The Nature of Satisfaction With Subordinates: Its Predictors and Importance to Supervisors

Beehr, Terry A.; Glaser, Katherine; Beehr, Matthew J.; Beehr, Dana E.; Wallwey, Dee A.; Erofeev, Dmitry Alexandrovich; Canali, Kristophor G.

doi:10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00070.x

Cited by 28 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In sum, whether attributable to rater information processing, intentional distortion, bias true performance, or a common causal variable, rater liking is expected to be a correlate of performance ratings (Allen & Rush, 1998;Beehr et al, 2006;Bolino, Varela, Bande, & Turnley, 2006;Judge & Ferris, 1993;Keenan, 1977;Strauss, Barrick, & Connerley, 2001;Tsui & O'Reilly, 1989;Varma, Pichler, & Srinivas, 2005). Yet the magnitude of this relationship has been variable across studies, and as a result, the magnitude of the overlap is unknown (Lefkowitz, 2000).…”

Section: True Performance Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Rater Liking and Performance Ratings

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analysis reviewed the magnitude and moderators of the relationship between rater liking and performance ratings. The results revealed substantial overlap between rater liking and performance ratings (ρ = .77). Although this relationship is often interpreted as indicative of bias, we review studies that indicate that to some extent the relationship between liking and performance ratings potentially reflects "true" differences in ratee performance. Moderator analyses indicated that the relationship between liking and performance ratings was weaker for ratings of organizational citizenship behaviors, ratings made by peer raters, ratings in nonsales jobs, and ratings made for development; however, the relationship was strong across moderator levels, underscoring the robustness of this relationship. Implications for the interpretation of performance ratings are discussed.Performance evaluation systems are central to a cross-section of talent management functions, such as determining employee compensation and rewards, providing developmental feedback, documenting administrative decisions, succession planning, and reinforcing organizational norms (Cascio & Aguinis, 2005). In fact, Ghorpade and Chen (1995) suggested that performance ratings are "inevitable in all organizations-large and small, public and private, local and multinational" (p. 32). Yet performance appraisals have been the subject of substantial criticism over the years. Indeed, skepticism as to the quality of the information obtained from human evaluations has persisted for nearly as long as the field of psychological measurement (Thorndike, 1925;Wells, 1907). Murphy (2008) succinctly summed up the state of affairs, noting "performance ratings are widely viewed as poor measures of job performance" (p. 148).Over the years, a litany of factors has been proposed to hinder the quality of performance ratings. The overarching theme of this school of thought is that raters introduce performance irrelevant variance into performance ratings because they are either unable or unwilling to provide accurate ratings. Early research attributed low-quality ratings to rater ability (or presumably, lack thereof) and sought to design better scales

show abstract

Section: True Performance Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Rater Liking and Performance Ratings

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Usually, research in satisfaction with supervision (Beehr et al, 2006;Jernigan & Beggs, 2005;Scarpello & Vandenberg, 1987) uses leader characteristics and traits to measure the level of satisfaction with supervision. To do the same, this study relied on leader and member relations that involve both leader and member characteristics.…”

Section: Overview Of the Research Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leader-Member Exchange and Job Satisfaction Bond and Predicted Employee Turnover

Mardanov

Heischmidt

Henson

2008

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of hypotheses testing using the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) scale and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) indicate that 7 out of 12 LMX measures (explaining 98% of the variance) and 6 out of 20 MSQ measures (explaining 71%-79% of the variance) were positive and significant. Satisfaction with supervision had a significant impact on job satisfaction, explaining 80.7% of the variance. In the near future, employee job satisfaction is predicted to be lower than satisfaction with supervision, due to absence of strong intrinsic motivation. Testing hypotheses on these scales also helped predict future employee turnover in the banking industry.

show abstract

“…This swing of pendulum between positive and negative poles of ingratiation outcomes requires researchers to understand mechanisms underlying the relationship between employee ingratiation and supervisor satisfaction (Beehr et al, 2006). Examining such mechanisms can strengthen this line of research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of ingratiation on supervisor satisfaction through helping behavior: A moderated mediation model

Asadullah

Haider

Heredero

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This research intends to investigate the mediating role of helping behavior in relationship between employee ingratiation and supervisor satisfaction across high and low levels of ingratiation behavior, and answers the questions: how, when and why ingratiation is effective.Design/methodology: Data were collected through questionnaire surveys in hotel industry, and structural equation modelling was applied to analyze these data by using hypotheticaldeductive approach. Findings:The results indicate that helping behavior is an important mediator of the relationship between ingratiation and supervisor satisfaction. Moreover, ingratiation is also a strong moderator of the relationship between helping behavior and supervisor satisfaction.This research concludes that employee ingratiation positively predicts helping behaviors, and consequently the supervisor satisfaction.-1157-Intangible Capital -http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.759 Research limitations/implications:This study is not experimental in nature, but a crosssectional design has been followed. Future research can focus on an experimental design by incorporating a time element, and the design and analysis should be nested since this study did not use multilevel analysis. Moreover, this study used only two forms of ingratiation for measuring employee ingratiation behavior. We suggest researchers to consider all four dimensions of ingratiation by using some distinct scales. Originality/value: Previous research emphasized more on customer-directed employee ingratiation but this study offers its contribution by emphasizing coworker as well as supervisor directed employee ingratiation. Moreover, this study measures effectiveness of ingratiation in terms of employee task performance representing supervisor satisfaction. Practical implications:

show abstract

The Nature of Satisfaction With Subordinates: Its Predictors and Importance to Supervisors

Cited by 28 publications

References 52 publications

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Rater Liking and Performance Ratings

A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship Between Rater Liking and Performance Ratings

Leader-Member Exchange and Job Satisfaction Bond and Predicted Employee Turnover

Effect of ingratiation on supervisor satisfaction through helping behavior: A moderated mediation model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About