\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Impact of Personality Match/Mismatch on Employee Level Performance Which Ultimately Affects Organizational Performance},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2012-06-15 (revised: 15 June 2012)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2012-06-15}
\title{Impact of Personality Match/Mismatch on Employee Level Performance Which Ultimately Affects Organizational Performance}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Dr. Sara  Khan}

             \author[2]{Muqaddas Bin  Tahir}

             \affil[1]{  International Islamic University}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 10 May 2012 Accepted: 2 June 2012 Published: 15 June 2012}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


The quality of the relationships employees have with each other determines the quality of the work outcomes. Personality of employees effects their roles and responsibilities in the organization. However, personality match between employee/employer has a strong impact on the interaction and communication patterns of the employees, as well as the subjective experiences of individuals which results in different forms of organizational integration and also in managing the interrelationships synergistically. On the other hand, every good employee that an organization fails to retain, walks out the door costing the business money, every poor or mismatched recruit can result in missed opportunities and can severely damage your culture and organizational reputation. Our paper is about how personalities matter in work environments and ultimately results in superior organizational performance. Too much difference among personalities at the work place creates difficulty in retaining employees. Mismatch can cause coordination problems. While matching personalities complement each other which lead to motivation at work place. We propose that personality match leads to positive attitudes. Furthermore, it creates emotional alignment at employee level, which contributes to increased organizational performance; develops emotional integration and a deep collaborative culture. Once all these factors are established the whole organization creates fit or connectedness which of course complements other aspects of emotional integration, collaborative culture and positive attitudinal alignment.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{I. Introduction}]{I. Introduction}\par
lthough recent research has clearly demonstrated the effects of "implicit theories," of leadership on leader ratings, their impact on performance and overall output, still there has been a lack of attention to the aspect that shows the impact of match / mismatch of personalities of leaders and members on performance, both on individual level and organizational level. Theoretical analysis of leadership argue that leaders shift their emphasis from task to relationship orientation which pays more consideration to the phenomenon of personality match/ mismatch among leaders and followers, specially, in the context of Pakistan, a collectivistic country.\par
Leader-follower similarity and personality match in the workplace is a crucial element which affect the Author ? : International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan. outcomes as quality of leader-member relationships (Bauer and Phillips) as well as performance  {\ref (Pulakos \& Wexley, 1982)} . Early research on attraction and similarity carries the view that individuals prefer others who are similar to themselves (Berscheid and Kandel). Individuals select partners who are similar in terms of attitudes, values, and traits (Byrne; Caspi and Hill). Once there is seen to be a large discrepancy between the way an organization functions with the individuals preferences and values it is clear that the organization will fail to retain thus costing it highly therefore a collaborative culture which recruits similar others from the start is crucial.\par
Match of leader-followers personalities builds the grounds for values alignment and attitudinal similarity. It plays a pivotal role in emotional integration of individuals, leading them to go an extra mile. If the personality of leaders and followers match is established then it creates the basis for culture of collaboration as well as it enables employees to fit with their work and organization.\par
The personality match of leaders and followers can be beneficial in the development of a climate of high performance such as ; Enhanced performance of leaders even when they or the employees are under pressure; Increased levels of empathy in leadership group; Leaders learn to adapt their behaviour as well as to create positive and productive environments for their workgroups; Leaders increase their range of their responses to suit the demands of different situations they face; and leaders learn to develop the mental toughness and flexibility which is required to lead their workgroups through times of instability and uncertainty.\par
