Search results

This study aims to examine whether the internal locus of control, self-esteem and leadership self-efficacy can predict differences in self–other rating agreement on leader effectiveness. First, the authors predicted that the greater the internal locus of a leader the more their self-rating will be in agreement with others' rating of them (1a). Second, the authors proposed that the greater the self-esteem of a leader the more their self-rating will be in discrepancy with others' rating (1b). Third, the authors hypothesized that the greater the self-efficacy of a leader the more their self-rating will be in agreement with others' rating (1c).

To test the hypotheses, multisource data were collected from 128 banking leaders (who responded about different aspects of leadership self-efficacy, internal locus of control, self-esteem and leadership effectiveness) and 344 subordinates (who rated their leaders' effectiveness in performing leadership tasks).Multivariate regression was performed by jointly regressing both leaders' self-ratings and subordinates' ratings as a dependent variable on internal locus of control, self-esteem and leadership self-efficacy as predictor variables.

Self-esteem of a leader the more their self-rating will be in discrepancy with others' ratings.

The study tried to investigate the leader-subordinate dis(agreement) on leaders’ effectiveness taking banking leaders in the Ethiopian Context. The finding of the results is crucial and important for leadership development programs.

This paper aimed to examine the relationship between 360° assessment of leadership derailment factors and leadership effectiveness, differences across position levels, and impact of self‐other agreement.

The data were from an archive of 360° feedback (N=523). Boss ratings of leadership effectiveness were regressed on leadership derailment factors as rated by other rater sources (e.g. peers and direct reports). Polynomial regressions were conducted to examine the impact of self‐other agreement.

As hypothesized, derailment factors had statistically significant negative correlations with leadership effectiveness. Higher‐level managers were rated higher on derailment factors than lower‐level managers. In‐agreement high ratings of derailment factors (i.e. rated high by both self and others) were associated with lower effectiveness than in‐agreement low ratings (i.e. rated low by both self and others). Self under‐ratings of derailment factors (i.e. self ratings lower than others’ ratings) were related to lower effectiveness than self over‐ratings (i.e. self ratings higher than others’ ratings). It also was found that self ratings were less accurate than ratings from other rater sources.

Leadership derailment induces significant direct as well as indirect costs to organizations. The 360° feedback process can be used to help managers enhance their self‐awareness of derailment potential. Findings of this study can be used to help interpret 360° assessment results.

Past research on 360° feedback has focused primarily on positive leadership characteristics. This study represents one of the few in the literature that empirically has examined the assessment of negative leadership characteristics in 360° feedback.

Because of the potential cost savings that online teaching evaluations can deliver, many universities are converting their student evaluations of teaching to this mode of administration. In this study, we examine the effects of transitioning administration of student evaluations from paper-and-pencil to online. We use data from accounting and other departments in the College of Business Administration of a large private, research university that converted from paper to online administration of teaching evaluations. We examine the average teaching effectiveness rating and response rate for instructors who taught the same course before and after the conversion. In addition, we survey a sample of accounting students to investigate their responses to online teaching evaluations. We find a significant increase in the average effectiveness rating and a significant decrease in response rate. Furthermore, we find that those instructors with lower ratings under the paper administration experience the greatest increase in ratings when the evaluations are converted to online administration. In a follow-up survey, we find that students who are highly motivated and have higher grade point averages are more likely to complete and provide higher evaluations with the online administration. We discuss the implications of our results to accounting and business education literature.

In order to determine the usefulness of multi‐source rating in different types of organizations, this study explored differences among organization types in four areas: leniency, interrater agreement, relationships between these ratings and effectiveness, and the relationship between agreement and effectiveness. Used self, subordinate, peer, and supervisor ratings for 1,080 target managers in six types of organizations: education, military, government, manufacturing, finance, and health. Interrater agreement was measured in three ways: an index of variance, a point‐difference categorization method, and categories of self‐other agreement. Results indicated that a leniency bias was present in educational institutions, after controlling for demographic characteristics. Interrater agreement was lowest in government agencies and highest in education and manufacturing organizations. In private sector organizations, more poor‐performing managers tended to over‐estimate their performance relative to the perceptions of others. Interrater agreement was positively related to effectiveness especially in education and finance organizations. Results suggest that multi‐source feedback may work differently in different types of organizations, and such differences may need to be taken into account by researchers, practitioners, and feedback recipients.

This paper aims to increase the transparency of information in official anti-money laundering rating data to assist evidence-informed decision-making in compliance, policy-making and research.

This paper converts anti-money laundering rating data into information-rich visualisations, reintroduces a comparison methodology and ranks all anti-money laundering regimes evaluated to date.

Official anti-money laundering ratings as currently structured and presented offer surprisingly little policy-relevant information. Persistent failure to transform available data into information for knowledge and insight suggests that the risk has been realised that impressionistic judgments or politicised interests drive the policy agenda at least as much as objective evidence or substantive economic and social goals.

Any reluctance to generate policy-relevant information from the industry’s primary data set or disinclination to engage constructively with a growing body of independent critical policy effectiveness evidence calls into question whether implementing anti-money laundering controls with some prospect of achieving substantial societal benefits, or perpetuating the current system, prevails.

With a dearth of scholarship at the intersection of money laundering and policy effectiveness scholarship and practice, this paper combines elements of these disciplines and examines anti-money laundering effectiveness from a different viewpoint. Rather than seeking to measure money laundering or estimate the proportion of criminal proceeds successfully intercepted, this paper draws directly from the anti-money laundering industry’s own “main” data set.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationships between leadership development level (LDL) and leadership effectiveness utilizing 360‐degree feedback scores. Researchers examine raters' ability to recognize effective leadership practices using a constructive developmental framework.

