The short answer

Conscientiousness is the personality trait behind being organized, reliable and willing to do the boring part. People who score high on it plan ahead, finish what they start and keep their promises. People who score low are often bright and capable, but find that good intentions keep slipping.
If you are in the second group, there is real reason for optimism. Over the last decade, researchers have tested whether people can raise this trait on purpose, and the answer is a cautious yes. The catch is that the change comes from doing, not from wanting. Below is what conscientiousness is, why it matters, what the change studies found, and the specific strategies with the best evidence.
What conscientiousness is
Conscientiousness is one of the Big Five personality traits, alongside openness, extraversion, agreeableness and emotional stability. Brent Roberts and colleagues describe it as the tendency to be responsible, organized, hard-working, goal-directed and able to follow rules and control impulses.
It is not one single thing. When Roberts's team analyzed seven major personality questionnaires in 2005, they found it breaks into several related facets. Knowing your weak facet tells you where to start.
| Facet | What it looks like | Low-end example |
|---|---|---|
| Industriousness | Working hard, persisting, aiming high | Stopping as soon as a task gets dull |
| Orderliness | Planning, tidiness, organization | Losing keys, missing deadlines |
| Self-control | Thinking before acting, resisting impulses | Buying on impulse, checking the phone mid-task |
| Responsibility | Keeping commitments, being dependable | Agreeing to things you then do not do |
| Conventionality | Following rules and norms | Ignoring procedures that matter |
| Virtue | Honesty and doing the right thing | Cutting corners when no one is watching |
Most people trying to "become more conscientious" are really trying to improve one or two of these: usually industriousness, orderliness or self-control.
Why it matters
Conscientiousness predicts outcomes across work, study and health, which is why it gets so much attention.
- Work. Murray Barrick and Michael Mount's 1991 meta-analysis found conscientiousness was the Big Five trait most consistently related to job performance, across every occupational group they studied.
- Study. Arthur Poropat's 2009 meta-analysis, with combined samples of over 70,000 people, found conscientiousness predicted academic performance largely independently of intelligence. At university level, it added about as much to prediction as intelligence did.
- Health. Tim Bogg and Brent Roberts pooled 194 studies in 2004. Conscientiousness-related traits were linked to less smoking, less excessive drinking, less risky driving and more physical activity: the behaviors behind many early deaths.
None of this means low conscientiousness dooms you. Effects are averages across many people, and the trait has trade-offs (very high scorers can be rigid). But it is one of the most useful traits to nudge upward.
Can conscientiousness change?
Yes, both naturally and on purpose.
Naturally, with age. Roberts, Walton and Viechtbauer's 2006 meta-analysis of 92 longitudinal samples found that people on average become more conscientious through adulthood, especially between about 20 and 40. Researchers link this to the demands of adult roles: jobs, relationships and parenting reward reliability, and people grow into them.
On purpose, with effort. Several studies now test deliberate change:
- Hudson and Fraley (2015) ran two 16-week experiments. People who said they wanted to increase a Big Five trait tended to show actual increases in that trait and in related daily behavior. One intervention did not help, but a second one, which trained people to write specific if-then plans, did help them reach their desired changes.
- Hudson, Briley, Chopik and Derringer (2019) gave people weekly "challenges" matched to the trait they wanted to change, over 15 weeks. Accepting challenges did not predict change. Completing them did. Wanting to change was not enough. Following through was.
- Stieger and colleagues (2021) ran a randomized trial with 1,523 people using a three-month smartphone coaching program. The intervention group changed more than controls, in the direction of their goals. Friends and family also noticed the change, though less strongly, and the changes were still there three months after the program ended.
A broader review by Roberts and colleagues in 2017 pooled 207 intervention studies and found that personality scores changed meaningfully over an average of 24 weeks, mostly in emotional stability. So change is real but modest, and it takes months.
How to increase conscientiousness: strategies with evidence
| Strategy | How to do it | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| If-then plans | "If it is 8 am on a weekday, I open the report first" | Gollwitzer and Sheeran meta-analysis of 94 tests: medium-to-large effect on goal attainment |
| Trait-matched challenges | One small conscientious action a week, then do it | Hudson et al. 2019: completing, not accepting, predicted change |
| Habit stacking on a cue | Same action, same time and place, every day | Lally et al. 2010: automaticity builds with repetition in a consistent context |
| Environment design | Make the right action easy and the wrong one awkward | Wood and Neal 2007: habits are cued by context |
| Progress tracking | Record what you did, ideally on paper or in public | Harkin et al. 2016: monitoring improved goal attainment, more so when recorded or shared |
| Guided change programs | Structured coaching over several months | Stieger et al. 2021: lasting change in a randomized trial |
1. Turn goals into if-then plans
Vague goals ("be more organized") rarely change behavior. Implementation intentions do. They link a specific situation to a specific action: "If I sit down at my desk, then I write the day's three priorities before opening email." Peter Gollwitzer and Paschal Sheeran's 2006 meta-analysis of 94 tests found these plans had a medium-to-large effect on reaching goals, mainly by making the right action automatic when the cue appears. It was also the approach that worked in Hudson and Fraley's study.
