Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
493
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/publication-ethics
The Influence of Personality Traits on Communication
Competence
Narehan Hassan, Nur Athirah Sumardi, Rozilah Abdul Aziz
To Link this Article: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i13/6999 DOI: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i13/6999
Received: 22 March 2019, Revised: 17 April 2019, Accepted: 02 May 2019
Published Online: 23 August 2019
In-Text Citation: (Hassan et al., 2019)
To Cite this Article: Hassan, N., Sumardi, N. A., & Aziz, R. A. (2019). The Influence of Personality Traits on
Communication Competence. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences,
9(13), 493–505.
Copyright: © 2019 The Author(s)
Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute,
translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full
attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen
at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration, 2019, Pg. 493 - 505
http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/IJARBSS
JOURNAL HOMEPAGE
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
494
The Influence of Personality Traits on Communication
Competence
Narehan Hassan, Nur Athirah Sumardi, Rozilah Abdul Aziz
Faculty of Business and Management, UiTM Puncak Alam, Malaysia
Email: drnarehan@puncakalam.uitm.edu.my, athirah1990@gmail.com,
rozilah@puncakalam.uitm.edu.my
Abstract: This pilot study was conducted to identify the relationship between personality traits and
communication competence among final year undergraduate students at two public universities in
the Klang Valley which were Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
(UKM). The purpose was to investigate the effects of personality traits on communication
competence and to acquire a deeper understanding on one of the main factors of unemployment
issue in Malaysia which is communication deficiency among graduates. It was found that four
dimensions of personality traits which were extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness and openness
to experience had significant relationships with communication competence. However,
conscientiousness trait was not found to be related to students’ communication competence.
Extraversion, agreeableness and openness to experience had significant and positive relationships
with communication competence while neuroticism was negatively related with communication
competence. It was also found that UKM students’ communication competence were significantly
influenced by agreeableness trait while for UiTM students, extraversion had the strongest influence
towards the communication competence. It is recommended that undergraduate students should be
coached to freely express their views freely which may include their discontentment in Malaysia’s
classroom settings. This exercise will prosper a healthy two-way communication between a teacher
and a student and can further spark verbal exchanges especially among introverted students.
Students with low level of openness to experience trait need to have the courage to imagine and
explore new things where instructors can assist them in shaping this trait to build up their confidence
level as well as to be spontaneous in sharing their experiences in classroom.
Keywords: Personality Traits, Communication Competence, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Openness
to Experience Conscientiousness, Neuroticism
Introduction
Currently, unemployment among fresh graduates has become an integral issue not only in Malaysia
but also around the globe. In fact, it has been reported that unemployment rate in Malaysia has
increased from 3.1% in 2015 to 3.4% in 2016 (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2017) and has
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
495
remained status quo for 2017 (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2018). It was reported too that
when recruiting new graduates for job candidates, the first criterion employers were looking for was
their communication skills (Archer & Davison, 2008; Khalid, Islam & Ahmed, 2019) but unfortunately,
they found that most of these new graduates failed to effectively communicate and to express
themselves intelligently. In fact, 81% of companies rated communication skills among Malaysian
graduates as their major skills deficit that will prevent them from being employed (TalentCorp
Malaysia, 2014). As a matter of fact, higher education has been focusing on communication
competency over the past few decades as a ‘back to basic’ element and being stressed out by the
educational policy makers and advocates (McCroskey, 1984).
