Attribution of the “causes” of performance: A constructive, quasi-longitudinal replication of the staw (1975) study

Downey, H. Kirk; Chacko, Thomas I.; McElroy, James C.

doi:10.1016/0030-5073(79)90031-x

Cited by 44 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, as previously noted, several studies found that observers tend to confuse category-consistent but unobserved leader behaviors with observed behaviors (Binning et al, 1986;Downey et al, 1979;Foti & Lord, 1987;Phillips, 1984;. A connectionist view of knowledge can adequately explain this "gap-filling" phenomenon in terms of the activation of an entire prototype when many, but not necessarily all, of the perceived features match the prototype.…”

Section: Connectionist Views Of Knowledge Leadership Perceptions Anmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…In addition, raters tend to distort behavioral ratings in a manner that is consistent with prior categorization. Specifically, they tend to misremember prototypical behaviors that did not actually occur when good performance has produced categorization as a leader, but when a leader's poor performance leads to categorization as an ineffective leader, antiprototypical behaviors tend to be falsely remembered (Binning, Zaba, & Whattam, 1986;Downey, Chacko, & McElroy, 1979;Foti & Lord, 1987;Phillips, 1984;. Relying exclusively on the symbolic perspective of knowledge created many problems for explaining why followers incorrectly remember the leader possessing prototypical leadership traits.…”

Section: Symbolic Views Of Knowledge Leadership Perceptions and Memorymentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Leadership and knowledge: Symbolic, connectionist, and embodied perspectives

Lord

Shondrick

2011

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Connectionist Views Of Knowledge Leadership Perceptions Anmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Symbolic Views Of Knowledge Leadership Perceptions and Memorymentioning

confidence: 94%

Leadership and knowledge: Symbolic, connectionist, and embodied perspectives

Lord

Shondrick

2011

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Even with the advantages of convenience of data collection and applicability over a variety of organizational settings, the utility of these measures has recently been questioned. The main issue is whether perceptual measures assess situational attributes or individual characteristics (see Downey et a/., 1979;Staw, 1975;and Mitchell et al, 1977). Organizational researchers have been prone to accept perceptual measures as reflections of objective realities with little or no evidence that they are.…”

Section: Andrew D Szilagyimentioning

confidence: 99%

Causal inferences between leader reward behaviour and subordinate performance, absenteeism, and work satisfaction

Szilagyi

1980

Journal of Occupational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A longitudinal field study, using corrected cross‐lag correlations, investigated the causal inference relationships between perceived leader reward behaviour and subordinate performance, absenteeism, and work satisfaction in a controller's department of a merchandising organization. The results revealed that: (a) perceived positive leader reward behaviour served as a source of causation for subordinate performance and work satisfaction; (b) perceived punitive leader behaviour acted as a source of causation for subordinate work dissatisfaction; and (c) subordinate performance and absenteeism served as sources of causation for perceived punitive leader behaviour. The results support the belief that perceived performance‐contingent rewards given by the leader can be a significant influence on subordinate attitudes and behaviour.

show abstract

“…This effect has been documented by Staw () and replicated by Downey et al . () in an experiment in which teams that were told that they performed well in a financial analysis task subsequently rated their cohesiveness, influence, communication and motivation significantly higher than teams that were told that they performed poorly – although there was no actual difference in the performance between the teams.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Essence of Dynamic Capabilities and their Measurement

Laaksonen¹,

Peltoniemi

2016

Int J Management Reviews

241

206

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing popularity of explaining firm performance through dynamic capabilities has motivated plenty of conceptual development in the field. However, empirical approaches to measuring dynamic capabilities have so far not been under comprehensive scrutiny. The authors; purpose is to assess the extent to which different ways of measuring dynamic capabilities in quantitative studies correspond to the theoretical essence of the concept, and develop recommendations for future research. They find that four types of operationalizations have been used: (1) managers' evaluations;(2) financial data; (3) company's experience, actions and performance; and (4) managers' or employees' experience, actions and performance. Based on their analysis, the authors provide eight recommendations for future research that relate to identifying ordinary and dynamic capabilities, avoiding common method bias, taking into account the quality and fitness rather than the quantity of dynamic capabilities, and acknowledging the cumulativeness of dynamic capabilities through the use of longitudinal data. They conclude that refining the dynamic capability operationalizations would help to formulate competing hypotheses and to increase the theoretical precision of the field.

show abstract

Attribution of the “causes” of performance: A constructive, quasi-longitudinal replication of the staw (1975) study

Cited by 44 publications

References 6 publications

Leadership and knowledge: Symbolic, connectionist, and embodied perspectives

Leadership and knowledge: Symbolic, connectionist, and embodied perspectives

Causal inferences between leader reward behaviour and subordinate performance, absenteeism, and work satisfaction

The Essence of Dynamic Capabilities and their Measurement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About