Write two or three if-then plans for the moments where you usually slip. Our guide to implementation intentions exercises has templates.
2. Pick small, specific challenges and actually do them
Hudson's 2019 study points to the most direct route. Choose one concrete, trait-typical action each week, sized so you will complete it:
- Industriousness: work for 25 minutes on the task you are avoiding before lunch.
- Orderliness: spend ten minutes each evening setting out tomorrow.
- Responsibility: reply to every message that needs an answer within a day.
- Self-control: leave your phone in another room for the first work hour.
Completing an easy challenge beats accepting a heroic one.
3. Build habits around a fixed cue
In Phillippa Lally's 2010 study, 96 volunteers repeated a new daily behavior in the same context, such as "after breakfast". Automaticity grew gradually and then leveled off. The time to reach that plateau varied hugely between people, from 18 to 254 days, with a median of about two months. Missing a single day did not materially derail the process. Expect weeks, not days, and do not quit after one miss.
4. Design your environment
Wendy Wood and David Neal's review shows that habits are triggered by context: places, times and objects. Use that. Put the gym bag by the door. Keep the work laptop off the sofa. Delete the app that eats your evenings. When the environment does the deciding, you need far less willpower.
5. Track what you do
Benjamin Harkin and colleagues pooled 138 experiments in 2016 and found that prompting people to monitor their progress improved goal attainment. Effects were larger when progress was physically recorded or shared with others. A paper checklist or telling a friend works. Track actions you control, such as "wrote for 30 minutes", rather than outcomes.
6. Expect gradual change, and measure it
Personality change shows up over months. Check in every few weeks. If you want a structured snapshot of where your self-discipline sits now and later, our discipline test gives you a baseline to compare against.
Common pitfalls
- Waiting to feel motivated. The studies suggest action comes first and the self-image follows.
- Starting too big. Ambitious plans you abandon do less than small ones you finish.
- Relying on willpower alone. Cues, plans and environment carry the load when you are tired.
- Treating a slip as failure. One missed day does not undo a habit. Restart the next day.
- Chasing perfectionism. Very high conscientiousness can turn rigid. The goal is reliable, not flawless.
For a broader look at how traits shift over a lifetime, see personality change explained.
Questions people ask
Can you really increase conscientiousness?
Yes, modestly. Randomized and longitudinal studies show that people who deliberately practice conscientious behaviors over several months tend to score higher on the trait, and that the change can last after a program ends.
How long does it take to become more conscientious?
The change studies ran for 15 weeks to three months, and habit formation in Lally's study took a median of about two months, with wide variation. Think in seasons, not days.
What is the fastest way to become more disciplined?
Write if-then plans for your two or three most common slip points, and change your environment so the right action is the easy one. These have some of the strongest evidence for quick improvements in follow-through.
Is conscientiousness genetic?
Partly. Like all Big Five traits, it is influenced by genes, but it also changes with age and life roles, and studies show it can shift with deliberate effort.
Does conscientiousness matter more than intelligence?
They predict different things and work together. In Poropat's meta-analysis, conscientiousness predicted grades largely independently of intelligence, and at university level it added about as much to the prediction as intelligence did.
References
- 1.Roberts, B. W., Lejuez, C., Krueger, R. F., Richards, J. M., & Hill, P. L. (2014). What is conscientiousness and how can it be assessed? Developmental Psychology, 50(5), 1315-1330.
- 2.Roberts, B. W., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). The structure of conscientiousness: An empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Personnel Psychology, 58(1), 103-139.
- 3.Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 1-26.
- 4.Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135(2), 322-338.
- 5.Bogg, T., & Roberts, B. W. (2004). Conscientiousness and health-related behaviors: A meta-analysis of the leading behavioral contributors to mortality. Psychological Bulletin, 130(6), 887-919.
- 6.Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 1-25.
- 7.Hudson, N. W., & Fraley, R. C. (2015). Volitional personality trait change: Can people choose to change their personality traits? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(3), 490-507.
- 8.Hudson, N. W., Briley, D. A., Chopik, W. J., & Derringer, J. (2019). You have to follow through: Attaining behavioral change goals predicts volitional personality change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(4), 839-857.
- 9.Stieger, M., et al. (2021). Changing personality traits with the help of a digital personality change intervention. PNAS, 118(8), e2017548118.
- 10.Roberts, B. W., et al. (2017). A systematic review of personality trait change through intervention. Psychological Bulletin, 143(2), 117-141.
- 11.Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119.
- 12.Lally, P., van Jaarsveld, C. H. M., Potts, H. W. W., & Wardle, J. (2010). How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(6), 998-1009.
- 13.Wood, W., & Neal, D. T. (2007). A new look at habits and the habit-goal interface. Psychological Review, 114(4), 843-863.
- 14.Harkin, B., et al. (2016). Does monitoring goal progress promote goal attainment? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 142(2), 198-229.
Also relevant: Discipline Test (20 questions · about 5 min).