This approach is quantitative and involved data gathered from subject‐object CD interviews and 360‐degree feedback scores collected from individuals enrolled in an executive leadership development program.

The analysis revealed that LDL predicted leadership effectiveness using the 360‐degree feedback measure across a number of sources including superiors, subordinates, and peers. In addition, researchers reveal that individuals that lead from higher levels are more effective in a number of leadership competencies (e.g. Leading Change, Managing Performance, Creating a Compelling Vision, etc.). Finally, the research demonstrates that superiors and peers can predict leader effectiveness better than subordinates or oneself.

Implications for integrating constructive developmental theory in both the research and practice of leader selection and development is discussed.

This study is one of the first studies to empirically demonstrate the link between leadership development level and leadership effectiveness using the constructive developmental framework.

Although individual difference variables are important in the prediction of leadership effectiveness, comparatively little empirical research has examined distal and proximal traits/characteristics that help managers lead effectively in organizations. The aim of this paper is to extend previous research by examining whether and how specific distal, narrow personality traits and the more proximal characteristic of political skill are related to decisiveness, a specific competency of leadership effectiveness, as rated from direct reports and peers.

Self-report data on political skill and personality traits (i.e. perceptiveness and affability) from 225 practicing managers from the US, together with other-report (i.e. peer and subordinate) ratings of their leadership effectiveness (i.e. decisiveness) were used to test the mediating effects of political skill.

Results show that political skill (i.e. the social astuteness dimension) mediated the relationships between narrow personality traits and evaluations of leadership effectiveness as rated by some, but not other rater sources. Specifically, the social astuteness dimension of political skill mediated the relationship between perceptiveness and decisiveness ratings from direct reports but not for ratings from peers, and the full political skill composite measure mediated the relationship between affability and decisiveness ratings from peers but not for ratings from direct reports.

Limitations include the availability of only two narrow personality traits, which constrained the scope of the possible mediation tests of all individual dimensions of political skill.

Political skill is shown to be a more proximal predictor of leadership effectiveness than personality dimensions. Thus, political skill should be considered over personality for emerging leaders. Further, differences in ratings due to source (i.e. peer and subordinate) indicate the need for organizational leaders to consider the source when evaluating effectiveness reports.

This study is one of the first to integrate the Ferris et al. model of political skill and the Zaccaro et al. distal-proximal trait model of leadership effectiveness.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the IC Rating™ approach as a management consulting approach to measure intellectual capital and to report on the implementation and experience in one case study firm.

The paper describes the IC Rating™ model in the context of the exiting literature in the field of IC measurement and uses a case study to demonstrate its practical application.

Based on the presented case study as well as implementations in other organizations we find the IC Rating™ model a useful tool to facilitate the analysis and discussion about intellectual capital in organizations.

The article gives a complementary view to the most commonly used score card methods and guidelines for intangibles on how intangibles can be measured. IC Rating™ focuses on the comparability between companies and industries as well as a simplification of how to interpret intangible measures.

The original idea for the paper was to answer the question “Why do companies really need to measure and develop intangibles?”. The answer is “To improve company financial performance”. The IC Rating™ methodology is therefore based on the answers to two other questions: “Which parameters does an executive manager need to have insightful knowledge of, in order to make the right decisions for the future?” and “From where and whom should the executive manager receive this information?”.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relative importance of four managerial skill dimensions (technical skill, administrative skill, human skill, and citizenship behavior) for predicting managerial effectiveness. In addition, it aims to explore whether the relative importance of these skill dimensions varies as a function of gender or organizational level.

Participants were 733 managers enrolled in a nationally recognized leadership development program. Ratings of managerial skill were obtained from peers using a well‐validated 360‐degree assessment instrument, while manager effectiveness ratings were provided by supervisors. Moderated multiple regression and relative weight analysis were used to test the study's hypotheses.

Using ratings provided by multiple sources, these results show that all four of the managerial skill dimensions were significantly important predictors of manager effectiveness. Human skills were significantly more important than technical skill and citizenship behavior, while administrative skills were most important overall. Gender was not a significant moderator of the skill‐effectiveness relationship, but organizational level was.

Individuals tasked with selecting, developing, or placing managers should take all four skill dimensions into account. Moreover, special consideration should be given to administrative skill, and this emphasis should increase for managers higher up in the organizational hierarchy.

Although prior research has speculated about the importance of different managerial skills, this study is the first to provide empirical support for this skill typology in predicting actual managerial effectiveness using appropriate statistical analyses for examining the relative importance of these skill dimensions.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how different team learning activities relate to different types of team performance as rated by team members and managers.

The 624 respondents, working in 88 teams in seven different organizations indicate their perceptions of team learning and their performance ratings of the team. Moreover, managers in the organization are asked to evaluate the team performance.

Team member ratings of effectiveness are positively related to the boundedness and stability of the team and information processing and negatively related to information acquisition. Manager ratings of effectiveness are positively related to boundedness and stability, information processing and information storage and retrieval. Team member ratings of efficiency are positively related to information processing and negatively related to information acquisition. Manager ratings of efficiency are positively related to boundedness and stability and information storage and retrieval. Team member ratings of innovativeness are positively related to information processing, while no predictors are found for manager ratings of innovativeness.

Since the data are cross‐sectional, the authors cannot draw conclusion about the causality between the variables. Longitudinal designs that study the sequence of team learning and team performance are called for. Furthermore, future studies might include more objective performance measures.

As team learning proved to have predictive value for diverse team performance indicators, rated by team members and managers, team should carefully organise their learning process in order to enhance their performance.

Although some studies have proven the significance of team learning for team performance, none have investigated which team learning activities are related to which types of performance ratings.