Alternative to theories which promote the importance of universal traits and behaviors for leaders, some have proposed that the effectiveness of leader behaviors depends on the environment. These "contingency" theories contend that leader behaviors may be helpful or harmful, depending on the personality traits of subordinates and the situation. For instance, the Vroom-Yetton model of supervisory decision-making promotes a careful consideration of situational factors before determining the most effective decision-making strategy  {\ref (Vroom \& Yetton, 1973)}. Also, the Path-Goal theory calls for leaders to consider the needs of If employees have a personality match, each person's some personality characteristics compliment the other personality in such a way that their motivation level is increased and they work together more willingly and will do their best in a particular situation. For example, according Harris, Harris \& Eplion, (2007) 'The personality traits each tap into different aspects of a subordinate's motivation, confidence, and initiative and thus would be expected to be positively related to LMX quality'. Which pin points the fact that personality match would create high quality of relationship. This kind of relation can also create a high-high style of leadership, which is the most effective style according the 'style approach' of leadership. This means that the quality of work (tasks assigned) as well as of the employee/employer relation is quite high which makes it more effective. It creates a relationship of mutual trust and friendship. . These relations express emotions to each other and also influence each others' attitudes. People having positivity in their personality is shown through their positive emotions, are more likely to be favoured by others and get positive responses \hyperref[b2]{(Staw, Sutton \& Pelled, 1994)}. Such people reflect a positive image on others. Positive outcomes are experienced by positive people  {\ref (Dunning and Story, 1991)}.Similarly Emotional alignment depends on mutual trust as well. Therefore, the quality of relationship that exists between employee/employer impacts their performance. Thus we propose that a personality match can help employees to develop an emotional connection which further integrates the whole organization to perform better. 
\section[{II.}]{II.} 
\section[{Propositions a) Proposition 1}]{Propositions a) Proposition 1}\par
Positive alignment and similarity between attitudes of employee/employer enhance performance.\par
An attitude represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for something. Attitudes are generally positive or negative views of a person towards some, place, thing, or event-this is often referred to as the attitude object.\par
Little empirical research has focus on personality differences of the leaders and followers, and their consequent impact on attitude similarity of individuals. In leadership research, similarity between leaders and followers attitudes has predominantly been analyzed as a predictor of leader-member exchange (e.g.,  {\ref Deluga, 1998;} {\ref Dose, 1999)}. Similarity has also been examined in terms of value congruence (e.g.,  {\ref Jung \& Avolio, 2000)}.\par
When discussing similarity, the following distinctions have to be made. First, one should distinguish between surface-level and deep-level similarity  {\ref (Hiller \& Day, 2003} A lot of studies highlight the importance of attitude alignment between employee/employer for increased performance. Similarity is one of the most central theoretical and empirical constructs in cognitive psychology (Medin, Goldstone, \& Gentner, 1993).\par
The impact of deep-level attitudinal similarity between Leaders and followers has been tested on interrelations between leaders and members, and outcomes was analyzed. It is noted that similarity in terms of subjective meaning of work, occupational selfefficacy, and emotionality, impacts the overall performance.\par
Empirical study found a negative interrelation between leaders and their teams' goal fulfillment when followers scored higher than their leaders on subjective meaning of work and when followers were more emotionally irritated than their leaders.\par
The LMX model also suggests that attitudinal similarity is an important influence on leader and follower interaction, being a prime determinant of successful ongoing relationships. Employees who are less at attitudinal fit to a work group and leader participate less in performing activities associated to them, thus hampering the overall performance (Lichtenstein, Alexander, Jinnett, \& Ullman, 1997). Individuals with no match of their attitude with their leaders, they are perceived as less effective workers, and lack on output (Baugh \& Graen, 1997) resultantly making them feel low in their self esteem, discouraging them to put in extra efforts which will ultimately affect their performance negatively. Thus, dissimilarity of attitudes may limit an individual's integration or involvement in work, yet this integration is critical for performance (Maznevski, 1994; Shaw \& Barrett -Power, 1998).\par
