Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:19:46.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Method for Capturing Context in the Assessment of Leaders: The “Too Little/Too Much” Rating Scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Jasmine Vergauwe ,
Robert B. Kaiser ,
Bart Wille ,
Filip De Fruyt  and
Joeri Hofmans
Jasmine Vergauwe*
Affiliation:
Department of Developmental, Personality, and Social Psychology, Ghent University
Robert B. Kaiser
Affiliation:
Kaiser Leadership Solutions
Bart Wille
Affiliation:
Department of Personnel Management, Work and Organizational Psychology, Ghent University
Filip De Fruyt
Affiliation:
Department of Personnel Management, Work and Organizational Psychology, Ghent University
Joeri Hofmans
Affiliation:
Research Group of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jasmine Vergauwe, Department of Developmental, Personality, and Social Psychology, Ghent University, H. Dunantlaan 2, B-9000 Gent, Belgium. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their focal article, Reynolds, McCauley, Tsacoumis, and the Jeanneret Symposium Participants (2018) stress the importance of context in leadership assessment. For instance, they argue that senior executives work in a different context compared to lower-level managers and that this should be taken into account. A simple example is that the competency of strategic thinking is critical for executive performance but much less so, if at all, for front-line supervisors. The claim that context matters in leadership and in the assessment of leaders is easy to grasp but difficult to apply in practice.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 11 , Issue 4 , December 2018 , pp. 657 - 662
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kaiser, R. B., & Kaplan, R. E. (2005a). Overlooking overkill? Beyond the 1-to-5 rating scale. Human Resources Planning, 28 (3), 7–11.Google Scholar
Kaiser, R. B., & Kaplan, R. E. (2005b). On the folly of linear rating scales for a non-linear world. In Reddy, S. (Ed.), Performance appraisals: A critical view (Ch. 12, pp. 170–197). Nagarjuna Hills, Hyderabad, India: ICFAI University Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, R. B., & Kaplan, R. E. (2009). When strengths run amok. In Kaiser, R. B. (Ed.), The perils of accentuating the positives (pp. 57–76). Tulsa, OK: Hogan Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, R. B., Overfield, D. V., & Kaplan, R. E. (2010). Leadership Versatility Index version 3.0 Facilitator's Guide. Greensboro, NC: Kaplan DeVries Inc.Google Scholar
Kaplan, R. E., & Kaiser, R. B. (2003). Rethinking a classic distinction in leadership: Implications for the assessment and development of executives. Consulting Psychology Journal: Research and Practice, 55, 15–25.Google Scholar
McCall, M. W. Jr., & Lombardo, M. M. (1983). Off the track: Why and how successful executives get derailed. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.Google Scholar
Parrigon, S., Woo, S. E., Tay, L., & Wang, T. (2017). CAPTION-ing the situation: A lexically-derived taxonomy of psychological situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112 (4), 642–681. DOI: 10.1037/pspp0000111Google Scholar
Pervin, L. (1978). Definitions, measurements, and classifications of stimuli, situations, and environments. Human Ecology, 6 (1), 71–105.Google Scholar
Porter, L. W., & McLaughlin, G. B. (2006). Leadership and the organizational context: Like the weather? Leadership Quarterly, 17, 559–576.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., Gallardo-Pujol, D., Guillaume, E. M, Todd, E., Nave, C. S., Sherman, R. A., . . . Funder, D. C. (2014). The Situational Eight DIAMONDS: A taxonomy of major dimensions of situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107 (4), 677–718. DOI: 10.1037/a0037250Google Scholar
Reynolds, D. H., McCauley, C. D., Tsacoumis, S., & the Jeanneret Symposium Participants (2018). A critical evaluation of the state of assessment and development for senior leaders. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 11 (4), 630–652.Google Scholar
Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Vergauwe, J., Wille, B., Hofmans, J., Kaiser, R. B., & De Fruyt, F. (2017). The “too little/too much” scale: A new rating format for detecting curvilinear effects. Organizational Research Methods, 20, 518–544. DOI: 10.1177/1094428117706534Google Scholar
Vroom, V. H., & Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar