New research in the Journal of Applied Psychology delves into the complexities of multisource leadership ratings, offering a fresh perspective on how leaders are evaluated and the implications for their effectiveness. The study utilizes the Leadership Arena-Reputation-Identity (LARI) model, a novel empirical framework that disentangles shared and unique perspectives in leadership ratings.
The study focuses on understanding whether the shared (Arena) and unique perspectives provided by the LARI model relate to the effectiveness of a leader. It explores the impact of how a leader is perceived, in general, by others, versus their how they are thought to respond to the demands and context of specific stakeholders (e.g., direct reports, peers, board members). The research also considers the role of a leader’s Reputation, or what is known solely by others, in predicting leadership effectiveness.
The research, based on the LARI model, offers a more nuanced understanding of multisource leadership ratings. It provides valuable insights into how different perspectives shape leader effectiveness and how these insights can be leveraged to enhance leadership development and performance.
Key Takeaways:
- 360 leadership assessments are valuable because they capture distinct perspectives from different sources.
- Using data from CCL’s Benchmarks for Executives, we found that the different sources (e.g., direct reports, board members) provide distinct perspectives of a person’s leadership.
- We also found evidence that different sources, while rating various dimensions of leadership, predict common measures of leader effectiveness (e.g., division performance, influence), as captured via CCL’s TeamVantage assessment.
- The pattern of findings depends on how well each source can observe leaders based on the different dimensions.
