Self-Other Agreement: Comparing its Relationship with Performance in the U.S. and Europe

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.

Self–other agreement in empowering leadership: Relationships with leader effectiveness and subordinates' job satisfaction and turnover intention

“…Although previous studies have concluded that over-estimators are generally poor performers and less effective (e.g., Atwater et al, 2005;Ostroff et al, 2004;Tekleab et al, 2008;, there are nevertheless some indications that this picture is more nuanced. For example, Atwater et al (1998) found that leaders who received high ratings from others (i.e., peers and subordinates) but provided still higher self-ratings were rated as more effective by their direct supervisor.…”

“…However, our hypothesis regarding turnover intention appears to have indirect support in that turnover intention has been shown to have significant association with job satisfaction in a number of studies. For example, Tett and Meyer (1993) Atwater et al (2005) found that only others' ratings were significant in the prediction of leader performance in five European countries; that is, self-rating and the interaction between self and others' ratings played an insignificant role. In contrast, they found both self and others' ratings to be significant predictors in the United States.…”

“…However, their study, including 21 countries, indicates that cultural characteristics may play a role in understanding relationships between self and others' ratings. Likewise, Atwater, Waldman, Ostroff, Robie, and Johnson (2005) found the effect of self and others' ratings in relation to the prediction of leader performance differed between U.S. and European leaders (the European countries studied were Germany, France, Italy, Denmark, and the U.K.). It is therefore important that more SOA research be carried out in countries other than those that have been previously studied in order to better understand potential cultural differences and their implications for SOA.…”

“…Compared with the countries studied by Atwater et al (2005) Norway can roughly be categorized in the same group as Denmark and France; that is, relatively lower individualism and low masculinity. However, if we consider Hofstede's (1983) index values on cultural dimensions in more detail, Norway has the lowest value for these dimensions compared with both Denmark and France.…”

“…However, if we consider Hofstede's (1983) index values on cultural dimensions in more detail, Norway has the lowest value for these dimensions compared with both Denmark and France. As such, the present study investigates a country with a combination of cultural values different from those studied by Atwater et al (2005), and may therefore be an important contribution to SOA research.…”