An investigation of the validity of leader behavior descriptions obtained from subordinates.

Ilgen, Daniel R.; Fujii, Donald S.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.61.5.642

Cited by 29 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding has been shown in a number of leadership subdomains, and its importance would appear (on the surface) to vary considerably according to the theory or framework involved (cf. Bass, 1957;Bass & Avolio, 1988;Campbell, 1956;Ilgen & Fujii, 1976;Mitchell, 1970;see Bass, 1990, pp. 515, 888-890;and Schriesheim & Kerr, 1974, for reviews).…”

Section: General Issues Concerning Leadership Description Convergencementioning

confidence: 96%

Supervisor–subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: Review and testable propositions

Zhou

Schriesheim

2009

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c tTheoretical explanations are presented for the poor convergence in supervisor and subordinate leader-member exchange (LMX) descriptions that are commonly reported in the literature. We focus on (1) measurement deficiencies, and (2) differences in supervisor-subordinate perceptions of the LMX construct. Additionally, several other factors (e.g., informationprocessing styles, attributional biases, etc.) are explored that may explain poor convergence. Testable propositions and suggestions for future research are developed and presented, and the applicability of the explanations to other leadership approaches is considered.

show abstract

Section: General Issues Concerning Leadership Description Convergencementioning

confidence: 96%

Supervisor–subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: Review and testable propositions

Zhou

Schriesheim

2009

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another example is a study by Ilgen & Fugii (1976), who, after showing that observers and group members did not agree on descriptions of leader behavior at the individual level of analysis, proceeded to reestimate agreement by computing correlations between mean observer perceptions and mean group member perceptions on a sample of groups. Finally, Schneider and Snyder (1975) correlated means of managers' climate perceptions and means of trainees' climate perceptions on a sample of life insurance agencies to test the hypothesis that "people in an organization should agree more on their description of the climate than on their feelings of job satisfaction" (p. 319; note that the level of interpretation here is individuals).…”

Section: Double Aggregate Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement.

James

1982

Journal of Applied Psychology

1,851

1,398

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need to demonstrate agreement among individuals' perceptions of climate prior to averaging climate scores is discussed from the perspective of aggregation. It is then shown that estimates of agreement based on group mean scores have been incorrectly interpreted as applying to perceptual agreement among individuals. Of initial importance is a study by Drexler, who concluded that a considerable proportion of the variance in climate perceptions is accounted for by organizational membership. This conclusion has been employed recently by other authors to support the assumption that individuals in the same environment tend to agree with respect to climate perceptions. The present article demonstrates that Drexler's analysis provided inflated estimates of agreement among individuals, The logic of the approach is then extended to other studies in which inflated estimates of agreement appeared likely.

show abstract

“…Finally, sport would appear to offer an excellent setting for studying the behavior of leaders. Ilgen and Fujii (1976) have stressed the importance of field studies relating group performance and morale to behavioral data on leaders. They suggested that the greater importance of a leader's behavior to subordinates and the increased time frame over which leadersubordinate interactions occur may produce stronger relationships in a naturalistic field setting than those that have been obtained in the laboratory.…”

Section: Leadership Research In Youth Sport Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leadership Behaviors in Sport: A Theoretical Model and Research Paradigm¹

Smoll

Smith

1989

J Applied Social Pyschol

244

183

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A heuristic model is presented concerning leadership behaviors in youth sports. The cognitive‐behavioral model specifies individual difference variables, situational factors, and cognitive processes assumed to mediate overt coaching behaviors and athletes' reactions to them. Initially, the status of leadership research is reviewed, focusing on the potential relevance of behavioral assessment to this area of inquiry. Next, the athletic environment is characterized as a largely untapped naturalistic setting for psychological research, and a rationale is developed for the study of leadership in youth sports. Following this, consideration is given to the basic components of a mediational model of coach‐athlete interactions and some preliminary research relative to the model. An expanded model is then presented, along with suggestions and hypotheses for future research. Finally, the sport‐specific model and associated research is related to the larger context of theoretical advances and empirical work in the area of leadership.

show abstract

An investigation of the validity of leader behavior descriptions obtained from subordinates.

Cited by 29 publications

References 10 publications

Supervisor–subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: Review and testable propositions

Supervisor–subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: Review and testable propositions

Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement.

Leadership Behaviors in Sport: A Theoretical Model and Research Paradigm¹

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

An investigation of the validity of leader behavior descriptions obtained from subordinates.

Cited by 29 publications

References 10 publications

Supervisor–subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: Review and testable propositions

Supervisor–subordinate convergence in descriptions of leader–member exchange (LMX) quality: Review and testable propositions

Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement.

Leadership Behaviors in Sport: A Theoretical Model and Research Paradigm1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Leadership Behaviors in Sport: A Theoretical Model and Research Paradigm¹