Notes on the Practical and Theoretical Consequences of Implicit Leadership Theories for the Future of Leadership Measurement

Abstract

The accuracy of leadership questionnaires has been the subject of considerable debate in recent years. Although research has demonstrated that such measures can often be systematically biased indices of leader behavior, the issues surrounding the appropriate use of questionnaires are far from resolved. To help clarify some of these concerns, the present article attempts to (a) present a meaningful definition of accuracy in the measurement of leadership, (b) summarize the conclusions from existing research concerning leadership questionnaires, (c) assess the consequences of this research, and (d) offer several practical recommendations for the future of leadership questionnaires.

The typical leadership study: Assumptions, implications, and potential remedies

“…For example, it appears that liking, in particular, is a relevant biasing variable to consider when conducting leadership research. Others may include implicit leadership schemas, where leaders who fit -or do not fit -our stereotype for a "good" leader may be rated in biased fashion (e.g., Gioia & Sims, 1985;Phillips & Lord, 1986;Yukl, 2006). These variables, specifically, provide the researcher with direction for control variable investigation.…”

Applications of item response theory to measurement issues in leadership research

“…As the work of Lord and others (e.g., Foti & Lord, 1987;Lord, Foti, & DeVader, 1984;Osborn, Hunt, & Jauch, 2002;Phillips & Lord, 1986) has demonstrated, measurement of these constructs can be a very complicated and difficult issue for leadership research. Correspondingly, the importance of understanding the psychometric properties of our leadership measures has been recognized for some time (e.g., Korman, 1974;Schriesheim & Kerr, 1974, 1977Schriesheim, Powers, Scandura, Gardiner, & Lankau, 1993).…”

Authentic Leadership: Development and Validation of a Theory-Based Measure†

“…Hence, organizational stakeholders appear to be much less tolerant of inconsistencies between leaders' espoused principles, values, and conduct and are expecting those leaders to operate at higher levels of integrity. Although organizational stakeholders have certain expectations about the positive attributes they require of leaders (e.g., implicit leadership theories; Lord, 1985;Phillips & Lord, 1986), including integrity as a core quality (Kouzes & Posner, 1993), there are relatively few validated tools for measuring these attributes or behaviors. Simply expecting leaders to be more authentic and to demonstrate integrity will be ineffective if tools for measuring these aspects of leadership are lacking.…”