Purpose -The purpose of this research is to focus on the development of three scales to measure the three dimensions of accountability presented by Wood and Winston ( 2005): responsibility; openness; and answerability. Design/methodology/approach -The scale development process followed the method proposed by Spector in 1992 and DeVellis in 2003 in that each of the three constructs were defined and through a search of the literature the authors generated pools of 26, 21, and 19 items respectively. The items were submitted to a panel of six experts, who reviewed them for relevance to the construct and who made suggestions for the general improvement of the scales. The scales were then tested online by 148 participants. Findings -Factor analyses revealed that the item pools measured one construct in each of the scales. Reliability analysis revealed Cronbach alpha coefficients of 0.98 (Responsibility), 0.99 (Openness) and 0.98 (Answerability). The scales were reduced to 10 items by removing items deemed redundant or confusing. Alpha scores for the ten-item scales were 0.97 (Responsibility), 0.97 (Openness) and 0.98 (Answerability).Research limitations/implications -The study participants were primarily Caucasian males. Further study should be done to validate the instrument in other ethnic groups. Originality/value -The three scales may be useful for leadership selection, development, and research in overall leadership effectiveness.
This article defines leader accountability as (a) the leader's willing acceptance of the responsibilities inherent in the leadership position to serve the well-being of the organization; (b) the implicit or explicit expectation that the he/she will be publicly linked to his/her actions, words, or reactions; and (c) the expectation that the leader may be called on to explain his or her beliefs, decisions, commitments, or actions to constituents. This paper presents and defines accountability in a manner that provides greater clarity than prior literature attempts and sets the stage for future research.
PurposeThe purpose of this study is to examine the role of trigger events and leadership crucibles in the lives of authentic leaders. The study was based on two theories: authentic leadership theory and born versus made theory.Design/methodology/approachParticipants were included in the study if they scored between 64 and 80 on the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ). The qualified leaders were then asked to participate in a qualitative interview utilizing an interview guide born out of the relevant literature. The interview followed the guidelines of the Critical Incident Technique (CIT).FindingsThe data indicated that trigger events and leadership crucibles play a significant role in authentic leadership development.Practical implicationsPractitioners should emphasize the prominent themes of self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing and moral perspective and the connection with other themes that emerged from the current study when developing or training leaders. Furthermore, practitioners concerned with creating an authentic leadership culture may consider the findings of the current study to develop and employ hiring and promotion strategies that increase the probabilities of hiring and promoting leaders that exhibit authentic leadership behaviors.Originality/valueThe findings of the research indicate that trigger events and crucibles both affect authentic leadership development. The research findings confirm characteristics associated with authentic leadership theory were predominant in the participants. However, one theme that prevailed was that of spirituality, which may or may not be considered to be part of an authentic leader's moral perspective
The objective of this research project was to develop a validated scale to measure Level 5 Leadership using the Collins () Level 5 attributes. An expert panel reduced the 99 attributes from Collins to 74. The 349 participants evaluated their bosses on a 10‐point semantic differential scale for each attribute. A review of the literature suggested that Level 5 leadership and servant leadership represent the same concept; thus the study used a 10‐item servant leadership scale to check for concurrent validity. Additionally, Collins proposed eight untested questions to determine if individuals qualify as Level 5 leaders. Principal component analysis resulted in two factors that explained 55.2% of the variance; these factors matched Collins's proposed personal humility and professional will constructs. The final instrument contains five attributes of personal humility and five attributes of professional will that yield Cronbach alphas of .83 and .83, respectively. The analysis also revealed statistically significant positive relationships between the Level 5 attributes, servant leadership, and a single factor that represented Collins's eight questions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.