Your future now!
  • English
  • Bosanski
  • Türkçe

COMPARISON OF OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE IN MANAGERS AND NON-MANAGERS EMPLOYED AT MEAT INDUSTRY ‘OVAKO’ VISOKO, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

TitleCOMPARISON OF OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE IN MANAGERS AND NON-MANAGERS EMPLOYED AT MEAT INDUSTRY ‘OVAKO’ VISOKO, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2018
JournalEconomic Review – Journal of Economics and Business
Volume16
Issue2
Number of Volumes16
Start Page63
Pagination63-74
Date PublishedNovember, 2018
PublisherEconomic Faculty University of Tuzla (UNTZ)
Place PublishedTuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH)
Type of ArticleReview
ISSN NumberISSN 2303-680X (Online)
KeywordsFive Factor Model, managers/employees., meat industry OVAKO, openness to experience, Visoko
Abstract

ABSTRACT
This primary research was conducted in order
to find out what was the level of managers’ and
employees’ openness to experience. In addition
to this, this research will try to answer the
question as to; are there any differences between
the managers and non-managers or employees
of a certain industry, in terms of openness to
experience. It additionally covers the enduring
characteristics, in other words, the big five
personality traits, where Openness to Experience
is to be one of those traits and the main emphasis
is placed particularly on it. This research project is
based on extensive literature review and previous
works related to the openness to experience.
Quantitative research design was applied with
cross-sectional time frame at the end of Summer
and beginning of Fall, 2015. The original-primary
research has been conducted at the meat industry
OVAKO, one part of AKOVA Impex. Quantitative
survey instrument originally developed by
Oregon Research Institute was adopted as a basis
and was modified to meet statistical criteria
for this research. Selection process was simple
random sampling, which means that every
single individual had the equal opportunity to
be selected. Survey questions were distributed to
200 participants. From the sampling frame, 130
participants formed sample and the rest of 70
questionnaires were not completely filled out. The
study found out that there was no statistically
significant difference between the managers and
non-managers in terms of openness to experience
at meat industry OVAKO, Visoko.

Key words: openness to experience, meat
industry OVAKO, Visoko, Five Factor Model,
managers/employees.

JEL: M12, M54.

URLhttp://ef.untz.ba/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/09-EKONOMSKA-REVIJA-Vol.-XVI-Issue-2-pp.-63-74.pdf
Refereed DesignationRefereed
Full Text

Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018 63
Comparison of openness to experience in managers and non-managers employed at meat industry ‘Ovako’...
COMPARISON OF OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE IN MANAGERS
AND NON-MANAGERS EMPLOYED AT MEAT INDUSTRY ‘OVAKO’ VISOKO,
BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
Goran Riđić1, Minela Ahmić2, Ognjen Riđić3, Senad Bušatlić4
1 Faculty of Business Administration (FBA), International University of Sarajevo (IUS); E-Mail: gridic@ius.edu.ba,
2 Faculty of Business Administration (FBA), International University of Sarajevo (IUS); E-Mail: minelaahmic57@gmail.com,
3 Faculty of Business Administration (FBA), International University of Sarajevo (IUS) E-Mail: oridic@ius.edu.ba,
4 Faculty of Business Administration (FBA), International University of Sarajevo (IUS) E-Mail: sbusatlic@ius.edu.ba
ABSTRACT
This primary research was conducted in order
to find out what was the level of managers’ and
employees’ openness to experience. In addition
to this, this research will try to answer the
question as to; are there any differences between
the managers and non-managers or employees
of a certain industry, in terms of openness to
experience. It additionally covers the enduring
characteristics, in other words, the big five
personality traits, where Openness to Experience
is to be one of those traits and the main emphasis
is placed particularly on it. This research project is
based on extensive literature review and previous
works related to the openness to experience.
Quantitative research design was applied with
cross-sectional time frame at the end of Summer
and beginning of Fall, 2015. The original-primary
research has been conducted at the meat industry
OVAKO, one part of AKOVA Impex. Quantitative
survey instrument originally developed by
Oregon Research Institute was adopted as a basis
and was modified to meet statistical criteria
for this research. Selection process was simple
random sampling, which means that every
single individual had the equal opportunity to
be selected. Survey questions were distributed to
200 participants. From the sampling frame, 130
participants formed sample and the rest of 70
questionnaires were not completely filled out. The
study found out that there was no statistically
significant difference between the managers and
non-managers in terms of openness to experience
at meat industry OVAKO, Visoko.
Key words: openness to experience, meat
industry OVAKO, Visoko, Five Factor Model,
managers/employees.
JEL: M12, M54.
1. INTRODUCTION
This primary quantitative research will
explore the answer whether employees and
managers are open to experience and whether
there is significant difference in the openness
to experience between managers and nonmanagers
at meat industry OVAKO Visoko?
Every person has its own characteristics that
affect the way they think, behave and feel in
particular moment. These characteristics are
called personality traits. Personality traits
are said to be enduring tendencies to feel,
think and act in certain ways (Jones & George
2009). According to these researchers, there
are five big personality traits and those are:
extraversion, negative affectivity, agreeableness,
conscientiousness and openness to experience.
These personality traits may be at the low,
middle and high level. In addition to this, those
managers or employees that are at the low point,
in terms of openness to experience, are not able
to take risks and they are afraid of them. On the
other hand, those with the high level are said
to be very innovative and they like to take risks
in their daily business. One possible answer to
given research question could be that managers
or employers who have high level of openness
to experience started their own business and
became most successful entrepreneurs, such
as: Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos (Jones & George
2009).