Other than having employees with great communication competency, those equipped with
great personality traits are equally considered as potential employees. The relationship between
personality traits and individual’s job performance has been recognized in various studies and meta-
analysis, stating that human personality traits are highly related to job performance (Barrick &
Mount, 1991; Barrick, Mount & Judge, 2001; Rothmann & Coetzer, 2003; Alzgool, 2019; Muhammad,
Saoula, Issa & Ahmed, 2019). Moreover, a few scholars have stressed the relevancy of using
personality measures in selecting personnel for organizations (Kodydek & Hochreiter, 2013). With
the help of the personality characteristics; organizations will be able to predict the individual’s level
or quality of competencies as well as to obtain the valuable information regarding the individual’s
cognitive social ability (Robertson, Gibbons, Baron, MacIver & Nyfield, 1999). Additionally, some
scholars have reported in previous studies that an employee’s personality is an effective tool to
predict their job performance later on (Ozer & Benet-Martinez, 2006; Schulman, 2011). As such, this
has been the reason why personality-related technique has been frequently adopted during the
employees’ selection procedure (Barrick & Mount, 1991). In fact, experts in personality field
completed countless observations to ascertain that some personalities may affect peoples’ behaviors
later at the workplace (Denissen, van Aken & Roberts, 2011; Gerber et al., 2011).
As a matter of fact, personality is a psychological construct and is regarded as one of the
components in interpersonal communication, as it is believed to help shaping how individuals
interact with their environment and relate to other people (Dunning, 2003; Hargie & Dickson, 2004;
Heathcote, 2010; Zeisset, 2006). Other than that, Hannawa and Spitzberg (2015) emphasized how
the differences in personality may moderate the communication competence of an individual.
Despite these research findings which concluded that personality traits are indeed related to
communication behaviour, and other findings showed that organizational outcomes such as job
satisfaction are related to personality traits and communication competence (Brown & Reilly, 2009;
Daly, 2002; Hofmann & Jones, 2005; Spitzberg, 2000; Wilson & Sabee, 2003).
Literature Review
Personality Traits
Adequate consensus and empirical evidence have identified the big five personality traits as universal
dimension despite a lack of theoretical rationale for the etiology of traits described by the five factor
model (Costa, 1997; Costa & McCrae, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 1997). According to Chamorro-Premuzic
and Furnham (2014), the big five personality model conceptualizes the differences in individuals
which are independent from each other and refers to the stable patterns of individual’s behaviour.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
496
In addressing the dimensions of the Big Five Theory, the researchers chose to use Furnham (2002)
enlightenment as the descriptions of the theory are more related and inclined towards work-related
activities.
a) Extraversion is the personality that characterises people who are active, expressive, impulsive, and
sociable (Furnham, 2002).
b) Neuroticism characterises people who lack positive psychological adjustment and emotional
stability (Judge, Higgins, Thoresen & Barrick, 1999).
c) Agreeableness may be referred to an individual’s tendency to defer to others (Furnham, 2002).
d) The openness to experience dimension may concern the individuals’ wide range of interests and
intellectuality (Furnham, 2002).
e) Conscientiousness is about the reliability measurement in which those with high
conscientiousness are believed to be more efficient, reliable, responsible, organised, dependent,
thorough, and prudent (Furnham, 2002).
Communication Competence
Communication is not an unfamiliar concept to be meandered as it has been highlighted for decades.
The term has been coined and dated back in 3000 BC with the emergence of an essay on effective
speaking addressed to the son of a Pharaoh, Huni Kagemni. The book ‘Precept’, which dealt with
teaching effective communication and written in 2675 BC was dedicated to another Pharaoh’s son,
composed by the Egyptian Ptah-Hotep (McCroskey, 1984; Khalid, Islam & Ahmed, 2019; Alzgool,
2019; Muhammad, Saoula, Issa & Ahmed, 2019).
