Comparing multisource ratings: can I believe what they say about my leadership behaviour?

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate whether the feedback managers receive from their work colleagues is based on a shared understanding of their leadership behaviours. This similarity in perception is called conceptual equivalence. The study also took into account the managers’ and their work colleagues’ expectations. Design/methodology/approach A total of 441 managers participated in a 360-degree feedback programme that sought responses from their bosses (n = 380), peers (n = 1,621) and subordinates (n = 1,680). The instrument used was the Competing Values Framework 16-item survey, which describes the leadership behaviours that managers must display to be effective. It also measures the behaviours they consider important. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted on the rating scores of the managers and the three hierarchical levels of their work colleagues to determine conceptual equivalence between self and work colleagues’ ratings. Conceptual models were formulated and compared by testing for factor form equivalence. Findings Conceptual equivalence was found across all rater groups for both leadership behaviours displayed and the importance of leadership behaviours. Practical implications This paper provides managers and human resource professionals with useful insights on how to improve the use of 360-degree feedback processes by ensuring that conceptual equivalence is established for feedback supplied by raters from different hierarchical levels. The findings also stress the importance of including expectations when receiving feedback on leadership behaviours. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on the benefits of determining the conceptual equivalence of feedback received by managers from various work colleagues. A second contribution is the inclusion of expectations in the feedback process, as none of the previous work has included such a measure.