Search results

The study represents a theory-based leadership approach in exploring the subordinate's perceptions of leadership behaviors in relation to age, gender and type of work environment. The aim was (1) to compare subordinates' ratings of their respective leaders' leadership behaviors based on of the leaders' age and gender, controlling for type of work environment and (2) to analyze the relationship between the subordinates' ratings of their leaders' leadership behaviors and their ratings of the outcome of these leadership behaviors.

Data were collected using the Developmental Leadership Questionnaire (DLQ) from a sample of Swedish leadership course participants (n = 10,869) and their respective subordinates (n = 97,943). The DLQ measures leadership behaviors designed to reflect the following leadership styles: developmental leadership, conventional-positive leadership, conventional-negative leadership and destructive leadership.

Results showed that older leaders (51 years or older) were rated less favorably than younger (29 years or younger) and mid-aged leaders. Female leaders received more positive ratings than male leaders. A 3-way analysis-of-variance showed strong main effects for age, gender, and type of work environment and no significant interaction effects. A significant model with high equivalents of R² coefficients (Cox and Snell, 1989; Nagelkerke, 1991) was obtained in a logistic regression analysis. Developmental leadership and conventional-positive leadership made significant positive contributions to the subordinates' ratings of the outcome of their leaders' leadership behaviors. Destructive leadership behaviors contributed negatively to the outcome ratings.

Weaknesses include the cross-sectional study design. The large sample size is a strength, and the results have novel implications for leadership theory related to subordinates' view on leadership.

Counter-stereotype age and gender findings may have implications for organizational decisions and processes regarding selection of managers. Development programs are suggested for all categories but for older, male leaders with a focus on reducing their use of leadership behaviors perceived negatively by their subordinates, whereas younger female leaders should be encouraged to continue to develop their positive leadership behaviors.

The theory-based approach on subordinates' perceptions of leadership behaviors with a simultaneous focus on age, gender and type of work environment, based on a large-scale data set, is new.

The purpose of this study is twofold. First, to compare the self-rated leadership behaviors, leadership-related competencies and results of the leadership of younger, mid-aged and older leaders; and second to compare these aspects among younger leaders in different kinds of the work environment and between men and women.

Data was collected using the developmental leadership questionnaire from a sample of Swedish leadership course participants (N = 7,743).

The results showed that the younger group of leaders (29 years old or younger n = 539), rated themselves more negatively than the mid-aged (30–50 years, n = 5,208) and older (51 years or older, n = 1,996) leaders. Analysis of the group of younger leaders showed that those working in the private sector scored most favorably. The gender comparison revealed that young male leaders scored higher on negative conventional (transactional) and destructive leadership behaviors. A logistic regression analysis of the younger group showed that social competence, developmental leadership and destructive leadership (negative) influenced self-rated results of leadership.

The study is based on leaders’ self-ratings only.

The results can be used in leadership development contexts and in individualized coaching or mentoring programs.

The results have new implications for leadership theory related to self-confidence, stereotypes, selection and organizational culture.

The aim of this study was twofold, first to examine the relationship between developmental leadership (a Scandinavian culture adapted version of transformational leadership) and instrumental leadership, as well as the relationship between these leadership variables and indices of performance and job satisfaction. Second, to identify individual patterns regarding developmental and instrumental leadership.

Using a longitudinal design, questionnaire data were collected three times among Swedish conscripts and voluntarily employed soldiers during their basic military training (n = 667 at T1, n = 503 at T2 and n = 554 at T3).

The main findings were: (1) high observed correlations between the developmental and instrumental leadership scales on all measurement occasions; (2) a low to moderate amount of explained variance explained by these leadership scales in regression analyses with performance and job satisfaction as dependent variables, where developmental leadership was strongly associated with ratings of job satisfaction and instrumental leadership accounted for a higher proportion of the variance on ratings of performance and (3) the identification of three distinct profiles of response patterns on the leadership scales, which were fairly similar across time and indicate a temporal consistency of leadership styles.

Methodological strengths include the longitudinal study design, the comparatively large sample size, the use of well-established measurement scales and the person-centered approach allowing for the identification of response patterns. Study weaknesses include too few background variables and the use of self-report ratings only. From a work and organizational perspective, the sample with low-level conscripts and soldiers could also be regarded as unusual.

Education of leaders should focus on the importance of both interpersonal and instrumental aspects. There is also a need for development of leadership training fostering leaders’ instrumental leadership skills.

The study responds to the call from leadership researchers to further research on instrumental leadership and its relationship to the FRLT across diverse organizational contexts. Longitudinal comparisons of developmental (transformational) and instrumental leadership resulted in more trustworthy results as both a variable-oriented and a person-oriented approach was used.

The Indirect Leadership Questionnaire (ILQ) is constructed to measure important parts of a theoretical model of indirect leadership to be used in leadership courses for high-level managers. The ILQ consists of 15 model-derived items plus extra space that provides for free-text comments. This study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the ILQ, its predictive power and practical usefulness in indirect leadership courses and to evaluate the indirect leadership model in the light of new data.

The study sample consisted of 225 higher managers and 6–10 of their subordinates (total: 1,703). The latter were working at least two hierarchical levels below their higher manager. The managers made self-ratings, and the subordinates rated their respective higher manager using the ILQ.

Results showed that the ILQ has acceptable psychometric properties in terms of dimensionality (two model-compatible factors were obtained), reliability, discriminability and predictive power. Previous problems with many “Don’t know” responses from subordinates working two or more hierarchical levels below their higher manager were considerably reduced. A qualitative analysis of the free-text responses showed that indirect leadership behaviors that can be seen as inspirational influence and communication skills should be more emphasized in future indirect leadership courses. The leaders’ personality, task-related competence and performance-orientation were also highlighted more than in the indirect leadership model.

It was concluded that the ILQ is a useful tool in indirect leadership courses but that it is too limited to be used as a basis for theory development of indirect leadership.

The ILQ has acceptable psychometric properties and provides an easy-to-use tool to gain practical, usable knowledge of the “how’s” of indirect leadership.

The purpose of this study was to develop an easy-to-use, theoretically well-founded and psychometrically sound assessment tool of the concept co-workership.

Firstly, inductively generated examples of favourable and unfavourable co-worker behaviours were collected, clustered and then expressed as frequency-based Likert-type scale items. Data were obtained from 825 Swedish white collar workers and military personnel. A factor analysis (principal axis factoring with oblique rotation) resulted in a seven-factor solution built up by 30 items and forming the instrument Co-Worker Questionnaire (Co-Worker Q).

The factors have a strong resemblance to the content of dominating models of leadership, followership, organizational citizenship behaviour and leader–member exchange. The factor scales had relatively high reliability (high Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and low standard errors of measurement). Regarding discriminability, women scored more favourably on five of the factors, men on one factor and age differences were noted on two factors.

Shortcomings include the lack of data on possibly related aspects including person factors, such as personality and socio-economic status, and contextual factors such as more detailed data on the type of work environment and organizational culture.

The instrument has an easy-to-use format and can be used in organization development interventions with a co-workership focus and in individualized coaching or mentoring programmes.

The co-workership concept has so far mainly been used in the Nordic countries. The development of the Co-Worker Q opens up for broader applications.