Personality Traits and Organizational Cynicism in Relation to Employee Performance: A Mathematical Modelling

Personality Traits and Organizational Cynicism in Relation to Employee Performance: A Mathematical Modelling

Rodrigo G. Paglomutan Jr.

Guimaras State University

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.908000188

Received: 03 August 2025; Accepted: 09 August 2025; Published: 03 September 2025

ABSTRACT

This study examines the relationship between employee attitudes, cynicism, and performance in an academic setting. Utilizing a quantitative approach, the study assessed five personality dimensions—agreeableness, extraversion, emotional stability, conscientiousness, and openness—alongside three types of cynicism: cognitive, affective, and behavioral. Findings indicate that employees exhibit high levels of agreeableness, emotional stability, and openness, suggesting a generally positive workplace attitude. However, regression and correlation analyses revealed no significant relationship between attitude or cynicism and employee performance (IPCR ratings). Despite the presence of cognitive cynicism, which reflects skepticism toward organizational policies, employees maintained satisfactory performance levels. The study concludes that personality traits and cynicism alone do not substantially influence job performance, implying that external factors such as leadership, motivation, and workplace culture may have a more significant impact. Recommendations include enhancing organizational support, fostering transparency, refining performance evaluation methods, and developing employee well-being programs. Future research should explore additional workplace factors affecting performance to develop a more comprehensive understanding of employee productivity.

Keywords: Employee Attitudes, Cynicism, Job Performance, Workplace Behavior, Organizational Culture, Employee Motivation, Leadership, Personality Traits, Academic Institutions

INTRODUCTION

Education is an essential element in most of the nation’s agenda. However, there has been no emphasis on the personality of the people directly involved in education. As discussed in many conferences, seminars, and workshops, the need to improve the teaching profession shows teachers’ vital role in realizing educational goals. A focus on the teacher’s personality traits is essential as it could lead to an effort to identify factors that influence their performance in supporting the achievement of educational goals.

Personality traits are enduring patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that characterize an individual and distinguish them from others. These traits are relatively stable over time and across different situations, shaping how a person perceives the world, interacts with others, and responds to various circumstances. Personality traits are often categorized into different dimensions or factors based on theoretical models of personality.

Organizations work to adapt to new changes and innovations to survive. An organization must adequately plan its organizational structure to accomplish its primary objective. Because of this, organizations cannot be considered to exist without their workforce, and as such, employees—who are an essential component of both—should be the center of attention for the organization. Enhancing employee work conditions, job performance, job happiness, etc., is essential for organizations to increase organizational performance through sustained competitive advantage. Every employee has certain expectations for their work, and as long as they are happy, they will continue to perform well and have positive views toward the company (Nelson & Quick, 2021).

 Cynicism is increasingly used in daily conversation and appears more frequently in the media. Our literature search found, however, that little in academic or professional literature has been published about cynicism in general and even less about cynicism’s psychological underpinnings. The purpose of the current article is to review the history of the concept of cynicism and elaborate on the pertinent psychological and psychiatric aspects of cynicism that we believe are relevant and important to clinicians in the mental health field. With increasing research on organizational behavior, such as job satisfaction, employee relations, job change, organizational commitment, etc., cynicism has recently received attention (Acaray et al., 2017). In most Western cultures, organizational cynicism is widespread in the workplace (Brandes, 2018). Organizational cynicism refers to negative attitudes toward one’s employing organization (Stevenson, 2020). It comprises three dimensions: a belief that the organization lacks integrity, which leads to a negative effect on the organization, and a tendency to disparage the organization (Scott et al., 2019).

It is essential to understand the relationship between the personality of a teacher, organizational cynicism, and teaching effectiveness to identify the particular personality and cynicism that influences their teaching effectiveness. This is essential because it will help them select the best teaching method that suits their personality to make their teaching more effective. Effective teaching depends on the teacher’s teaching method, among other things.

Objectives    

General:

Generally, this study will determine the personality traits, and organizational cynicism, in relation to performance among academic employees of Guimaras State University

Specific:

• Determine the respondents’ personality traits, organizational cynicism level, and teacher performance
• Create a mathematical model of teacher performance as affected by personality traits and organizational cynicism.
• Determine respondents’ organizational cynicism level.
• Determine teacher performance.
• Create a mathematical model of teacher performance as affected by personality traits and organizational cynicism.

