See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348420403

Sad, Bad or Mad: Common Personality Disorders in Firms

Conference Paper · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

8 1,951

1 author:

David Robinson
Holmes Institute
71 PUBLICATIONS 239 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by David Robinson on 13 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Sad, Bad or Mad: Common Personality Disorders in Firms

A paper submitted for presentation at ACPID Bond 27 November 2009

David A Robinson
Bond University

Abstract

Principle Topic

Just as personality disorders afflict individuals, so too can they apply to firms. This paper
examines psychological theory relating to the three clusters of personality disorder and
integrates it with the development of firms. The purpose is to point out pitfalls that
constrain the firm from achieving optimal growth and performance and to provide
guidelines to ensure organizational wellness through the growth stages of entrepreneurial
firms.

Method

This conceptual paper brings together the fields of personality psychology and
organizational behaviour to create a road map that depicts the development journey of
individuals and firms. It relates common personality disorders in individuals to problems
encountered in firms as they transition across six developmental steps. Mal-alignment of
practices, over-reliance on the negative manifestations of each step, and/or an inability to
advance up the steps, if unchecked, may become endemic to the firm. Firms that suffer
from such ‘personality disorders’ have a lower propensity for growth. The paper defines
three clusters of firm disorders, which correspond to the established clusters of individual
personality disorders, and also guidelines to ensure firm wellness.

Implications

1
Entrepreneurial firms typically seek to transition quickly through the infant and
adolescent stages of growth to reach prime ahead of competitors. To do effectively they
should guard against personality disorders associated with inconsistent practices, negative
traits and arrested development.

Introduction

Just as personality disorders afflict individuals, so too can they apply to firms. This paper
examines psychological theory relating to the three clusters of personality disorder and
that about the normal development of firms. The purpose is to point out pitfalls that
constrain the firm from achieving optimal growth and performance and to provide
guidelines to ensure organizational wellness through the growth stages of entrepreneurial
firms. It brings together the fields of personality psychology and organizational behaviour
to create a road map that depicts the development journey of individuals and firms. It
relates common personality disorders in individuals to problems encountered in firms as
they transition across six developmental steps. Mal-alignment of practices, over-reliance
on the negative manifestations of each step, and/or an inability to advance up the steps, if
unchecked, may become endemic to the firm. Firms that suffer from such ‘personality
disorders’ have a lower propensity for growth. The paper defines three clusters of firm
disorders, which correspond to the established clusters of individual personality disorders,
and also guidelines to ensure firm wellness.

Literature

Disorders of personality consist of “configurations of traits considered socially

undesirable” (Funder, 2007: 589), and have been defined as “a class of disorders marked
by extreme, inflexible personality traits that cause subjective distress or impaired social
and occupational functioning” (Weiten, 2008:580). Personality disorders in individuals
have been grouped by the DSM (diagnostic and statistical manual). There are believed to

2
be overlaps in the categories, so the notion of clusters is more convenient than clear-cut
(Morey, 1988).

Cluster A comprises the so-called mad disorders, characterized by odd, eccentric or

dysfunctional patterns of thinking. These include paranoid, schizoid, and schizotypal
personality disorders. Paranoid refers to suspiciousness and mistrust of others’ motives,
while seeing self as blameless. Schizoid includes the lack of desire and inability to form
attachments to others, with a preference for being alone, leading to impaired social
relationships. Schizotypal includes eccentricity, with reduced capacity for close
interpersonal relationships.

Cluster B comprises the so-called bad disorders, characterized by impulsive or dramatic

patterns of behaviour, specifically histrionics, narcissism, antisocial, and borderline
personality disorder. Histrionic refers to excessive attention-seeking, theatrical,
provocative, and seductive behaviour. Narcissistic includes self-promoting, grandiose or
self-absorbed behaviour with a corresponding lack of empathy. Antisocial behaviour
comprises deceitfulness, shameless manipulation of or disregard for others, the violation
of others rights, and is associated with a lack of moral development or conscience.
Borderline is characterized by impulsiveness, boredom, instability in interpersonal
relationships, affect and self-image, with attempts at self-mutilation or suicide.