Communication competence can be referred to as an individual’s ability to interact accurately,
clearly, comprehensively, coherently, expertly, effectively and appropriately with others (Spitzberg,
1988). Spitzberg & Cupach’s Interpersonal Communication Competence Model was chosen as the
communication competence indicators as its constructs are likely to enhance an individual’s ability
to communicate appropriately and effectively (Spitzberg & Cupach, 1984). This model comprised of
three major components of motivation, knowledge and skills which most scholars have agreed that
these three are the essential components that established the communication competence
(Arasaratnam, 2004; Flaherty & Stojakovic, 2008; Spitzberg, 2000; Wiseman, 2003). Knowledge may
imply on how much a person knows about a specific communication context, motivation may state
to the degree of an individual wanting to converse with another person, and skills may demonstrate
the successful performance of a communicative behavior (Flaherty & Stojakovic, 2008). These three
dimensions will either directly or indirectly assessed by the employer when recruiting new personnel
as communication has stirred quite an issue in employment. It is imperative that the communication
is studied extensively to assist policy makers to assist both unemployment and Malaysian graduates
quality (Rahmah, Ishak & Wei Sieng, 2011). This statement was supported by (Malhi, 2009) who
mentioned that Malaysian graduates are mainly weak in ten aspects which are management,
communication, creativity, problem-solving, leadership, proactive, critical thinking, self-confidence
and interaction skills.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
497
Research Objectives and Hypotheses
Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework of the relationship between personality traits and
communication competence. Two research objectives were formulated for this study which are: (1)
To identify the relationships between dimensions of personality traits on communication
competence and (2) To identify the dimension(s) of personality traits that influenced communication
competence. Besides, researchers have also formulated several hypotheses for this study which are:
H1a: There is a relationship between extraversion and communication competence.
H1b: There is a relationship between agreeableness and communication competence.
H1c: There is a relationship between conscientiousness and communication competence.
H1d: There is a relationship between neuroticism and communication competence.
H1e: There is a relationship between openness to experience and communication competence.
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework on the Relationship between Personality traits and
Communication Competence
Methodology
This study was a pilot study where data was collected from two public universities in the Klang Valley,
Malaysia. The two public universities were UiTM Puncak Alam campus and Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia (UKM) Bangi. UiTM was represented by students from the Faculty of Pharmacy and Faculty
Business and Management while students from the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities
represented UKM. 140 final year students answered the questionnaires through convenience
sampling. As UiTM had greater number of final year students, data from 85 students were collected
as opposed to 55 respondents from UKM. The instrument for personality traits consisting of 21 items
was used while communication competence was measured using a-21 items Interpersonal
Communication Competence questionnaire by Spitzberg & Cupach (1984). A six-point Likert scale was
used with the values from 1=strongly disagree to 6=strongly agree. Out of the total 42 items, 12 items
were reverse-coded.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
498
Table 1: Study’s return rate
University
Questionnaires
Distributed
Questionnaires
Returned
Return Rate (%)
UiTM
85
85
100
UKM
55
55
100
Total
140
140
100
Results and Discussion
Reliability Analysis
For personality traits, two domains were reported to have Cronbach’s alpha of >0.6, which can be
considered as acceptable (Hair, Black & Babin, 2010; Sekaran, 2005). The two domains were
agreeableness and neuroticism, while all other domains had Cronbach’s alpha of 0.7 and above. The
researchers decided to use the instrument because it was a well-established set of questionnaires
commonly used in various studies of personality traits. In fact, this instrument was found to be a
reliable instrument in Malaysian settings which almost always generate a Cronbach’s alpha greater
than 0.7 (Ong, 2014). Next, the instrument on communication competence variable was found to
have excellent reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.905. Despite having a high value of
Cronbach’s alpha, two items from the motivation domain were deleted to increase the alpha value
from 0.608 to 0.709. These slight changes increased the overall value of Cronbach’s alpha for the
overall communication competence variable from 0.905 to 0.910 and decreased the number of items
from 29 to 27 items.