According to the Jones & George (2009)
Openness to Experience is the tendency of
business professionals or individuals to be
original, being able to take risks and to be open
to every new challenge that comes toward
them. Those at high levels are mostly risk takers
and innovative persons who like to perform
64 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018
Riđić G., Ahmić M., Riđić O., Bušatlić S.
various tasks and that trait in certain point(s)
of time may be disadvantageous. Openness to
Experience is one of the personality traits that
are discussed in relation with many other issues,
such as: job/organizational performance, close
relationships, distinctive behaviors, and so on.
Researchers made studies in variety of cases
and one of those is the relationship status with
family and marriage, as well. Openness in these
terms refers to the making choices, decisions
and responses to the consequences. There are
many theories that try to answer the question
whether individuals will seek for the same
characteristics in other people (Coan 1972).
Open people want to make close relations with
the open partner(s) because of their similar
nature, while they will make distance from
the close partners because they would find
themselves bored in those kinds of relationships.
The similar issues are present with the close
people, because they do not feel comfortable in
the presence of open individuals. Openness is
not just explored in terms of relationships; it is
also seen through the job performance where
it is said that open to experience employees
strengthen their skills and abilities, while close
to experience individuals face with the decline
of performance which affects their working
environment, their careers and references as
well. Openness to Experience can be expressed
in variety of works and performances and
in many occasions they will find out the way
to show their creativity, emotions, feelings
and observations. According to the Kickul &
Newman, in their work, written in 2000, open to
experience employees are said to be ambitious
and like to take risks and in most of cases
because of these reasons they are in the higher
positions in the companies when compared to
the closed ones. Openness to Experience will be
explained through many issues and examples in
the further parts of this research and as it was
mentioned before, it will try to give the best
possible answer to the research question.
1.1 RESEARCH QUESTION
This research project was concerned with the
research question as to was there statistically
significant difference between the managers
and non-managers in terms of openness to
experience at ‘OVAKO’ meat industry factory in
Visoko?
1.2 RESEARCH AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
In terms of research aims and objectives it can
be stated that the main goal of the project is to
answer the research question which is related to
the comparison of managers and non-managers
in terms of openness to experience, employed
in meat industry ‘OVAKO’ Visoko. Serious
deficiencies have been discovered in researches
regarding the openness to experience in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, and, in addition to this, there
are not so many literary works that could
be used, when it comes to answering that
question. Regarding this, one more aim of the
project is to make base for the deeper research
that should be conducted by the government
and more about this issue could be discussed in
future works. It is a fact that the meat industry
‘OVAKO’ with its main founder AKOVA IMPEX
is one of the leaders in meat production whose
main products are represented by chicken meat
products.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
This primary quantitative survey instrument
based research will be conducted and its
findings will be compared with previous
studies and secondary sources. First part of
the research contains data from the book
‘’Essentials of Contemporary Management’’
written by Gareth Jones & Jennifer George,
in 2009. In this book, the chapter titled ‘’The
Manager as Person’’ investigates how different
personality traits influence organization and
working places. There are five big personality
traits mentioned and one of those, which is
emphasized in the introduction, is openness
to experience. Beside this book, there are
also other books and articles that are talking
about the mentioned topic. There are, in total,
20 articles related to openness to experience
which will be covered in this research (Jones
& George 2009). One of the articles used
as well, titled ‘’Extraversion, Openness and
Conscientiousness’’, was written by Zopiatis
& Constanti, in Leadership & Organization
Developmental Journal, in 2012. This article
is based on findings that studied managers
Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018 65
Comparison of openness to experience in managers and non-managers employed at meat industry ‘Ovako’...
working in the hotel industry. In addition to
this, mentioned article studies association
between five personality traits and leadership
behaviors (Zopiatis & Constanti 2012). The
article ‘’On Openness’’, written by Jason Pontin
in Technology Review, in 2009, discusses
openness as a virtue and how openness to
experience is important in technology and
information technology (IT) world. Managers,
in every working environment, seek to explore
what would be the most advantageous for
company. IT world requires openness to
experience is very important (Pontin 2009).
One of the article that was used in the
literature review for this research is titled
‘’Openness to Experience, intelligence, and
successful ageing’’. This article is written by
Tess Gregory, Ted Netellbeck & Carlene Wilson,
in Science Direct Journal. This article studies
how openness to experience is associated
with memory and everyday’s functioning, in
addition to influencing the successful ageing.
Results of those studies showed that Openness
to Experience is very important for successful
ageing. Key words of this article are openness
to experience, memory, intelligence, everyday
functioning and successful ageing as well
(Gregory, Netellbeck & Wilson 2010).
One of the articles, titled as ‘’Members’
Openness to Experience and Teams’ Creative
Performance’’, in Sage Journals, written by
Marieke C. Schilpzand, David M. Herold &
Christina E. Shalley was very useful in terms of
Openness to Experience. It studies relationship
between team members’ Openness to
Experience and team creativity. Results from
this research showed that those people with
high level openness to experience are the most
creative one but in the case that they have
few members that are low and those that are
at moderate level of openness to experience
(Schilpzand, Herold & Shalley 2011). Article
that was covered for this research project was
titled ‘’The Big Five personality traits, learning
styles, and academic achievement’’ written by
Komarraju et al., in 2011. This article places
emphasis on the Big Five Personality traits
and how do they affect learning outcomes and
behavior, as well as the academic achievement.