Cluster C comprises the so-called sad disorders characterized by dysfunctional anxious or

fearful emotional processes. These include the dependent, avoidant, and obsessive-
compulsive personality disorders. Avoidant emotional processes include extreme shyness,
social inhibition and hypersensitivity to negative evaluation. Dependent emotional
processes include indecisiveness, submissiveness, reluctance to disagree with others for
fear of rejection. Obsessive-compulsive emotional processes include exaggerated
conscientiousness, overt perfectionism, lack of warmth, and inability to relax. In business
these may translate to an over-concern with rules and detail, perfectionism, workaholism,
inflexibility, reluctance to delegate, miserliness, and stubborn rigidity (Funder, 2007),
resulting in work being done slowly, though thoroughly.

3
Table 1 shows the classification of personality disorders in individuals.

*** place Table 1 about here ***

4
 Cluster A B C

Main affect Thinking Behaviour Emotion

Eccentric Erratic Avoidant
Symptoms Suspicious Impulsive Dependent
Dysfunctional Dramatic Obsessive-
Compulsive
Abbreviated label MAD BAD SAD

Table 1: Personality Disorders in Individuals

Personality disorders may be diagnosed in four ways: clinical impression, self-report

scales, structured interviews, and informant reports. Accurate diagnosis requires multiple
sources of information. Despite an elaborate system of classification, known as the
diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM), there remain no clear-cut diagnostic tools for
personality disorder. The DSM is criticized for labelling without explaining, by those
who associate pathologizing with negative psychology. By contrast, the positive
psychology movement (Gable and Haidt, 2005) seeks to focus on promoting meaningful
and pleasurable ways of living, including positive individual traits and positive
organizations rather than the treatment of disorders. According to Seligman and
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000: 5), ‘pathologies arise when life is barren and meaningless’.

There appears to be general consensus that personality disorders originate in childhood,

although full-blown symptoms may only appear in adolescence or early adulthood. This
would appear to hold significance for the field of entrepreneurship, as there are parallels
between business venture creation/growth/maturity and the transition from child to adult
in individuals.

Researchers have concluded that the foundations of personality variations are to be found
in five dimensions. Known as The Big Five (McRae and Costa, 2003), these include

5
extraversion (also known as positive emotionality), neuroticism (also referred to as
negative emotionality), agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience.

According to the big five theory, a range of normality exists within each of these that
approximates the mean between the two extremes. In Aristotelian philosophy, the
extremes are depicted as one of excess and one of deficiency, which appears a convenient
way to categorize some of the common personality disorders. For example, excessive
extraversion is associated with histrionics, while deficient extroversion / excessive
introversion is more akin to avoidant and schizoid disorders.

***place Table 2 about here ***

6
Personality Disorder The Big Five Traits

Conscientious
Extraversion
Neuroticism

Experience
Agreeable

Open to
Schizotypal high low high
MAD

Schizoid low low

Paranoid high low
Histrionic high high high high
Narcissistic high low high high
BAD

Antisocial high high low low

Borderline high low low
Dependent high high
Avoidant high low
SAD

Obsessive- high low high low

Compulsive

Table 2: The Ten Principle Personality Disorders in terms of The Big Five Traits of
Personality (Widiger, et. al., 1994: 90)

Table 2 shows the relationship between the ten principle personality disorders and the
‘Big Five’ traits of personality. Blanks in the table indicate that no association has been
found to exist between that trait and the disorder.
It can be seen that while most sufferers of personality disorder are high in neuroticism,
there are specific variations in the other four traits. Extraversion, for example is low for
the ‘MAD” cluster but high for the ‘BAD’ cluster. Even the clusters contain variations.
Within the ‘SAD’ cluster, for instance, dependent disorder scores high on agreeableness,
while obsessive-compulsive scores low.

7
Though this may be too crude a way to classify personality disorders in individuals, it
may be helpful in an attempt to explain personality disorders in firms.

