Compare And Contrast Parson's Trait-And-Factor Theory

Parson’s trait-and-factor theory, Schreuder and Coetzee (2011) explains this theory to be the match between individual traits and the needed requirements of each and every distinct line of work. The term trait refers to an inborn characteristic or individualizing standard that cleary makes a person unique, this unique criterion should be measured to emphasize the skills of an individual. Factor refers to the skill, ability and knowledge needed to perform that specific job, the main characteristics one should look at when determining which type of person to choose for the job. According to Schreuder and Coetzee (2011) ‘’the primary role of this theory is the assumption that individuals have unique patterns of ability and/or traits that can be objectively measured and correlated with the requirements of various types of jobs.’’

Parson

There is two different types of values, your general values which is the everyday values such as religious, political, social and economic values. The second type of value is work- related values, which is financial security, authority, autonomy, risk and creativity.

Parson’s trait-and-factor approach fired up a process that is still rolling, the development of assessment instruments for example. Aptitude tests, IQ tests, vocational and personality inventories. The performance results of these tests rely upon two things to determine whether these tests are sufficient or limited. The first one is the reliability and the second one is the validity of the tests. (Schreuder & Coetzee 2011).

With all the good there has to be bad, emphasizing the disadvantages of this trait-and-factor theory. It comes across to be a simple theory, because it is a mechanistic approach in which a man is seen as a passive rather than an actively functioning being which makes this approach limited. (Schreuder & Coetzee