Each of those traits is related with certain
points, such that openness to experience is
related with the learning styles and elaborative
processing. These researchers claim that those
people with high level of openness to experience
display a strong intellectual curiosity and
are eager to learn new things (Komaraju
et al. 2011; Gregory, Netellbeck & Wilson
2010; Mohan & Mulla 2013). It is important
to note that previous research of secondary
resources provided highly deficient examples
of similar research being conducted, either,
internally, within Bosnia and Herzegovina or
internationally. Slightly similar studies were
found in the works of Homan, Hollenbeck,
Humphrey, Knippenberg, Ilgen and Van Kleef
(2008) titled “Facing Differences with an Open
Mind: Openness to Experience, Salience of
Intragroup Differences, and Performance of
Diverse Work Groups”.
2.1 OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE
Openness to Experience is one of the big
five personality traits or Five Factor Model
(Digman 1990). There are many explanations
of that term and sometimes it is mixed with the
meaning of interpersonal openness (De Raad
& Van Heck 1994). In this part of research, the
term Openness to Experience will be defined
according to the Big Five Inventory and Revised
NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae
1992) and (Benet-Martinez & John 1998).
According to the Revised Personality Inventory,
Openness to Experience is composed of Fantasy,
Aesthetics, Feelings, Actions, Values and Ideas.
In addition to this, people who have high level of
openness are said to be sensitive to art, beauty,
to be imaginative, liberal in values, flexible
and curios (McCrae & Sutin 2009). In contrast
to the open people, those closed to openness
are uninterested in art, lacking curiosity and
they have traditional values. According to the
psychologists, Openness to Experience is based
on genetics and it is heritable, so in addition to
this, people who are curios, will probably be
imaginative and artistic, as well (Terracciano,
Costa & McCrae 2006). According to the author
who pointed out the main parts of Openness
to Experience, it is very important not to
erroneously mix it with intelligence because
these two terms are sometimes misused
66 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018
Riđić G., Ahmić M., Riđić O., Bušatlić S.
(McCrae 1987). Open to experience people can
express their openness in many different ways,
and, as it was found in some conducted studies,
those people would spend most of their time
in restaurants and coffee shops (Mehl, Gosling
& Pennebaker 2006; Rouse & Haas 2003;
Borkenau 2004).
As it was discussed in previous sections, in the
team performance as well, Openness has its
own advantages and disadvantages. In terms
of disadvantages, it is said that in some cases
Openness may cause problems for the team.
Every group needs to achieve and accomplish
specific goals, so leaders of the group try to
retain the harmony inside the group, but if in the
group there are more open people it would be
impossible because all the time they announce
some new ideas and strategies what for the
leaders make problems and causes misbalance
(Stewart, Fulmer, & Barrick 2005). One of the
negative sides of open people is that they do not
fit into uncreative groups, while the closed ones
do not like to interfere with the outsiders, those
people who they do not consider as their own
(Wilkinson 2007; McCrae & Terracciano 2008).
2.2 MEASURABLE COMPONENTS OF
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE
Every individual is different and unique and
they have distinctive things to which they are
open to. Researchers used one questionnaire
composed of 114 true-false questions related to
the Openness to Experience, in terms of: feelings,
values, ideas and other states of mind. This
conducted research showed that an individual
can be open in one sphere while closed in other,
for instance results showed that women were
open to feelings while men were open to actions.
In addition to this, different factors were used
to measure Openness to Experience and those
are: aesthetic sensitivity versus insensitivity,
unusual perceptions and associations,
openness to theoretical or hypothetical ideas,
constructive utilization of fantasy and dreams,
openness to unconventional views of reality
versus adherence to mundane, material reality,
indulgence in fantasy versus avoidance of
fantasy and deliberate and systematic thought
(Coan 1972). When there is a question about the
measurement of Openness to Experience it is
very hard to find the most competent relations
to the mentioned trait, so researchers in most
of cases use factors to which an individual
is open or close and those are as mentioned
before fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, actions,
ideas and values (McCrae 1993; Botwin, Buss,
& Shackelford 1997; Watson et al. 2004).
In terms of fantasy an individual tries to have
a vivid imagination and active fantasy life,
aesthetics relates to the art and an individual
is emotional to it, as well he or she feels
happiness and unhappiness stronger than
close people. Actions in relation with the
Openness to Experience shows whether a
person will try new and different things, while
values take into consideration social, political
and religious values. Those facets were used
in the questionnaires in order to find out the
best possible explanation and measurement of
Openness to Experience. In some cases it is not
possible to claim that a person is open because
some of the mentioned facets correlate with
each other and observer may misunderstand
the given answer. In addition to this, someone
can easily change the concepts of intelligence
with the Openness to Experience because
highly intelligent people will have innovative
ideas and successful strategies to develop, but
that does not mean that an individual is open to
experience (McCrae & Costa 1997; Heaven et al.
2006; Metsäpelto & Pulkkinen 2003).
