The effects of leader self-awareness -
a systematic literature review
Drs. M.A.H.C. (Claudia) Heijnen (s0823325)
University of Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business
MSc BA – General Management January 2016
Supervisor: Dr. J. F. J. Vos Second Assessor: Drs. H.P. van Peet
Word count: 11.255
2
The Road Not Taken – Robert Frost
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel both And be one traveller, long I stood And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth; Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there Had worn them really about the same,
And both that morning equally lay In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day! Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper marks the end of four years MSc Business Administration at AOG School of Management and Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. A lot has happened in the past four years. Meeting wonderful & interesting people, gaining loads of knowledge, laughed my socks off at the weekly lectures at the Nieuwe Academie, attending the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management in Boston, and travelling to China and Hong Kong. These experiences and knowledge created a solid foundation, professionally and personally.
In the summer of 2014, the phone rang. My husband and I were becoming parents of a beautiful boy of 4 years old. In December 2014 we landed at Schiphol airport; the three of us. Obviously, hardly any work done after this life changing phone call. Furthermore, I changed jobs at the start of 2015. Finishing this paper therefore means a lot to me.
4 ABSTRACT
Background: Self-awareness plays a major role in the effectiveness and performance of leaders.
The objective of this study is to gain insight in leader self-awareness and the effects thereof on individual and organisational levels through summarising and analysing recurring themes and empirical evidence in the extant literature.
Methods: A systematic literature review on empirical research on the effects of leader
self-awareness was conducted. Search terms included : self-self-awareness, self-consciousness, other rating agreement, self-other agreement, leader, leadership, effectiveness, and performance. Databases used were Web of Science, Emerald, and EBSCO. Articles had to meet the following criteria: (1) be academic peer-reviewed, (2) written in English, (3) the entire text is available online, and (4) the focus is on the effects of leader self-awareness.
Results: Initially, a total of 402 articles were identified of which 23 met the requirements. The
findings from these articles were first grouped using a classification framework consisting of (A) effects on individual leader, (B) effects on team and others, and (C) effects on organisations. Subsequently, the findings were subgrouped into themes. This resulted in 35 findings divided over 11 themes, namely effects on: performance, career derailment, compensation and organisational advancement, miscellaneous (individual leader), quality of (mentoring) relationships, trust and organisational commitment, job satisfaction, productivity and job performance, miscellaneous (team and others), culture and change, and finally climate of quality and innovation.
Conclusions: These findings provide an overview of the literature on the effects of leader
self-awareness and identifies relevant lines of research. Additionally, gaps in the literature are identified and used for proposing starting points for further research on the topic of leader self-awareness and its effects.
5 INTRODUCTION
Today’s business climate can be described as fast changing, turbulent and complex. In this respect Eisenhardt & Brown (1998:786) assert that “change is the central strategic challenge”. These business environments place particular demands on the company leaders in regard to interpreting the environment, crafting the appropriate strategy, and building an organisation that thrives in such contexts (Crossan & Mazutis, 2008). In the current era of continuously changing business environments, the performance of organisations is tied to learning to lead organisations, others and oneself (Crossan et al., 2008; Crossan & Mazutis, 2008; Erikson, 2008; Taylor, 2010). Key in this respect is innovation and continuous improvement: changing what is done and how it is done. The degree in which organisations are capable of changing in order to gain and sustain competitive advantage depends on the capacity of the leader to lead the organisation and also themselves. Such dynamic and fast-paced environments require effective leadership for facing these challenges. It demands leadership that prevents ‘stuckness’ by ensuring movement, whereby ‘stuckness’ is about inertness, disfunctioning, partial implementation and frustration (Higgs & Rowland, 2010). Kotter and Schlesinger (2008) assert that successful organisational changes have two characteristics: leaders put diverse strategies in place while taking their own strengths and weaknesses into account, and also have a realistic picture of the change context. It also requires leaders who can engage the cooperation of followers and exert the necessary influence to attain superior performance (Hanna & Glassman, 2004).
Leaders set the direction with the intention of creating active contribution to this set course. Consequently, the desired outcome of leader behaviour is that others will follow (‘followership’) (Brumm & Drury, 2013; Taylor, 2010). As such, it is necessary to influence perception and behaviour of the followers with the objective to accomplish the desired changes and to increase performance. Self-awareness is said to contribute to the desired affective outcomes and increased leadership effectiveness (Bratton et al., 2011; Butler et al., 2014; Church, 1997; Shipper et al., 2003). Additionally, successful influencing of followers and therewith increasing the effectiveness of the leader is positively associated with leader self-awareness (Bratton et al., 2011;Higgs & Rowland, 2010; Toegel & Barsoux, 2012). Leadership, hence, is considered to be a relational process: leaders must work to be aware of their influence on others to be effective (Taylor, 2010).
6 Much has been written on self-awareness. One of the first theories on self-awareness dates back to the seventies: the Objective Self-Awareness (OSA) Theory of Duval & Wicklund (1972). OSA suggests that people can develop self-awareness when directing their attention inward and focusing on themselves. This “self-focused attention automatically results in self-evaluation against self-defined, subjective standards of correctness” (Sturm et al., 2013:659). According to the OSA theory, if people discover that they fail to meet their standards, they either change the standard, change themselves or ignore their awareness and their standards altogether.
The concept of ‘self-awareness’ is defined in many ways, yet with more or less analogous meaning. Self-awareness is being aware of and trusting one’s own characteristics, values, motivations, emotions and knowledge (Crossan & Mazutis, 2008; Shipper et al., 2003). Self-awareness is also defined as the capacity to understand one’s prejudices, preferences and experience (Balogun & Hope Hailey, 2008:9). Self-awareness points to having subjective and accurate knowledge of one self, such as the mental state of mind, emotions, convictions, desires and personality (Showry & Manasa, 2014). Church (1997) describes self-awareness as the capability that allows a person to evaluate their own behaviours and skills. Goleman (2004) explains self-awareness as the ability to recognize and understand one’s moods, emotions, and drives, as well as their effect on others. A person with a high degree of self-awareness is aware of how their feelings affect them and also how their feelings affect others and have an effect on their work performance (Shipper et al., 2003).
Self-awareness, consequently, comprises of two components. The first component is having an understanding of oneself (e.g. strengths and weaknesses) and rating oneself in comparison with others’ ratings. And secondly, there is the meta-perception component in the form of predicting others’ ratings (Showry & Manasa, 2014; Sturm et al., 2013; Taylor, 2010). Hence, there are two sides to self-awareness: an internal (self) side and an external (others) side. Gallagher et al. (2012) speak of professional self-awareness and emotional self-awareness.