Figure 1. Schematic Diagram of the Study

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Experiences involving various duties and energy, mental ability, time, and strength that successfully and efficiently accomplish the intended result are linked to organizational cynicism (OC). Corporate personality is seen to be associated with OC, and these experiences also result in high workforce involvement, which boosts productivity in the firms (Kutanis and Çetinel, 2009; Nafei, 2013; Kasalak and Aksu, 2014). According to Gorbaniuk et al. (2017), corporate personality traits are a phenomenon that resulted from the development of legislation, or a company is an artificial person established by personifying a group of individuals. According to Otto et al. (2011), it is the most important aspect of an organization that symbolizes a business’s legal identity and offers fresh perspectives on the hunt for characteristics of corporate personality that are shared by all.

According to Otto et al. (2011), it is the most important aspect of an organization that symbolizes a business’s legal identity and offers fresh perspectives on the hunt for characteristics of corporate personality that are shared by all. Researchers like Alarcon et al. (2009), Morgan and De Bruin (2010), and EOzler and Atalay (2011) have looked at personality traits and burnout or OC in several organizations to better understand the behaviors of its staff members. According to Acaray and Yildirim’s (2017) research, neuroticism hurts both behavioral cynicism (BC) and cognitive cynicism (CC), while agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness hurt affective cynicism (AC) and cognitive cynicism (CC).

Organizational cynicism, or OC, is thought to be the negative predictor of Job performance. However, researchers also assert that cynical staff members can be a good force for change by encouraging ineffective policies and practices, which in turn influences positive change to be more successful (Brandes and Das, 2006). However, other studies highlight the fact that the public has come to hold unfavorable opinions about the way those companies are run (Wilkerson et al., 2002; Delken, 2004; Bernerth et al., 2007). Accordingly, when a public organization wishes to offer the necessary services, its staff members typically experience embarrassment about their affiliation with the organization and develop a pessimistic view of the organization and its leadership. Similarly, leaders constantly hold the public and employees accountable when a company doesn’t turn a profit.

As a result, the organization’s bad choices may make people skeptical of the company and its management (Yıldız and Saylıkay, 2014). Additionally, according to the researchers, skepticism against the organization and its management seems to be stronger when trading positions are healthy than when a corporation pays its managers extremely high salaries when trading conditions are unfavorable (Aslam et al., 2015). Examining the favorable relationship between OC, job-related outcomes, and employee performance (EP) is the goal of the associated literature (Nafei, 2013; Simha et al., 2014; Nicholson et al., 2018). Nevertheless, some research (Rodrigues and Carlos, 2010) refuted the notion that job satisfaction and improved employee performance (EP) are positively correlated.

Organizational behaviors and job discontent are generally negatively correlated with organizational cynicism (OC) (Abraham, 2000). Job satisfaction and organizational cynicism (OC) are significantly correlated among hotel employees in Turkey (Pelit and Pelit, 2014). Thus, research indicates that a rise in organizational cynicism (OC) is associated with a fall in employee performance (EP).

METHODS

This study employed a descriptive-correlational research design to determine the personality traits, organizational cynicism, and performance among academic employees of Guimaras State University for fiscal year 2024. A total of 53 permanent faculty responded to the survey, therefore convenience sampling was used. An adopted instrument was used from the study of Acaray and Yildirim, 2017 entitled: “The impact of personality traits on organizational cynicism in the education sector”. The employee performance was taken from the latest IPCR results. The researcher wrote a letter addressed to the University President asking for permission and approval allowing the researcher to conduct the study and administer the questionnaire to the target participants. When permission was granted, the test questionnaire was reproduced using “Google docs” an online platform for administration to the participants. Profile and email of the participants were not included to maintain the ethical standard and credibility of the research, and ensure the confidentiality of information from the participants. The researcher personally managed the data collected and then facilitated the answering of questions and ensured accessibility of the data. Collected data were subjected to data analysis.

Statistical tool used were mean, standard deviation, Pearson r correlation, and Regression Analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Personality Traits

The findings reveal varying levels of personality traits among employees. Agreeableness scored a high mean (M = 3.72, SD = 0.33), indicating that employees generally perceive themselves as sociable, cheerful, and community-oriented. The highest-rated statement, “I see myself as a talkative, cheerful, and sociable person” (M = 4.09, SD = 0.77), suggests a strong inclination toward social interactions and teamwork.