Even though these two concepts, Openness
to Experience and intelligence should not be
mixed, there is positive relationship between
these mentioned concepts. Researchers found
out that the possible explanation for this is that
Openness to Experience has a positive effect
on the levels of activity engagement, which
increases brain memory and remains as that
until old ages (Ball et al. 2002). In addition
to the intelligence with the correlation with
Openness to Experience, there is a fact taken
from the studies that most of highly intelligent
individuals scored high levels of Openness
to Experience. Taking this statement into
consideration, researchers claim that intellect
is as well one of the aspects of Openness to
Experience. In contrast to this, individuals who
score low level of Openness to Experience,
are not less intelligent, just their openness
Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018 67
Comparison of openness to experience in managers and non-managers employed at meat industry ‘Ovako’...
is narrowed and they are resistant to change
which reflects at some points negatively on their
performances (Psychometric Success 2013).
2.3 THE MODERATING EFFECTS OF
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE
As stated previously, Openness to Experience
is one of the Big Five Personality Traits and
is related to the variety of multicultural skills
and settings. According to the one of articles,
Openness to Experience is one part of cultural
intelligence and related to four factors of
that intelligence which are metacognitive,
cognitive, motivational and behavioral. Those
researchers claim that Openness to Experience
is very important in the working places
where imagination and innovation is highly
needed. In addition to this, it can be said that
managers’ Openness to Experience is required
personality trait when it comes to the point
of different cultural tasks. Workers who have
high level of Openness to Experience like to
explore new environments, new ideas and
they have metacognitive strategies. They like
to investigate the cultural background of the
workers who have low level of Openness to
Experience. Openness to Experience at some
point may be good and at the same time may
be bad. It all depends on the workers and what
type of team company has. Every company
needs diversity of workers and each of them
should perform its tasks in order for certain
company to operate. (Ang, Van Dyne, & Koh
2006; Gregory, Netellbeck & Wilson 2010;
McCrae 1996, Bell 2007).
It is not just Openness to Experience enough
for employees to be successful because they
like to investigate; they are creative and risk
takers. One of the most important points in the
working places is training and preparation for
the specific tasks, and some of the researchers
took to investigate the relationship between
job training and Openness to Experience.
According to those researchers, personality
traits are very important in determining the
willingness for training and educating. In
addition to this, dimensions of Openness to
Experience in managers can determine who
of them will engage in training and at what
extent that will be advantageous for them. In
the study of relationship between job training
and Openness to Experience, results showed
that if provided training and education is not
constant and high, those who have high level
of Openness to Experience may be bored and
do not find interesting the given education
(Barrick & Mount 1991; Robbins & Judge 2013;
McElroy & Dowd 2007).
On the other side, those who are low on
Openness to Experience they find it very
suitable and easy to perform. In addition to this,
as education increases and gets harder situation
became opposite, those high on Openness
to Experience get chance to be creative and
innovative, and for those at low level it becomes
very uncomfortable because they do not know
how to express themselves in complete manner
and they do not like changes and innovations
(Barrick & Mount 1991). When it comes to the
point of organizations, employers try to find
different types of people and profiles because
of diversity of jobs. It is not possible to have
homogenous team because organizations do
not want that either, so they have to be very
serious when it comes to the employment.
It is said that, diversity can be advantageous
and disadvantageous, in some cases it is very
good to have diversity because there is variety
of opinions and knowledge is on higher level.
In addition to this, companies may gain profit
because team performance can be very good
because of diversity. It is not easy and there is
not exact way in which effects of diversity can
be seen, whether it has positive or negative
impacts. The best way to discuss that is using
the personality traits, and in this research main
focus is on Openness to Experience. People or
managers who have higher level of Openness to
Experience are said to be open to diversity, they
are broad-minded and are not conservative.
Openness to Experience stresses out person’s
willingness to search, explore and find out the
new ideas and experiences (McCrae & Costa
1987; Oh & Berry 2009; Payne, Youngcourt &
Beaubien 2007; Judge et al. 2001).
3. METHODOLOGY, DATA ANALYSIS AND
RESULTS
First section of the methodology describes
the participants, a representative sample that
was questioned for the purpose of research. In
addition to this, there is used population from
Bosnia and Herzegovina while representative
sample were managers and employees in Akova
68 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018
Riđić G., Ahmić M., Riđić O., Bušatlić S.
Group, meat industry ‘OVAKO’ which operates in
the Central-Bosnian town of Visoko. This is the
business sector, which provides customers with
chicken meat products. Selection process was
represented in simple random sampling, which
means that every single individual had the equal
opportunity to be selected. Survey questions
were distributed to 200 participants and 130
participants formed the sample extracted from
the sampling frame. Responses were received
from 130 randomly selected participants, other
70 surveys were not completely filled out and
they were not used in the data processing. Those
participants in already mentioned industry
were not divided into any group based on
particular characteristics. In addition to this,
all participants were treated in the same way.
Representative sample includes 130 participants
who were given a quantitative questionnaire
(survey) instrument with a total of 25 questions.
Questions numbered from “1” to “4” denoted
descriptive statistics’ items, while questions from
5 to 25 represented the inferential statistics.
Those survey questions required answer(s)
on which position in that particular industry
an individual is operating, age and gender.
Other questions are based on Likert’s rating
scale from “1” to “5”, starting with “1” (very
inaccurate) to “5” (very accurate). In terms of
design, the survey instrument represents oneshot
design, which means that participating
group is studied only one time. Advantage
of this design is that it is efficient and results
can be obtained in short period of time but
disadvantage is that this design cannot assess
long term effects. As it was mentioned before,
data collection procedure was questionnaire
composed of 25 questions. Surveys have an
advantage to have a large group of randomly
selected people in purpose of measuring their
attitudes and behaviors. First of all, participants
were given questions with rating scale. In
addition to this, with the received answers
it is possible to see how accurate person is;
in these terms it is manager or employee in
the mentioned company. With these answers,
researcher is able to see what level of Openness
to Experience and innovation is in managers
and non-managers in meat industry ‘OVAKO’,
Visoko. In addition to this, there is a statistical
background to study whether there is difference
in Openness to Experience in managers and
non-managers in meat industry OVAKO, Visoko.
