Abstract
Many leadership development programs assume that m anagers utilize feedback from subordinates to prepare a personal improvement agenda. Encouraging the use of such feedback assumes that (a) raters can clearly distinguish between different dimensions of leadership behavior, (b) that the data reflect managers’ personal leadership style or predispositions rather than other, external influences, and (c) that the rated behaviors are valued by the organization. This study examines the validity of these assumptions in a sample of engineering managers undergoing leadership training. Results indicate that although subordinates did make distinctions between different leadership dimensions, organizational roles of the leaders were significantly related to such ratings, and organizational rewards were significantly but weakly related to only one of five leadership dimensions being assessed. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for leaders and organizations trying to make sense of subordinate data in leadership development contexts.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
