평가자의 직급 및 피평가자와의 관계가 리더십 평가에 미치는 효과
The Effects of Rater Positions and Levels on Leadership Ratings
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 리더십의 다면평가에서 평가자의 직급과 피평가자와 평가자와의 관계(상사, 동료, 혹은 부하)에 따라 사용되는 평가의 조망을 검토하였다. 리더십 경쟁가치 모델(Quinn, 1988)에서 사용된 네 가지 리더유형을 잘 발휘하거나 잘 발휘하지 못하는 8개의 사례를 개발하여, 평가자에게 사례속의 리더에 대한 리더십을 전반적 리더십 평정척도와 리더십 의미미분 척도 상에서 평가하도록 하였다. 연구 결과, 1) 평가자 직급에 따라 리더십 평가의 조망이 다르게 나타났다. 즉, 평가자의 직위가 높을수록 성과조망을 사용하고, 평가자의 직위가 낮을수록 관계조망을 사용하였다. 또한 평가자의 직위가 높을수록 혁신조망과 안정조망을 평가에 더 많이 사용하였다. 2) 평가자와 피평가자의 관계에 따라서도 평가에서 사용하는 조망이 다르게 나타났다. 부하를 평가할 때는 관계조망 보다 성과 조망을 더 많이 사용하여 평가하지만, 상사를 평가할 때는 반대로 관계조망을 더 많이 사용하고, 피평가자가 상사일 때 보다 부하일 때 혁신조망과 안정조망을 더 많이 사용하였다. 끝으로 이 결과가 현장에서의 리더십 다면평가에 시사하는 바와 리더십의 발달적 접근에 대해 논의하였다.
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to investigate the rater perspectives from different positions and levels. Eight scenario were developed about the four good or bad leadership-style from Quinn(1988)`s competing values model: Market, Clan, Adhocracy, and Hierarchy. And the rater`s perspectives were measured by general leadership rating scales and semantic differential scales. The results of this study were as follows: 1) there are differences in perspectives among rater`s position. The raters from high position tended to adopt performance, Innovation, and stability perspective but the raters from low position tended to adopt only relation perspective. 2) There are also differences in perspectives among levels. When supervisors assess their subordinates, they tended to use various perspectives like performance, innovation, and stability. But when subordinates assess their supervisor, they use only relation perspective. Based on these results, it was proposed that rater`s differences in leadership ratings are not simply the error of assessment but the systematic effect reflecting the rater`s position and level. The limitations of this study and implications for the further study were discussed.
참고문헌 (15)
- "리더십 다면평가에서 나타난 평가자 조망 산업 및 조직", pp.75~87 (2003)
- "평가차원에서 기술차원으로 태도차원의 변형생성과정 사회심리학연구", pp.155~181 (1988)
- "Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process", autumn, pp.24~38 (1996)
- "The ratings of individuals in organizations:An alternative approach", 12, pp.105~124 (1974)
- "Psychometric properties of multisource performance ratings A meta-analysis of subordinate", pp.331~360 (1997)
- "Bottom-up vs. top-down evaluation of candidates' managerial potential: an experimental study.", pp.423~439 (1999)
- "Rating a boss, a colleague and a subordinate.", pp.655~671 (2002)
- "A meta analysis of self-supervisor", pp.43~62 (1988)
- "The multitrait- multirater approach to measuring managerial job performance journal of Applied Psychology", pp.369~381 (1967)
- "Can multi-source feedback change perceptions of goal accomplishment and performance- related outcomes? theory-based applications and directions for research", pp.803~839 (1995)
- "360-degree feedback - more than a tool! In M Maximizing the value of 360-degree feedback Center for Creative Leadership", pp.1~8 (1998)
- "Development of leadership skills: experience and timing.", pp.87~114 (2000)
- "Mastering the paradox and competing demands of high performance" (1988), Jossey-Bass Publishers
- "Multiple assessment of managerial effectiveness Interater agreement and consensus in effectiveness models", pp.779~803 (1988)
- "산업 및 조직Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology2005 119-138The Effects of Rater Positionsand Levels on Leadership RatingsYun-Jae Lee Young Seok ParkThe Catholic University of KoreaThe purpose of this research was to investigate the rater perspectives from different positions and levels Eight scenario were developed about the four good or bad leadership-style from Quinn And the rater's perspectives were measured by general leadership rating scales and semantic differential scales The results of this study were as follows there are differences in perspectives among rater's position The raters from high position tended to adopt performance and stability perspective but the raters fr", in(vation) (2005)