SummaryJob dimensions of autonomy, variety, and feedback were objectively manipulated to evaluate their effect on perceptions of job characteristics and on job outcomes. Except for feedback level, manipulations and perceptions independently predicted satisfaction, and one significant two-way interaction emerged. In a high variety task, increased autonomy led to increased satisfaction, while in a low variety task, increased autonomy had a negligible effect on satisfaction. For performance, objective variety and autonomy also interacted, indicating that in a low variety task, autonomy had little impact, while in a high variety task, increased autonomy contributed 16 per cent to performance. In addition, autonomy and feedback interacted with one another, with increased feedback in a high autonomy task again contributing 16 per cent to performance, while increased feedback in a low autonomy task had little impact on performance. Findings are discussed from both the Job Characteristics Model and control theory perspectives.

No abstract

This study explored the relationships between a leader’s self‐awareness of his/her leadership behavior and the attitudes and performance of subordinates. Following previous research, leaders were categorized as overestimators, underestimators or in‐agreement. Results indicate that subordinates of underestimators reported significantly higher levels of supervisory and job satisfaction than did subordinates of those who were in‐agreement, and both subordinates of underestimators and those in‐agreement reported significantly higher levels of supervisory and job satisfaction than did subordinates of overestimators. No significant differences were found between the self‐awareness categories and transfer intent. Finally, subordinates of underestimators and those in‐agreement achieved a significantly higher level of productivity than did subordinates of leaders who overestimated their leadership ability.

Purpose-This research paper aims to follow a line of research that examines the impact of elements of emotional intelligence (EI), particularly those related to self-awareness, on self-other agreement and performance. Design/methodology/approach-This is a quantitative study that employs the same methodology as Sosik and Megerian to analyze survey data gathered from a matched sample of 146 managers and 1,314 subordinates at a large international technology company based in North America. Findings-The analysis revealed that the relationship between EI and leader performance is strongest for managers who underestimate their leader abilities. Underestimators earn higher follower ratings of leader performance than all other agreement categories (In agreement/good, In agreement/poor, and Overestimators). The analysis also suggests that there appears to be a negative relationship between EI and leader performance for managers who overestimate their leader abilities. Research limitations/implications-Implications of the counterintuitive findings for underestimators as well as the imperative for further study utilizing alternative measures of EI are discussed. Originality/value-Previous empirical work in this area used an ad hoc measure of EI. This study extends this work by utilizing a larger, business sample and employing a widely-used and validated measure of EI, the Emotional Quotient Inventory. Results further illuminate the nature of the relationship between EI and self-other agreement and provide a potential selection and development tool for the improvement of leadership performance.

No abstract