Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine the relative importance of four managerial skill dimensions (technical skill, administrative skill, human skill, and citizenship behavior) for predicting managerial effectiveness. In addition, it aims to explore whether the relative importance of these skill dimensions varies as a function of gender or organizational level.Design/methodology/approachParticipants were 733 managers enrolled in a nationally recognized leadership development program. Ratings of managerial skill were obtained from peers using a well‐validated 360‐degree assessment instrument, while manager effectiveness ratings were provided by supervisors. Moderated multiple regression and relative weight analysis were used to test the study's hypotheses.FindingsUsing ratings provided by multiple sources, these results show that all four of the managerial skill dimensions were significantly important predictors of manager effectiveness. Human skills were significantly more important than technical skill and citizenship behavior, while administrative skills were most important overall. Gender was not a significant moderator of the skill‐effectiveness relationship, but organizational level was.Practical implicationsIndividuals tasked with selecting, developing, or placing managers should take all four skill dimensions into account. Moreover, special consideration should be given to administrative skill, and this emphasis should increase for managers higher up in the organizational hierarchy.Originality/valueAlthough prior research has speculated about the importance of different managerial skills, this study is the first to provide empirical support for this skill typology in predicting actual managerial effectiveness using appropriate statistical analyses for examining the relative importance of these skill dimensions.

Managing the demands of the workplace and the responsibilities of the rest of your life can be tricky, especially when you're a driven leader who wants to succeed. This book will show you how to successfully establish and manage work-life boundaries so that you can be more successful at work and at home

""Cover""; ""Copyright""; ""Title Page""; ""Ã#x8D;ndice""; ""Introducción""; ""La división entre el trabajo y la vida personal""; ""La importancia de manejar los límites entre el trabajo y la vida personal""; ""Una nueva manera de manejar los límites entre el trabajo y la vida personal""; ""Construya su propia manera de manejar los límites""; ""Mejore la manera en que maneja los límites""; ""Conclusiones""; ""Antecedentes

Whereas overt forms of discrimination against women at work have decreased over time with the passage of formal antidiscrimination laws, implicit biases against women still plague organizations. To understand how implicit biases may appear in the workplace today, we examined how dissimilar outcomes may emerge for men and women leaders when their self-ratings differ from others' (e.g., subordinates, peers) ratings. Drawing upon role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders and the status incongruity hypothesis, we theorized and found that women who overrated their leadership behaviors received lower performance ratings and higher perceived risk of derailment scores from their supervisors than did women who underrated their leadership behaviors. Men, however, experienced fewer negative consequences (than women) when they overrated. Given these findings, especially in light of discovering that most self–other agreement (SOA) research does not explicitly address gender as a main variable of interest, we question some of the field's previous findings. We discuss the implications of our results for both practice and research regarding how SOA plays a role in the development of one's career, highlighting the potential importance of implicit gender biases.

Feedback orientation is an individual difference variable that represents individuals' receptivity to feedback. In 2010, Linderbaum and Levy developed and validated a measure of feedback orientation called the Feedback Orientation Scale (FOS). We investigated the validity of the FOS using 172 participants in a leadership development program designed for middle- to senior-level leaders. Our results support the FOS's convergent validity, as it was correlated with implicit person theory (assumptions regarding the malleability of personal attributes) and achievement motivation. We also found support for the FOS's criterion-related validity, as it was correlated with participants' reactions to their 360-degree feedback. Participants' feedback orientation, however, was unrelated to coach ratings of their openness, likelihood to change, and defensiveness during their feedback sessions.

PurposeThe theoretical and practical criticality of self‐talk for leader success receives extensive multidisciplinary discussion, without a great deal of empirical research given the challenge of assessing actual self‐talk. The purpose of this paper is to advance research and theory on self‐leadership by examining leader self‐talk and its relationship to effectiveness and strain.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 189 senior executives' self‐addressed, future‐oriented letters were collected. The executives wrote these letters to themselves for their own personal development; thus, the language used represented a form of naturally occurring self‐talk. Two types of self‐talk were coded: constructive and dysfunctional. Supervisor and direct report ratings of leadership of others and creativity and self‐ratings of job strain were collected.FindingsExtensive variability among leaders in constructive self‐talk was found. Exemplars of constructive and dysfunctional self‐talk are presented. Constructive self‐talk positively related to effective leadership of others and creativity/originality as evaluated by subordinates and superiors and was negatively related to job strain. Dysfunctional self‐talk related negatively to creativity/originality.Originality/valueIn addition to illustrating the types of self‐talk used by leaders, research is extended by providing some of the first empirical evidence of how leaders' free‐flowing thoughts are related to their effectiveness and their overall well‐being, lending direct support to a principal proposition from the self‐leadership framework.