(Liden, Wayne, \& Stilwell, 1993) has investigated the influence of attitudinal similarity on leader member relationship. Attitudinal similarity would make it an entire process. It is really necessary for the leader to change employees' attitudes from negative to positive, create attitudinal allignment and enhance employees performance as well as organizational success. The factors that influence positively to attitudinal alignment and increase worker performance requires that leaders must understand some of the underlying elements that may create behaviorally distant workers. Researchers in the study reported that five elements contributed negatively to attitudinal similarity of employees, which include excessive workload; concerns about leadership effectiveness; anxiety about job and frustration; and insufficient recognition. No or less attitude match among leaders will ultimately hamper the employee performance. Increased alignment of attitudes in turn generates the atmosphere of understanding, self respect and trust, which further effects performance positively Match of personalities of leaders and followers, in addition to understanding and maintaining fit, also effects outcomes of leader-member exchange by creating attitude similarity which positively affects the workgroup cohesion, follower's affective commitment and overall performance. There are some elements within organization that contribute positively to create attitudinal alignment of employees and leader, such as: having a sense of self-worth i.e. having confidence, feeling competent and in control of their work and work experience; the contributions workers as well as leader helping their organizations succeed; and being rewarded and recognized i.e. knowing that their contributions are recognized and compensated, emotional integration of leaders and members etc. Knowing some of the factors that cause employees to be emotionally distant from their work, as well as some of the elements that are valued by employees are mandatory to create and enhance attitudinal similarity among members, which will ultimately boost the employee performance. Individuals with no or less attitudinal alignment with leader fit less to work group, resultantly contribute less to group tasks  {\ref (Kirchmeyer, 1993)}.\par
It is important to discuss that only positive attitudinal match can contribute to performance. Leaders can start changing employees' attitudes to a positive mindset by identifying and communicating priorities. Setting priorities with employees helps them to focus on important tasks, and may help to lessen some of the stress they feel when they're overwhelmed by a heavy workload. Leaders should set expectations for the outcome, and provide direction only when needed. Allowing workers a greater sense of autonomy and authority in deciding how to conduct the work breeds trust, and invests employees in the process, as well as the outcome. To build positive attitude leader must talk to employees about their workplace concerns, address them quickly and confidently. Dispel rumors with the facts. Be honest about mistakes and problems. The alignment of these positive attitudes of leader and followers will enable employees to fall in discretionary behaviors which in turn enable them to go an extra mile. Attitudinal similarity of leaders and followers will make employees to own the organizational goals, which will ultimately have a positive influence on performance. Personality match between leader\textbackslash member has a strong impact on the patterns of interaction of individuals, which bring leaders and followers on the same page, thus contributing to attitudinal alignment According to Zenger \& Lawrence(1989), individuals with personal attitudes mismatch engage in less frequent output, and negatively impact overall performance. Thus, personality match creates an environment of respect, trust and friendship which help individuals to associate them in a bonding and help the organization to be more emotionally integrated as stated in our next proposition. 
\section[{b) Proposition}]{b) Proposition}\par
Employer\textbackslash employee personality match facilitates an organization to achieve emotional integration.\par
An organizations main challenge today is retention of good employees and to manage their working relations synergistically. If personalities working in it matches with each other, it may result in better interrelationships.\par
Emotional alignment among the people of an organization results in an emotional integration of the whole organization. This further can help people understand each other's capabilities and only then their best utilization is possible. In a broader perspective, linked with the same identity, gives individuals a sense of belonging that emotionally connects every employee to the ethos of their work place (Samantra \& Goshal, 2002). Employees working collectively through shared knowledge with common objectives, integrates the organization in a social, emotional and intellectual, way.\par