First, the internal (self) side or professional self-awareness is about being aware and understanding the self-resources a leader possesses (who they are, what strengths they possess, what they value etc.). Taylor (2010) indicates that self-awareness is about leaders being aware of their character traits, assessment of strengths and weaknesses, sense of purpose, core values, motivations and desires. It concerns the leader’s awareness of the self-resources that guide effective leadership. For example, Goleman (2000) distinguishes six different styles of leadership that have impact on organisational climate, i.e. coercive, authoritative, affiliative, democratic, pacesetting and coaching. Self-aware leaders know which style is needed in a given situation and know whether they possess the necessary competencies.
7 made between the perception of leader behaviour by others and the leader’s personal resources (Taylor, 2010). By actively trying to understand the perceptions of others, leaders can maximise the effectiveness of their interactions with others (Sturm et al., 2013). Such leaders have the ability to see how they are seen by others and understand the impact of their behaviour.
The above makes clear that self-awareness plays a major role in the effectiveness and performance of leaders. It is for this reason that in this study the focus is on a single leader characteristic: self-awareness. Yet, to deal successfully as organisations and as leaders with the ever increasing pace of change, it would be beneficial to have a thorough understanding of the effects of leader self-awareness which already have been identified in extant literature. This in turn could present a case for more focus on, and development of, self-awareness as part of leadership development.
Therefore, in order to provide an overview of what can be learned from previous empirical research on leader self-awareness and its effects, this study provides a systematic literature review. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no systematic reviews of the literature concerning leader self-awareness and its effects. This article, hence, fills this gap. Moreover, this study aims to answer the following research question:
Which general findings and gaps can be identified on leader self-awareness and the individual and organisational consequences thereof and how can the general findings be categorised?
8 METHODOLOGY
This systematic literature review aims at providing a comprehensive overview of the recent literature on leader self-awareness and the consequences it has on individuals and organisations. The way in which existing literature was searched and the selection process was carried out is outlined below.
Choice of key words and search strategies
In order for this literature review to provide a comprehensive overview of the extant literature on the effects of leader self-awareness, it is important that all relevant terms are covered in the search for literature. Relevant synonyms and related terms need also be included.
Self-awareness can be measured by means of rating comparison: the degree of congruence or agreement between self-ratings and ratings given by others (Bratton et al., 2010; Church, 1997; Moshavi et al., 2003). The first component of awareness consists of being aware of the self-resources one possesses. Operationalising this component of self-awareness is generally been done by multisource feedback assessment (360-degree feedback) (Church, 1997; Taylor, 2010; Yammarino, 2003). This is done by looking at how the self-ratings of the participants of multisource feedback are compared to others’ ratings. Furthermore, the second component of self-awareness – the ability to anticipate the views of others and the impact on others – can be measured by having the leader predict the ratings given by others before receiving these multifeedback ratings (Taylor, 2010). It is contended that it is now common to assume that if a leader’s self-ratings are congruent with others’ ratings, that the leader is more self-aware than whose ratings are incongruent (Moshavi et al., 2003; Taylor et al., 2012; Yammarino, 2003).
Based on the aforementioned, the following key terms were used to search the databases: awareness, consciousness (relevant synonym to awareness), other rating agreement, self-other agreement, leader, leadership, effectiveness, and performance. Additionally, by adding “ “ around a complete term, the search engine searches for the entire term and not each word individually.
9 Table 1 - Overview of the search strategies
Besides the above mentioned search strategies, the references of articles which met the selection criteria below were assessed for other possible relevant articles that did not surface on the basis of the search strategies.
Databases
The following search engines were chosen based on their relevance to the subject matter of this article:
Web of Science
Emerald
EBSCO
The Web of Science refers to articles in international scientific magazines. Data of three Citation Indexes are included: the Science Citation Index (from 1945), the Social Sciences Citation Index (from 1956) and the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (from 1975). Next, the EBSCO databases includes articles in the fields of business economics and business administration. EBSCO uses several databases; some of which are not relevant for the purpose of this article. The databases deemed irrelevant were excluded. See appendix A for an overview. Emerald, lastly, is a database operated by Emerald publishing house. In general, relevant articles are articles in the field of Management & Organisation.
In the Web of Science database the search field ‘Topic’ was used for the terms described in the table below. This included searching in article titles, abstracts and keywords. The search field ‘Abstract’ was used in the Emerald as well as in the EBSCO database.
Selection criteria
10 articles. Peer-reviewed articles can be considered validated knowledge and have the most impact (Podsakoff et al., 2005). These articles were subsequently assessed on the basis of the following criteria: the article is written in English, the entire text of the article is online available and the focus of the article is on the effects of leader self-awareness. For assessing this criterion the available abstracts were read.
Classification of findings
To answer the research question this study will use the classification scheme as shown in figure 1 below, which presents the concepts and relationships of interest for this study. From the scheme it becomes clear that first the types of self-awareness, i.e. the different operationalisations of the construct ‘self-awareness’, as identified in this systematic literature review, will be clarified. This is followed by an investigation of the literature on the identified effects of self-awareness on (A) the individual leader, (B) on the team and others and finally (C) on organisations. This classification scheme is based on the premise that self-awareness is essential to producing effective individual, team and organisational performance (Taylor et al., 2012; Tekleab et al., 2008).
First, the findings of every single study, which was included in this review, were extracted. Subsequently, for every finding an assessment was carried out to ascertain which one of the three effects that specific finding pertained to. And finally, for further subcategorization, per category the attributed findings were analysed in order to distinguish recurring themes.
11 RESULTS
Firstly, in this section the results of the literature search are explained and outlined. Furthermore, the findings distilled from the relevant studies are presented.
Paper selection
The search for relevant articles in Web of Science and Emerald was conducted on the 6th of September
2015. A few days later on the 9th of September 2015 a similar search was carried out in the relevant
databases of EBSCO. Entry of the 16 search strategies in the abovementioned search engines resulted initially in a total of 402 articles. Of these articles three were not written in English. For this reason these articles were eliminated after which 399 articles remained.