The development of firms has been depicted as a Values Journey (Robinson, 2008)
consisting of in three phases, each having an expressive and submissive track (see figure
3). The way a firm, as a collection of the individuals comprising it, thinks feels and
behaves is referred to as its culture, which it lives out through its day to day practices.
When firms employ day-to-day practices that correspond to those commonly associated
with their particular phase of development, i.e. congruence exists between what is done
and what is effective, they may be said to be normal. Firms that fail to consistently apply
managerial practices that fall within the normal range, or are incongruent with the
requirements for effectiveness in business, however, may be said to be suffering from
personality disorders. For example, a firm that over-emphasizes profits (at all cost, i.e.
while ignoring moral conscience and/or neglecting to give sufficient resources to
sustainability). The firm’s culture could be seen as excessively mercenary, or obsessive-
compulsive in a monetary sense. But, simply identifying problems that could occur in
firms and finding labels for them is not the aim of this paper. Here I am seeking a more
positive psychological contribution by proposing a way of ensuring that the firm remains
‘on track’, so to speak, during its various developmental phases. To that end the Values
Journey appears an appropriate model against which to explore what might ensue in firms
whose critical mass strays from the track or becomes stuck in a value station that is no
longer appropriate.

***place figure 1 here***

8
 Figure 1: The business lifecycle

A typical business lifecycle is depicted in figure 1, where the left hand side refers to a
firm’s growth curve, and the right hand side to its decline. Interestingly, just as with
people, the ailments that accentuate a firm’s decline on the right may arguably originate
during its growth phases on the left. Some typical disorders that commonly occur in firms
are: profits at all cost; erratic styles of management, as evidenced by lack of focus, too
many projects, too much change/insecurity, instability; resistance-to-change or arrested
development. On a more positive note, organizational wellness (or lack of disorder) is
characterized by engaged and empowered staff, timely and open communication, a
sustainable work ethic, and continuous improvement.

Psychology has provided various theoretical models that explain personal development,
specifically: Beck and Cowan (1995), Maslow (1954), Kohlberg (1958), McCleland
(1961), Covey (1990), Egan (1997), Piaget (1965) and Alderfer (1969), Rotter (1996).

9
Beck & Cowan developed a continual growth model using value stations (building on
Graves’ 1970 theory on levels of human existence). This forms the foundation of
Robinson’s (1998) Personal and Corporate Values Journey Chart.

The classic motivation theory, Maslow’s (1954) Hierarchy of Needs, illustrates a seminal
five step personal development path starting from the essential physiological needs to the
pinnacle of self-actualization. Robinson’s chart is not an alternative to Maslow’s
Hierarchy; indeed it implies that such a hierarchy of needs exists within each of the
identified value stations. Kohlberg’s (1958) Stages of Moral Development dovetail
perfectly with the value stations of the chart. Kohlberg’s stages 1& 2 equate to the
submissive (purple) and egocentric (red) stations of the Values Journey, where people
have to learn the rules of society to advance; his stages three and four equate to duty-
compliance (blue) where rules are enforced for long-term stability and safety; and his
stage five is equivalent to the success-striving (orange) station of the Values Journey. The
sixth stage looks at the ‘big picture’ requiring a substantially more relativistic worldview,
thus approximating the harmony-seeking (green) and synergy-seeking (yellow) stations
of Robinson’s (1998) values chart.

Kohlberg’s phases also allude to the notion of ‘leaps in understanding’ as one develops.
These are included in the Values Journey chart, represented by the two divides, namely
ethical and holistic, representing second order change or paradigm shifts in understanding
and coping. Similarly, early cognitive development work by Piaget (1965) likewise
supports the levels of thinking. Egan’s (1997) work on natural mind development follows
a similar linear approach to cognitive growth, which supports the axis of rational conduct.
Rotter’s (1996) locus of control distinction differentiates the expressive and submissive
value stations. This is known as the dependency ravine. The chart also includes Covey’s
(1990) three stages of personal development, namely dependency, independency, and
interdependency. Alderfer (1969) recognised that humans may simultaneously have, and
indeed move between, successive need levels. Figure 2 shows a typical development path
according to theories of development by various psychologists.