Emotional alignment among employees keeps them focused on their shared future. It keeps the financial security; lack of challenging work, boredom, Phillips \& Bedeian in 1994 found a positive relation of attitudinal similarity with the exchange quality. Research finds that attitudinal similarity of leaders and employees' about work can positively affect the organizational success. It is noted that less or no attitudinal alignment among leaders and followers have a negative impact on performance and adversely affect productivity, profitability, performance, and retention which are the key factors in organizational success. Attitudinal similarity of leaders and followers bring similarity of values among them, which ultimately improves the quality of working relationship, leading to enhanced level of productivity. The phenomenon of personality match has a positive influence in bringing the attitude alignment of leaders and followers which enhances the quality of relationships employees have with each other, which further determines the quality of the work outcomes. Moreover, personality match between leader\textbackslash member has also strong impact on the interaction and communication patterns of the employees which positively effects owning their roles and responsibilities in the organization, leading to improved performance. employees engaged across different work styles, departments and businesses.\par
To engage employees, an organization must capture their minds and hearts by sharing and communicating its strategic direction and goals, and this phenomenon stems from leadership  {\ref (Seijts \& Crim, 2006)}. The role of leader in engaging employees at work place is very important. Leader/member or colleagues and match between their personalitiesfacilitates the communication process in a more friendly way. The nature of their relationship affects their performance. These factors make them emotionally aligned and emotionally engaged at the work place. They understand each other's interests and perceptions easily and will be more professionally engaged as well.\par
According to Law et al. (  {\ref 2004}) employee emotional intelligence influences work outcomes via the quality of interpersonal relationships of employees, inside the organization. These relationships in turn allow employees to perform effectively.\par
Personality match can align employees emotionally, creating a connection among the workers of the whole organization into the business objectives. Indeed if supervisors and subordinates share a similar tendency to manage and utilize emotion in their workplace interactions (e.g. Law et al. 2000), thus may validate self perceptions regarding their use of emotion, resulting in increased interpersonal attraction and LMX.\par
According to LMX theory, supervisors assign roles to those who they view as more competent, trustworthy and the subordinates develop a strong relationship with their supervisors, characterized by trust and emotional support (Harris, Harris \& Eplion, 2007). It makes them feel that they are treated with respect and trust, where they invest most of their time throughout the week. This is possible usually when employee/employer share the same personality traits as the general idea that prevails says that one's own actions/ perceptions are over estimated and though to be better than others.\par
However, it's the emotional aspects of the business that form the core of the working environment, they connect all other elements and that make the real difference in employees' minds. These emotional aspects include the unique culture that differentiates each business from others. This kind of emotional connectivity makes employees show up each day at the work place. It actually makes people tick, who are motivated more because of their match with the supervisor/colleague. They tap into each others mental and emotional aspects and develop a long lasting motivation thus enhancing both individual and organizational performance. Emotional alignment cannot be imitated and be used as a source of sustainable competitive advantage.\par
If the employees are emotionally connected, it makes them feel special, as if they fit the working environment and they are investing more than forty hours a week, it shows that they want to contribute to a business ,as well as they care for where the business is going. Their supervisors having a personality match can develop trust and emotional support with them. Employees with similar personalities have tendency to work together more conveniently and willingly, and are more likely to form an emotional connection between them. Emotional integration amongst employees thus creates a deep collaborative culture which is proposed in our second proposition. 
\section[{c) Proposition}]{c) Proposition}\par
Similar personality traits of (employee/employer) will create a deep collaborative culture and a superior organizational performance.\par
The pervasiveness and importance of values in organizational culture are fundamentally linked to the psychological process of identity formation in which individuals appear to seek a social identity that provides meaning and connectedness  {\ref (Ashforth \& Mael, 1989)}.A substantial body of research has shown that individuals tend to classify themselves into social categories, such as gender, race, ethnicity, and organizational affiliation, and to use those categories to define themselves. For instance, people appear particularly able to discriminate between in-groups and out-groups and to be attracted to those seen as similar to themselves  {\ref (Brewer, 1979;} {\ref Moreland, 1985)}.\par