Assessment of the search results was done per search engine. Entry of the 16 search strategies in the Web of Science resulted in 253 articles. After eliminating three articles not written in English, 250 articles remained. All titles and abstracts were reviewed. If necessary, next to assessing the title and abstract, the entire article was read. Of the 250 remaining articles, 156 were considered not relevant for the purpose of this article. These articles did not meet the criterion of focussing on the effects of leader self-awareness. Furthermore, 74 duplicates were found, obviously within the search engine. Eliminating duplicates was done after a manual check. After eliminating these duplicates, 20 articles resulting from the Web of Science search remained for in-depth analysis.
Following the search in the Web of Science, the searches in the Emerald database were carried out on the same day. The initial yield was 47 articles, which were all written in English. After a manual check 11 articles were considered duplicates as well as between the search engines as within the search engine. Besides this, 35 articles lacked focus on the effects of self-awareness. This was concluded based on the title and abstract. And in the case title and abstract did not offer sufficient information, the entire article was read. This resulted in 1 article remaining for in-depth analysis. Finally, the search strategies were applied in the EBSCO search engine. This resulted in 102 articles, which were all written in English. Based on a manual check, 21 articles were considered duplicates as well as between search engines as within the search engine. Of the remaining 81 articles, 79 articles did not have a focus on the effects of leader self-awareness, which was concluded based on title and abstract, and if necessary based on the entire article. Hence, 2 articles remained for in-depth analysis.
12 Figure 2: Selection procedure
Overview of included articles
For the purpose of clarifying the context and objectives of the 23 remaining articles, an overview is given in table 2 below. Each article has been given a unique number, which is used throughout the remainder of this paper.
The first study pertaining to the effects of leader self-awareness dates back to 1992 - some 20 years after Duval and Wickland introduced their Objective Self-Awareness Theory - and 2015 being the most recent year. The selection of articles consists of 1 mixed and 22 quantitative research method studies. Most studies were carried out in the USA with participants residing in the USA. Of the 23 samples 7 were of non USA origin or partly of USA origin. These 7 studies were carried out in Israel, Europe (Norway, Belgium, UK, Germany, France, Denmark and Italy and Asia (China, South Korea and Taiwan). In most instances self-other agreement is used as the operationalisation of the construct self-awareness. In one study, however, self-awareness has been operationalised as prediction-other agreement.
aims to identify, categorise and analyse the existing findings on the effects of leader self-awareness. Hence, the results will be presented, categorised and discussed based on the classification scheme displayed in figure 1.
The process of categorisation started by assessing whether a specific finding from a study should be placed in category A (effects of leader awareness on individual leader), B (effects of leader self-awareness on team and others), or C (effects of leader self-self-awareness on organisation). Comparing and combining the findings within each category resulted in distinguishing a number of themes that leader self-awareness has an effect on. Subsequently, per category and theme these findings are presented below. However, before elaborating on these findings, first the operationalisations of the concept of self-awareness will be discussed.
Operationalisations of concept of self-awareness. Out of the 23 articles 22 used agreement
between self-ratings and other ratings for operationalising self-awareness. Individuals’ ratings of their behaviour is then compared to ratings of the same behaviour given by others. Congruence between these self- and other ratings is considered to reflect self-awareness, whereas incongruence is considered to reflect the opposite. Congruence and incongruence manifests itself in different levels of self-awareness. The original model of self-other rating agreement was developed by Atwater & Yammarino (1992, [1]). They suggest that degree and type of agreement between self- and other ratings are relevant to performance and effectiveness. This original model consists of three agreement categories: under-estimation, in-agreement and over-estimation. Leaders whose self-ratings are below others’ self-ratings are referred to as under-estimators. Leaders whose self-self-ratings are similar to the ratings of others are referred to as in-agreement. And leaders whose self-ratings are higher than the ratings of others are referred to as over-estimators. ‘Others’ can be grouped into peers, superiors and subordinates or direct reports.
This model has been extended from three agreement group model to four agreement group model. The four agreement group model is the most used model in the articles this review is comprised of. In the four agreement group model the in-agreement category is further subdivided into agreement/high and agreement/low. This subdivision takes into consideration that in-agreement raters who receive good ratings may differ from in-in-agreement raters who receive poor ratings. Hence, the aforementioned subdivision is used. The self-ratings of in-agreement/good raters are favourable and similar to the ratings of others, whereas the self-ratings of in-agreement/low raters are not favourable, yet also similar to the ratings of others (Fleenor et al., 1996, [3]).
In one instance, research has been carried out using a six agreement group model (Fleenor et al., 1996, [3]). The self-raters were divided into good and poor performers based on their subordinate ratings. Subsequently, for each level of performance (good or poor), the leaders were then grouped into one of three categories (over-estimators, in-agreement and under-estimators), based on congruence with their subordinate ratings. This six agreement group model has not been further researched in relation to the effects of leader self-awareness since.
16 other ratings’, whereby they compare the leaders’ predicted ratings of their boss with the actual ratings of their boss. This method comes closest to the second component of self-awareness, being ‘other focused’.
Effects on individual leader. In this section effects of leader self-awareness on the individual
leader are presented. The effects on the individual leader are categorised as shown in table 3 and outlined below. The categories are: performance effects, effects on career derailment, compensation and organisational advancement, and miscellaneous.
Table 3: Effects of leader self-awareness on individual leader
17 study carried out by Tekleab et al. (2008, [13]) largely agree with the abovementioned results. This study pertains to among others the effects of leaders' self-awareness of their own leadership and leader effectiveness. In general, in-agreement/good leaders were rated as the most effective, followed by under-estimators. In-agreement/poor leaders were rated as less effective, but they were rated higher than over-estimators.
Yet, Van Velsor et al. (1993, [2]) and Amundsen & Martinsen (2014, [22]) show contradictory results. Van Velsor et al. (1993, [2]) investigated the relationship between self/rater agreement and rated self-awareness and its effects on performance. Amundsen & Martinsen (2014, [22]) investigated the effects of self-other agreement in empowering leadership on, among others, leader effectiveness. Results of these studies indicate that managers who underrate themselves are perceived by direct reports as being more effective than those whose self- and others-ratings are accurate (also supported by Ostroff et al. (2004, [10])). More specifically, leader effectiveness of over-estimators and agreement/good leaders is considered to be between under-estimators and in-agreement/poor. In agreement/poor leaders are considered to be the least effective leaders (also supported by Ostroff et al. (2004, [10])). One of the findings of Atwater et al. (1998, [4]) is in line with these results. Atwater et al. (1998, [4]) explored the relationship between self-ratings, peer ratings and managerial effectiveness as well as the relationship between self-ratings, subordinate ratings and managerial effectiveness. Results indicate that perceived managerial effectiveness is highest when both self- and other ratings are high and in-agreement (similar to [1] and [3]), but also when self-ratings are substantially lower than other ratings (severe underestimation). Finally, the abovementioned is also supported by research carried out by Bratton et al. (2010, [15]). They examined the effects of leaders' self-awareness of their own leadership on followers' satisfaction, self-leadership and leader effectiveness. One of the findings is that under-estimators earn higher follower ratings of leader performance than over-estimators, agreement/good and in-agreement/poor.
