Generic challenges Globalisation: e.g.

e.g. virtual economic climate,

organisations, world threats, ethics
and corporate

Assessing
Diversity: e.g.
social
responsibility;
Leadership
e-leadership, Compliance; e.g..
mergers and leadership: e.g. changes in reporting and control,
takeovers, integrity leadership, new technology, interim
restructuring, diverse teams,
partnerships and
alliances, regulatory
 Assessing Leadership and
Measuring Its Effects

“Only 8% of Fortune 1000 executive directors

rate their leadership capacity as excellent,
while 47% rated their leadership capacity as
fair to poor.”

~The Conference Board

 Practice-Research Gap

• The gap between what researchers

know about predicting and evaluating
leadership effectiveness and the
techniques actually used by
organizations to hire, evaluate, and
promote leaders.
• This gap has a profound impact on the
quality of people in leadership positions
today.
 Managerial Incompetence

• Base rate of managerial incompetence

• may be somewhere between 50 – 75 percent.

• Use Dr Gordy test

consider the level of incompetence among leaders.

• The most effective leaders

are individuals who are good at building teams and
getting results.
• Leadership positions get paid to get results,
One of the best ways to get results is by building
teams.
Managerial Incompetence (continued)

• Managers can be categorized as being:

– Competent Managers
– Results Only Managers
– Cheerleaders
– In Name Only Managers
• Research shows that organizations
having higher number of Competent
Managers occupying critical positions
are more successful than those without.
The Two Dimensions of Managerial
Incompetence
Need for Leadership Talent Management
• The biggest source of worry for
most organizations is the lack of
high quality leadership talent.

• The biggest source of worry for

military is developing and
retaining leadership talent.
Need for Leadership Talent Management
• Three critical ingredients most looked for
in persons in positions of authority include:
–Problem solving and sound decision
making abilities.
–Local/functional know-how.
–Ability to get things done through
others.
 Leadership Talent Management

1. Leadership talent management system:

Consists of those processes and procedures
organizations use to hire, develop, evaluate,
reward, promote, and retain its leaders.
2. Research has shown that good talent
management systems can have a profound
impact on organizational effectiveness and
success.
 Steps Involved in Leadership Talent
Management (continued)

• Clarify the organization’s strategy for the future.

• Identify what are or will be the critical leadership
Organizations have both organizational plans for the
positions in the organization.
next decade, or two, and career maps to show
• Develop a competency model for the critical leadership
where
Thethey
CEO want theare
roles
positions. individuals
the mostincritical
their community
positions.
to move over the
• Ensure the next 5-10 years.
organization’s recruiting and selection
You see this in the
processes are military nothiring,
identifying, only developing,
through the
community career
rewarding, andprogression
promoting themodels but though
right candidates.
the qualification
• Adopt valid processes, promotion
and well-researched boards,
processes for hiring,
Weselection
promote from within
boards,
developing, (no CO
informal
and is hired from
assignment
promoting leadership outside)
processes
talent.
so every
and leader isfor
opportunities brought up within
additional the organization
education.
andOur recruiting
exposed andbillets
to key promotion system is largely
/ experiences.
successful at this effort.
 Assessing Leadership Potential

• Fundamentally concerned with predicting who

will or will not be an effective leader before they
have been placed into a position.
Accurately predicting managerial effectiveness is
critically important but not at all straightforward.

• An individual’s performance at progressively

more complex leadership tasks is used to
predict their chance of success at the next
higher level.
 Best Practices
in Assessing Leadership Potential
What the military uses?
What does your organisation uses?
• Research shows that by developing a competency
model, one can clearly define the skills and attributes
required in the right candidate.
• The best candidate would be the person with the
most, if not all, of those skills and attributes.
• The multiple hurdles approach is the most
cost-effective and valid way to identify the best
candidate from the applicant pool.

– FBI use this model: written exams (#1 and #2), interviews (#1 and
#2), Polygraph
Example of a mid-level leadership
competency model
 Measuring the Effects of Leadership

• Just as various techniques are used to assess leaders,

there are also various ways to measure their effects on
subordinates and organizations.
– When judging, the consequences of leader behaviors
are examined, more than the behaviors per se.
– However, individual behaviors can get the CO of a
successful unit fired!
• Commonly used measures to judge successful and
unsuccessful leaders include:
– Superiors’ effectiveness and performance ratings
– Subordinates’ ratings of their job satisfaction and morale
or of their leader’s effectiveness
– Unit performance indices
Common Measures of Successful and
Unsuccessful Leadership
 Best Practices in Measuring
Leadership Success
• Ratings by superiors and subordinates generally
yield useful information about a leader’s
effectiveness.
• Multiple measures often yield the best information
about leadership success.
• Practitioners need to think critically about how
their behavior affects the measures used to judge
leadership success.
• Practitioners need to be aware of leadership
success measures being biased.
Assessing Leadership Behavior: Multirater
Feedback Instruments

