The Big Five Trait Managers Consistently Mistake for Talent, and the One They Overlook

Walk into any office and you'll likely see a manager praising a specific type of person for their talent. Managers tend to reward outwardly confident people who enthusiastically seize new challenges and speak up; the stereotypical leader, go-getter or team multiplier. It's a profile that maps neatly onto one Big Five trait: Extraversion. 

These traits can be genuinely valuable on a team, of course. But do they equal talent? What is talent anyway? And if managers are using Extraversion as a shorthand for it, who are they overlooking?

Extraversion, the Favorite Trait of Corporate America 

Decades of research shows the managerial bias toward trait Extraversion. Quite simply, possessing high levels of Extraversion makes it easier to rise through the ranks.

In one meta-analysis on leadership emergence, researchers found that Extraversion is the most consistent predictor of whether people emerge as leaders in groups. 

Another study found that Extraverted behavior is closely tied to how people perceive leadership. In a group experiment involving 601 participants, some were asked to act Introverted or Extraverted regardless of their natural style. People who acted Extraverted were rated as having more leadership potential, even when they were naturally Introverted. 

Some research even suggests that Extraverted employees are more likely to receive promotions, and much of that advantage traces back to the person having stronger relationships with managers, separate from their actual performance. Read that again. They aren’t promoted for their skills or talent, but for the impression they leave on the people signing off on the promotion. 

The Nuance Behind the Extraversion Advantage

Societal expectations explain part of why Extraverts get ahead. It’s taken as read that a top performer is sociable, confident and assertive, and it’s assumed that they are effective because of these traits. 

But when we drill into the research, the link between Extraversion and effectiveness doesn't hold.

One research article, “Inclined but Less Skilled? Disentangling Extraversion, Communication Skill, and Leadership Emergence,” found that communication skill is actually a better predictor of who emerges as a leader than Extraversion itself. Being Extraverted might make someone a warmer or more gregarious communicator, but that’s not the same as being an effective communicator. Introverts tend to talk less and listen more, and several studies link active listening directly to how trustworthy and effective a communicator is perceived to be, particularly in leadership roles. 

The most cited piece of research here is 2011’s “Reversing the Extraverted Leadership Advantage.” Researchers found that Extraverted leaders got better results from passive teams, but with proactive, idea-driven employees, Introverted leaders produced higher profits. The theory? Extraverted leaders tend to dominate the room and are less receptive to other people's initiative, while Introverted leaders create more space for others to contribute, and are more likely to absorb what's said back to them.

As to whether Extraversion provides a genuine workplace advantage, a 2019 review of 97 meta-analyses found that it does, but the benefits are modest and uneven. Extraversion showed an overall positive association with workplace outcomes, but the average effect was very small, representing only a marginal boost across performance metrics that may or may not trace back to Extraverted traits specifically.

All this to say, while Extraversion can provide advantages at work, being an Extravert is not, on its own, an indicator of talent or higher workplace performance above other personality traits.

Conscientiousness: The True Indicator of Workplace Performance 

Across several studies, the trait that actually predicts workplace performance is not Extraversion, but Conscientiousness. When researchers compare all of the Big Five traits, Conscientiousness repeatedly emerges as the leading predictor of job performance and success.

In their landmark 1991 meta-analysis, Murray Barrick and Michael Mount examined the relationship between the Big Five traits and job performance across three performance criteria and five occupational groups. Conscientiousness was the only trait to consistently show a positive correlation across every category. While Extraversion was a meaningful performance predictor for managers and salespeople, it didn’t predict job performance in other occupations.

A 2022 synthesis by psychologists Ethan Zell and Tara L. Lesick pulled together 54 meta-analyses covering more than 550,000 participants, and found that Conscientiousness had the highest correlation with job performance of any Big Five trait. Interestingly, Openness came next, followed by Extraversion and Agreeableness, which scored about the same as each other. So not only did Conscientiousness come out on top, Extraversion only received third place. That detail is worth sitting with, given how much workplace credit Extraverts tend to get.

Should We Be Rethinking What Talent Looks Like? 

Given that Conscientiousness tracks so closely with performance, the image most managers default to when they picture “talent” might need an update. Quick wit and a magnetic presence in the room are one version of it. Follow-through, organization, goal-setting and a sense of personal responsibility are another version that gets an employee to the desired result: work that consistently gets done well. People with high Conscientiousness in the Big Five share several sub-traits that make them workplace powerhouses, including: 

• Strong self-discipline.
• A methodical, organized work style.
• An internal drive and ambition to reach high standards. 
• Trust in their own ability to handle work effectively. 
• A strong sense of moral responsibility and obligation.
• The willpower to push through boredom or distractions.

• The habit of thinking carefully before taking action. 

Ironically, Conscientious workers may fade into the background. They may or may not join in spontaneous office banter—that depends on their other traits—and they probably won’t volunteer for risky assignments that haven’t been scoped out yet. Their contributions consist of consistency and follow-through, and they’re talented at risk analysis. They pay more attention to details without losing sight of the bigger picture. These traits are highly beneficial, but they are low key and not exactly glamorous.

Ultimately, this is a call for managers to look beyond the employees who command the room to see where else talent may be hiding. As you consider your next round of performance reviews, it’s worth asking:

• Who do I see consistently following through?
• Who finds problems in the workflow before they get bigger?
• Who works well independently? 
• Who is finishing nearly every goal they set?
• Who is bringing a reliable, organized structure to the team?
• Who is always prepared for meetings and team events?
• Who is learning from their mistakes?
• Who do I see demonstrating leadership behavior, even if that isn’t through social dominance?

None of this diminishes what Extraverts bring to a team. It simply means talent has more than one shape, and widening that definition pays off in practical ways. Managers get a deeper bench for every promotion and stretch assignment. Employees who show up prepared and consistently get results have those skills named as talent, and that gives them a reason to stay rather than watch louder colleagues get credit for less. It also changes the shape of the team itself: Conscientious and Extraverted employees tend to cover different ground, so a team with both is better equipped than one built around a single profile. 

Organizations often complain about talent shortages, but the research suggests that talent was never in short supply. Managers have just been looking for one version of it. It’s time to look for the rest.