In contrast, managers who overrate themselves are rated by others as being the poorest performers (Van Velsor, 1993, [2]). This finding is in accordance with an outcome of the study by Atwater et al (1998, [4]). They conclude that effectiveness is lowest for over-estimators when self-ratings are moderate and subordinate ratings are low. Research carried out by Tekleab et al. (2008, [13]) show similar results. When leaders and followers disagree on the leader's transformational leadership, ratings of leader effectiveness decline and the degree of decline for over-estimators is greater than for under-estimators. Finally, research carried out by Bratton et al. (2010, [15]) shows a negative relationship between Emotional Intelligence and leader performance for managers who overestimate their leader abilities.
18 specifically, for self–subordinate ratings, self–other agreement was significantly related to performance in the United States of America in the sense that overestimation is worse in relation to performance than underestimation. Furthermore, for self-peer ratings in United States of America, performance decreases somewhat as underestimation increases, and performance decreases more substantially as over-rating becomes more severe. However, no significant relation was found between over- and underestimation and performance in Europe.
The second study where cultural context was taken into account, was a study conducted by Butler et al. (2013, [19]) on examining whether self-awareness relates to perceptions of leadership effectiveness for hospitality leaders when cultural context is considered. These cultural contexts are uncertainty avoidance, performance orientation and in-group collectivism. They found that leader self-awareness has greater relationships to increased ratings of managerial effectiveness in cultural contexts high in uncertainty avoidance and performance orientation compared to those low in uncertainty avoidance and performance orientation. Furthermore, leader self-awareness has a greater relationship to increased ratings of effectiveness in cultural contexts high and low in in-group collectivism compared to those medium in in-group collectivism.
The degree of self-awareness was measured using three constructs, being Passive/Defensive, Aggressive/Defensive and Constructive styles of thinking and behaving. Greater awareness in the Passive/Defensive style of thinking and behaving predicts higher levels of perceived effectiveness in low uncertainty avoidance contexts. Higher levels of effectiveness were predicted by greater self-awareness in the areas of Passive/Defensive and Constructive styles in contexts of high level of uncertainty avoidance. Greater self-awareness in both Constructive and Passive/Defensive styles results in greater levels of perceived effectiveness in low and medium performance orientation contexts. Greater self-awareness in Constructive styles of thinking and behaviour results in perceptions of greater effectiveness in contexts of low in-group collectivism. Moreover, greater self-awareness of Constructive and Passive/Defensive styles results in increased perceptions of leader effectiveness in contexts of high in-group collectivism. In contrast, lower awareness of Aggressive/Defensive styles of thinking and behaving in contexts of high level of uncertainty avoidance, performance orientation and in-group collectivism results in greater levels of perceived leader effectiveness.
Career derailment. A number of studies deal with career derailment in relation to self-awareness. These are Shipper & Dillard (2000, [5]), Tang et al. (2011, [16]), Braddy et al. (2014, [20]) and Cullen et al. (2015, [23]). Derailment is defined by Cullen et al. (2015:162) as leaders failing to climb their career ladder as anticipated by their organisation. Career derailment furthermore relates to leader behaviours that limit the career advancement of focal leaders (Braddy et al., 2014, [20]). Hence, behaviour that could result in a leader being fired or demoted or experiencing career plateau.
19 to their successful cohorts. Furthermore, the early impending derailers overestimated their follow-up skills in comparison to the early fast trackers. In addition, derailers at each stage of their careers overestimated their ability on a number of specific managerial skills in comparison to the fast trackers at a similar career stage. The three categories of fast trackers, on the other hand, in general accurately estimated or underestimated their ability on the upfront skills and to a lesser degree the follow-up skills. Finally, the early and mid-career recoverers did significantly more accurately estimated or underestimated their overall, up-front profiles, and follow-up profiles than the non-recoverers.
Second, Tang et al. (2011, [16]) investigated how self-awareness of leadership derailment affects leadership effectiveness. The derailment characteristics that were rated are problems with interpersonal relationships; failed to effectively hire, build, and lead teams; experienced difficulty to adapt or change; failed to meet business objectives; and/or possessed too narrow of a functional orientation. Results show that in-agreement high ratings (i.e. high ratings on the derailment factors by both self and peer ratings) and self-under rating of derailment factors were related to lower ratings of leadership effectiveness as opposed to over-rating of these factors. Furthermore, in-agreement low ratings of derailment factors were associated with high ratings of leadership effectiveness.
Next, Braddy et al. (2014, [20]) examined self-other agreement in relation to career derailment potential. They investigated if a focal leader's peers, direct reports, and supervisors consider the task- and relationship-oriented leader behaviours important for career derailment. Results show that career derailment potential is higher when the discrepancy is such that self-ratings are higher than direct report ratings, peer ratings, and supervisor ratings on task-oriented leader behaviour as well as relationship-oriented behaviour. In other words, derailment is higher for over-estimators than for under-over-estimators. Furthermore, the opposite was also established. This being that derailment potential is considered lower when the discrepancy is such that supervisor ratings are higher than self-ratings on relationship-oriented leader behaviour. More specifically, derailment is lower for under-estimators than for over-estimators.
20 Compensation and organisational advancement. Ostroff et al. (2004, [10]) examined self-other agreement and performance outcomes as well as relationships to compensation and organisational level. They found that compensation is highest for self - other agreement (subordinate, supervisor, peer) at high levels of rated behaviours. Further, as the degree of both underrating and overrating increases, compensation decreases, but more sharply for under-raters than over-raters. The same goes for the effect on organisational level. Organisational level is highest for self - subordinate agreement at high levels of rated behaviours. Moreover, as the degree of both underrating and overrating increases, organisational level decreases but more sharply for under-raters than over-under-raters. These findings are supported by research carried out by Sturm et al. (2013, [18]). Their research was about understanding how women leaders predict that their bosses will rate them on their leadership behaviours and how this may affect women leaders in the workplace. Results indicated that consequences of underestimating one’s leadership behaviour were among others lack of advancement and salary.