Pearson-Correlation and Multiple Regression Analysis
Table 2: Correlation between respondents’ Emotional Intelligence and Communication
Competence
1
2
3
4
5
6
Extraversion
1
Agreeableness
.341**
1
Conscientiousness
.014
168**
1
Neuroticism
-.174*
-.369**
-.514**
1
Openness to Experience
-.546**
.184*
-.089
-.021
1
Communication
Competence
.545**
.482**
.044
-.175*
.466**
1
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)
Table 2 shows the findings on the correlation between personality traits and communication
competence among the final year students in two public universities in Klang Valley. The results
pointed out that there were three significant positive relationships between extraversion,
agreeableness and openness to experience and communication competence (r=.545, r=.482, r=.466
p<.01) (see Table 2). In addition, it was also found that there was a small, negative but significant
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
499
relationship between neuroticism and communication competence (r=-.175, p<.05). Furthermore,
the results also confirmed that there was a large positive relationship between extraversion and
communication competence, which indicated that greater the level of extraversion among the
students would result in higher communication competence. Therefore, research question one was
answered and hypotheses H1a, H1b, H1d and H1e were supported.
Table 3: Multiple Regression Analysis
Independent variables
Standardized
Coefficients Beta
t
Sig.
Extraversion
.300
3.691
.000
Agreeableness
.338
4.623
.000
Conscientiousness
.012
.155
.877
Neuroticism
.013
.167
.868
Openness to Experience
.241
3.087
.002
R Square
.437
F
20.797
Sig. F Value
.000
Durbin Watson
1.795
Findings from the regression analysis between personality traits and communication
competence were tabulated in Table 3. It was found that R² was .437, in which all of the independent
variables such as extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and openness to
experience explained 43.7% of the variance (R square) for communication competence, with
significant of F value of .000. In addition, the Durbin Watson value was 1.795, which was good as it
was in the range of 1.5 to 2, in line with one of the assumptions for bivariate and multivariate
correlation analyses. The analysis revealed that agreeableness was the most influential component
of personality traits on the students’ communication competence (β=.338, p<.001). Consecutively,
extraversion was found to be the second variable that had an influence on communication
competence (β=.300, p<.001). Finally, the sub variable openness to experience was also found to
influence communication competence (β=.241, p<0.05). Conscientiousness and neuroticism
dimensions were not found to influence communication competence among undergraduate
students. All influential elements of personality traits had positive influence on communication
competence. Therefore, it can be concluded that based on this analysis, it was found that
agreeableness significantly contributed in predicting the students’ communication competence.
Table 4 summarizes the comparison between UiTM and UKM undergraduate students’
personality traits and communication competence. For UKM, it was found that all of the components
in independent variable such as extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and
openness to experience explained 43.4% of the variance (R square) for communication competence,
while for UiTM students, the dimensions of personality traits explained 46.1% of the variance for
communication competence which was 2.7% greater than UKM undergraduate students. Durbin
Watson values for both universities were within the good range of 1.5 to 2, in line with one of the
assumptions for bivariate and multivariate correlation analyses. Further, the analysis also revealed
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
500
that communication competence for UKM students was significantly influenced by two personality
traits, which were agreeableness as the most influential dimension of personality traits (β=.478,
p<.05) followed by openness to experience (β=.325, p<.05). In the meantime, it was also found that
UiTM students’ communication competence was significantly influenced by three personality traits
which were extraversion trait being the most influential (β=.368, p<.05) followed by agreeableness
and openness to experience (β=.265, p<.05; β=.204, p<.05) respectively. Conscientiousness and
neuroticism dimensions were found to have no influence towards communication competence
among undergraduate students for both UKM and UiTM. All influential elements of personality traits
had positive influence on communication competence.
Table 4: Multiple Regression Analysis (Comparisons between Universities)
Uni.
Independent variables
Standardized
Coefficients Beta
t
Sig.
UKM
Extraversion
.122
.928
.358
Agreeableness
.478
4.190
.000
Conscientiousness
.078
.603
.550
Neuroticism
.110
.830
.411
Openness to Experience
.325
2.454
.018
R Square
.434
F
7.513
Sig. F Value
.000
Durbin Watson
1.658
UiTM
Extraversion
.368
3.473
.001
Agreeableness
.265
2.744
.008
Conscientiousness
-.027
-.280
.780
Neuroticism
-.052
-.495
.622
Openness to Experience
.204
2.064
.042
R Square
.461
F
13.488
Sig. F Value
.000
Durbin Watson
1.837
These findings have been supported by various communication studies. According to Teven,
McCroskey and Richmond (2006), Berne (2011) and Grant, Gino and Hofmann (2011), previous
researches have indicated that the way individuals communicate and their ability to successfully lead
others can be influenced by their personality. This was also supported by Layton (2013), who stated
that personality played a major role in developing an individual’s communication competence.
