领导力中的自他协议是直觉化还是合理化?

IF 4.2 3区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT
Guy J. Curtis, Heather E. Douglas
{"title":"领导力中的自他协议是直觉化还是合理化?","authors":"Guy J. Curtis, Heather E. Douglas","doi":"10.1108/lodj-09-2022-0397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>Congruent self-other agreement in leadership evaluations is associated with positive outcomes such as work unit performance. In contrast, poor self-other agreement in leadership evaluations is associated with negative outcomes such as leaders making ineffective job-relevant decisions. This study examined whether the extent of leaders’ preference for intuitive and rational thinking predicted self-other agreement in leadership evaluations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Self-ratings and follower ratings of transformational leadership were analysed for 160 dyad pairs of leaders and followers (<em>n</em> = 320). Leaders self-rated their preference for rational and intuitive thinking. Response surface analysis was used to model the relationship between self-other agreement and leaders’ thinking styles.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>As ratings of transformational leadership increased in both leaders and followers, we observed higher scores on preferences for both rational and intuitive thinking. Leaders’ preference for intuitive thinking showed a curvilinear relationship with self-other agreement, such that more intuitive thinking was related to higher leader–follower congruence in ratings of transformational leadership. We further uncovered that higher leader preferences for rational thinking were related to increased leader–follower disagreement in transformational leadership ratings.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>Research has focused more on the outcomes than antecedents of self-other agreement in leadership. Thinking styles have undergone limited examination as antecedents of self-other agreement in leadership evaluations. Thinking styles are semi-malleable traits that can be used for the selection of leadership potential and developed to improve leadership performance. The current research suggests that relationships between thinking styles and self-other agreement on leadership effectiveness are more complicated than first thought.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":48033,"journal":{"name":"Leadership & Organization Development Journal","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intuiting or rationalising self-other agreement in leadership?\",\"authors\":\"Guy J. Curtis, Heather E. Douglas\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/lodj-09-2022-0397\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Purpose</h3>\\n<p>Congruent self-other agreement in leadership evaluations is associated with positive outcomes such as work unit performance. In contrast, poor self-other agreement in leadership evaluations is associated with negative outcomes such as leaders making ineffective job-relevant decisions. This study examined whether the extent of leaders’ preference for intuitive and rational thinking predicted self-other agreement in leadership evaluations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\\n<p>Self-ratings and follower ratings of transformational leadership were analysed for 160 dyad pairs of leaders and followers (<em>n</em> = 320). Leaders self-rated their preference for rational and intuitive thinking. Response surface analysis was used to model the relationship between self-other agreement and leaders’ thinking styles.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Findings</h3>\\n<p>As ratings of transformational leadership increased in both leaders and followers, we observed higher scores on preferences for both rational and intuitive thinking. Leaders’ preference for intuitive thinking showed a curvilinear relationship with self-other agreement, such that more intuitive thinking was related to higher leader–follower congruence in ratings of transformational leadership. We further uncovered that higher leader preferences for rational thinking were related to increased leader–follower disagreement in transformational leadership ratings.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\\n<p>Research has focused more on the outcomes than antecedents of self-other agreement in leadership. Thinking styles have undergone limited examination as antecedents of self-other agreement in leadership evaluations. Thinking styles are semi-malleable traits that can be used for the selection of leadership potential and developed to improve leadership performance. The current research suggests that relationships between thinking styles and self-other agreement on leadership effectiveness are more complicated than first thought.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\",\"PeriodicalId\":48033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Leadership & Organization Development Journal\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Leadership & Organization Development Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-09-2022-0397\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership & Organization Development Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-09-2022-0397","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 领导评价中的自我-他者一致性与工作单位绩效等积极结果相关。相反,领导评价中自我与他人意见不一致则与消极结果有关,如领导者做出的与工作相关的决策无效。本研究探讨了领导者对直觉思维和理性思维的偏好程度是否能预测领导评价中的自我-他者一致性。设计/方法/途径分析了 160 对领导者和追随者(n = 320)的自我评价和追随者对变革型领导的评价。领导者对其理性思维和直觉思维的偏好进行了自我评分。研究结果 随着领导者和追随者对变革型领导力评价的提高,我们发现领导者对理性思维和直觉思维的偏好得分都有所提高。领导者对直觉思维的偏好与自我他者的认同呈现出曲线关系,因此,在对变革型领导力的评价中,更多的直觉思维与更高的领导者-追随者一致性相关。我们进一步发现,领导者对理性思维的偏好越高,领导者与追随者在变革型领导力评价中的分歧就越大。思维方式作为领导力评价中自我与他人意见一致的前因所进行的研究十分有限。思维风格是一种半可变特质,可用于甄选领导潜力,并可用于提高领导绩效。目前的研究表明,思维风格与自我-他人对领导效能的认同之间的关系比最初想象的要复杂得多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Intuiting or rationalising self-other agreement in leadership?

Purpose

Congruent self-other agreement in leadership evaluations is associated with positive outcomes such as work unit performance. In contrast, poor self-other agreement in leadership evaluations is associated with negative outcomes such as leaders making ineffective job-relevant decisions. This study examined whether the extent of leaders’ preference for intuitive and rational thinking predicted self-other agreement in leadership evaluations.

Design/methodology/approach

Self-ratings and follower ratings of transformational leadership were analysed for 160 dyad pairs of leaders and followers (n = 320). Leaders self-rated their preference for rational and intuitive thinking. Response surface analysis was used to model the relationship between self-other agreement and leaders’ thinking styles.

Findings

As ratings of transformational leadership increased in both leaders and followers, we observed higher scores on preferences for both rational and intuitive thinking. Leaders’ preference for intuitive thinking showed a curvilinear relationship with self-other agreement, such that more intuitive thinking was related to higher leader–follower congruence in ratings of transformational leadership. We further uncovered that higher leader preferences for rational thinking were related to increased leader–follower disagreement in transformational leadership ratings.

Originality/value

Research has focused more on the outcomes than antecedents of self-other agreement in leadership. Thinking styles have undergone limited examination as antecedents of self-other agreement in leadership evaluations. Thinking styles are semi-malleable traits that can be used for the selection of leadership potential and developed to improve leadership performance. The current research suggests that relationships between thinking styles and self-other agreement on leadership effectiveness are more complicated than first thought.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
6.10%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: The journal addresses a broad range of topics which are relevant to organizations and reflective of societal developments. Public and private sector organizations alike face ongoing pressure to streamline activities, improve efficiency and achieve demanding organizational objectives. In this context, the ability of senior managers to understand the culture and dynamics of organizations and to deliver strong leadership during periods of change, could be the difference between organizational failure and success.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信