Thus, congruency between an individual's values and those of an organization may be at the crux of person-culture fit.\par
Collaboration depends on mutual trust and friendship. Employees with complementary traits or with a personality match can develop trust and friendship quickly. These two factors help in the execution of shared knowledge and create value. These aspects are the key factors towards building a more collaborative and transparent culture. Such a culture of the organization is clearly connected to its business purpose. The people it employs are more aligned right from the outset, as the culture of any organization plays a role in attracting talent.\par
Developing such a collaborative culture will be easier with similar personality traits. This kind of Insightful way will ensure that employees you attract will be a natural cultural fit right from the beginning.\par
More and more companies are beginning to recognize that intellectual capital is dependent on cultural capital.\par
Emphasis on cultural attributes like collective actions and information sharing contribute towards developing a collaborative culture. The degree to which employees are willing to share their creativity and knowledge is dependent on how aligned they feel with the organization and the relationship they have with their direct supervisor. When there is a lack of alignment between employees' values and the organization's values, employees are less willing to share their ideas. Match between personalities plays an important role to to go an extra mile. These kinds of relationship among leader/member develop of a positive culture that supports employee collaborative environment. By focusing on the needs of its people, the organization encourages higher levels of personal productivity and creativity. This occurs as a natural byproduct of building trust, community spirit and internal cohesion.\par
Culture resulting from personality match among employees can be strong based on shared values. Culture cannot be imitated by the competitors and organizations having strong cultures perform better.\par
In "Corporate Culture and Performance," Kotter and Heskett show that companies with strong adaptive cultures based on shared values outperformed other companies by a significant margin. Over an eleven-year period, companies that emphasized all stakeholdersemployees, customers and stockholders, and focused on leadership development, grew four times faster than companies that did not. They also found that these companies had job creation rates seven times higher, had stock prices that grew twelve time faster and profit performance that was 750 times higher than companies that did not have shared values and adaptive cultures.\par
In "Built to Last," Collins and Porras show that companies that consistently focused on building strong corporate cultures over a period of several decades outperformed companies that did not by a factor of 6 and outperformed the general stock market by a factor of 15.\par
The secret to a more collaborative culture lies in building and strengthening relations between supervisor\textbackslash subordinate and also among the colleagues working at the same level. And this can be more conveniently developed where personality matches exist.\par
According to Towers Perrin global workforce survey conducted in 2005, emphasis on collaboration and information sharing contribute to the innovativeness of an organization. They also foster learning orientation sharing of new ideas.\par
Information sharing can be utilized for positive organizational outcomes like productivity and creativity. Personality match improves interpersonal communications and is important for coordination. Thus information sharing and generating new ideas depends on the relationship people have at the work place. These relations further make a collaborative culture.\par
The notion of organizational culture has been important in the study of organizational behavior for the past decade (e.g.,  {\ref Barley, Meyer, \& Gash, 1988;} {\ref O'Reilly, 1989;} {\ref Smircich, 1983)}. In spite of disagreements over some elements of definition and measurement, researchers seem to agree that culture may be an important factor in determining how well an individual fits an organizational context (e.g., Kilmann, Saxton, \& Serpa, 1986; Schein, 1985). Thus another proposition that we propose is that personality match creates a deep collaborative culture which offers unique potential for improving fit within the organization d) Proposition 4 Personality match offers unique potential for understanding and improving fit within organizational environment.\par
Much previous research has suggested that person-culture fit increases commitment, satisfaction, and performance, but very little empirical research on these relationships has been done.\par
The general notion of fit, or congruence, has long been important in psychology and organizational behavior  {\ref (Nadler \& Tushman, 1980)}. In studying personsituation fit, organizational behavior researchers have typically taken one of two broad paths. One has led to exploration of the interaction of individual characteristics and broad occupational attributes, the other to exploration of the fit between specific characteristics of an organization and the people in it. Examples of the second approach range from studying the match of individual skills to job requirements to studying the relationship between individual characteristics and organizational climate (e.g.,  {\ref Downey, Hellriegel, \& Slocum, 1975)}.\par