• 360-degree (multi-rater feedback) tools allow

managers to get accurate information about how
others perceived their on-the-job behaviors.
• Questionnaire construction very important.
• Leaders who received 360-degree feedback had
higher performing work units.
• 360-degree feedback systems can add tremendous
value when used for development purposes.
Multirater Feedback Instruments (continued)
• The key to high observer ratings is to develop a
broad set of leadership skills that help groups
accomplish goals.
• Research shows that it is possible to change
others’ perceptions of a leader’s skills over time.
– Leaders must set development goals and commit to
a development plan to improve skills.
• Societal or organizational culture, race, and gender
play key roles in the accuracy and utility of the
360-degree feedback process.
Sources for 360-Degree Feedback
Example of 360-Degree Feedback
 Assessing Leadership
• Who they are (now we know)
• How do we know?
– Why do we need to know?
– Identifying and Assessing Leaders
(assessment strategies)

21
 Need to Identify Them
– Recruitment
– Selection
– Succession planning (promotion)
– Development

22
 Assessment: How to
• Start with Job analysis:
• SMEs
– Conduct interviews
• Review job description
• Confirm leadership duties and KSAOs (Knowledge,
skill, ability, and other characteristics)
– (use factors and competencies)
• Develop matrix (duties & competencies)
• Document Job Analysis findings

23
 Assessment:
Issues in Assessing

• Validity & reliability

• Utility (effectiveness and cost)
• Test portability (VG)

24
 Assessment: Issues
• Validity strategies
– Content validity
– Criterion related validity
– Construct validity
– Face validity

25
 Assessment: Issues
• Utility
– Effectiveness
– Logistics
– Screening or ranking
• Costs
– Internal: Agency Personnel
– External: Vendors = $$$

26
 Assessment: Issues
• Validity Generalization
– Constructs are valid
– Job analysis: JA verification
• Test portability
– Why re-invent the wheel?

27
 Assessment:
Principal Traits
(Northouse, ’04)
• Intelligence
• Self-confidence
• Determination
• Integrity
• Sociability

28
 Assessment:
Methods
• Personal History
• Assessment center
• Behavioral interview / Oral board
– handout “Candidate Leadership Ratings”
• Written tests / inventories

29
 Assessment:
Personal History
• Supplemental application blank
• References
• Past performance reviews
• Past accomplishments
• Peer assessments (promo / dev)
– 360 / multi-rater

30
 Assessment: Assessment Center
• Situational interview
• In-basket technique
• Job simulation
• Leaderless Group Discussion
– Leader emergence

31
 Assessment:
Written tests/ inventories
• Cognitive ability
• Integrity inventories
• Personality inventories
• Leadership ability tests
• Biodata

32
 Assessment:
Cognitive Ability
• Watson-Glazer Critical Thinking Appraisal
(Psychological Corporation: Harcourt Brace, Pub)

• -> Measures:
– Inference
– Recognition of Assumptions
– Deduction
– Interpretation (generalizing, conclusions)
– Evaluation of Arguments

• Wonderlic Personnel Test

– (Wonderlic Personnel Test, Inc., 1992. 1-800 323-3742 )

• -> Measures
– “g” general intelligence (potential for development)
– Extensive norms

33
 Assessment: Integrity

• Integrity tests
– Overt
– Personality
• Hogan Personnel Selection Scale
– (organizational delinquency)
– http://www.hoganassessments.com/
– Polygraph (?)

34
 Assessment:
Personality Inventories
• NEO-PI (Five factor model)
– (Costa & McRae, ’92)

• CPI (California Psychological Inventory)

– CPP (Gough)

• HPI (Hogan Personality Inventory)

– (R. & J. Hogan)

• IPIP (International Personality Item Pool)

– (L.Goldberg)

35
 Five Factor Model:
Big Five Personality Dimensions (C A N O E) (Barrick & Mount, ’91

• Conscientiousness
– persistence, doggedness, hardworking, dependable,
– thorough, and responsible.

• Agreeableness
– being liked, courtesy, good-natured, cooperative, forgiving, soft
hearted.

• Neuroticism
– anxiety, depression, anger worry, and insecurity.

• Open to Experience
– imaginative, creative, broad-minded and intelligent.