Managers’ Openness to Experience is very
important for their working environment. In
addition to this, there are two variables that are
used in this research. First one is independent
variable and that is the organizational function
or position (managerial vs. non-managerial) a
person is working in the mentioned industry
while dependent variable was the actual degree
of Openness to Experience.
Openness to Experience is one of the Big Five
personality traits and it can be measured as
low, medium and high. Some studies showed
that the managers who possess high level of
Openness to Experience are some of the most
successful people.
It is important to mention that this study had
utilized the following methodological steps:
• Research problem was identified;
• Research questions were formed;
• A literature review of articles and books was
performed to investigate the openness to
experience drivers;
• The sub-topics for the research study were
established based on the results of the
literature review;
• Null and alternate hypothesis were created,
evaluated and finalized;
• Survey questions were created, validated
and modified based on the respondents’
feedback;
• The survey started in June, 2015 and the
completed survey with collected answers was
completed by the beginning of September,
2015;
• The introduction of the survey did explain
the purpose of the given survey and that all
responses were anonymous and confidential
and were used just in purpose of scientific
work. Original English survey provided by
Lewis. R. Goldberg from Oregon Research
Institute was translated to Bosnian language
by certified English translator and then
back-translated into English to assure the
corrected translation (George & Jones 2009);
• Using the ‘Likert’s scale’ from “1” (very
inaccurate) to “5” (very accurate), the
instructions were given to the respondents to
choose one of the answers closest to the way
the participants felt about the statement;
Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018 69
Comparison of openness to experience in managers and non-managers employed at meat industry ‘Ovako’...
• The data for all 130 surveys was entered
into the SPSS software program in order to
perform the statistical analysis;
• The first part of the SPSS analysis was to
test two questions based on each hypothesis
statement;
• Descriptive analysis was conducted following
the demographic responses;
• The testing of the two hypothesis statements
was performed by using the bivariate
correlation test in SPSS to calculate sample
Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The
objective was to determine if there was a
significant difference in managers and nonmanagers
in terms of openness to experience
and innovation;
• The results of the tests were interpreted and
evaluated based on 95% confidence level;
• A graph was created for the answers of given
survey questions;
• Results and recommendations were reported.
3.1 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There are no statistically
significant differences between managers and
non-mangers (or employees) in OVAKO meat
industry in terms of Openness to Experience.
H1 (Alternate Hypothesis): There are
statistically significant differences between
managers and non-managers or employees in
OVAKO meat industry in terms of Openness to
Experience.
To test the research hypothesis, it has to be seen
if managers and non-managers differ in openness
to experience, in addition to this researcher
constructed the continuous variable (openness to
experience) out of related 5 points Likert’s-scale
coded questions. Particular attention was devoted
in order to properly account for reversely-coded
answers, and after manipulation, new index
variable has following properties:
Figure 3.1.1. Histogram of openness index
New variable (Openness index) has a mean
of 35.96 and standard deviation of 3.964. The
distribution of the variable is not normal, which
was established by the results of normality
tests. After elimination of extremes (values
beyond ±3 standard deviations), Shapiro-Wilk
normality tests (employed due to small sample
size) indicated that the new distribution is
normal (SW=0.983; p = 0.116 > 0.05).
70 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018
Riđić G., Ahmić M., Riđić O., Bušatlić S.
Table 3.1.1. Group Statistics of openness index.
distribution of the variable is not normal, which was established by the results of normality
tests. After elimination of extremes (values beyond ±3 standard deviations), Shapiro-Wilk
normality tests (employed due to small sample size) indicated that the new distribution is
normal (SW=0.983; p = 0.116 > 0.05).
Table 3.1.1.: Group Statistics of openness index.
Function/position N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
openess_index Manager 14 5.8467 .33041 .08831
non-manager 103 5.9749 .24204 .02385
Table 3.1.2. Demographic profile of respondents (Function/Position)
11
Table 3.1.2: Demographic profile of respondents (Function/Position)
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Manager 16 12.4 12.9 12.9
nonmanager
108 83.7 87.1 100.0
Total 124 96.1 100.0
Missing System 5 3.9
Total 129 100.0
Majority of respondents were obtaining non-managerial position at the time of the
survey (108 respondents; 83.7% of the total), while only a small minority of 16
respondents (12.4% of the total) had the managerial position.
Table 3.1.3.: Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference Lower Upper
open_indx Equal
variances
assumed
2.299 .132 -
1.774
115 .079 -.12815 .07223 -
.27122
.01493
Equal
variances
not
assumed
-
1.401
14.955 .182 -.12815 .09147 -
.32316
.06686
It can be seen from the table 3.1.3., above, that there are no significant differences between
the managers’ and non-managers’ (employees’) groups on openness to experience (F=2.299;
t=-1.774, p = 0.079 > 0.05).
Majority of respondents were obtaining nonmanagerial
position at the time of the survey
(108 respondents; 83.7% of the total), while
only a small minority of 16 respondents (12.4%
of the total) had the managerial position.