Byrne  {\ref (1971,} {\ref 1997)} proposed that people choose to interact with similar others. Variants of this idea have been promoted in diverse contexts (e.g.,  {\ref Bauer \& Green, 1996;} {\ref Palmer \& Byrne, 1970;} {\ref Rubin et al., 1994;} {\ref Rushton, 1995;} {\ref Wetzel, Schwartz, \& Vasu, 1979)}.  {\ref McClane (1991)} hypothesized that high quality leader-member exchange results from similarity. Now a day's organizations are increasingly structuring jobs in terms of groups  {\ref (Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, \& Mount, 1998;} {\ref Guzzo \& Dickson, 1996;} {\ref Levine \& Moreland, 1990}), yet relatively little is known about intragroup processes mediating individuals' contributions to team performance. Personality match is an important phenomenon which offers unique potential for understanding and improving fit within work groups. People feel most welcome in a culture where others think and behave as they do  {\ref (Schneider, 1987)}. The level of their comfort highly depends on their personality and the others with whom they are interacting.\par
Muchinsky and Monahan (1987) distinguished between two types of person-environment congruence. Supplementary congruence occurs when "an individual supplements, embellishes, or possesses characteristics which are similar to other individuals in the environment". Complementary congruence occurs where "the characteristics of the individual serve to 'make whole' or complement the characteristics of an environment" Thus, supplementary is defined in terms of similarity, and complementarily in terms of mutual need. make workers feel encouraged to share their ideas and Complementarity offers a unique basis for interpersonal attraction and group effectiveness. And that too depends on the degree of supplementary.\par
Although suggesting distinct explanations of compatibility, the similarity hypothesis can be derived as a special case of complementary, where similarity promotes mutual trait.\par
A key feature of interpersonal models is that trait expression is viewed reciprocally: personality compatibility results when one person's trait expression offers opportunities for the other's trait expression If trait expression is inherently rewarding (i.e., anxiety reducing), then social exchange theory implies that people will be more comfortable in a relationship to the degree that it provides opportunities for trait expression. This level of comfort then ultimately effects how individuals are going to contribute to their organization.  {\ref Tett et al. (1999)} suggested that personality can contribute to three levels of person-job fit. Task-level fit occurs with respect to the immediate activities, goals, and duties that define a given job; group-level fit denotes a matching of the person to his or her coworkers; and organization-level fit results when a person's traits match the organization's culture. All these three aspects are also complementary as group cohesiveness depends on how well you interact and the interaction further depends on how well your personality matches thus creating an overall environment of mutual understanding.  {\ref (Carson, 1969;} {\ref Kiesler, 1983} past research found that when used appropriately(i .e., there is a fit between the Group support system structures and the task, and the group receives appropriation support), GSS use increased the number of ideas generated, took less time, and led to more satisfied participants than if the group worked without the GSS. Fitting the GSS to the task had the most impact on outcome effectiveness (decision quality and ideas), while appropriations support the most impact on the process (time required and process satisfaction). Group support system is also complemented by individuals who have congruence in some aspects or other.\par
Thus, personality match plays a pivotal role in in building, understanding and managing the work fit within the organization. Personality match make the individuals more adaptive toward their roles which build a culture of mutual understanding, responsibility and care, consequently leading to better standard s of performance. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Conclusion}]{Conclusion}\par
Individuals like to be lead by personalities that are similar to them. They can influence them easily. The influence employer have on employees changes their attitudes. Personality match can be used to engage the employees emotionally at the working environment and fosters a deep collaborative culture. Cultures that are strong; especially built on emotional basis i.e. emotional integration between the employees which are also difficult to imitate and can be a competitive advantage for organizations. Understanding personalities at the workplace can establish FIT in groups throughout the organization.\par