• Extroversion
– sociability, gregariousness, talkativeness, and activity.
.
36
 NEO-PI
• NEO-PI-R (Costa & McRae, ‘92)
– NEO Personality Inventory: Revised
• Long & short version
• Management report
• Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. (PAR)
http://www3.parinc.com/

37
 CPI:
Psychological Personality Inventory (3rd ed)

• 20 scales (approximate “Big five”)

• 2 special scales:
– Managerial Potential (Mp)
– Leadership Potential (Lp)

• Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. (CPP)

– http://www.cpp.com/

38
 Hogan Personality Inventory:
(HPI)

• 7 traits: BIG Five

– Adjustment (Neuroticism)
– Ambition / Sociability (Extraversion)
– Likeability (Agreeableness)
– Prudence (Conscientiousness)
– Intellectance & (Openness)
– school success

• Hogan Assessments, Inc. http://www.hoganassessments.com/

39
 IPIP
• IPIP International Personality Item Pool
– (L.Goldberg) http://ipip.ori.org/ipip/
• Five Factors:
– http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/j/5/j5j/IPIP/
– Long version: 300 items (40-60 minutes)
– Short version: 120 items (15-20 minutes)

40
 Leadership Ability:
Measures

• Leadership Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ)

– (Self report)
• The Supervisory Behavior Description (SBD)
– (used by subordinates to rate supervisor)
• (E. Fleishman, Ohio State studies)

• Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

• (B. Bass, transformational Leadership)

41
 Leadership Ability: LOQ

• Two dimensions (independent constructs)

– Consideration
• Concern for others
– Initiating structure
• Task oriented

– Creative Organizational Design, Inc. (COD)

• http://www.creativeorgdesign.com/testpages/loq.htm

42
 LOQ: Consideration

• Relationships with subordinates characterized by:

– Mutual trust
– Respect for their ideas
– Consideration of their feelings
– Warmth between manager and subordinate

• High score: Good rapport and two-way communications

• Low score: More impersonal in relations with group members

43
 LOQ: Initiating Structure
• Defines own and subordinates’ roles toward goal attainment

• High score: Takes very active role in directing activities through

– Planning
– Communicating information
– Scheduling
– Criticizing
– Trying new ideas

• Low score: Relatively inactive in directing activites

44
 LOQ
used for:

• Training
• Assessment of culture
• Selection
• Coaching

45
 MLQ
Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass & Avolio)

• Transformational Leadership
• Transactional Leadership
• Passive/Avoidant
• Mindgarden, Inc. http://mindgarden.com/products/mlqr.htm

46
 MLQ: Used for

• Selection

• Succession Planning

• Development (3600 Feedback)

• Diagnosis / coaching

47
 Some Vendors
• CCL Center for Creative Leadership
– http://www.ccl.org/leadership/index.aspx

• PDI Personnel Decisions International

– http://www.personneldecisions.com

• DDI Development Dimensions International

– http://www.ddiworld.com/our_expertise/leadership.asp

• Personnel Testing Council Metropolitan Washington

– http://www.ptcmw.org/

(I/O consulting firms)

48
 Conclusion

• Because
– We know who they are &
– Can identify them

• We can
– Improve Agency functioning & productivity
• Through effectiveness

– Reduce costs
• Improve the bottom line

49
 Leadership

• Comments?

• Questions?

50
 Online Sources:
• Center for Creative Leadership
• http://www.ccl.org/leadership/index.aspx

• Development Dimensions International (DDI)

• http://www.ddiworld.com/our_expertise/leadership.asp

• Personnel Decisions International

• http://www.personneldecisions.com

• Hogan Personnel Selection Scale

• http://www.hoganassessments.com/

• Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire

• http://mindgarden.com/products/mlqr.htm

• Leadership Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ)

• http://www.creativeorgdesign.com/testpages/loq.htm

51
 References

• Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis.
Personnel Psychology, 44, 1-26.
• Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum, pub.
• Bass, B. & Avolio, B. (2000). MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 2nd ed. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden
• Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO PI Personality Inventory: NEO PI and NEO Five Factor
Inventory (NEO FFI: Professional Manual: Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.)
• Fiedler, F. (1967). A theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw Hill.
• Fleishman, E. A. & Harris, E. F. (1962). Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and
turnover. Personnel Psychology, 15, 43-56.
• French, J. R. P, & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright. (Ed.),
– Studies of social power ) pp. 150-157. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
• Jeanneret, Richard, & Silzer, Rob. (1998). Individual Psychological Assessment Predicting behavior in
organizational settings. Jossey Bass pub. Chapter 12 Shaping organizational leadership.
• Johnson, Jeff W., Questar Data Systems, Inc. Mineapolis, MN [email protected]
• (Handout for ratings leadership characteristics)
• Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of Organizational Behavior, 3rd 3d. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall
• House, R. J., & Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Path-goal theory of leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business, 3, 81-97.
• Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change: How leadership differs from management (pp. 3-8). New York: Free Press
• Northouse, Peter G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. Sage, pub.

52