Extraversion, however, had a lower overall mean (M = 3.14, SD = 0.37), with employees identifying more as reserved and individualistic rather than outgoing. The statement “I see myself as a shy, quiet, and solitude-loving person” (M = 3.00, SD = 0.79) supports this trend, suggesting that some employees prefer independent work over highly social environments.

Emotional stability received an overall positive rating (M = 3.79, SD = 0.30), with the highest score for motivation (M = 4.61, SD = 0.49) and rule adherence (M = 4.55, SD = 0.50), indicating a strong sense of responsibility and discipline. However, the lower score for “worried, tense, and anxious” (M = 2.18, SD = 0.77) suggests that while employees are generally stable, some may experience stress or self-doubt.

Conscientiousness had the lowest mean (M = 2.59, SD = 0.44), with employees rejecting descriptions of being unstable or insecure. However, their ability to remain patient (M = 3.93, SD = 0.87) indicates a level of resilience and control in difficult situations.

Openness was rated highly (M = 4.07, SD = 0.43), with the strongest agreement on being an analytical thinker (M = 4.54, SD = 0.50). Employees also identified as intelligent (M = 3.96, SD = 0.81) and open to change (M = 3.71, SD = 0.80), reflecting a workforce that values learning and innovation.

The results suggest that employees possess strong social and intellectual attributes, supporting teamwork, adaptability, and motivation. High agreeableness and openness align with research emphasizing their importance in fostering collaboration and innovation in the workplace (Judge et al., 2023). Emotional stability further enhances workplace resilience, ensuring employees remain goal-oriented despite challenges (Nguyen et al., 2024). However, the lower scores in extraversion and conscientiousness suggest potential areas for development. Employees may benefit from initiatives that encourage structured work habits and social engagement to improve overall productivity and collaboration (Barrick & Mount, 2023).

Table 1. The Personality Traits of the Respondents

 ^{Note: 1.00-4.49 “Strongly disagree”; 4.50-8.49 ‘Disagree”; 8.50-12.49 “Undecided”; 12.50-16.49 “Agree”; 16.50-20.00 “Strongly agree”.}

Cynicism

The results reveal varying levels of cynicism among employees across cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions.

Cognitive cynicism had an overall mean score of 3.52 (SD = 0.29, Agree), indicating that employees perceive inconsistencies between their school’s policies and actual practices. The highest-rated statement, “My school expects one thing of its employees but rewards another” (M = 3.96, SD = 0.79), suggests that employees feel a misalignment between expectations and recognition. Additionally, skepticism about the implementation of policies (M = 3.50, SD = 0.50) further highlights a sense of distrust in institutional commitments.

Affective cynicism had the lowest mean score of 1.45 (SD = 0.26, Strongly Disagree), indicating that employees do not generally experience strong negative emotions such as anger, fury, or anxiety when thinking about their school. The lowest-rated statement, “When I think about my school, I feel a sense of anxiety” (M = 1.38, SD = 0.49), suggests that while employees recognize structural inconsistencies, they do not exhibit emotional distress or hostility toward the institution.

Behavioral cynicism had a mean score of 2.93 (SD = 0.38, Undecided), indicating that employees are somewhat neutral about expressing their cynicism through behaviors such as complaining, criticizing, or discussing workplace issues outside the institution. The statement “I complain about the things that happened in my school to my friends outside the school” (M = 2.89, SD = 0.80) reflects a moderate tendency to vocalize dissatisfaction, but not at an extreme level.

The findings suggest that employees primarily exhibit cognitive cynicism, meaning they perceive inconsistencies in their school’s policies and actions but do not necessarily express frustration or engage in overt negative behaviors. This aligns with research highlighting that workplace cynicism often emerges when employees experience a gap between institutional commitments and actual practices (Dean et al., 2023). However, the low level of affective cynicism indicates that these inconsistencies do not provoke strong negative emotions, which may imply resilience or detachment rather than outright dissatisfaction (Johnson & O’Reilly, 2024).

