We are upgrading Wiley Online Library over the weekend of September 11th–12th.
All content will continue to be available, but some functionality may not work as expected. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.

By continuing to browse this site, you agree to its use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy.×
Applied Psychology
Volume 40, Issue 4 p. 437-454

Congruence of Self and Others' Leadership Ratings of Naval Officers for Understanding Successful Performance

Bernard M. Bass,

Corresponding Author

Center for Leadership Studies and School of Management, State University of New York at Binghamton, New York, U.S.A.

Center for Leadership Studies and School of Management, State University of New York at Binghamton, P.O. Box 6000, Binghamton, New York 13902–6000, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author
Francis J. Yammarino,

Corresponding Author

Center for Leadership Studies and School of Management, State University of New York at Binghamton, New York, U.S.A.

Center for Leadership Studies and School of Management, State University of New York at Binghamton, P.O. Box 6000, Binghamton, New York 13902–6000, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author
First published: October 1991
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1991.tb01002.x
Citations: 185

Abstract

Self-rated leadership behaviour (transformational, transactional, laissez-faire), was obtained for a representative, random sample of 155 U.S. Navy surface fleet officers in parallel to the leadership descriptions for the same dimensions provided by the officers' senior subordinates. In addition, Navy records completed by the officers' superiors provided performance and promotion data that were indexed as appraisals of the officers' success. The self-ratings of leadership behaviour tended to be inflated in comparison to subordinates' ratings, but the more successful officers were less likely to inflate their self-described leadership behaviour. A possible explanation for this effect is that subordinates' descriptions of leadership were significantly related to superiors' ratings of performance and promotion, but self-ratings of leadership were not associated with these measures. Thus, congruence of self and others' ratings was related to successful performance.

On a obtenu d'un échantillon représentatif tiré au hasard de 155 officiers de la flotte de surface de la Marine Américaine l'autoévaluation de leur comportement de leadership (transformationnel, transactionnel et laisser-faire) en même temps que les descriptions des mêmes dimensions de leadership fournies par leurs subordonnés immédiats. En outre, des notations provenant des supérieurs apportèrent sur les performances et les promotions des données qui ont été appréhendées comme estimations des réussites des officiers. Les auto-évaluations du comportement de leadership avaient tendance àêtre excessives en comparaison des jugements des subordonnés, mais les officiers qui réussissaient le mieux présentaient une moindre probabilité d'exagérer l'autodescription de leur comportement de leadership. Une explication possible de ce fait est que les descriptions du leadership par les subordonnés étaient significativement corrélées aux évaluations des performances et des promotions par les supérieurs, mais que les auto-évaluations du leadership n'étaient pas liées à ces mesures. Ainsi, la conformité des auto- et hétéro-évaluations était en rapport avec le succès.