Trevor M. Jensen and Dr. Barton Poulson, Psychology
Ample literature has focused on how to effectively improve the work environment of medical practices. However, little research has been conducted concerning personality in a doctor’s office environment. In conversing with several local doctors, group behavior was listed as one of the most important aspects to consider in creating and maintaining a medical practice that is efficient and free of problems (N. Jorgensen, personal communication, June 5, 2000; D. Phillips, personal communication, June 10, 2000). Personality is a large component of the functioning of work groups. In a study conducted on military leaders, personality was found to be the greatest predictor of transformational leadership, and in turn related significantly to work group performance and work group member satisfaction (Ross & Offermann, 1997). Overall, research supports the notion that personalities of leaders and group members are important in determining the performance of workers in a group setting. Similar information specific to health care practices, however, has not been researched. This study sought to provide such information by assessing the effect that personality has on the workplace environment.
A power analysis performed prior to the collection of data showed that 65 individuals were needed to have an 80% chance of finding a medium sized (r = .30) true relationship. Therefore, 76 individuals who worked with physicians in health care offices located in Nevada and Utah were recruited to participate in the study. Each participant was asked to fill out a four-page survey. The survey asked questions regarding the worker’s job satisfaction, relationship with the physician, aspects of the office environment, and relationship with the other employees in the office. Questions regarding the personality of the physician-employer, and the worker him or herself were also asked. The sixteen factor labels used by Cattell’s Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (1973, see figure 1) were used as descriptors on which to rate personality. These factor labels were chosen due to their clear representation of many aspects of personality. All participants were thanked for their participation.
The participants were almost entirely female (97.4%), and had an average of 6.6 years of experience working in the field of health care. Almost 40% of the respondents were employed in an office where only one physician worked; the rest came from offices where more than one physician was present. A variety of physician specialties and individual job titles were represented in the sample. Overall, respondents seemed satisfied with their job, 83% reported that they would recommend their job to a friend.
The outcome variables were composed of questions regarding the employee’s satisfaction with his or her job. Based on a factor analysis, these variables were divided into two factors: one representing the quality of the office environment and one representing the employee’s relationship with the physician. The predictor variables were the personality descriptions of the physician, and the employee. A factor analysis of the 16 traits yielded 5 factors (see Figure 1). Finally, because the similarity between the physician’s and employee’s score could also be an important predictor of job satisfaction, additional variables were created that simply indicated the difference between the two scores (i.e., the physician’s score minus the employee’s score).
Data analysis yielded several interesting relationships between the predictor and outcome variables. A positive physician-employee relationship was likely to be found if the doctor was reported to be Forthright and Trusting (r = .46, p < .001), or Conscientious, Sensitive, and Controlled (r = .58, p < .001). Also, a positive relationship was likely when doctors were rated as Happy-Go-Lucky, Outgoing, Experimenting, Venturesome, Relaxed, and Imaginative (r = .26, p < .05), or Emotionally Stable, Highly Intelligent, and Self-Assured (r = .27, p < .05).
The personality of the employee was not as strongly predictive of the employee-physician relationship, although a high level of employee Self-Sufficiency and Dominance had a near significant correlation with a positive doctor/employee relationship (r = .21, p < .10).
The scores created by taking the difference between the personality scores of the physician and the employee did produce several interesting results. Doctors perceived as more Forthright and Trusting relative to the employees were likely to have a good relationship with their workers (r = .52, p < .001). Additionally, physicians reported to be highly Conscientious, Sensitive, and Controlled relative to the employees were likely to have good relationships with their employees (r = .53, p < .001).
The results of the data with respect to the outcome variable measuring the employee’s satisfaction with the office environment were less impressive. Employees were more likely to report a satisfying office environment if they rated their physician-employer as Emotionally Stable, Highly Intelligent, and Self-Assured (r = .27, p < .05), or as Conscientious, Sensitive, and Controlled (r = .26, p < .05).
There were no significant correlations found between the office environment and the personality of the employee. Nor were there any relationships observed between the factors describing the interaction between the doctor and employee’s personalities.
This research experiment was one of the most educational experiences I have had since entering college. I learned much concerning the planning and work involved in creating and carrying out a self-designed project. Working with my faculty mentor was extremely beneficial, for I was able to ask questions and learn habits that allowed me to complete the project in a more efficient manner. I also developed a hunger for knowledge and expertise within an area. As I found results and began to understand the outcome of the project, I began to have more questions and a desire to further understand the subject. This project has created within me an aspiration to continue to learn and discover unknown information.
References
- Cattell, R. B. (1973). Personality Pinned Down. Psychology Today, 7, 40-46.
- Ross, S. M., Offermann, L. R. (1997). Transformational Leaders: Measurement of Personality Attributes and Work Group Performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1078-1086.