Table 3.1.3. Independent Samples Test
11
Table 3.1.2: Demographic profile of respondents (Function/Position)
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Manager 16 12.4 12.9 12.9
nonmanager
108 83.7 87.1 100.0
Total 124 96.1 100.0
Missing System 5 3.9
Total 129 100.0
Majority of respondents were obtaining non-managerial position at the time of the
survey (108 respondents; 83.7% of the total), while only a small minority of 16
respondents (12.4% of the total) had the managerial position.
Table 3.1.3.: Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference Lower Upper
open_indx Equal
variances
assumed
2.299 .132 -
1.774
115 .079 -.12815 .07223 -
.27122
.01493
Equal
variances
not
assumed
-
1.401
14.955 .182 -.12815 .09147 -
.32316
.06686
It can be seen from the table 3.1.3., above, that there are no significant differences between
the managers’ and non-managers’ (employees’) groups on openness to experience (F=2.299;
t=-1.774, p = 0.079 > 0.05).
Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018 71
Comparison of openness to experience in managers and non-managers employed at meat industry ‘Ovako’...
It can be seen from the table 3.1.3., above, that
there are no significant differences between the
managers’ and non-managers’ (employees’)
groups on openness to experience (F=2.299;
t=-1.774, p = 0.079 > 0.05).
Hence, OVAKO’s managers and non-managers
are (statistically speaking) alike in regards
to openness to experience. Further, the
researchers established (the correlation tests)
signifying that a correlation between openness
based on the obtained group responses
was weak (Pearson correlation = - 0.014;
p = 0.125 > 0.05) and not approaching the
conventional level of statistical significance.
So while some individual components of
openness to experience are correlated with
some demographic variables in this research,
the overall model fails to conclusively prove
the existence of differences between managers
and non-managers in OVAKO meat industry, in
regards to their openness to experience.
In continuation, according to the statistical
results, the researchers failed to reject Ho, thus
proving the absence of statistically significant
differences. Further, the linear regression
modeling established lack of significant effect
of openness to experience in this company,
as a whole. Weak influence of openness to
experience (F=2.388; p=0. 125 > 0.05) explains
about 2% of total model variability (R² = 0.020),
while further hierarchal regression modeling
(to control for effect of demographic variables
in the model) improved model’s explanatory
power modestly, but without approaching to
conventional levels of statistical significance.
As stated in discussion, the reason for lack of
detectable effects could be that management
of mentioned industry has clearly defined
parameters and its employees and employers
know exactly what their obligations and tasks
are. Industry in this terms does not have to
invest a lot of money in educational and training
programs of its workers, but to invest that
money in other programs that would improve
their role in the market economy and as well
their production of goods and services. In
addition to this, answers to the given statements
and questions were slightly the same with the
managers and non-managers or employees in
the meat industry OVAKO, Visoko. As it is stated
in the discussion part, there may be several
reasons why there is no significant difference
between managers and non-managers in terms
of openness to experience and all of those
will be discussed in further work (Zopiatis &
Panayiotis 2012).
4. DISCUSSION
It is important to note that previous research
of secondary resources provided highly
deficient examples of similar research being
conducted, either, internally, within Bosnia and
Herzegovina or internationally. Slightly similar
studies were found in the works of Homan,
Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Knippenberg, Ilgen and
Van Kleef (2008) titled “Facing Differences with
an Open Mind: Openness to Experience, Salience
of Intragroup Differences, and Performance of
Diverse Work Groups”.
Openness to Experience is the tendency of
business professionals or individuals to be
original, being able to take risks and to be
open to every new challenge that comes
toward them.Variables included in the research
could not conclusively establish existence
of any differences between managers and
non-managers in terms of Openness to
Experience in meat industry ‘OVAKO’ Visoko.
Researchers failed to reject Ho, thus proving
absence of statistically significant differences.
Openness to Experience can be advantageous
and disadvantageous as well, depending on
the tasks, team and working environment.
The advantage of high level of Openness
to Experience is that those managers or
employees are highly innovative, creative;
full of new ideas which in many aspects can
contribute to themselves and company as well.
In addition to this, answer to the first question
may be found in some basic information about
AKOVA group, meat industry OVAKO based in
Visoko and their working skills. Akova group
has originated from family tradition and
entrepreneurship spirit of Džafić family. The
experience of generations in production of meat
and meat processed products resulted in the
establishment of one fast food restaurant in the
1980’s in Sarajevo, named Akova. The positive
perspective of the project was recognized by
72 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018
Riđić G., Ahmić M., Riđić O., Bušatlić S.
international financial organizations and Akova
as the first private company in BiH was granted
a commercial loan to construct the meat
processing factory. At the beginning of 1999, the
project was officially completed and there was
a solemn launch of the production capacities. In
order to complete the production process cycle,
provide its own raw materials and establish
balance of financial flows, Akova stepped into
the phase of primary production by privatizing
the livestock food factory and a farm in Visoko
and constructing its own centre for production
material and a poultry slaughterhouse named
Brovis at the same location. Today, the group
is comprised of three successful companies:
Akova Impex (sales and distribution), Meat
Industry Ovako (production of meat processed
products) and BROVIS (production of chicken
meat). It is the fact that the AKOVA group’s
imperative is to have successful management
that manages each section of company. Their
successful management, that is at the top of
company’s pyramid coordinates the lower
sections that are composed of team leader or
manager and non-managers or employees. As
it could be seen from the obtained hypothesis,
there are no statistical differences in terms of
openness to experience and between managers
and non-managers in meat industry OVAKO
(Judge, Thoresen, Bono & Patton 2001).