Miscellaneous. This section presents miscellaneous outcome variables pertaining to effects on individual leaders themselves, being self-awareness, interpersonal orientation, trust and organisational commitment.
Self-awareness and interpersonal orientation. First of all, Fleenor et al. (1996, [3]) researched two outcome variables, which are self-awareness and interpersonal orientation. Self-awareness is defined as knowledge of how one is seen by others and interpersonal orientation as being sensitive to the feelings of others. Under-estimators and in-agreement/good raters were rated higher than over-estimators and in-agreement/poor on self-awareness. In-agreement/good raters received higher ratings than over-estimators on the scales related to interpersonal orientation. In-agreement/good raters did not receive higher ratings than under-estimators on interpersonal orientation scales. Van Velsor et al. (1993, [2]) show similar results. Under-raters were rated more highly than were accurate raters on 'knows self' and 'willing to approve', and accurate raters were rated more highly on both components than were over-raters.
Trust and organisational commitment. Furthermore, according to a study conducted by Sosik (2001, [7]), managers who are in agreement regarding their charismatic leadership behaviour report the highest levels of trust and organisational commitment on a personal level followed by respectively those managers who are under-estimators and estimators, and those managers who are over-estimators and under-over-estimators. Sosik’s (2001, [7]) study pertained to whether self-awareness of managers influences work attitudes of managers and their subordinates and relationships between charismatic leadership behaviour and managerial performance.
Effects on team and others. A number of studies examined the effects of leader self-awareness
21 Table 4: Effects of leader self-awareness on team and others
22 Research carried out by Landry et al. (2014, [21]) also pertained to the quality of the relationship, specifically the quality of the leader-member exchange relationship (LMX). Results show that LMX is higher when supervisor commitment and perceived commitment are both high.
Trust and organisational commitment. Work attitudes pertaining to trust and organisational commitment are researched by Sosik (2001, [7]), Cogliser et al. (2009, [14]), Devos et al. (2012, [17]) and Landry et al. (2014, [21]). First, Sosik (2001, [7]) examined whether self-awareness of managers influences work attitudes of managers and their subordinates. Subordinates of managers who underestimated their charismatic leadership behaviour reported the highest levels of trust and organisational commitment followed by subordinates of managers who were in agreement and finally followed by over-estimators.
Cogliser et al. (2009, [14]), next, researched the effects of self-awareness on the outcome variable ‘organisational commitment’. More specifically, Cogliser et al. (2009, [14]) explored the extent to which congruence in leader and follower ratings of LMX quality (i.e. the quality of the relationship between leader and follower) influences followers’ organisational commitment. Their results show that followers in balanced/high LMX relationships experience the highest organisational commitment and follower under-estimators the lowest. The ratings of organisational commitment for the followers of estimators and balanced/low are intermediate, with the followers of over-estimators having higher organisational commitment than balanced/low.
Also, Devos et al. (2012, [17]) analysed the relation between the self-awareness of school leaders and key components of school culture and change, such as teachers' organisation commitment, defined as identifying with and involvement in the organisation. Results show that teachers in schools of under-estimators reported significantly higher organisational commitment than teachers in schools of over-estimators. And teachers in schools of under-estimators reported similar on organisational commitment as teachers in schools of in-agreement/good leaders.
Finally, Landry et al. (2014, [21]) investigated how level and direction of employee-supervisor (dis)agreement on employee-supervisor's affective commitment to the employee related to, among others, organisational commitment. Employee organisational commitment is higher when perceived commitment and supervisor commitment are both high. Furthermore, organisational commitment is higher when employees overestimate their supervisor's commitment.
Job satisfaction. Furthermore, Cogliser et al. (2009, [14]) explored the extent to which congruence in leader and follower ratings of LMX quality (i.e. the quality of the relationship between leader and follower) influences followers’ job satisfaction. This outcome variable is also researched by Moshavi et al. (2003, [8]) and Amundsen & Martinsen (2014, [22]). The latter combined it with turnover intention.
The relationships between leaders' self-awareness of their leadership behaviour and the attitudes and performance of subordinates was explored by Moshavi et al. (2003, [8]). The subordinates of under-estimators reported significantly higher levels of job satisfaction than did subordinates of those who were in-agreement, followed by subordinates of over-estimators.
23 turnover intention can be defined as the degree in which a person thinks about changing jobs. In line with the previous findings on under-estimation, in this study underestimation was related to higher job satisfaction and lower turnover intention among subordinates than overestimation. No differences in job satisfaction turnover intention were found among subordinates of in-agreement/good and /poor leaders. And overestimation was associated with the lowest job satisfaction and higher turnover intention among subordinates.
The study carried out by Cogliser et al. (2009, [14]) show somewhat different results. Followers in in-agreement/good LMX relationships experience the highest levels of job satisfaction and in-agreement/low the lowest levels. The ratings of job satisfaction for the unbalanced types is intermediate, with over-estimators having a higher experience of job satisfaction than under-estimators.
Productivity and job performance. Moshavi et al. (2003, [8]) reported additional findings regarding productivity, which were that the groups of subordinates whose leaders underestimated their levels of transformational leadership achieved a significantly higher level of productivity, followed by the groups of subordinates whose leaders were in-agreement. The groups of subordinates led by supervisors who overestimated the extent to which they engaged in transformational leadership behaviour achieved the lowest level of productivity.
An outcome variable related to productivity is job performance. This variable was researched by Landry et al. (2014, [21]). Their research on how employee-supervisor agreement on supervisor’s affective commitment relates to, among others, job performance shows that job performance is higher when supervisor commitment and perceived commitment are both high. However, job performance is higher when employees underestimate their supervisor's commitment.
Job performance is also an outcome variable examined in a study carried out by Cogliser et al. (2009, [14]). In this study the extent to which congruence in leader and follower ratings of LMX quality, in other words the quality of the relationship between leader and follower, is related to, among others, follower job performance is explored. Results indicate that followers in balanced/high LMX relationships receive the highest ratings of job performance and balanced/low LMX relationships receive the lowest. The ratings of job performance for the unbalanced types is intermediate, with under-estimators having a higher performance level than over estimators.