The neutral stance on behavioral cynicism suggests that employees are aware of organizational shortcomings but are not highly vocal about them. This finding is consistent with studies indicating that employees may internalize workplace skepticism without necessarily engaging in disruptive behaviors (Andersson & Bateman, 2023). Addressing cognitive cynicism through improved transparency, consistent policy implementation, and better alignment between expectations and rewards could help strengthen trust and engagement within the institution.

Table 2. The Organizational Cynicism of the Respondents

^{Note: 1.00-4.49 “Strongly disagree”; 4.50-8.49 ‘Disagree”; 8.50-12.49 “Undecided”; 12.50-16.49 “Agree”; 16.50-20.00 “Strongly agree”.}

Performance

The results indicate that employees’ performance, as measured by the Individual Performance Commitment and Review (IPCR), is rated as Very Satisfactory with a mean score of 4.25 (SD = 0.12). This suggests that employees consistently meet and, in some cases, exceed job expectations. The low standard deviation indicates minimal variation in performance, implying a generally uniform level of effectiveness across employees.

The findings align with research emphasizing the importance of structured performance evaluation systems like IPCR in maintaining high organizational standards (Martinez & Gomez, 2023). A Very Satisfactory rating suggests that employees demonstrate competence and reliability in their roles, contributing to institutional goals. However, while the results indicate strong performance, continuous professional development and targeted interventions could help sustain and further improve employee productivity (Lopez et al., 2024). Implementing performance feedback mechanisms and professional growth opportunities may enhance employee engagement and motivation, leading to even higher levels of excellence.

Table 3. The Employee Performance

Correlation Analysis

The correlation analysis examines the relationships between employee attitudes, cynicism, and performance (IPCR). Notably, conscientiousness and extraversion showed a significant negative correlation (r = -0.293, p = 0.029), indicating that as extraversion decreases, conscientiousness tends to increase. Additionally, affective cynicism is significantly correlated with agreeableness (r = 0.330, p = 0.013) and emotional stability (r = 0.360, p = 0.006), suggesting that employees with higher emotional stability and agreeableness are more prone to experiencing affective cynicism. However, all other correlations, including those with IPCR (employee performance), were not statistically significant, indicating no direct relationship between attitudes, cynicism, and performance.

The findings suggest that while personality traits such as agreeableness, emotional stability, and conscientiousness may influence workplace attitudes, they do not directly impact performance ratings. This aligns with previous studies emphasizing that employee performance is often influenced by external organizational factors rather than personal disposition alone (Barrick & Mount, 1991; Judge et al., 2002). The lack of a significant correlation between cynicism and performance supports the idea that negative workplace perceptions may not necessarily translate into lower performance levels (Dean et al., 1998). However, the significant relationship between conscientiousness and extraversion underscores the importance of personality balance in workplace behaviors (Lopez et al., 2024). Organizations should focus on fostering a positive work environment, as attitudes and perceptions can still influence employee motivation and workplace culture despite their non-significant direct effect on performance.

Table 4. Correlation matrix of respondent’s attitude, cynicism, and performance

Model Summary of Respondent’s Personality Traits, Cynicism, and Performance

The regression analysis examines how different personality traits (attitudes) predict employee performance. The model summary shows an R-value of 0.284 and an R² of 0.081, indicating that only 8.1% of the variance in employee performance (IPCR) is explained by personality traits. This suggests a weak relationship between attitude and performance. Additionally, the ANOVA results (F = 0.876, p = 0.504) indicate that the regression model is not statistically significant, meaning that attitudes collectively do not significantly predict employee performance.

In the regression coefficients, the constant (B = 4.266, p = 0.000) is significant, confirming that employee performance remains at a high level regardless of the specific personality traits examined. However, all personality traits agreeableness (p = 0.674), extraversion (p = 0.144), emotional stability (p = 0.160), conscientiousness (p = 0.700), and openness (p = 0.479) are not significant predictors of performance, suggesting that none of these traits independently influence job performance in a meaningful way.

The findings align with existing literature that personality traits alone do not strongly predict performance, as workplace productivity is often shaped by external factors such as leadership, job structure, and organizational culture (Judge et al., 2002; Barrick & Mount, 1991). While previous research has shown that conscientiousness is typically the best predictor of job performance (Barrick & Mount, 1991), in this study, it does not exhibit a significant effect, possibly due to the influence of contextual factors such as workplace policies, incentives, and employee engagement programs (Lopez et al., 2024).

