Showing papers by "David A. Waldman published in 1988"

Transformational Leadership in a Management Game Simulation: Impacting the Bottom Line

Abstract: This investigation examined the practices of transformational and transactional leadership in a management simulation game that spanned a 3-month period. Transformational and transactional leadership were measured by using Bass's (1985) Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Form 4). Participants were second-year, part- time and full-time MBA students who worked in teams, each composed of seven to nine members. Each team represented the senior management of a hypothetical manufacturing organization. Data were collected from 27 teams on the perceived leadership of team presidents and the financial performance of their respective teams. Financial performance was based on five traditional indicators of organi zational effectiveness,that is, market share, stock price, earnings per share, return on assets, and debt-to-equity ratio. Analyses of leadership data collected independently of financial performance demonstrated significant and positive relationships be tween active transactional leadership, transformat...

Adding to Leader-Follower Transactions: The Augmenting Effect of Charismatic Leadership

Abstract: : The hypothesis that transformational/charismatic leadership predicts unique variance in leader effectiveness beyond that of transactional/contingent reward leadership was tested for a sample of U.S. Navy Officers. The 186 officers were rated by their 793 immediate subordinates on charismatic and contingent reward leadership and effectiveness, and by their superiors on performance evaluation and early promotion potential. Results from hierarchical regression analyses indicated that charisma augmented the predictive power of contingent reward behavior for determining subordinate-rated effectiveness of focal leaders and superior-rated effectiveness and early promotion recommendation for focal leaders. Keywords: Behavior, Effectiveness, Performance, Early promotion, Hierarchical regression, Leader-follower relationships, Augmentation effectiveness, Multifactor officer questionnaire, Fitness reports, Naval personnel.

A Field Study of Rating Conditions and Leniency in Performance Appraisal

Abstract: Summary.-Performance appraisal ratings of 89 secretarial and clerical employees of a large university were studied. Most recent administrative ratings, used to make personnel decisions, were obtained for all employees. In addition, research ratings were collected under one of two conditions. For approximately half of the employees, confidential ratings were obtained from the employees' supemison whereby the supervisors were told that only the researchers would see their ratings. For the other half of the employees, ratings were obtained under sharing conditions whereby supervisors were told that copies of their ratings would be sent to their respective employees. As expected, administrative ratings showed relatively more leniency than corresponding confidential research ratings but did not show more leniency than corresponding sharing research ratings. Findings were discussed in terms oi the cognitive dynamics which may cause more lenient ratings to occur. The importance of performance appraisal necessitates an understanding of conditions which can affect the rating process. As noted by Saal, Downey, and Lahey (1780) performance appraisal is often characterized by sysrematic rating error. Perhaps the most troublesome of these errors is leniency, which can lead to such problems as having misinformed employees whose performance is not as good as their ratings indicate, and merit pay costs for which a company may not be getting its money's worth. Traditional attempts at remedying leniency focused on improving rating forms and formats, training raters to minimize leniency, and increasing the observation skds of raters. More recent approaches have emphasized analyzing the cognitive processes underlying performance ratings (DeNisi, Cafferty, & Meglino, 1784; Feldman, 1781). Research on ratings has been based on the principle that raters observe and attend to employees' stimulus behavior; they store, possibly evaluate, and integrate this behavior in existing knowledge structures or schemas, and at some later point in time recall ths information for judgment. Moreover, this cognitive approach recognizes that the context of the rating process, including the purpose of the rating, may influence raters' cognitions and subsequent judgments. Landy and Farr's (1980) process model of performance rating stressed