[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The development of effective leaders and leadership behavior is a prominent concern in organizations of all types. We review the theoretical and empirical literature on leader and leadership development published over the past 25 years, primarily focusing on research published in The Leadership Quarterly. Compared to the relatively long history of leadership research and theory, the systematic study of leadership development (broadly defined to also include leader development) has a moderately short history. We examine intrapersonal and interpersonal issues related to the phenomena that develop during the pursuit of effective leadership, describe how development emerges with an emphasis on multi-source or 360-degree feedback processes, review longitudinal studies of leadership development, and investigate methodological and analytical issues in leader and leadership development research. Future research directions to motivate and guide the study of leader and leadership development are also discussed.
The Leadership Quarterly 02/2014; 25(1):63-82. · 2.70 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Feedback orientation is an individual difference variable that represents individuals’ receptivity to feedback. In 2010, Linderbaum and Levy developed and validated a measure of feedback orientation called the Feedback Orientation Scale (FOS). We investigated the validity of the FOS using 172 participants in a leadership development program designed for middle- to senior-level leaders. Our results support the FOS’s convergent validity, as it was correlated with implicit person theory (assumptions regarding the malleability of personal attributes) and achievement motivation. We also found support for the FOS’s criterion-related validity, as it was correlated with participants’ reactions to their 360-degree feedback. Participants’ feedback orientation, however, was unrelated to coach ratings of their openness, likelihood to change, and defensiveness during their feedback sessions.
Group & Organization Management 12/2013; 38(6):690-716. · 2.43 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Knowledge exchange among employees is crucial to organizational effectiveness. Leadership can enhance or detract from employees’
willingness to share knowledge. This study examines how leadership affects knowledge sharing in a knowledge-intensive work
setting. It proposes and tests a model which posits that (1) transformational leadership affects the extent to which employees
identify with their manager; (2) this relational identification, mediated by the quality of LMX (Leader-Member Exchange),
leads to greater identification with the organization and its goals, which in turn results in greater knowledge sharing. The
sample consisted of two hundred and three R&D employees engaged in advanced technological projects. Path analysis results
indicated that there are both direct and indirect (through LMX) relationships between transformational leadership and relational
identification: relational identification promotes organizational identification which, in turn, is positively related to
knowledge sharing. These results highlight the importance of transformational leadership and LMX for promoting relational
and organizational identification, thereby facilitating employee knowledge sharing.
KeywordsKnowledge sharing–Leadership–Relational identification–Organizational identification
The Journal of Technology Transfer 01/2011; 36(3):257-274. · 1.18 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study investigated the influence of feedback format (text versus numeric/normative) on leaders' reactions to 360 degree feedback received from bosses, direct reports, and peers. Leaders who received numeric/normative feedback reacted more favourably than those who received text feedback regardless of the source. The reactions recipients experienced following feedback were relevant to changes in their number of development needs compared pre- and post feedback. Those who reacted negatively had a larger number of development needs reported post feedback while those who had positive reactions showed fewer development needs post feedback. These findings suggest that, contrary to predictions of feedback intervention theory (FIT), feedback that provided scores and comparative information was reacted to more positively than text feedback that provided only self-relevant data. In addition, negative reactions to feedback were detrimental to future changes.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 12/2010; 79(4):517 - 532.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Exhaustion has a significant impact on employees and organizations, and leader behavior may affect it. We applied conservation of resources theory to test propositions regarding the joint effects of goal-focused leadership (GFL) and personality on employee exhaustion. We proposed that the relationship between GFL and exhaustion depends on employees' standing on both conscientiousness and emotional stability. Specifically, we expected that high-conscientiousness subordinates experience greater compatibility with a goal-focused leader because of their predisposition to direct resources toward achievement and goal setting, resulting in lower exhaustion under such a leader than among low-conscientiousness employees. Furthermore, high emotional stability may compensate for GFL incompatibility among low-conscientiousness employees by providing additional resources to manage GFL. In contrast, employees low on both traits likely experience greater exhaustion under a goal-focused leader compared with other employees. Results revealed a 3-way interaction in 2 independent samples and were generally supportive of our predictions. GFL was associated with heightened exhaustion among individuals in the low-emotional-stability, low-conscientiousness group but not among workers having any other trait combination.
Journal of Applied Psychology 11/2010; 95(6):1145-53. · 4.31 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on self–other rating agreement (SOA) related to leadership in the workplace, focusing primarily on research published between 1997 (the year of Atwater & Yammarino's seminal paper on SOA) and the present. Much of the current interest in SOA derives from its purported relationships with self-awareness and leader effectiveness. The literature, however, has used a variety of metrics to assess SOA, resulting in discrepancies between findings across studies. As multi-rater (360-degree; multisource) feedback instruments continue to be widely used as a measure of leadership in organizations, it is important that we more clearly understand the relationships between SOA and its predictors and outcomes. To this end, in this article, we review (a) models of agreement, (b) factors affecting self-ratings and the congruence between self–others' ratings, (c) factors affecting others' ratings, (d) correlates of agreement, and (e) measurement issues and data analytic techniques. We conclude with discussions of practitioner issues and directions for future research.