Regardless of personality type, leaders may possess the ability to be competent in communication. A
local researcher has also noted in her study that psychological constructs, for instance personality,
are one of the main criteria that is necessary in validating the theory of communication competence
(Lailawati, 2008). Nonetheless, according to Daly (2002), the integrative models of personality have
been given little attention by the communication scholarship, though a body of existing research has
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
501
suggested that personality is somehow connected to communication behaviors (Daly, 2002; Grant et
al., 2011; Hargie & Dickson, 2004; Spitzberg & Cupach, 1984).
Conclusions
This research was conducted as a pilot study; hence it may limit the generalizability of the findings of
this study. It was intended to ascertain the instrumentation of the study as well as to determine the
relationship between personality traits and communication competence among final year students
in two public universities in Klang Valley. Based on the statistical analyses, it was found that three
dimensions of personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness and openness to experience) had
significant and positive relationships with communication competence, while one dimension
(neuroticism) was negatively related to the dependent variable. Moreover, it was also found that
agreeableness had the greatest influence on communication competence, followed by extraversion
and openness to experience. Two dimensions of personality traits (conscientiousness and
neuroticism) were not found to influence communication competence among undergraduate
students for both universities, UiTM and UKM. In a nutshell, personality is one of the many
determinants that may influence the communication competence among students. Therefore, it
would be a wise step for educational administrators to assist students in enhancing their
communication skills by engaging more activities that promote certain personality traits. In essence,
students in general were born with different personalities, and yet, they can still be assisted to
maximize their communication potentials by matching certain elements in their own personality.
Recommendations
Students in Malaysia especially need to know their own personality traits in order to enhance their
communication skills. Culture, the authors suspect, may influence the students to communicate
openly. It is an open secret that Malaysian students, especially from the Malay society have high
respect for those who are older than them, especially the teachers. This is especially true when
Malaysian students in general will not ask questions in classrooms, would prefer peer or group-work
type of study instead of two-way classroom interactions with the teacher. In addition, most Malay
students tend not to show that they disagree with a respected person, such as a teacher, a supervisor
or persons with authority. It is recommended that instructors reward class participations by
encouraging the students to ask questions and to encourage them to disagree with the teacher. In
fact, it is the opinion of the researchers that the students should be rewarded for disagreeing with
the teachers after presenting an opposing idea which can be a better solution than what is laid out
by the teachers.
This is especially true when the decision of saying something different from the authority like
a boss or a supervisor (in this case, the teacher) may affect others. According to Flynn and Smith
(2007), those with the responsibilities of making crucial decisions and participating in discussion
process are more likely those with lower level of agreeableness and neuroticism traits. Nevertheless,
those with agreeableness traits were more likeable by their superiors due to the nature of the
willingness to compromise with their own interests and being supportive with everything.
It is absolutely pitiful for one to more agreeable or disagreeable just to please the person of
authority. This ability is essential in balancing and coping with the pressure and demands of the
working world later in life. Workforce of the future should have employees who are risk-takers, the
ones who are willing to say no when it is rightfully so to say no and those who work without fear or
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
502
favor for the organizations they work for. Universities are the training grounds in preparing young,
inquisitive minds to help shape this nation to be right along other advanced counties. Therefore,
students must be coached and to freely express their disagreements or to appropriately point out
their views and opinions. Extraverted people are those with motivation to communicate to others.
