Extreme behaviors
All positive and adaptive traits that are otherwise valued in the workplace can have a negative side when performed too much or too often. For example, research suggests that conscientious managers are welcomed at work because they are planful, organized, rule-following, and reliable. Yet carried to an extreme, they may seem picky, critical, and micromanaging to their staff. Unhappily, research associates Conscientiousness with an increased incidence of abusive management such as intensely surveilling others’ work, setting unrealistic deadlines, or pushing employees beyond their levels of competence and resources. These behaviors typically arise from a desire to “get things done the right way” and achieve ambitious goals but result in aversive behaviors that pose a risk for the engagement of their employees. Similarly, individuals who score high on Agreeableness has a strong impact on team cohesion but may also be interpersonally naive and enter overly obedient relationships, in which they risk being taken advantage of or even result in compassion fatigue.
In conclusion, a large and growing amount of literature shows that:
- Curvilinear relationships are observed for all personality traits (performance drops at the extremes).
- Middle scores may well be preferable in many contexts, particularly in leadership roles.
- Average leaders are less likely to burn out, disengage their employees or get their teams into trouble.
In other words, when taken to the extreme, otherwise fruitful and helpful behaviors can become counterproductive and destructive (for oneself as well as for others). These extreme dispositions may harm an individual’s ability to make effective decisions, work with their colleagues, and navigate stressful situations — all of which diminish organizational performance and individual and team effectiveness. These effects are even strengthened if the individual remain unaware of their extreme behavior or fail to even see the link to negative outcomes.
MAP-X captures these extreme behaviors from a curvilinear perspective on the Big 5 and describes the potential risks associated with these behavioral patterns. In this context, extreme behaviors are defined as behavioral patterns attached to either very high or very low scores associated with the big five personality traits that may be connected to maladaptive personality traits posing a risk of adverse consequences for either the individual themselves or their surroundings.
The importance of context
Personality is not the only thing that determines our behavior. The context is also important. Personality is reflected in concrete behavior depending on the strength of the situation and in every situation, there are signals that evoke specific personality traits in us. because our personality traits are activated depending on the situation. We thrive and perform best in a job where our personality traits match the demands of the situation.
Triggering factors
When talking about risk behaviors, the perception is that these are behaviors that only occur when you are under pressure. That is not quite true. Extremes at either end will typically be more visible to others and describe behavior that is characteristic of the person across situations. Just like personality traits, MAP-X scores reflect deeply ingrained, all-encompassing patterns of behavior. Managing or controlling these behaviors is possible but very demanding. Thus, when under pressure or during tough times, inhibiting these behavioral tendencies becomes even more difficult. However, other factors can trigger these risk behaviors as well, below are four examples.
Critical situations
Most of us know what acceptable behavior is and can restrain ourselves when we try, but when we are under pressure it becomes more difficult – and therefore one's risk behavior will become more apparent in these situations.
Safety and familiarity
Managing your behavior requires energy and willpower and can be difficult to maintain over time and in situations where it is less necessary. Therefore, situations where we feel safe or familiar will also be situations where we become less controlled.
Cultural impacts
What behaviors are considered inappropriate or productive might differ across contexts depending on cultural impacts and interpersonal compositions. Because of this, cultural cues may legitimize certain behaviors – also extreme ones – thus creating a challenge when changing contexts.
“Weak” situations
In strong situations where we know how to behave, we can act accordingly. In weaker situations, the ones we rarely think about or give much weight to, our personality will generally come out more clearly.
The MAP-X model
MAP-X is an additional insight to Assessio’s personality assessment, MAP, connecting Big-5 personality traits to maladaptive personality extremes describing potential risks associated with extreme behavioral patterns from a curvilinear perspective, meaning that both high- and low-end extremes are described.
Since MAP-X is based on MAP, scores are derived from existing scores and there are no extra effort needed from the candidate to get the insight. In MAP-X, the scales are arranged with dual labels (low and high extremes) linked to the Big Five.
Classifying extremes
Scores at the top and bottom 11 % are classified as “extreme scores” (as opposed to simply high or low scores, which usually refers to the top and bottom 23 %), meaning that extreme high and low scores range from c-score 8-10 and 0-2, respectively. This means that 64 % of cases will have at least 1 extreme (at either end), whereas 36 % are expected to have no extremes.
