Self-other rating agreement and leader effectiveness

Fleenor, John W.; McCauley, Cynthia D.; Brutus, Stéphane

doi:10.1016/s1048-9843(96)90003-x

Cited by 193 publications

(184 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

156

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…leaders who rated themselves higher than others perceived them) tended not to be as effective as in-agreement and under-estimators. 15 The results implied a need to incorporate self-awareness elements in nursing leadership development programmes. Self-awareness is crucial to good leadership and enables leaders to choose roles where they will succeed, as well as recognise how to build teams that complement their strengths.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership style of nurse managers as perceived by registered nurses: A cross-sectional survey

Goh

Ang

Della

2018

Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given rapid changes in the health care landscape, nurse leaders need to be equipped with effective leadership skills. Those who are aware of their styles of working and its impact on their employees could adopt a better leadership style. The study aim was to assess the leadership styles of nurse leaders, as perceived by their employees. The secondary objectives were to explore differences between self-ratings and others' ratings of leadership styles, as well as correlation between perceived leadership styles and organisational outcomes. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among registered nurses from four inpatient wards in an acute tertiary hospital in Singapore. Respondents were asked to complete a questionnaire that consisted of demographic questions, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire and the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire, as well as a Three-index item Questionnaire, to elicit turnover intention. A total of 111 completed surveys (37% response) were received. Overall, registered nurses reported that their nurse leaders exhibited both transformational and transactional leadership behaviours and, to a lesser extent, laissez-faire. Of interest was the finding that nurse leaders in this study tend to rate themselves higher than others rate them. The results implied a need to incorporate self-awareness elements in nursing leadership development programmes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership style of nurse managers as perceived by registered nurses: A cross-sectional survey

Goh

Ang

Della

2018

Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We did this by standardizing the score for self and other, and any leader with a standardized score on the self-rating half a standard deviation above others' score was categorized as an overestimator, whereas any leader with a standardized score for self half a standard deviation below others' score was categorized as an under-estimator. Leaders within these limits were categorized as in agreement with others (Fleenor, McCauley, & Brutus, 1996). All three of the categories were well represented in the sample, which, according to Shanock et al (2010), constituted a good basis for our subsequent SOA analyses (Table 2).…”

Section: Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Amundsen

Martinsen

2014

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, Atwater et al (1992) and Van Velsor et al (1993) as well as Fleenor, McCauley, and Brutus (1996) categorized individuals as over-or-under raters based on the differences between self and other ratings. This method has been criticized in such work as Edwards (1995), and regression-based models have been advocated.…”

Section: Self-other Agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding and optimizing multisource feedback

Atwater

Waldman

Brett

2002

Human Resource Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-hundred-and-sixty degree or multisource feedback, the process in which subordinates, peers, supervisors, and/or customers provide anonymous feedback to recipients, has grown in popularity over the past decade (Waldman & Atwater, 1998). In 1993, HRMJ published a special issue that included articles addressing topics such as 360-degree feedback as a competitive advantage, the impact of such feedback on management skills development, and suggestions for boosting the power of peer ratings. In July 1995, The APA Monitor published the following: "Anecdotal information indicates that these [360-degree] feedback methods heighten managers' awareness of their strengths and weaknesses; create an atmosphere of constructive dialogue; remove personal blind spots; and are a powerful incentive for change." In 1996, Antonioni reported that an estimated 25% of companies were using some type of upward or 360-degree-feedback process. (Upward feedback is solicited from only one source: subordinates.) In fact, numerous studies have reported improvements in overall performance following 360 or upward feedback interventions (e.g., Atwater, Roush, & Fischthal, 1995;Reilly, Smither, & Vasilopoulos, 1996). So why would any organization decline to engage in a 360-degree intervention?Although the use of 360-degree programs increased in the 1990s, research during this time on multisource feedback took a number of twists and turns that suggests that positive results are not the only potential outcome. Research indicates that a variety of factors can impact the success of a feedback intervention. In this article, we review the pivotal studies: those that question the validity of the impact of feedback interventions, those that address factors that influence change, and those that identify potential risks and negative effects. These studies are summarized in (56) upward (978) upward and peer (198) upward (238) upward (110) upward (238) upward (252) upward (158) upward (648) upward (1460) upward and peer upward (252) Key FindingsSignificant positive change for supervisors receiving feedback compared to control group Leader behavior improves following feedback; over-estimators get the most benefit from feedback Skill increases and higher self-coworker agreement years after receiving multisource feedback Managers with low or moderate scores improved Study incorporated a control group; those receiving feedback did not improve significantly more than did survey-only group Performance improvements sustained over time primarily managers whose initial feedback scores were low Managers rated as low or moderate showed improvements over 5 years-effects beyond regression to the mean Performance best for those with self-ratings in agreement with subordinate-ratings Under-raters are most effective; over-raters are least effective Over-raters are poorer performers; under-raters are better performers Feedback leads to improvements in both subordinate and peer ratings-but not customer ratings or sales volume Upward feedback scores correlated significantly...

show abstract

Self-other rating agreement and leader effectiveness

Cited by 193 publications

References 22 publications

Leadership style of nurse managers as perceived by registered nurses: A cross-sectional survey

Leadership style of nurse managers as perceived by registered nurses: A cross-sectional survey

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

Understanding and optimizing multisource feedback

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About