Emotional Intelligence and Work Performance among Executives Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 7(2), pp. 218-220 www.ejop.org The study of personality in organizations: Interv iew with Gian V ittorio Caprara By Miruna Andreescu and Daniela Vercellino ASPSE, Bucharest SNSPA, Buc harest I n this interv iew Professor Gian Vittorio Caprara shares w ith us some of his thoughts about personality psychology and organizational psychology, emerging out of a long experience of w orking in both fields. Many important questions hav e been raised in these areas w here there is a long-lasting concern w ith how personality should be understood and „measured‟. Professor Capr ara addresses this and other pressing issues for theorists and practitioners alike in the present interv iew . Gian Vittorio Caprara holds degrees in political science and a specialization degree in psyc hology. He is prof essor of psychology at Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza" where he also served as chair of the department and dean. He held visiting prof essor appointments at Stanf ord, UCLA, UCI, University of Michigan and Santiago University. He is a member of several International Scientific Associations and has been president of the European Association of Personality. Prof essor Capr ara is author and co-author of more than 450 scientif ic publications, including several volumes. His research interests are f ocused on primarily on the topics of personality and social psychology. Address f or correspondence: Dipartimento di Psicologia, ‘‘Sapienza’’ Universita` di Roma, Via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy E-mail: gianvittorio.caprara@uniroma1.it Interviewer: You first graduated Politic al Science and three years later, you graduated Psychology at the same univ ersity. How did you become interested in the scientific study of personality? Prof. Caprara: When I started to study Psychology I w as interested in understanding the person, w hat makes a person unique, w hat distinguishes a person from the other ones; I w anted to prov ide a meaning to the life of the others. I w as interested in understanding w hat makes people happy, how can w e offer people the possibility http://www.ejop.org/ The study of personality in organizations to make the best of themselv es. My interest in psychology has alw ays been a political interest, an ideological interest: the more I study psycholog y, the more I think w e should acknow ledge the div ersities and w e should try to compensate the inequalities. Our goal as psychologists is to understand how our people can dev elop, w hich are the conditions that allow all people to express the best of themselv es. Psychology c an help us understand the causes of div ersities, it can help us moderate, attenuate the ones that are due to nature; it can help us av oid the expansion of these div ersities and the injustice that could follow . I hav e alw ays been interested in politics, I graduated Politic al Science and for the last fifteen years I did research in the field. For many years, I w as a militant in the left party. When I left IBM, I joined the Communist Party, w hich I left too, ev entually. After I BM, I realized communism w as a disillusion, I expected too much from it. The kind of communism that w e hav e seen and experienced is not desirable anymore. The question is w hether democracy c an be the best for m of gov ernment. Democracy offers most people the possibility to express themselv es, to participate, to be responsible of how the gov ernment w orks. The w orld w e live in is v ery complic ated, w ith tremendous disparities, but still one has to try to understand, to make sense of things, to search for better w ays to manage the problems, managing the society. I ‟m v ery muc h conv inced that psychologists c an contribute in making a w orld more just. Interviewer: Betw een 1968 and 1973 you w orked in Human Resources at I BM. What w as your greatest challenge there, as a psychologist? W hat did you like most about your experience in that company? Prof. Caprara: I BM for me w as a very interesting experience, I learned a lot. IBM offered me many opportunities, it w as the good face of c apitalism. I say that because I BM is an organization w ith many defects and v irtues of capitalism: in there I learned to w ork, I learned the importance of competencies, the importance of organization. I w as responsible of dev eloping all the measurement, all the testing and training. I hav e alw ays been more inv olv ed in managing processes other than managing people. I BM offered me many opportunities, I w as exposed to many experiences. I w as very young at the time, I w as hired right after I finished my military serv ice – at that time it w as a compulsory draft in I taly. I BM let me go to school, so I could complete my graduation, my PhD progr am. After that I got another leav e because I received a scholarship in Canada and w hen I returned, I BM offered me a managerial position. Finally, I left I BM to go to w ork in univ ersities, but they kept me as a consultant for many years. Interviewer: I n the last years, organizational psychology headed to the intense study of personality. What do you think w ill be the hot topics of tomorrow? 219 Europe’s Journal of Psychology 220 Prof. Caprara: I dentification and actualization of potentials, elaboration for innov ation and justice - to offer people the feeling that they are respec ted and treated fairly! Interviewer: Research has found personality to be related to important organizational outcomes such as positiv e job attitudes and behav iors and job performance. This means that organizations should use personality tests to select their future employees. How ev er a common criticism is that job applicants can easily f ake their answers to personality sc ales. What are your thoughts on this issue? Prof. Caprara: You need a good test! First, you need a good theory of personality functioning, comprehensiv e theory. Then, you need good measures. But the theory deter mines the v alidity of the measures. I t is the theory that driv es the measures, that allow s you to understand w hether people fake or not, w hether their responses to tests are reliable or not. I am strongly conv inced of the primacy of the theory! And that is unusual because people hav e some kind of fetishism for testing. I trust in w hat people report, I ‟m not so concerned about social desir ability. For instance, tw o months ago I w as inv ited to identify potentials in an adv ertising company, among very young people w ith an excellent CV. The tests w ere absolutely av erage, the people responded av erage, so there w as no concern about faking. I n many situations, the best choice is the right choice – w hat do you think it‟s true. I f the test is correct, the people do not know w hat is going on, ultimately they do not know w hat you expect from them. Of course, there are certain tests that are difficult – for instance, it is difficult to assess ef ficacy in selection because if I ask you “Are you capable to do so?”, of course you say ”Yes!”. But if I ask you w hether you like or not a certain kind of mov ie, w hat is the right answ er? There is no right answ er! Interviewer: The differences betw een scientists and pr actitioners are a common theme in organizational psychology. How can w e bridge this gap betw een science and practice? Prof. Caprara: Scientists should make an effort to make themselv es easier to understand. Practitioners should be more diligent, less lazy. Both should be less arrogant! We should educ ate the client to be more exigent, to be more sev ere. The companies buy an instrument because there is a good salesman. The clients don‟t question many things, because they don‟t understand w hy w e use tests, w hat is v alidity, w hat is reliability, w hat makes a test better than the other. We should defend our instruments, our ideas, by prov iding ev idence, research, documentation!