The similarity of personalities of employee and employer determines the worth of the relationships and level of exchange among them which in turn has a strong impact on employees as well as overall organizations performance. Personality match creates an invisible way by which the knowledge, talent and skills of employee and employer are harnessed. It arouses the feeling of trust, mutual help, friendship and cohesion which ensures productivity both at individual and organizational level.\par
Similar personalities not only help creating the culture of deep collaboration and understanding, it also is essential for the individuals to prove their worth and fit in organizations. It helps creating attitude alignment which in turn affects employees roles, responsibilities and collaboration in the organization. Working without the environment that promotes similarity is like many haphazard directions ending in one place putting everyone in confusion.\par
Thus we conclude that matching personalities complements and influences attitudes and emotions at personal level, and can lead to some very unique outcomes at organizational level like emotional integration and a deep collaborative culture which gives a company a winning edge among its competitors.			\footnote{Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XII Issue XI Version I} 			\footnote{© 2012 Global Journals Inc. (US)Julysubordinates before deciding on a leadership strategy (House, 1996).} 			\footnote{July} 			\footnote{© 2012 Global Journals Inc. (US) July} 			\footnote{July} 			\footnote{July} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Crant and Bateman ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		‘Charismatic Leadership Viewed from above: The Impact of Proactive Personality’.  		 			M Crant 		,  		 			T Bateman 		,  		 			S 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Organizational Behavior}  		2000. 21  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Robie et al. ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		‘Do People Fake on Personality Inventories? A Verbal Protocol Analysis’.  		 			C Robie 		,  		 			D Brown 		,  		 			J Beaty 		,  		 			J 		,  		 			C 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2007. 21  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Cellar et al. ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘Effects of Leader Style, Leader Sex, and Subordinate Personality on Leader Evaluations and Future Subordinate Motivation’.  		 			D Cellar 		,  		 			F Sidle 		,  		 			S Goudy 		,  		 			K Brien 		,  		 			D 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2001. 16  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Smith and Canger ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		‘Effects of Supervisor "Big Five" Personality on Subordinate Attitudes’.  		 			A Smith 		,  		 			M Canger 		,  		 			J 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2004. 18  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Staw et al. ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		‘Employee Positive Emotion and Favorable Outcomes at the Workplace’.  		 			B M Staw 		,  		 			R I Sutton 		,  		 			L Pelled 		,  		 			H 		.  	 	 		\textit{Organization Science}  		1994. 5  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Avey et al. ()]{b30}\label{b30} 	 		‘Experimentally analyzing the impact of leader positivity on follower positivity and performance’.  		 			J Avey 		,  		 			B Avolio 		,  		 			B 		,  		 			J Luthans 		,  		 			F 		.  	 	 		\textit{Current Directions in Psychological Science}  		2011. 22  (5)  p. .  	 	 (The Leadership Quarterly) 
\bibitem[Carmeli et al. ()]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		‘How CEO empowering leadership shapes top management team processes: Implications for firm performance’.  		 			A Carmeli 		,  		 			A Carmeli 		,  		 			J Schaubroek 		,  		 			A Tishler 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Leadership Quarterly}  		2011. 22 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Rotemberg ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		‘Human Relations in the Workplace’.  		 			J Rotemberg 		,  		 			J 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Journal of Political Economy}  		1994. 102  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Subramaniam et al. ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		‘Implicit leadership theory among Malaysian managers; Impact of the leadership expectation gap on leader-member exchange quality’.  		 			A Subramaniam 		,  		 			R Othman 		,  		 			M Sambasivan 		.  	 	 		\textit{Leadership \& Organization Development Journal}  		2010. 31  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Chatman ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		‘Improving Interactional Organizational Research: A Model of Person-Organization Fit’.  		 			J Chatman 		,  		 			A 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Academy of Management Review}  		1989. 14  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ghoshal and Gratton ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		‘Integrating The Enterprise’.  		 			S Ghoshal 		,  		 			L Gratton 		.  	 	 		\textit{MIT Sloan Management Review}  		2002. 44  (1) .  	 