Miscellaneous. This section presents miscellaneous outcome variables concerning effects on team and others, that being emotional well-being and distress, followers’ self-leadership, followers’ satisfaction with supervision, participative decision making and display of influence tactics.
Emotional well-being and distress. Besides the quality of the relationship Landry et al. (2014, [21]) also investigated how employee-supervisor agreement on supervisor’s affective commitment relates the emotional well-being and distress of the subordinates, named emotional exhaustion. They found that emotional exhaustion is lower when supervisor commitment and perceived commitment are both high.
24 Self-leadership refers to the degree of control followers exert over their own behaviour. Findings of this study show that followers of under-estimators of empowering leadership displayed the most self-leadership behaviour, followed by those of in-agreement/good leaders. Self-self-leadership was the lowest among followers of in-agreement/poor leaders. Similar relationships between transformational self-awareness and follower self-leadership were not found.
Followers’ satisfaction with supervision. The effects of leaders’ self-awareness of their own leadership on followers' satisfaction were examined by Moshavi et al. (2003, [8]) and Tekleab et al. (2008, [13]). The subordinates of under-estimators reported significantly higher levels of satisfaction with supervision than did subordinates of those who were in-agreement, followed by subordinates of over-estimators.
Results from the study carried out by Tekleab et al. (2008, [13]) show that follower satisfaction with supervision of followers who report to transformational leaders is similarly higher for those who report to under-estimators and in-agreement/good estimators than for those who report to over-estimators and in-agreement/poor leaders. Similar relationships between empowering self-awareness and follower satisfaction were not found.
Participative decision making. Devos et al. (2012, [17]) analysed the relation between the self-awareness of school leaders and key components of school culture and change, such as participative decision making. This relates to involvement in the decision making process. Results show that teachers in schools of under-estimators reported significantly higher participative decision making than teachers in schools of over-estimators. Next, teachers in schools of in-agreement/good leaders reported significantly higher participative decision making than teachers in schools of over-estimators. And finally, teachers in schools of under-estimators reported similar on participative decision making as teachers in schools of in-agreement/good leaders.
25 display higher levels of soft and rational persuasion tactics than over-estimators or in- agreement/poor managers.
Effects on organisation. Relatively few findings can be categorised in the category ‘effects on
organisation’ when compared to the other categories. Some findings mentioned in the category ‘effects on team and others’ have intuitively also an effect on organisations, such as effects on an individuals’ productivity and performance, and organisational commitment. These effects are indirect, however.
Two studies contain findings on effects on organisations. The findings relate to effects on culture and change (Devos et al., 2012, [17]) and climate of quality and innovation (Berson & Sosik, 2007, [12]).
Table 5: Effects of leader self-awareness on organisations
Culture and change. Devos et al. (2012, [17]) analysed the relation between the self-awareness of school leaders and key components of culture and change in a school context, such as support of school vision and perception of the practicality of reform. Support of school vision is about shared beliefs about purposes, practices, and desired behaviour. Perception of the practicality of reform respectively pertain to identifying with and involvement in the organisation and feeling the need of the reform and understanding its goals. The reform must also be practical. Results show that teachers in schools of under-estimators reported significantly higher practicality of reform than teachers in schools of over-estimators. Furthermore, teachers in schools of in-agreement/good leaders reported significantly higher support of school vision than teachers in schools of over-estimators. Finally, teachers in schools of under-estimators reported similar on support of school vision and teachers' practicality of reforms as teachers in schools of in-agreement/good leaders.
Climate of quality and innovation. The type of influence behaviour displayed by self-aware leaders and the extent to which leader self-self-awareness predicts processes that encourage a climate of quality and innovation was examined by Berson & Sosik (2007, [12]). Results show that managers who were in agreement with their subordinates and had high ratings of charismatic leadership were associated with subordinates who perceived their units as emphasizing quality and innovation more than managers who overestimated their leadership or were in agreement with followers over poor ratings of charismatic leadership.
27 DISCUSSION
This literature review embarked on the notion that self-awareness plays an important role in the effectiveness of leaders. To this end 23 peer-reviewed articles that reported on the effects of leader self-awareness were identified. This gained insight in the current body of knowledge of the effects of leader self-awareness. After extracting the findings from the articles, they have been classified in one of the three classification categories. Within these categories, the findings that pertained to the same subject matter have been further sub grouped. This resulted in identifying 35 findings pertaining to effects of leader self-awareness relating to 11 subcategories (themes).
Whether these effects of leader self-awareness are beneficial or detrimental depend on the degree of agreement. In general it can be said that in-agreement/good and under-estimation are associated with positive effects to the individual leaders themselves, to their team and others, and to the organisation. Over-estimation, on the other hand, is generally associated with negative effects. Firstly, in-agreement/good is said to have positive effects. Some of the findings of effects of leader self-awareness on leaders themselves show these positive effects. Examples of such findings are that leaders who are agreement are perceived as the most effective leaders. Furthermore, high in-agreement leaders have the least derailment potential. Besides, in-in-agreement leaders are more associated with career recovery after career derailment. These findings suggest that accurate knowledge of one’s skills may be an important first step to career success and avoiding derailment or if derailed, a needed first step to recovery (Shipper & Dillard, 2000).
Also, congruent and positive relationships favourably affect subordinates’ attitudes (Amundsen & Martinsen, 2014; Cogliser et al., 2009). For instance, in-agreement is associated with highest quality of mentoring relationships, highest organisational commitment, highest levels of job satisfaction, least emotional exhaustion and highest levels of satisfaction with supervision.
In-agreement also favourably affects organisations, albeit not extensively researched. More specifically, in-agreement affects an aspect of culture and change in the sense of higher support of school vision. It also positively affects a climate of quality and innovation.
28 that under-estimators continually strive to improve and not become overconfident or complacent (Atwater et al., 1998; Moshavi et al., 2003). Under-estimators set high standards for themselves, possibly due to a more critical self-image and adapt their behaviour to get more involved with their followers (Devos et al., 2012). They are thought of as continually striving to self-improve in order to meet behavioural expectations by considering feedback of others (Sosik, 2001).
Furthermore, the effects underestimating leaders have on others is generally speaking also beneficial. Underrating, based on the findings in this literature review, is associated with highest quality of mentoring relationships, highest levels of trust and organisational commitment, highest levels of job satisfaction and lowest levels of turnover intention, highest levels of productivity, highest satisfaction with supervision and highest participative decision making.