The Leadership Quarterly 01/2010; 21(6):1005-1034. · 2.70 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Recently, several researchers have suggested that personality will influence the extent to which people improve their performance after receiving multisource feedback (MSF). Building on previous research, we offer theory-driven hypotheses about how specific aspects of personality might influence improvement in MSF ratings over time. In three longitudinal studies, using three different and well-established measures of personality and three multisource feedback instruments, we found little or no evidence to support hypotheses that personality is systematically related to improvement following receipt of multisource feedback.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined the relationship between self and subordinate ratings of leadership and the relationship between self and peer ratings of leadership for 964 managers from 21 countries. Using multilevel modeling, the authors found that cultural characteristics moderated the relationship between self and others' ratings of leadership. Specifically, the relationship between self and subordinate ratings, as well as between self and peer ratings, was more positive in countries that are characterized by high assertiveness. The relationship between self and subordinate ratings, as well as between self and peer ratings, was also more positive in countries characterized by high power distance. The authors also found a leniency bias in individualistic cultures for self, peer, and subordinate ratings. In sum, cultural characteristics should be considered in attempts to understand relationships between self and other ratings.
Journal of Applied Psychology 08/2009; 94(4):876-86. · 4.31 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined how leaders create the impetus for creativity at work. One hundred ninety-three employees occupying a variety of jobs in Israeli organizations completed surveys at two points in time to assess their perceptions of the quality of their relationship with their leader (LMX), their level of energy, and their creative work involvement. SEM and regression analyses showed that LMX was positively related to employees' feelings of energy, which in turn were related to a high level of involvement in creative work. Factors that leaders should take into consideration in promoting followers' creative behaviors are discussed.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: We examined 145 leaders' recall of their multisource feedback (MSF) 9 months after receiving the feedback. Leaders recalled more strengths than weaknesses, but these memories had only a small relationship with the actual feedback received. Leaders were more likely to recall feedback related to their consideration of employees and performance orientation than feedback related to developing and recognizing employees, and they were more likely to recall feedback from supervisors and direct reports than peers. Self versus other rating discrepancies were unrelated to recall, and recall of MSF was not related to subsequent improvement in MSF.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 01/2008; 14(3):202-218.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: A field experiment was conducted to examine outcomes associated with an upward feedback program in a policing agency. Experimental groups included 110 supervisors who were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 conditions: (a) a feedback group in which supervisors and subordinates completed surveys and received feedback at two time periods, or (b) a survey-only group in which supervisors and subordinates completed surveys at Times 1 and 2, but supervisors received feedback only at Time 2. Results showed no significant improvement for the feedback or survey-only group with regard to subordinate ratings of leadership. However, a significant decrease in self-rated leadership scores occurred between Time 1 and Time 2 for the supervisors receiving feedback at Time 1, and no such changes were observed for supervisors who were only surveyed at Time 1. In addition, Time 1 to Time 2 leadership change was predicted by organizational cynicism and the extent to which the recipient reacts positively to upward feedback and takes steps to improve. Thus, individual attitudes appear to be relevant to behavior change following upward feedback. In addition, leadership measured at Time 1 predicted supervisors' commitment to their subordinates at Time 2 for the feedback group, but not for the survey-only group. Such results demonstrate that outcomes in addition to performance, such as commitment to subordinates, need to be considered in the implementation of upward feedback programs.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This study examined the extent to which changes in leader behavior 1 year after a 360-degree feedback intervention related to changes in employee attitudes. Participants were 145 leaders and their subordinates, peers, and manager. The results indicated that improved subordinate ratings of the leader on consideration, performance orientation, and employee development related to increased subordinate engagement and satisfaction as well as reduced intentions to leave following 360-degree feedback to leaders. This study demonstrates that improved leader behavior following 360-degree feedback is related to improved employee attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Group & Organization Management is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Group & Organization Management 10/2006; 31(5):578-600. · 2.43 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The use of multi-source feedback has proliferated in the United States in recent years; however, its usefulness in other countries is unknown. Using a large sample of American managers (n=3793), this study first replicated earlier studies demonstrating that simultaneous consideration of self and other ratings of leadership skills is important for managerial performance ratings. In addition, the impact of self–other agreement on performance was investigated among 2732 managers in five European countries (U.K., Germany, France, Denmark, Italy). Results indicated that the effect of self and other ratings in the prediction of performance differs between the U.S. and the European countries in that the simultaneous inclusion of both self and other ratings is generally less useful in those countries than in the U.S. Further, the effect of self–other agreement varies among the European countries. Implications for multi-source feedback interventions as well as multi-national personnel management are discussed.
International Journal of Selection and Assessment 02/2005; 13(1):25 - 40. · 1.30 Impact Factor