and McRae, 1991) personality data (six facets for each of the scales of neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness). The factor totals are included. Risk Propensity Index data - these data refer to a set of items developed by the authors concerning the frequency of six different types of risk-taking, both now and in the past. Scales have been developed by summing the now and past data in each domain, and there is a total scale that is the sum of all the data. Job-related well-being data (Warr, 1987, 1990a). These data refer to positive and negative emotions experienced in the past few weeks at work. Two scales are developed from the data: the depression-enthusiasm scale and the anxiety-contentment scale. These data have been recoded in accordance with the author's instructions. Cognitive Style Index data (Allinson and Hayes, 1996). These items have been recoded in accordance with the authors' instructions and are used to form a scale. A high scale score represents analytical thinking and a low-scale score represents intuitive thinking. Decision Making Style Questionnaire data. This questionnaire was developed by the principal investigators. The five scales mentioned in the Abstract section above, plus self perception, are developed from the data. Big Five Inventory data (John, Donahue and Kentle, 1991). This is a short form five factor personality measure. Scales representing neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness are formed from the items. Job fit data developed by the principal investigators. Participants were asked to rate their fit with a number of different job types. Job characteristics data data developed by the principal investigators. These data were completed by the managers of participants in the research. Standard Measures The sources mentioned above: Allinson, C.W. and Hayes, J. (1996) 'The Cognitive Style Index: a measure of intuition analysis for organisational research' <i>Journal of Management Studies</i>, 33(1), pp.119-135. Costa, P.T. and McCrae, R.R. (1991) <i>Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual</i>, Odessa FLA: Psychological Assessment Resources Inc. John, O., Donahue, E.M. and Kentle, R. (1991) <i>The 'Big Five' Inventory - versions 4a and 54</i>, Berkely: University of California, Berkeley Institute of Personality and Social Research. Mullarkey, S. et al (1999) <i>Measures of job satisfaction, mental health and job-related well-being: a bench-marking manual</i>, Sheffield: Institute of Work Psychology. Warr, P. (1987) <i>Work, unemployment and mental health</i>, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Warr, P. (1990a) 'The measurement of well-being and other aspects of mental health' <i>Journal of Occupational Psychology</i>, 63, 193-210.
Volunteer sample
participants in Organisation A (investment bank); students at London Business School were class participants - questionnaire completion was part of assigned work.
Self-completion
