Abstract
It is widely recognized that leadership behaviors drive leaders' success. But despite the importance of assessing leadership behavior for selection and development, current measurement practices are limited. This study contributes to the literature by examining the structured interview method as a potential approach to assess leadership behavior. To this end, we developed a structured interview measuring constructs from Yukl's (2012) leadership taxonomy. Supervisors in diverse positions participated in the interview as part of a leadership assessment program. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the assumption that leadership constructs could be assessed as distinct interview dimensions. Results further showed that interview ratings predicted a variety of leadership outcomes (supervisors' annual income, ratings of situational leader effectiveness, subordinates' well-being and affective organizational commitment) beyond other relevant predictors. Findings offer implications on how to identify leaders who have a positive impact on their subordinates, and they inform us about conceptual differences between leadership measures.
Highlights
It is widely recognized that leadership behaviors drive leaders’ success
Findings offer implications on how to identify leaders who have a positive impact on their subordinates, and they inform us about conceptual differences between leadership measures
Drawing from a comprehensive leadership taxonomy (Yukl, 2012; Yukl et al, 2002), the present study explores the potential of the structured interview method to assess leadership behavior constructs
Summary
It is widely recognized that leadership behaviors drive leaders’ success. But despite the importance of assessing leadership behavior for selection and development, current measurement practices are limited. Results further showed that interview ratings predicted a variety of leadership outcomes (supervisors' annual income, ratings of situational leader effectiveness, subordinates' wellbeing and affective organizational commitment) beyond other relevant predictors. This is problematic, given that the effectiveness of leadership behaviors can depend on the specific situation (Liden & Antonakis, 2009; Vroom & Jago, 2007; Zaccaro, Green, Dubrow, & Kolze, 2018) In light of this problem, there have been strong calls to explore alternative approaches to measuring leadership behavior constructs (Antonakis, Bastardoz, Jacquart, & Shamir, 2016; DeRue, Nahrgang, Wellman, & Humphrey, 2011; Hunter et al, 2007; Yukl, 1999). Structured interviews ask for interviewees' behavior in specific situations, and offer the opportunity for a more context-sensitive assessment of leadership (similar to situational judgment tests; see Liden & Antonakis, 2009; Peus, Braun, & Frey, 2013) Despite these advantages, research has yet to employ interview methodology for assessing established leadership behavior constructs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