Interpreting individual scores, it is important to consider both job-, team-, and organizational fit. Using MAP-X to select-out candidates based on their number of risk behaviors might prove to be really hard, since the presence of extremes is quite common. Instead, we advise to consider each personality trait’s influence on the job match along with potential risks it may pose to individual and team performance, while using MAP-X as a foundation for self-awareness and as a basis for personal development and optimal management. However, although extreme scores may pose risks, these can be mitigated to some extent by proper communication and management.
Table 1. MAP-X scales and high-level definitions.
Extreme Low | FFM | Extreme High |
Withdrawn | Extraversion | Attention Seeking |
Reserved, shy, prefer to work alone
|
Outgoing, sociable, networking |
Dependent, needy, dominant
|
Insensitive | Agreeableness | Overcaring |
Self-focused, inconsiderate, dismissive of others’ feelings | Warm, empathic, trustworthy | Overly consensus-seeking, exploitable, excessively involved in other people’s problems |
Impulsive | Conscientiousness | Rigid |
Distractable, disorganized, overlooks details
|
Organized, reliable, focused | Inflexible, perfectionistic, overly cautious |
Emotional | Emotional Stability | Unresponsive |
Sensitive, anxious, worry excessively
|
Emotionally flexible, controlled, self-assured | Detached, unconcerned, overly optimistic |
Conformist | Openness | Eccentric |
Practical, conventional, unimaginative
|
Curious, open to ideas, thoughtful |
Impractical, unrealistic, too experimentative
|
Understanding the extremes
Below the 10 extreme scores in MAP-X are described. Interpretation of the high- and low-end extremes are emphasized and hypotheses for the potential risks for each extreme are elaborated.
Extraversion: Withdrawn – Attention Seeking
Withdrawn
The Withdrawn scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the low pole of the FFM Extraversion dimension. An individual who is low in Extraversion is typically perceived as shy, contained, and quiet. They seek less company from others, often preferring more solitary activities. Although not necessarily aloof, they might display less energy or enthusiasm in social settings.
The scale of Withdrawn measures the degree to which people may come across as overly reserved and avoidant of others. High scorers are shy, withdrawn or even aloof. They tend to be guarded, not investing in relationship building and struggle with collaboration.
Attention Seeking
The Attention Seeking scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the high pole of the FMM Extraversion dimension. Extraverted individuals are often perceived as social, dominant, cheerful, and energetic. They will often engage in small talk and seek the company of others. If they act overly cheerful or energetic, they might be perceived as unserious and become a distraction for others. They might also be boastful about their achievements or show a preoccupation with social image. They may trample others’ boundaries by monopolizing their attention or disregarding their need for personal space.
The scale of Attention Seeking measures the degree to which people crave social contact. They might seem overly reliant on others, needy, or attention-seeking. They typically struggle to complete tasks independently, preferring to seek help from others rather than find solutions on their own. Their desire for social interaction might cause them to engage in too much chit-chat and distract others from work.
Agreeableness: Insensitive - Overcaring
Insensitive
The Insensitive scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the low extreme of the FFM Agreeableness dimension. Those who are low on Agreeableness are often perceived as blunt, argumentative, and self-interested. They tend to place their self-interest above the needs and feelings of others. They are unconcerned with others' welfare and thus unlikely to extend themselves for other people.
They take an instrumental view of relationships and might sometimes act in exploitative ways and in team settings, they are likely to prioritize their own goals over those of the team, especially if there is some misalignment between the two.
The scale of Insensitive measures the extent to which people are likely to exhibit self-focus and a lack of concern for the needs, feelings or wellbeing of others. High scorers are more prone to dismiss others' feelings, transgress boundaries to achieve goals, or take an egoistic approach in their decisions.
Overcaring
The Overcaring scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the high extreme of the FFM Agreeableness dimension. Agreeable individuals are often perceived as compassionate, cooperative, and sincere. They are likely to be very transparent and sometimes overly preoccupied with the needs of others, at times even naïve. They typically have a preference for fitting in and maintaining harmony that may mark them out as submissive and conflict-avoidant. While they are eager to help their colleagues, they might often prioritize this at the expense of their own tasks.
The scale of Overcaring measures the extent to which people may over-identify with or prioritize the needs of others. High scorers tend to be too honest, compassionate and easily taken advantage of. They tend to put others first, even when it’s to their own detriment, and they might delay important decisions if they feel that those might upset others or risk stirring up conflict.