\bibitem[Parkinson and Taggar ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		‘Intelligence, Personality and Performance on Case Studies’.  		 			J Parkinson 		,  		 			S Taggar 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2006. 20  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Shani and Somech ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		‘Leadership, OCB and individual differences: Idiocentrism and allocentrism as moderators of the relationship between transformational and transactional leadership and OCB’.  		 			I Shani 		,  		 			A Somech 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Leadership Quarterly}  		2011. 22 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Judge and Cable ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		‘Managers' Upward Influence Tactic Strategies: The Role of Manager Personality and Supervisor Leadership Style’.  		 			T Judge 		,  		 			A Cable 		,  		 			D 		,  		 			M 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Organizational Behavior}  		2003. 24  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Granrose and Portwood ()]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		‘Matching Individual Career Plans and Organizational Career Management’.  		 			C Granrose 		,  		 			S Portwood 		,  		 			J 		,  		 			D 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Academy of Management Journal}  		1987. 30  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Berneth et al. ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Perceived Fairness in Employee Selection: The Role of Applicant Personality’.  		 			J Berneth 		,  		 			B Field 		,  		 			H 		,  		 			S Giles 		,  		 			W 		,  		 			F Cole 		,  		 			M 		,  		 			S 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2006. 20  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Burke and Witt ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		‘Personality and High-Maintenance Employee Behavior’.  		 			L Burke 		,  		 			A Witt 		,  		 			L 		,  		 			A 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2004. 18  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Burke and Witt ()]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		‘Personality and High-Maintenance Employee Behavior’.  		 			L Burke 		,  		 			A Witt 		,  		 			L 		,  		 			A 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2004. 18  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Ashton ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		‘Personality and Job Performance: The Importance of Narrow Traits’.  		 			M Ashton 		,  		 			C 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Organizational Behavior}  		1998. 19  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Tett and Murphy ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		‘Personality and Situations in Co-Worker Preference: Similarity and Complementarity in Worker Compatibility’.  		 			R Tett 		,  		 			P Murphy 		,  		 			P 		,  		 			J 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2002. 17  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Sanna and Robinson ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		‘Personality as Performance: Categorization Tendencies and Their Correlates’.  		 			L Sanna 		,  		 			J Robinson 		,  		 			M 		,  		 			D 		.  	 	 		\textit{Mental Simulation, Affect, and},  				2000. 2004. 13 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Chauhan and Chauhan ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘Personality at Workplace’.  		 			D Chauhan 		,  		 			S Chauhan 		,  		 			P 		.  	 	 		\textit{Indian Journal of Industrial Relations}  		2006. 41  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bolin and Neuman ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		‘Personality, Process, and Performance in Interactive Brainstorming Group’.  		 			A Bolin 		,  		 			U Neuman 		,  		 			G 		,  		 			A 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business and Psychology}  		2006. 20  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Nemiroff and Ford ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		‘Task Effectiveness and Human Fulfillment in Organizations: A Review and Development of a Conceptual Contingency Model’.  		 			P Nemiroff 		,  		 			M Ford 		,  		 			D 		,  		 			L 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Academy of Management Review}  		1976. 1  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Greaney ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		‘Teachers' Perceptions of Pupil Personality’.  		 			V Greaney 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Irish Journal of Education}  		1974. 8  (2)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Buss and Craik ()]{b31}\label{b31} 	 		‘The act frequency approach to personality’.  		 			D M Buss 		,  		 			K H Craik 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Review}  		1983. 90 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Davis and Rothstein ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘The Effects of the Perceived Behavioral Integrity of Managers on Employee Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis’.  		 			A Davis 		,  		 			L Rothstein 		,  		 			H 		,  		 			R 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business Ethics}  		2006. 67  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Guillen and Gonzalez ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		‘The Ethical Dimension of Managerial Leadership: Two Illustrative Case Studies in TQM’.  		 			M Guillen 		,  		 			T Gonzalez 		,  		 			F 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business Ethics}  		2001. 34  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Howell and Shamir ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		‘The Role of Followers in the Charismatic Leadership Process: Relationships and Their Consequences’.  		 			J Howell 		,  		 			M Shamir 		,  		 			B 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Academy of Management Review}  		2005. 30  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Gumusluoglu and Ilsev ()]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		‘Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation’.  		 			L Gumusluoglu 		,  		 			A Ilsev 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Business Research}  		2009. 62 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Jacobson ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		‘Unobservable Effects and Business Performance’.  		 			R Jacobson 		.  	 	 		\textit{Marketing Science}  		1990. 9  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Caspi and Moffit ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		‘When Do Individual Differences Matter? A Paradoxical Theory of Personality Coherence’.  		 			A Caspi 		,  		 			T E Moffit 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Inquiry}  		1993. 4  (4)  p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