10
 Figure 2: Healthy Development Path in Individuals

As in people, the development path to a healthy, functionally mature, sustainable firm

may be viewed as a step-wise journey, where each step is intended, alternately, toward
greater autonomy or responsibility. Firms develop one step at a time across ten
dimensions of maturity. These are: The people they choose to employ; their approach to
employee development; the way they ensure performance; the way they give recognition
and reward; the way people may earn a promotion; the style of management; how the
work is structured; the way they communicate within the firm; how they solve problems;
what they view as worthwhile opportunities.

In the way a firm ensures employee performance, for example, the stepwise journey
follows roughly the following path:
Step 1: Close supervision of small groups and a helping hand when needed
Step 2: Heavy-handed control of individuals who might otherwise cheat or manipulate
things
Step 3: Implementing the standard company review procedure
Step 4: Agreeing on performance goals and expecting achievement
Step 5: Interacting with team members as equals and resolving issues by consensus
Step 6: Allowing each to use their creative talents to advance the firm

11
In similar fashion, the six steps are defined for each of the ten dimensions. Notably, each
step both supersedes and builds upon the previous, so no steps can be skipped. Figure 3
shows the Values Journey as a stepwise progression. The steps are labelled as follows: 1.
safe-bonding; 2. power-seeking; 3. duty-compliant; 4. success-striving; 5. peace-loving; 6.
synergy-building.

****place figure 3 here***

Figure 3: The Values Journey as a step-wise progression

At the most basic level (bottom left, purple), individuals possess low levels of responsible
citizenship and lack autonomy, thus seeking safe-bonding. Naturally, the leadership
priorities at this level are survival and care oriented. Across the dependency ravine, exists
the power-seeking, ‘dog eat dog’ type culture (top left, red), typified by egocentric
aggression. Residents of this values station enjoy a higher level of autonomy, yet have

12
not advanced in responsibility. They will commonly exhibit a high need for power, as
first identified by McCleland (1961) and the leadership imperative here is to lead by
example and show strength of character. One step to the right is where social mores begin
to emerge (middle bottom, blue). Residents of this value station are duty-compliant and it
is common for them to display absolute respect for procedure and authority. Leadership
at this level entails formal and centralized control and is thus authoritarian and procedural.
The next value station, a step in the direction of increased autonomy, is characterised by
the intense drive for success, usually manifesting as materialism and affluence (middle
top, orange). Residents display a high need for achievement (after McCleland, 1961). It
demands a corresponding leadership style, i.e. goal-directed leadership.

More systemic thinking emerges beyond the holism divide, where peace and harmony are
the ideals sought (bottom right, green). Residents display a high need for affiliation (after
McCleland, 1961) and this tends to generate accommodative behaviour in followers.
Leaders are therefore expected to play a facilitative role. It is at this station that
Greenleaf’s (1977) servant leadership, with its emphasis is on collaboration, trust,
empathy, and the ethical use of influence, is best suited. Finally the sixth and ultimate
value station represents inter-dependency (top right, yellow). Here, leadership is about
recognizing and harnessing individual strengths, at whatever level of development or
station, and requires the ability to integrate and synergise.

Figure 4 illustrates the six value stations (rows) and the corresponding dimensions
(columns).

*** place Figure 4 about here ***

13
 Figure 4: Consistency within value stations

Each row in figure 4 represents a step in the values journey. As can be seen, a firm
wishing to create or maintain a progressive-type culture (level 4, success-striving, on the
values journey steps) that is results-oriented should seek to encourage entrepreneurial
processes within an active hierarchical structure. Typical employees will be self-
expressive, rational, achievist and materialistic. The firm should take care to discourage
manipulative behaviours.

The notion of a six-step developmental process makes it possible to consider the

alignment of the dimensions at each step. If, for example, the firm used step 4 practices to
select the people it employed, but then attempted to reward or manage them according to
step 3 practices, the firm would be ‘out of alignment’. Figure 4 can be used as a guide to
the degree of alignment. The extent to which a firm gets itself ‘out of alignment’ is a

14
possible measure of its disorder. A firm that then chooses to remain ‘out of alignment’
perpetuates erratic behaviours, thereby displaying the symptoms of a personality disorder.