An explanation for these positive effects is that under-estimators often are associated with possessing modesty and humility (Bratton et al., 2010; Cullen et al., 2015; Godschalk & Sosik, 2000). Also, perceptions of openness and concern for others occur as a result of continuously seeking feedback of others, which in turn induces a sense of trustworthiness (Sosik, 2001). This may imply that under-estimators pay more attention to the needs of subordinates (Moshavi et al., 2003). Their energy is more outward focused for the benefit of their subordinates and the organisation (Bratton et al., 2010). This in turn may result in higher levels of performance and more positive ratings of others.
However, in some instances under-estimation can have negative effects. Findings in this literature review that reflect this are, for instance, that compensation and organisational level decreases most for under-estimators and that self-under-rating of derailment factors is related to lower leadership effectiveness than over-rating of these factors.
As mentioned above, underraters are often associated with modesty and humility. Ostroff et al. (2004) argue that underraters may less likely pursue options for which they are qualified or persist in pursuing a certain goal or task and, furthermore, may less likely negotiate for higher raises or promotions. These assumptions combined with certain character traits may lead to lower compensation and more difficulty in moving up the career ladder.
Next, underrating of negative leadership characteristics, such as derailment factors, is also associated with negative effects, in this instance in lower perceived leader effectiveness. It does not seem logical that this type of underrating has relations with modesty and humility, rather with a lack of self-awareness, suffering from self-deception or not being in tune with the working environment. In this respect, underraters are quite similar to overraters. Both mistakenly see themselves in a favourable light. Tang et al. (2021) suggest that underestimating one’s derailment potential appears to be more harmful than overrating it. Elaborating on this, one could argue that generally underestimating negative leadership characteristics has potential detrimental effects.
co-29 workers (Moshavi et al., 2003), and experiencing difficulties with connecting on an interpersonal level with subordinates and others (Sosik & Godschalk, 2004). Over-estimators may raise the bar too high for themselves and others, resulting in negative outcomes for themselves, others and the organisation (Fleenor et al., 1998). Overrating may indicate some form of narcissism (Cullen et al., 2013), which in turn may lead to pursuing tasks for which they are not suited or ignoring risks (Ostroff et al., 2004) or may result in not being open for feedback and hence not trying to improve their performance because they believe their level of performance is already high (Fleenor et al., 1998).
Findings in this literature review that correspond with detrimental effects of the abovementioned display of negative attitudes and behaviours are that leaders who overestimate themselves are perceived as the poorest performers. Furthermore, overestimation is most related to career derailment, lowest quality of mentoring relationships, lowest job satisfaction and highest turnover intention and least display of soft persuasion tactics.
Future research directions
Based on the analysis of relevant findings in the field of leader self-awareness and its effects on individual leaders, their team and others, and their organisations gaps in the literature were distilled. These gaps lead to a number of future research directions.
Firstly, the data collected in the 23 research studies is largely based on male participants. It is remarkable that female leaders are underrepresented in the samples used. There is one exemption, which is a study carried out by Sturm et al. (2013) on understanding how women leaders predict that their bosses will rate them on their leadership behaviours and how this may affect women leaders in the workplace. Their research showed no significant differences between women’s predicted ratings and men’s predicted ratings. More research based on more balanced male and female samples is needed though.
Next, in comparison to the classification categories “effects on individual leader” and “effects on team and others”, relatively few findings pertaining to the effects of leader self-awareness could be attributed to the category “effects on organisation”. Future research on the effects of leader self-awareness on organisations is therefore needed. In particular, one study showed a relationship between leader self-awareness and a climate of quality and innovation (i.e. Berson & Sosik, 2007). Being able to create such a climate in the current era of continuously changing business environments is paramount. Hence, we call for more in depth research on this topic in the future.
30 way, by incorporating subjective as well as more objective data, the identified effects of leader self-awareness are supported by a more balanced set of data.
Finally, all of the studies in this literature review are cross-sectional studies. The degree of self-awareness is so to speak a stand-alone measure. Interesting would be to know if leadership development programmes including training in self-reflection and feedback will be beneficial in any way in enhancing awareness levels of leaders. And also if these enhanced levels of self-awareness has effects on themselves, their team and others and the organisation. To this end, longitudinal research is required.
Limitations
31 CONCLUSION
Today’s business climate can be described as fast changing, turbulent and complex. Such dynamic and fast-paced environments require effective leadership for facing these challenges. Self-awareness plays a major role in the effectiveness and performance of leaders. The objective of this systematic literature review was to gain insight in leader self-awareness and the effects thereof on themselves, their team / others, and their organisation. To this end, this review addressed the extant literature on the effects of leader self-awareness. As a result, 35 findings divided over 11 subcategories (themes) are identified.
32 REFERENCES
Amundsen, S. & Martinsen, Ø.L. 2014. Self–other agreement in empowering leadership: Relationships with leader effectiveness and subordinates' job satisfaction and turnover intention. The Leadership Quarterly, 25:784–800.
Atwater, L.E. & Yammarino. F.J. 1992. Does self-other agreement on leadership perceptions moderate the validity of leadership and performance predictions? Personnel Psychology, 45:141-164.
Atwater, L.E., Ostroff, C., Yammarino, F.J. & Fleenor, J.W. 1998. Self-other agreement: Does it really matter? Personnel Psychology, 51:577-598.
Atwater, L., Waldman, D., Ostroff, C., Robie, C. & Johnson, K.M. 2005. Self–Other Agreement: Comparing its Relationship with Performance in the U.S. and Europe. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13:25-40.
Balogun, J. & Hope Hailey, V. 2008, Exploring Strategic Change. Harlow: Prentice Hall/Pearson. Berson, Y. & Sosik, J.J. 2007. The Relationship Between Self–Other Rating Agreement and Influence Tactics and Organizational Processes. Group & Organization Management, 32:675-698.
Bourner, T. 1996. Effective management and the development of self-awareness: a plain manager’s guide. Career development International, 1/4:14-18.
Braddy, P.W., Gooty, J., Fleenor, J.W. & Yammarino, F.J. 2014. Leader behaviours and career derailment potential: A multi-analytic method examination of rating source and self–other agreement. The Leadership Quarterly, 25:373-390.
Bratton, V.K., Dodd, N.G. & Brown, F.W. 2010. The impact of emotional intelligence on accuracy of self-awareness and leadership performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32:127-149.