5. CONCLUSION
It is important to note that previous research
of secondary resources provided highly
deficient examples of similar research being
conducted, either, internally, within Bosnia and
Herzegovina or internationally. To lesser extent
similar studies were found in the works of
Homan, Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Knippenberg,
Ilgen and Van Kleef (2008) titled “Facing
Differences with an Open Mind: Openness to
Experience, Salience of Intragroup Differences,
and Performance of Diverse Work Groups”.
In this work the intragroup differences of
diverse teams have been researched. As the
statistical data analysis results have shown,
there was no statistically significant difference
between the managers and non-managers,
in terms of openness to experience as one of
the big five personality traits at meat industry
OVAKO, Visoko. In addition to this, it is
already mentioned in discussion part that
some other factors influence the particular
industries in the specific geographical region.
There are possibilities that there should be
higher number of respondents, who could
cause results to be in slightly different way
or there are other influencing factors. It is
already mentioned that there is possibility of
cluster effect because geographical position
can be an influencing factor. Openness to
Experience shows how managers will perform
in their working environment, how they will
threat other employees and behave in the
situations where many types of people are
present. According to the previous research
studies, Openness to Experience can be
advantageous and disadvantageous as well,
depending on the tasks, team and working
environment. The advantage of high level
of Openness to Experience is that those
managers or employees are highly innovative,
creative; full of new ideas which in many
aspects can contribute to themselves and
company. Numerous managers highly open
to experience started their own successful
businesses. As far as suggestions for future
research are concerned, this research project
can be a basis for deeper research that should
be done by state. Time frame for this research
was too short to generalize the results. The
same research should be conducted utilizing
bigger sample size.
6. REFERENCES
1. Ang, S., Van Dyne, L., & Koh, C.K.S. (2006)
Personality correlates of the four factor
model of cultural intelligence in Group and
Organization Management, 31 (1), pp.100-
123.
2. Barrick, M. & Mount, M. (1991) The Big
Five Personality Dimensions and Job
Performance: A Meta Analysis’ in Personnel
Psychology, 44 (1), pp. 1-26.
3. Barrick, M., Mount, M. & Judge, T. (2001)
Personality and Performance at the
Beginning of the New Millennium: What
Do We Know and Where Do We Go Next?’,
in International Journal of Selection and
Assessment, 9 (1-2), pp. 9-30.
Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018 73
Comparison of openness to experience in managers and non-managers employed at meat industry ‘Ovako’...
4. Bell, S. T. (2007) ‘Deep-level composition
variables as predictors of team performance:
A meta-analysis, in Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(3), pp. 595-615.
5. Borkenau, P., Mauer, N., Riemann, R.,
Spinath, F. & Angleitner, A. (2004) Thin
Slices of Behavior as Cues of Personality
and Intelligence in Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 86 (4), pp. 599-614.
6. Botwin, M., Buss, D. & Shackelford, T.
(1997) Personality and Mate Preferences:
Five Factors in Mate Selection and Marital
Satisfaction in Journal of Personality, 65(1),
pp. 107-136.
7. Coan, R.W. (1972) Measurable components
of Openness to Experience in Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 39 (2),
pp. 346.
8. Costa, P., & McCrae, R.R. (1992) Description
of NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R)
facet scales. Appendix D.’ in Revised NEO
personality inventory and the NEO five
factor inventory professional manual, pp.
16-18.
9. De Raad, B., & Van Heck, G. L. (1994) The
Fifth of the Big Five’ [Special issue] in
European Journal of Personality, 8 (4), pp.
225-227.
10. Digman, J. (1990) ‘Personality Structure:
Emergence of the Five-Factor Model’ in
Annual Review of Psychology, 41 (1), pp.
417-440.
11. Gregory, T., Netellbeck, T. & Wilson, C. (2010)
Openness to experience, intelligence, and
successful ageing in Science Direct.
12. Heaven, P. C. L., Smith, L., Prabhakar, S. M.,
Abraham, J., & Mete, M. E. (2006) Personality
and conflict communication patterns in
cohabiting couples’ in Journal of Research in
Personality, 40 (5), pp. 829-840.
13. Homan, A. C., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphrey, S.
E., Knippenberg, D. V., Ilgen, D. R., & Gerben
A. Van Kleef. (2008) Facing differences with
an open mind: Openness to experience,
salience of intragroup differences, and
performance of diverse work groups.
The Academy of Management Journal,
51(6), pp. 1204-1222. doi:10.5465/
AMJ.2008.35732995
14. Jones, G. & George, J. [eds.] (2009) Values,
Attitudes, Emotions, and Culture: The Manager
as Person’ in Essentials of Contemporary
Management, McGraw-Hill/Irwin; 5th ed., pp.
75-78.
15. Judge, T., Thoresen, C., Bono, J. & Patton, G.
(2001) The job satisfaction-job performance
relationship: A qualitative and quantitative
review, in Psychological Bulletin, 127 (3),
pp. 376-407.
16. Kickul, J. & Newman, G. (2000) Emergent
leadership behaviors: The function of
personality and cognitive ability in determining
teamwork performance, in Journal of Business
and Psychology, 15 (1), pp. 27-51.
17. Komarraju, M., Karau, S.J., Schmeck, R.R. &
Avdic, A. (2011) The Big Five personality
traits, learning styles, and academic
achievement in Personality and Individual
Differences, pp. 472-477.