Furthermore, each step is characterized by positive and negative attributes in each of the
ten dimensions. For example, a step 4 firm that adopts the appropriate performance
management practice, i.e. Agree on performance goals and expecting achievement, but
forces or manipulates the agreement and measurements relating to goal achievement (to
pay less commission, or whatever), would be practicing step 4 in the negative.

In addition, as a firm’s culture may be seen as the aggregate of individuals’ personalities,

every firm tends to adopt an internal way of working that relates to the critical mass of
thinking, emotions and behaviours. Table 3 shows how the firm’s Big Five profile will
tend to change as it develops along the values journey.
*** Place Table 3 about here ***

The Six Stages of Firm Development

5. Harmonious
Power-seeking
1. Submissive

2. Aggressive

The Big Five Traits

6. Integrative
4. Success-
Compliant
3. Duty-

Striving

Neuroticism X X X

Extraversion X X X

Agreeableness X X X X

Conscientiousness X X X X

15
 Openness X X X

Table 3: The Likely Prevalence of the Big Five Personality Traits at Various Stages of
Firm Development

Table 3 shows that the higher level stages in a firm’s development are dominated by
conscientiousness, openness and agreeableness; neuroticism is associated with low end
stages of development; and extraversion aligns only with the three expressive stations.

Implications for Management

There appears to be three origins of personality disorder in firms. The first is when the
firm exhibits only the negative traits of its value station, rather than the positive. Let us
refer to these ‘dysfunctional’ firms as type A. Another is where the firm advances in most
dimensions but remains trapped in, or inappropriately connected to, lower stations in
some. The firm is thus inconsistent in its day-to-day practices and thereby creates a
confused culture. Let us call these firms type B. The third is where the firm suffers from
‘arrested development’, being incapable of advancing along the values journey, becoming
stuck at the low level value stations. This mainly applies to those unable to develop
beyond safe-bonding and power-seeking, and includes an inappropriate over-reliance on
duty-compliance too. Because such firms know no better, they do not recognize
themselves as being stuck. In a sense they are incapable of seeing beyond their current
stage of development. Let us call them type C. Table 4 shows this classification of
personality disorders in firms, with their corresponding symptoms.

*** place Table 4 about here ***

Type A B C

Cause Negative Traits of Inconsistent Arrested

16
 Value Station Practices Development

Stressed Erratic Avoidant

Symptoms Dysfunctional Confused Dependent
Self-destructive Dissonant Obsessive-
Compulsive
Abbreviated label MAD BAD SAD

Table 4: Personality Disorders in Firms

It appears that Table 1 and Table 4 contain uncanny similarities.

Because of these we can apply similar cluster abbreviations for personality disorders in
individuals to firms. Thus, a mad firm would be one where the dominant day-to-day
practices are experienced as negative manifestations of its stage in the values journey; a
bad firm would be one in which the day-to-day practices are inconsistent, leading to
erratic behaviour. A sad firm would be one suffering from immature emotional responses.
Table 5 relates the common personality disorders to the development stages of a firm.

Personality Disorder The Six Stages of Firm Development

5. Harmonious
Power-seeking
1. Submissive

2. Aggressive

6. Integrative
4. Success-
Compliant
3. Duty-

Striving

Schizotypal X
MAD

Schizoid X
Paranoid X
Histrionic XX X
Narcissistic X XX
BAD

Antisocial X X
Borderline X
Dependent X X
SAD

Avoidant X X

17
 Obsessive- XX
Compulsive

Table 5: Common Personality Disorders Related to Firm Stage of Development

Table 5 depicts the stages of development at which firms are most likely to be prone to
personality disorders should unhealthy workplace practices be allowed to prevail. It can
be seen that the ‘BAD’ cluster mainly afflicts firms in the aggressive ‘power-seeking’
and progressive ‘success-striving’ stages, while the ‘SAD’ cluster is more closely
associated with the ‘submissive’ and ‘duty-compliant’ stages. The table also depicts an
apparent lack of pathologies in the ‘harmonious’ and ‘integrative’ mature stages of the
firm.

So how may a developing firm avoid becoming sad, bad or mad and advance to a level of
optimal effectiveness or organizational wellness?