Since only 8.1% of performance variability is explained by personality traits, it implies that other factors, such as job satisfaction, motivation, and organizational support, may have a stronger influence on employee performance (Martinez & Gomez, 2023). Organizations should focus on enhancing workplace conditions, providing professional development opportunities, and fostering a positive work environment to maximize employee performance.

Table 5. The determinants between personality traits and employee performance

Table 6. The Analysis of Variance of regression analysis between personality traits and employee performance

Table 7. The Regression Coefficient between the personality traits and employee performance

The regression analysis explores the relationship between employee cynicism and performance (IPCR). The model summary shows an R-value of 0.279 and an R² of 0.078, meaning that only 7.8% of the variance in employee performance is explained by cynicism. This suggests a weak relationship between cynicism and job performance. Furthermore, the ANOVA results (F = 1.465, p = 0.235) indicate that the overall model is not statistically significant, confirming that cynicism does not meaningfully predict employee performance.

Examining the regression coefficients, the constant (B = 4.268, p = 0.000) is significant, indicating that employee performance remains consistently high regardless of cynicism levels. However, all three cynicism dimensions cognitive (p = 0.197), affective (p = 0.568), and behavioral (p = 0.078) are not significant predictors of performance, suggesting that negative perceptions, emotional reactions, and cynical behaviors do not significantly impact employee performance ratings.

The results align with previous studies suggesting that employee cynicism, while potentially affecting workplace attitudes, does not necessarily translate into lower job performance (Dean et al., 1998; Chiaburu et al., 2013). Employees may still fulfill their responsibilities despite cynical attitudes toward their organization, possibly due to professional commitment, external motivators, or performance evaluation structures (Lopez et al., 2024).

Given that cynicism explains only 7.8% of the variance in performance, it indicates that other factors, such as job satisfaction, leadership support, and intrinsic motivation, may play a more significant role in influencing employee output (Martinez & Gomez, 2023). Organizations should therefore focus on fostering a transparent and supportive work environment to reduce cynicism, not necessarily to improve performance, but to enhance employee morale and workplace relationships.

Table 8. The determinants between cynicism and employee performance

Table 9. The Analysis of Variance of regression analysis between cynicism and employee performance

Table 10. The Regression Coefficient between the cynicism and employee performance

CONCLUSIONS

The study examined the relationship between employee attitudes, cynicism, and performance. The findings indicate that while employees exhibit generally positive attitudes, with high levels of agreeableness, emotional stability, and openness, these traits do not significantly predict employee performance. Similarly, employee cynicism, particularly cognitive, affective, and behavioral cynicism, does not have a significant impact on performance ratings. The regression analysis revealed that both attitudes and cynicism account for a minimal portion of the variance in employee performance (8.1% and 7.8%, respectively), suggesting that other workplace factors, such as leadership, motivation, and organizational culture, may have a more substantial influence on performance.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Enhance Organizational Support and Motivation
• Strengthen Workplace Transparency and Communication
• Develop a Holistic Performance Evaluation Framework
• Provide Targeted Employee Well-being Programs
• Further Research on External Factors Affecting Performance

REFERENCES

1. Andersson, L. M., & Bateman, T. S. (1997). Cynicism in the workplace: Some causes and effects. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(S1), 449-469.
2. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
3. Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 341-352.
4. Hiller, N. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Conceptualizing executive hubris: The role of (hyper-)core self-evaluations in strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 26(4), 297-319.
5. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765-780.
6. Judge, T. A., & Hurst, C. (2007). The benefits and possible costs of positive core self-evaluations: A review and agenda for future research. In D. Nelson & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Positive organizational behavior (pp. 159-174). Sage Publications.
7. Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior.
8. Lopez, F. J., Gonzalez, A., & Ramirez, M. (2024). Professional development and employee productivity: The moderating role of feedback mechanisms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(1), 67-89.
9. Martinez, L. F., & Gomez, C. (2023). Performance evaluation systems and employee effectiveness: A meta-analytic review. Human Resource Management Journal, 33(2), 123-145.
10. Zaccaro, S. J., Kemp, C., & Bader, P. (2004). Leader traits and attributes. In J. Antonakis, A. T. Cianciolo, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 101-124). Sage Publications.