Is Changing Jobs Really the Solution?

Baltas Group

Role Fit Through the Lens of Personality

Almost everyone in working life has had this thought at least once:

“Maybe the problem is the company I work for.”

Sometimes because of a heavy workload or disagreements with a manager, and sometimes because development opportunities are limited, we start looking for a new job. A higher salary or a more prestigious brand often carries the hope of a fresh start. What is interesting, however, is that some of us find ourselves facing similar problems again just a few months after changing jobs:

“There is constant uncertainty again.”
“Decisions move very slowly here too.”
“I don’t feel comfortable here either.”
“It didn’t turn out the way I expected.”

Of course, not every source of dissatisfaction lies with the person. An unhealthy corporate culture, inadequate leadership or unfair practices affect every employee negatively. On the other hand, there is another factor that often goes unnoticed: the fit between our personality and the role we apply for.

Same title, different roles

Thinking of job titles as uniform makes it easier to categorise people in our minds:

“She is a project manager.”
“He is a recruitment specialist.”

Yet very different roles can exist under the same title. For example, a project manager in a start-up environment with an entrepreneurial culture, frequently changing priorities and more flexible processes may stand out by reshaping the scope of the project according to changing needs, reorganising limited resources in line with priorities, and driving progress by quickly mobilising different functions in processes that are not yet standardised. For a project manager in a large corporate organisation, on the other hand, managing dependencies between stakeholders in projects involving many teams and decision-making mechanisms, tracking processes and responsibilities, and coordinating the work of different units towards a common goal may be more decisive. Even though both employees share the same title and the core requirements of the role, the specific behaviour patterns that support success, or the weight of certain behaviours, will differ depending on the focus of the role.

A similar situation can be seen within human resources. Of two recruitment specialists with the same title, one may be handling high-volume blue-collar hiring while the other runs senior executive recruitment. In the first role, effectively managing large candidate pools against specific criteria, tracking many positions simultaneously and coordinating with field needs may come to the fore. In the second, identifying the right profiles in a much smaller candidate pool, evaluating candidates’ experience and competencies in depth, and accurately matching candidate profiles with the expectations of top management may matter more. In career decisions, therefore, we need to look not only at the title but at what the role really demands.

The behavioural expectations of a role can differ according to the structure of the company or the sector in which it operates, and they can also be shaped by the manager’s working style and expectations.

Same title, different manager expectations

One manager may expect an employee to decide largely on their own how to reach a goal, to move forward by developing solutions when problems arise, and to involve the manager only at critical points. Another manager may prefer the work to be planned in detail from the outset, progress to be shared frequently, and important steps to be taken only with their knowledge and approval.

Two people doing technically the same job can perform differently because of the difference in their managers’ expectations about how work should be done. This is because the behaviours expected for success have changed.

What are we really choosing when we change jobs?

Job postings usually list technical qualifications, years of experience and job descriptions. Some also include general competency statements such as communication skills, teamwork or analytical thinking. However, these are often not enough to understand how a candidate is actually expected to behave in that role. That is why it is valuable for candidates to ask questions during the interview that make the behavioural expectations of the role visible. For example:

• Which behaviours make people successful in this role stand out?
• How will success be evaluated at the end of the first six months?
• How much autonomy is expected in decision-making?
• How much are uncertainty and change part of this role?
• Which behaviours make a difference here?
• What is the most common challenge in this role?

These questions not only help candidates make more informed decisions; they also move the interview from job descriptions to behaviours and help candidates understand the real expectations of the role.

The responsibility does not lie with the candidate alone. In recruitment, the aim is not to classify people as the “right person” or the “wrong person”, but to soundly evaluate the fit between the behaviour patterns that support successful performance in a role and the candidate’s natural tendencies.

The first condition for this is clearly defining the behavioural expectations of the role. If the behaviours critical for success are unclear, it also becomes difficult to determine which characteristics of the candidate should be assessed. Moreover, creating expectations for the same position that conflict with or undermine each other also damages the consistency of hiring decisions.

For this, the following questions first need to be clarified within the organisation:

• Which behaviours really determine success in this role?
• Which behaviours are indispensable?
• Which ones can be developed?
• Are we creating contradictory expectations? (For example, do we expect strict adherence to procedures on the one hand, while on the other hand wanting the person to take the initiative and step outside existing rules when necessary?)

Why are personality assessments valuable?

The value of personality lies in the fact that every role is a different “lock” and every personality profile is a different “key”. Research shows that when job analysis is carried out in recruitment and assessment processes and the specific behaviours and situational cues expected from a role are clarified in advance, rather than relying on general assumptions, the power of personality measures to predict performance doubles.¹

One of the earlier foundations of this approach can be seen in criticisms of evaluating job performance through a single, general criterion. The biggest mistake traditional research has made in measuring performance is reducing all roles to an “Overall Job Performance” (OJP) score.² Inconsistencies in performance predictions across different roles stem from the changing relative importance of different performance areas and competencies in different roles.

The structure of the Personova Personality Inventory makes it possible to address personality–competency–role fit within this framework. This makes it possible to interpret personality traits within the context of role-specific behavioural expectations and to draw a development roadmap for the competencies the position requires. The real question is no longer “Is this candidate’s personality profile good?” but “To what extent does this candidate’s personality profile support the behaviours expected of them in this role?”

Conclusion

Changing jobs is sometimes truly the right decision. However, moving to a new job does not in itself mean higher performance or greater job satisfaction. Before making a decision, it is healthy for both sides if the candidate and the organisation focus on which behaviours really determine success. From this perspective, personality assessment offers the mental and practical framework needed to make behavioural expectations visible and to manage them systematically.

Moreover, today it is not only the characteristics of the sector, the organisation or the manager that shape these expectations. The growing role of digital tools in the way we work has brought new demands such as speed, accessibility, attention management and staying constantly connected. The fit between a person’s working style and these demands can influence whether technology is perceived as an enabling tool or a source of stress.

Sources:

1. Tett, R. P., Toich, M. J., & Ozkum, S. B. (2021). Trait activation theory: A review of the literature and applications to five lines of personality dynamics research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 8, 199–233.
2. Bartram, D. (2005). The Great Eight competencies: A criterion-centric approach to validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1185–1203.