Research has shown that there is no sharp dividing line between normality and
abnormality in individuals (Clark & Watson, 1999; Furr & Funder, 1998; Krueger &
Tackett, 2003; O’Connor, 2002), so it appears to be for the firm. Indeed, Oldham and
Morris (1995) suggest that even exaggerated positive personality attributes, for example
self-confidence or vigilant, can be mistaken as disorders (narcissistic, paranoid,
respectively). Furthermore, having a mild degree of one characteristic cannot be taken to
imply pathology. Nevertheless, recurring symptoms that constrain the firm’s progress or
effectiveness demand attention. As prevention is almost always better than cure, the way
to ensure organizational wellness (lack of personality disorder in the firm) is to ensure
that the firm develops its day-to-day practices with appropriate thinking patterns,
behaviours and emotional responses.

To be free from type A disorders, managers must ensure that the firm is managed
predominantly in the positive aspects of the appropriate value station. For example, at
level 4, rather than manipulate they should negotiate; at level 3, instead of stubbornly

18
imposing a set of policies, they should communicate the logic underlying them, thereby
negating mistrust or suspicion.

To be free from type B disorders, managers must ensure that its day-to-day practices are
experienced as indicative of the appropriate value station. For example, a firm at level 4
on the values journey, namely duty-compliance, should be careful to manage all ten
dimensions of its culture in ways that are seen to correspond with step 4.

To be free from type C disorders, a firm that has reached the success-striving value
station should be free of practices associated with the submissive and power-seeking
stations, and be skilful in only utilizing those from the duty-compliant value station to the
extent that they support success-striving. Should the firm persist in carrying inappropriate
thinking patterns, behaviours, or emotional responses with it along its journey, it may be
said to have formed a type C personality disorder.

Table 6 shows some of the do’s and don’ts for firms at the duty-compliant, success-
striving and synergy-seeking steps in the values journey, respectively.

***place Table 6 about here ***

Duty-Compliant Success-Striving Synergy-Seeking

[level 3] [level 4] [level 6]
Do Don’t Do Don’t Do Don’t
Reward Single out Encourage Treat Allow staff to Enforce
loyalty individuals career everyone use their constraints
advancement as equal competencies
Standard Expect Cite Demand
operator change Negotiate inflexible Be flexible compliant
manuals initiatives policies behaviour
Pay by Show Link reward to Expect Allow social Show bias
seniority favourites results loyalty interaction

Table 6: Some Do’s and Don’ts to Avoid Personality Disorders in Firms

19
As it is impractical to mention every aspect of each dimension of culture for each of the
six levels, the following guidelines are proposed to ensure that the firm’s practices remain
in alignment as it embarks on its stepwise journey to maturity:

1. Development of a corporate vision

There must be a clearly articulated vision for the overall organization, is consistent with
the appropriate identifiable value station. For example, if the company that includes in its
corporate vision statement that it strives to become the market leader, then it is placing
itself, aspirationally, at the success-striving station. By so doing it raises the bar, so to
speak, for all day-to-day practices to be aligned with success-striving.

2. Assessment of adherence to the vision

Management needs to take stock of how the firm’s practices currently measures up to
those implied in the vision. For example, to what extent is the concept of ‘market
leadership’ understood and regarded as a driving force.

3. Articulation of values

Appropriate organizational values should be developed to create a sense of holism

throughout the organization. This is best illustrated by the case where sales employees
request remuneration based on performance, rather than straight salaries, resulting in a
stand-off between policy-wielding financial controllers and results-eager sales directors.

4. Ongoing development

Managers across all levels and functional areas may require assistance through
education/training in order to adjust their respective thinking paradigm and leadership
styles For example, financial controllers might need to be re-orientated toward seeing
their primary role as the supporters of orderly change that enables the company to be
demand hungry and sales-led.

5. Monitoring

20
Expectations and performance measures should be identifiably congruent with the value
station that is relevant to that level and function. An important element in all of this is the
feedback loop, whereby leaders themselves may assess the effectiveness with which they
are achieving congruency. Ultimately, that will enable the custodians of the organization
to continually adjust the degree of emphasis placed on the vision and the values necessary
to lead the firm along its developmental journey.