Conscientiousness: Impulsive - Rigid
Impulsive
The Impulsive scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the low end of the FFM Conscientiousness dimension. Impulsive people often struggle to follow strict procedures, maintain routines, or perform tedious tasks. They are unlikely to plan things ahead, which may lead to missing deadlines or being underprepared in case of emergencies. Even getting the bigger picture, they might fail to consider the details, which can lead to frequent or repeated mistakes.
The scale of Impulsive measures the degree to which people are easily distractable, prone to skipping monotonous work, and only focused on what is most interesting to them. High scorers are more likely to cut corners, overlook important details, abandon burdensome tasks, and not focus on long term goals.
Rigid
The Rigid scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the High end of the FFM Conscientiousness dimension. Conscientious people may be perceived as perfectionistic, excessively orderly, at times assuming more responsibilities than they can realistically fulfill. Because they hold onto very high performance standards, some people might find them unreasonable or hard to please or even micro-managing, nit-picky, overly critical, or controlling. They are likely to show signs of distress if met with a sudden change of plans. Since knowing things in advance is crucial to them, they might struggle to adapt to unforeseen circumstances.
The scale of Rigid measures the degree to which people are perfectionistic, overly strict, or inflexible. High scorers tend to struggle in unstructured environments and are overly focused on doing things right. They might find it difficult to change their initial plan when encountering unexpected drawbacks. Because they are very methodical, they might also be slow in reaching a decision.
Emotional stability: Emotional - Unresponsive
Emotional
The Emotional scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the low end of the FFM Emotional Stability dimension. Emotional people tend to be anxious, worried, and tense. Alert to risk, they may put great effort into limiting them but are also more likely to interpret events pessimistically and prone to missing opportunities by focusing too much on risks and problems. They might ruminate over past mistakes and may quickly react to adverse situations with anger or frustration that are visible to others.
The scale of Emotional measures the extent to which people are easily concerned and experience strong feelings of anxiety, worry, and frustration. High scorers are likely to dwell on mistakes or get frustrated over criticism. They can be aversive to potential risks or problematic situations and may be indecisive.
Unresponsive
The Unresponsive scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the high extreme of the FFM Emotional Stability dimension. Emotionally stable individuals are often even-tempered, and unlikely to get overwhelmed by negative feelings. They are not necessarily optimistic and positive; rather, they do not experience as many negative emotions. Although less susceptible to panic or doubt, they might often dismiss threats or fail to address legitimate concerns. While they will rarely lose their cool, they might be blind to risks or feel that it will not happen to them. Their indifference might be a result of their limited ability to experience negative emotions. Thus, they might come across as overly balanced or perhaps even ignorant.
The scale of Unresponsive measures the degree to which people seem emotionally detached and reluctant to act with urgency when needed. High scorers might seem over-optimistic, not taking problems seriously or responding adequately to negative events. They tend to be unconcerned with what other people think and unlikely to act with urgency when met with an aversive situation.
Openness: Conformist - Eccentric
Conformist
The Conformist scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the low extreme of the FFM Openness dimension. People with low Openness have trouble adapting to change, display a low tolerance for different lifestyles. They often lack imagination and show little interest in abstract ideas. Therefore, they often struggle with ambiguity and will often turn down very innovative ideas, as they tend to be very concerned with the very practical aspects of things and are less keen on experimentation and more inclined to stick to what they already know.
The scale of Conformist measures the extent to which someone may come across as narrow-minded, unimaginative, or lacks interest in new or seemingly unrealistic or impractical ideas. High scorers will seek comfort in what is practical, champion the status quo, and avoid change. They are more preoccupied with 'what is', rather than 'what can be'. Thus, they might lack imagination and vision.
Eccentric
The Eccentric scale reflects risk behaviors associated to the high extreme of the FFM Openness domain. Eccentric individuals will typically thrive in dynamic, flexible environments and are likely to struggle in jobs that require them to do a lot of routine work. While they don't necessarily miss deadlines, these people might adopt a more chaotic pace of work or have a distorted view of priorities. They might assume great risks for the sake of pursuing a grand vision and might slow down decision-making by continuously proposing new ideas and struggle to decide on which to pursue.
The scale of Eccentric measures the extent to which individuals endorse unusual or unrealistic ideas. High scorers might get too invested in grand plans while failing to consider what is actually possible. They may want to try out new things, even when this is unnecessary or unproductive. This might cause them to violate social norms or create friction. Thus, others might find their behavior disruptive, and they may waste valuable time or resources.