Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
J. Kotter (1990)
What leaders really doIEEE Engineering Management Review, 37
T. Manning, B. Robertson (2003)
Influencing and negotiating skills: some research and reflections – Part I: influencing strategies and stylesIndustrial and Commercial Training, 35
T. Manning, Richard Parker, G. Pogson (2006)
A revised model of team roles and some research findingsIndustrial and Commercial Training, 38
E.A. Fleishman, E.F. Harris, H.E. Burtt
Leadership and Supervision in Industry
T. Manning, G. Pogson, Z. Morrison (2009)
Interpersonal influence in the workplace: influencing behaviour and 360-degree assessmentsIndustrial and Commercial Training, 41
T. Manning, G. Pogson, Z. Morrison (2008)
Interpersonal influence in the workplace - part one: an introduction to concepts and a theoretical modelIndustrial and Commercial Training, 40
Harry Bernhard (1990)
Managing for Change or StabilityJournal of Organizational Change Management, 3
R. Belbin, Victoria Brown (2022)
Team Roles at Work
J. Kidd (1982)
Management Teams — Why They Succeed or FailJournal of the Operational Research Society, 33
T. Manning, G. Pogson, Z. Morrison
Interpersonal influence in the workplace part 3: influencing behaviour and team role behaviour
David Seters, R. Field (1990)
The Evolution of Leadership TheoryJournal of Organizational Change Management, 3
T. Manning, B. Robertson (2002)
The dynamic leader – leadership development beyond the visionary leaderIndustrial and Commercial Training, 34
T. Manning, G. Pogson, Z. Morrison (2008)
Interpersonal influence in the workplace – part two: some research findings – influencing behaviour, personality and contextIndustrial and Commercial Training, 40
Purpose – The purpose of this two‐part paper is to present and discuss research into gender and seniority differences in 360‐degree assessments of influencing, leadership and team behaviours. Design/methodology/approach – The paper builds on a previous article on influencing behaviour and 360‐degree assessments, which found a statistically significant positive relationship between these two sets of variables. However, the strength of this relationship was found to vary, depending on the seniority and gender of individuals. This article extends the previous one in two ways. First, it examines four hypotheses to explain the earlier findings. Second, it introduces data on two other types of behaviour – leadership and team behaviour – in relation to 360‐degree performance assessments. The first two hypotheses relate to seniority differences. The first is that influencing behaviour is more closely linked to 360‐degree assessments among middle managers because they have less power than senior managers and, in consequence, their style of influence is more important. The second hypothesis is that the behaviour of those at senior levels is symbolic and/or constrained and thus of little substantive importance. Gender differences are, therefore, explored more fully by considering two further hypotheses. The third is that male and female managers tend to be judged by different gender stereotypes. The fourth hypothesis is that male and female managers tend to do different jobs. Findings – Support was found support for the first hypothesis. 360‐degree assessments are affected by seniority. Influencing behaviour is more closely linked to 360‐degree assessments of middle managers who tend to have less legitimate power. By contrast, influencing behaviour is less closely linked to 360‐degree assessments in senior managers who have more legitimate power, more influence over change and others and a more significant leadership role. Little support was found for the second hypothesis. 360‐degree assessments were strongly related to leadership and team behaviours in senior managers, as well as middle managers. These findings indicate that the behaviour of those at senior levels is of consequence and, can therefore, be expected to influence 360‐degree assessments. Clear evidence was found to support the third hypothesis that male and female managers were judged by different gender stereotypes. Male managers were judged more positively when they displayed a range of “leadership” behaviours. In contrast, female managers were judged more positively when they displayed “management” and “team” behaviours. Support was also found for the fourth hypothesis that male and female managers tended to do different jobs. Male managers were over‐represented at senior levels and were likely to have more influence over change at both middle and senior management levels. Originality/value – The originality and value of this paper lies in its examination of the relationship between three different types of behaviour (i.e. influencing, leadership and team working) and 360‐degree assessments of performance, including seniority and gender differences.
Industrial and Commercial Training – Emerald Publishing
Published: Apr 20, 2010
Keywords: Influence; Leadership; Team working; 360‐degree feedback; Gender; Senior managers
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.