Hence, introverted students should continuously learn how to initiate conversation with others or at
least, learn how not to avoid conversations. Furthermore, students with low level of openness to
experience trait need to feel courageous to imagine and explore new things, which will indirectly
require them to communicate their minds. These students may have no problem with
communication but their lack of interest in getting out of their comfort zone may prevent them from
communicating with other people.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Research Management Institute (RMI) and the Faculty of Business
and Management, UiTM Selangor, Malaysia for funding this research project through the BESTARI
grant 600-IRMI/DANA 5/3/BESTARI (P) (030/2018) 2017 which has significantly contributed to this
study. In addition, the authors would also like to express our highest appreciation to both UKM and
UiTM students and officials for their wonderful cooperation and assistance while conducting this
study.
References
Arasaratnam, L. (2004). Intercultural communication competence: Development and empirical
validation of a new model. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International
Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.
Archer, W., & Davison, J. (2008). Graduate employability: the views of employers (London, Council
for Industry and Higher Education).
Alzgool, M. (2019). Nexus between Green HRM and Green Management towards Fostering Green
Values. Management Science Letters, 9(12), 2073-2082.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance: A
Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance at the beginning of
the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next? International Journal of
Selection and assessment, 9(1‐2), 9-30.
Berne, E. (2011). Transactional analysis in psychotherapy. New York: Grove Press (Original work
published 1961).
Brown, F. W., & Reilly, M. D. (2009). The Myers-Briggs type indicator and transformational
leadership. Journal of Management Development, 28(10), 916-932.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2014). Personality and Intellectual Competence. New York:
Psychology Press.
Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). The five factor model as a universal passport to understanding personality.
Paper presented at the Presidential address at the 8th biennial meeting of the International
Society for the Study of Individual Differences, Aarhus, Denmark.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
503
Costa, P. T. J., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). The Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO
Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment
Resources.
Daly, J. A. (2002). Personality and interpersonal communication. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.),
Handbook of Interpersonal Communication. Thousand Oaks,CA: SAGE Publications.
Denissen, J. J. A., van Aken, M. A. G., & Roberts, B. W. (2011). Personality Development across the
Life Span. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell
Handbook of Individual Differences (pp. 75-100): Wiley-Blackwell.
Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2017). Labour Force Survey Report, Malaysia, 2016. Retrieved
from
https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=126&bul_id=SGZCN
nMrWW9ZTEdpYys4YW0yRlhoQT09&menu_id=U3VPMldoYUxzVzFaYmNkWXZteGduZz09
Department of Statistics Malaysia. (2018). Labour Force Survey Report, Malaysia, 2017. Retrieved
from Putrajaya:
https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=126&bul_id=aEdIelh
lVTBtOHhjOUxqcXhyc2pCUT09&menu_id=U3VPMldoYUxzVzFaYmNkWXZteGduZz09
Dunning, D. (2003). Introduction to Type and Communication. Mountain View, CA: CPP,
Incorporated.
Flaherty, B., & Stojakovic, J. (2008). Intercultural Competence as a Key Element toward Cultural
Integration of International Students in the United States. Paper presented at the The annual
meeting of the NCA 94th Annual Convention.
Flynn, K. E., & Smith, M. A. (2007). Personality and health care decision-making style. The Journals
of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 62(5), P261-P267.
Furnham, A. (2002). Personality, Style Preference and Individual Development. In M. Pearn (Ed.),
Individual Differences and Development in Organisations. London: Wiley.
Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., Raso, C., & Ha, S. E. (2011). Personality traits
and participation in political processes. The Journal of Politics, 73(03), 692-706.
Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage:
The role of employee proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 528-550.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., & Babin, B. J. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective (7th
ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Hannawa, A. F., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2015). Communication Competence: Walter de Gruyter GmbH &
Co KG.
Hargie, O., & Dickson, D. (2004). Skilled Interpersonal Communication: Research, Theory and
Practice. London: Routledge.
Heathcote, A. (2010). Eric Berne's Development of Ego State Theory: Where Did It All Begin and
Who Influenced Him? Transactional Analysis Journal, 40(3-4), 254-260.