18. McCrae, R. (1987) Creativity, divergent
thinking, and openness to experience’ in
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
52 (6), pp.1258-1265.
19. McCrae, R. (1993) Openness to Experience
as a Basic Dimension of Personality, in
Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 13
(1), pp. 39-55.
20. McCrae, R. (1996) Social consequences
of experiential openness, in Psychological
Bulletin, 120 (3), pp. 323-337.
21. McCrae, R. & Costa, P (1997) Validation of
the five-factor model of personality across
instruments and observers in Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 52 (1),
pp. 81-90.
22. McCrae, R. R. (2002) NEO-PI-R data from 36
cultures: Further intercultural comparisons,
in McCrae & J. Allik, [Eds.], The Five-Factor
Model of personality across cultures, pp.
105-125, New York: Kluwer Academic/
Plenum Publishers.
23. McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1991) An
introduction to five-factor model and its
applications’ in Journal of Personality, 60
(2), pp. 175-215.
24. McCrae, R. R., & Sutin, A. R. (2009) Openness
to Experience’, in M. R. Leary and R. H. Hoyle
74 Economic Review – Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. XVI, Issue 2, November 2018
Riđić G., Ahmić M., Riđić O., Bušatlić S.
[Eds.], Handbook of Individual Differences
in Social Behaviour, pp. 257-273., New York:
Guilford.
25. McCrae, R. R., & Terracciano, A. (2008)
The Five-Factor Model and its correlates
in O’s Social Consequences 36 individuals
and cultures’, in F. J. R. Van de Vijver, D. A.
van Hemert and Y. H. Poortinga, [Eds.],
Individuals and cultures in multi-level
analysis, pp. 247-281, Mahwah, New York:
Erlbaum.
26. McElroy, T. & Dowd, E. (2007) Susceptibility
to anchoring effects: How opennessto-
experience influences responses to
anchoring cues, in Judgment and Decision
Making, 2 (1), pp.48–53.
27. Mehl, M., Gosling, S. & Pennebaker, J.
(2006) Personality in its natural habitat:
Manifestations and implicit folk theories
of personality in daily life in Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (5),
pp. 862-877.
28. Metsäpelto, R. L. & Pulkkinen, L. (2003)
Personality traits and parenting:
Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness
to Experience as discriminative factors in
European Journal of Personality, 17 (1), pp.
59-78.
29. Minbashian, A., Earl, J. & Bright, J. (2012)
Openness to Experience as a Predictor of
Job Performance Trajectories in Applied
Psychology, 62 (1), pp. 1-12.
30. Mohan, G., & Mulla, Z.R. (2013) Openness to
experience and work outcomes: Exploring
the moderating effects of conscientiousness
and job complexity in Tata Institute for
Social Sciences, 7 (2), pp. 18-33.
31. Oh, In-Sue, & Berry, C.M. (2009) The fivefactor
model of personality and managerial
performance: Validity gains through the
use of 360 degree performance ratings in
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94 (6), pp.
1498-1513.
32. Oregon Business Plan (n.d.) Industry
Clusters. Available from: http://www.
oregonbusinessplan.org/industry-clusters/
industry-clusters-faq/. [December 2, 2015].
33. Payne, S.C., Youngcourt, S.S., & Beaubien,
J.M. (2007) A meta-analytic examination
of the goal orientation nomological net in
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92 (1) pp.
128-150.
34. Psychometric Success (2013) The Big 5’
Aspects of Personality, Available from:
http://www.psychometric-success.com/
personality-tests/personality-tests-big-5-
aspects.html , [January 10, 2015].
35. Robbins, S.P, & Judge T.A, [eds.] (2012)
Essentials of Organizational Behavior.
Pearson Education; 11th ed. pp. 68-74.
36. Robbins, S.P., & Judge T.A, (2013)
Organizational Behavior. Pearson
Education: 15th ed., England.
37. Schilpzand, C.M., Herold, D.M. & Shalley, C.E
(2011) Members’ Openness to Experience
and Teams’ Creative Performance’ in Sage
Journals, 42 (2), pp. 55-76.
38. Stewart, G. L., Fulmer, I. S. & Barrick, M. R.
(2005) An exploration of member roles as a
multilevel linking mechanism for individual
traits and team outcomes in Personnel
Psychology, 58 (2), pp. 343-365.
39. Terracciano, A., Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae,
R. R. (2006) Personality plasticity after
age 30 in Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 32 (8), pp. 999-1009.
40. Thoresen, C., Bradley, J., Bliese, P. & Thoresen,
J. (2004) The Big Five Personality Traits
and Individual Job Performance Growth
Trajectories in Maintenance and Transitional
Job Stages in Journal of Applied Psychology, vol.
89, no. 5, pp. 835-853.
41. Watson, D., Klohnen, E. C., Casillas, A.,
Simms, E. N., Haig, J., & Berry, D. S. (2004)
Match makers and deal breakers: Analyses
of assortative mating in newlywed couples
in Journal of Personality, 72 (5), pp. 1029-
1068.
42. Wilkinson, T. J. (2007) Individual difference
and sport fans: Who roots for the underdog?
in Unpublished Dissertation Abstracts
International.
43. Zopiatis, A. & Panayiotis, C. (2012)
Extraversion, Openness and
Conscientiousness in Leadership &
Organization Developmental Journal, 33 (1),
pp. 86-104.