Brumm C.A. & Drury, S. 2013. Leadership that empowers: How strategic planning relates to followership. Engineering Management Journal, 25:17-32.
33 Church, A.H. 1997. Managerial Self-Awareness in High-Performing Individuals in Organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82:281-292.
Cogliser, C.C., Schriesheimb, C.A., Scandurac, T.A. & Gardnera, W.L. 2009. Balance in leader and follower perceptions of leader–member exchange: Relationships with performance and workattitudes. The Leadership Quaterly, 20:452-465.
Crossan, M. & Mazutis, D. 2008. Transcendent leadership. Business Horizons, 51:131-139. Crossan, M., Vera, D. & Nanjad, L. 2008. Transcendent leadership: Strategic leadership in dynamic environments. The Leadership Quarterly, 19:569-581.
Cullen, K.L., Gentry, W.A. & Yammarino, F.J. 2015. Biased Perception Tendencies: Self-Enhancement/Self-Diminishment and Leader Derailment in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures. Applied Psychology, 64:161–207.
Devos, G., Hulpia, H., Tuytens, M. & Sinnaeve, I. 2012. Self-other agreement as an alternative perspective of school leadership analysis: an exploratory study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 24: 296-315.
Eriksen, M. 2008. Leading adaptive organizational change: self-reflexity and self-transformation. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 21:662-640.
Eisenhardt, K.L., & Brown, S.L. 1998. Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos. Long Range Planning, 31:786-789.
Fleenor, J.W., McCauley, C.D. & Brutus, S. 1996. Self-other rating agreement and leader effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 7:487-506.
Gallagher, D., Costal, J. & Ford, L. 2012. Validating a Leadership Model Pinpointed Self-Awareness as Key to Success. T+D, November 2012:50-53.
George, J.M. 2000. Emotions and leadership: The role of emotional intelligence. Human Relations, 53:1027-1055.
Godschalk, V.M. & Sosik, J.J. 2000. Does Mentor-Protégé Agreement on Mentor Leadership Behavior Influence the Quality of a Mentoring Relationship? Group & Organization Management, 25:291-317.
34 Goleman, D. 2004. What Makes a Leader? Harvard Business Review, January 2004:82-91. Hanna, R.W. & Glassman, A.M. 2004. Enhancing Human Systems Change. Learning From An NTL Workshop and Field Applications. Journal of Management Inquiry, 13:7-18.
Higgs, M. & Rowland, D. 2010. Emperors with clothes on: the role of self-awareness in developing effective change leadership. Journal of Change Management, 10:369-385.
Kotter, J.P. & Schlesinger, L.A. 2008. Choosing Strategies for Change. Harvard Business Review, July-August 2008:130-139.
Landry, G., Vandenberghe, C. & Ben Ayed, A.K. 2014. Supervisor commitment to employees: Does agreement among supervisors' and employees' perceptions matter? The Leadership Quarterly, 25:885-900.
Moshavi, D., Brown, F.W. & Dodd, N.G. 2003. Leader self-awareness and its relationship to subordinate attitudes and performance. Leadership & Organization Journal, 24:407-418. Ostroff, C., Atwater, L.E. & Feinberg, B.J. 2004. Understanding self-other agreement: a look at rater and rate characteristics, context, and outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 51:333-375.
Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., Bachrach, D.G. & Podsakoff, N.P. 2005. The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s. Strategic Management Journal, 26:473-488. Shipper F. & Dillard. J.E. Jr. 2000. A study of impending derailment and recovery of middle managers across career stages. Human Resource Management, 39:331–345.
Shipper, F., Kincaid, J., Rotondo, D.M. & Hoffman, R.C. IV. 2003. A cross cultural exploratory study of the linkage between emotional intelligence and managerial effectiveness. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 11:171-191.
Showry, M. & Manasa, K.V.L. 2014. Self-Awareness – Key to Effective Leadership. The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 1:15-26.
Sosik, J.J. 2001. Self-Other Agreement on Charismatic Leadership: Relationships with work attitudes and managerial performance. Group & Organization Management, 26:484-511.
35 Sturm, R.E., Taylor, S.N., Atwater, L.E. & Brady, P.W. 2014. Leader self-awareness: An examination and implications of women’s under-prediction. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 35:657– 677.
Tang, K.Y., Dai, G. & De Meuse. K.P. 2011. Assessing leadership derailment factors in 360 feedback: Differences across position levels and self-other agreement. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 34:326-343.
Taylor, S.N. 2010. Redefining leader awareness by integrating the second component of self-awareness. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3:57-68.
Taylor, S.N., Wang, M. & Zhangoing, Y. 2012. Self-other rating comparison to measure leader self-awareness, Journal of Leadership Studies, 6:6-31.
Tekleab, A.G., Sims, H.P., Yun, S., Tesluk, P.E. & Cox, J. 2008. Are We On the Same Page? Effects of Self-Awareness of Empowering and Transformational Leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 14:185-201.
Toegel, G. & Barsoux, J.L. 2012. How to become a better leader. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53:50-60.
Velsor, Van E., Taylor, S. & Leslie, J.B. 1993. An Examination of the Relationships among Self-Perception Accuracy, Self-Awareness, Gender, and Leader Effectiveness. Human Resource Management, 32:249-263.
36
Appendix A – List of databases
This appendix provides an overview of all the databases that are covered by the search engine EBSCO. The databases that are in italic were excluded from the search.
1) Academic Search Premier
2) AMED - The Allied and Complementary Medicine Database 3) America: History & Life
4) American Bibliography of Slavic and East European Studies 5) Arctic & Antarctic Regions
6) Art Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
7) Art Index Retrospective (H.W. Wilson) 8) ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials 9) Business Source Premier
10) CINAHL
11) Communication & Mass Media Complete 12) eBook Collection (EBSCOhost)
13) EconLit 14) ERIC
15) Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia 16) GreenFILE
17) Historical Abstracts 18) L'Année philologique
19) Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts 20) MAS Ultra - School Edition
21) MEDLINE
22) Military & Government Collection 23) MLA Directory of Periodicals 24) MLA International Bibliography 25) New Testament Abstracts 26) Old Testament Abstracts 27) Philosopher's Index 28) Primary Search 29) PsycARTICLES 30) PsycBOOKS 31) PsycCRITIQUES
32) Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection 33) PsycINFO