Hofmann, D. A., & Jones, L. M. (2005). Leadership, collective personality, and performance. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 509.
Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The big five personality traits,
general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52(3),
621-652.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
504
Khalid, N., Islam, D. M. Z., & Ahmed, M. R. M. (2019). Sentrepreneurial Training and Organizational
Performance: Implications for Future. Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, 7(2), 590-593.
Kodydek, G., & Hochreiter, R. (2013). The influence of personality characteristics on individual
competencies of work group members: A cross-cultural study. Organizacija, 46(5), 196-204.
Lailawati, M. S. (2008). Communication competence: A Malaysian perspective. Human
Communication A Journal of the Pacific and Asian Communication Association, 11(3), 303.
Layton, L. K. (2013). Personality Traits and Assessments of Communication Competence in
Organizational Leaders. (PhD), Walden University.
Malhi, R. S. (2009). Make Yourself Employable: How Graduates Can Hit the Ground Running! : TQM
Consultants.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American
Psychologist, 52(5), 509-516.
McCroskey, J. C. (1984). Communication Competence: The Elusive Construct. In R. N. Bostrom (Ed.),
Competence in Communication: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Muhammad, K., Saoula, O., Issa, M., & Ahmed, U. (2019). Contract Management and Performance
Characteristics: An Empirical and Managerial Implication for Indonesia. Management
Science Letters, 9(8), 1289-1298.
Ong, C. H. (2014). Validity and reliability of the big five personality traits scale in malaysia.
International Journal of Innovation and Applied Studies, 5(4), 309.
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes.
Annual Review Psychology, 57, 401-421.
Rahmah, I., Ishak, Y., & Sieng, W. L. (2011). Employers’ perceptions on graduates in Malaysian
services sector. International Business Management, 5(3), 184-193.
Robertson, I., Gibbons, P., Baron, H., MacIver, R., & Nyfield, G. (1999). Understanding Management
Performance. British Journal of Management, 10(1), 5-12. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00107
Rothmann, S., & Coetzer, E. (2003). The big five personality dimensions and job performance. SA
Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(1), p. 68-74.
Schulman, S. (2011). The Use of Personality Assessments to Predict Job Performance: Burlington:
The University of Vermont.
Sekaran, U. (2005). Research Methods for Business - A Skill Building Approach (4th ed.). New York:
John Wiley and Sons.
Spitzberg, B. H. (1988). Communication competence: Measures of perceived effectiveness. In C. H.
Tardy (Ed.), A Handbook for the Study of Human Communication: Methods and Instruments
for Observing, Measuring, and Assessing Communication Processes. Norwood: Ablex
Publishing Corporation.
Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). What Is Good Communication? JACA: Journal of the Association for
Communication Administration, 29(1), 103-119.
Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (1984). Interpersonal Communication Competence. Beverly Hills,
CA: SAGE Publications.
TalentCorp Malaysia. (2014). Trends in Graduate Employability. Retrieved from
https://www.talentcorp.com.my/facts-and-figures/matching-talents-to-jobs
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences
Vol. 9 , No. 13, Special Issue: Revolutionizing Education: Challenges, Innovation, Collaboration., 2019, E- ISSN: 2222 -6990 © 2019 HRMARS
505
Teven, J. J., McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (2006). Communication correlates of perceived
Machiavellianism of supervisors: Communication orientations and outcomes.
Communication Quarterly, 54(2), 127-142.
Wilson, S. R., & Sabee, C. M. (2003). Explicating communicative competence as a theoretical term.
In J. O. Greene & B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook of Communication and Social Interaction
Skills. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wiseman, R. L. (2003). Intercultural Communication Competence. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Cross-
Cultural and Intercultural Communication (pp. 167-190). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Zeisset, C. (2006). The Art of Dialogue: Exploring Personality Differences for More Effective
Communication. Gainsville, FL: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