Conclusion

Personality disorders in individuals present as inappropriate thinking patterns, behaviours

and emotional responses. The same may be true for firms in which day-to-day practices
are mal-aligned and incongruent with their phase of development. A firm’s journey to
maturity entails six steps, each relying on the alignment of ten dimensions. Personality
disorders occur when the firm harbours practices from the first two steps, thereby limiting
its effective transition. The way to prevent personality disorder in the firm (organizational
wellness) is to have a clearly articulated aspirational vision for the firm’s future, and then
constantly monitor the firm’s practices to ensure that they adhere to the articulated values
and apply corrective measures as and when needed to maintain congruency and
consistency.

21
References

Alderfer, C. P. 1969, ‘An empirical test of a new theory of human needs’, Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance. May: 142-175.

Beck, D. E. & Cowan, C. C. 1996. Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership, and
Change. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Clark, L. A. & Watson, D. 1999. Personality, disorder, and personality disorder: Toward
a more rational conceptualization. Journal of Personality Disorders, 13: 142-151

Covey, S. R. 1990. An inside-out approach, Journal, vol. 7(10):3-4.

Egan, K. 1997. The educated mind: How cognitive tools shape our understanding.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Funder, D. C. 2007. The Personality Puzzle. New York: Norton.

Gable, S. L. & Haidt, J. 2005. What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of
General Psychology, 9: 103-110.

Furr, R. M. & Funder, D. C. 1998. A multi-modal analysis of personal negativity. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 74: 1580-1591.

Kohlberg, L. 1958. in Crain, W. C. 1985. Kohlberg's Moral Stages. Theories of

Development. 118-136. Prentice-Hall.

Kohlberg, L. (1973). The claim to moral adequacy of a highest stage of moral judgment.
The Journal of Philosophy. Available online:
http://www.vtaide.com/blessing/Kohlberg.htm

Krueger, J. I. & Tackett, J. L. 2003. Personality and psychopathology: Working toward

the bigger picture. Journal of Personality Disorders, 17: 109-128.

Maslow, A. 1954. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper & Row.

McClelland, D. C. 1961. The Achieving Society. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. 2003. Personality in Adulthood: A five factor theory
perspective. New York: Guilford.

Morey, L. C. 1988. Personality disorders in DSM-III and DSM-III-R: Convergence,

coverage, and internal consistency. American Journal of Psychiatry, 145: 573-577

O’Connor, B. P. 2002. The search for dimensional structure differences between

normality and abnormality: A statistical review of published data on personality
and psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 4: 962-
982.

22
 Oldham, J. M. & Morris, L. B. 1995. The New Personality Self-portrait. New York:
Bantam.

Piaget, J. 1965, The Moral Judgement of the Child. New York: Free Press.

Robinson, D. A. 1998. The Personal and Corporate Values Journey. Chart. Port
Elizabeth: PSI

Robinson, D. A. 2002. A phenomenological study of how entrepreneurs experience and

deal with ethical dilemmas. PhD thesis. Grahamstown: Rhodes University.

Robinson, D. A., Goleby, M, & Hosgood, N. 2007. Entrepreneurship as a values and

leadership paradigm. Conference proceedings: AGSE International
Entrepreneurship Research Exchange. Brisbane: QUT.

Robinson, D. A. & Harvey, M. 2008. Global leadership in a culturally diverse world.

Management Decision, Vol 46, Issue 3: 466-480.

Rotter, J. 1966. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of

reinforcements. Psychological Monographs, Whole No. 609:80.

Seligman, M. E. P. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. 2000. Positive psychology: An introduction.

American Psychologist, 55: 5-14.

Weiten, W. 2007. Psychology Themes and Varaitions. Belmont, CA, USA: Thomson
Wadsworth.

Widiger, T. A., Trull, T, J., Clarkin, J. F., Sanderson, C. & Costa, P. T. Jr. 1994. A
description of the DSM-III-R and DSM-IV personality disorders with the five-
factor model of personality. In P. T. Costa, Jr. & T. A. Widiger (Eds.),
Personality Disorders and the Five-factor Model of Personality. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association: 41-56.

23

View publication stats