Mary Shane Connelly

Exploring the relationship of leadership skills and knowledge to leader performance

Abstract The criterion-related validity of constructed response measures of complex problem-solving skills, social judgment skills, and leader knowledge is examined with respect to two criteria of leader effectiveness: leader achievement and quality of solutions to ill-defined leadership problems. Core aspects of the leader capabilities model are tested using these measures in a series of hierarchical regression analyses. Results indicate that constructed response measures of key leader capabilities account for variance in leader effectiveness and provide initial validation evidence for a central part of the theoretical model. The problem-solving, social judgment and knowledge measures account for significant variance in leadership criteria beyond that accounted for by cognitive abilities, motivations, and personality. Initial evidence also suggests that complex problem-solving skills, social judgment and leader knowledge partially mediate the relationship of cognitive abilities, motivation and personality to leader effectiveness. Implications and generalizability of the results are discussed in light of a related civilian leadership study conducted within the U.S. Department of Defense.

Leaders as creators: Leader performance and problem solving in ill-defined domains

Abstract The cognitive competencies of individuals often provide a useful basis for the description, prediction, and understanding of human performance. It has, however, proven difficult to specify the cognitive competencies contributing to the performance of organizational leaders. In the present paper, it was argued that organizational leadership calls for discretionary problem solving in ill-defined domains. Because creativity also requires discretionary problem solving, it was argued that our understanding of creative thought might be used to specify how cognitive capacities contribute to leader performance. The nature of these capacities was then discussed, along with their implications for understanding leader performance. Some practical applications of these observations for the development and facilitation of leader performance were then considered.

Leadership skills: Conclusions and future directions

Abstract Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, and Fleishman have argued that leadership can be understood in terms of knowledge, problem-solving skills, solution construction skills, and social judgment needed to solve organizational problems. In this article, we review the results obtained in a series of investigations intended to examine this proposition. We begin by reviewing the central implications of this skills-based model of leader performance. The strengths and limitations of the available evidence bearing on this model are discussed along with some potential directions for future research. Research directions are considered with respect to model development and refinement, linkages to other models of leadership, and potential practical applications. It is argued that this kind of skills-based model may provide a viable new perspective for understanding leader performance—one particularly appropriate for the dynamic, knowledge-based industries of the twenty-first century.

Charismatic leaders and destructiveness: An historiometric study

Abstract Previous research has examined the characteristics and behaviors of charismatic leaders in an effort to understand their ability to change organizational members. Charismatic leaders present a vision for an organizations future. The leaders beliefs, motives, and self-concept system influence the vision and act as guides for the behaviors the leader uses in bringing about change in the organization. Unfortunately, leaders are not always interested in effecting change for the purpose of benefitting the organization and its members as a whole; rather, the leader may be more interested in personal outcomes. This study tested a model of personality constructs found to contribute to destructive acts in a real-world sample of charismatic leaders. Benchmarks scales were used to operationalize the constructs such that ratings of the degree to which a leader exhibited behaviors indicative of the constructs could be quantified. A LISREL VI analysis provides support for the model. Practical and methodological implications are discussed.

Assessment of leader problem-solving capabilities

Abstract We describe the development of and initial psychometric evidence for a set of five constructed response measures designed to assess complex problem-solving skills and knowledge expected to influence leadership. Structured (cued) and unstructured (uncued) problem solving scenarios intended to assess process skills associated with creative problem solving are presented first. Solution construction tasks developed to assess attention to constraints and characteristics in the broader problem context are presented next. Finally, social judgment tasks intended to assess understanding of people and social systems and a task sort to assess knowledge of leadership roles are presented. Preliminary evidence for the reliability and construct validity of these constructed response measures supports their efficacy in assessing skills that underlie effective organizational leadership.

Leadership and destructive acts: Individual and situational influences

Abstract Leaders sometimes make decisions that harm organizational members and long-term organizational performance. The intent of the present study was to assess the role of personality and situational influences on destructive interpersonal and organizational decisions. Management majors were asked to complete a battery of personality and ability measures as part of a Regional Sales Manager Assessment Center. Additionally, they were asked to complete a 32-item “in-basket,” with eight items reflecting decisions that would harm others and eight items reflecting decisions that would harm the organization. Systematic manipulations were made in “in-basket” content to manipulate authority norms, feelings of self-efficacy, and psychological distance. It was found that destructive individuals tended to make decisions that harmed the organization when self-efficacy was low. However, they would not necessarily make decisions that harmed others unless actions of this sort were supported by authority. The implications of these findings for leadership and organizational performance are discussed.

Leadership and team dynamics for dangerous military contexts.

We propose an interdisciplinary, multilevel model of leadership and team dynamics for dangerous military contexts. Viewing this context as a higher level of analysis, our model includes constructs and multiple levels of analysis involved in team formation and assembly, which result in leadership and team dynamics, which in turn yield team performance and maintenance. Pragmatic leadership at the individual level, individualized leadership at the dyadic level, and shared leadership at the team level provide an integrated core for the approach. Multilevel precursors, consequences, and moderators of this leadership and team dynamics approach also are discussed. Twelve key multilevel propositions and five multilevel exploratory ones are derived from the model and asserted for testing in future work on dangerous military contexts.

On the Construct Validity of Integrity Tests: Individual and Situational Factors as Predictors of Test Performance

Although integrity tests are widely applied in screening job applicants, there is a need for research for examining the construct validity of these tests. In the present study, a theoretical model examining the causes of destructive behavior in organizational settings was used to develop background data measures of individual and situational variables that might be related to integrity test scores. Subsequently, 692 undergraduates were asked to complete these background data scales along with (a) two overt integrity tests – the Reid Report and the Personnel Selection Inventory, and (b) two personality-based measures – the delinquency and socialization scales of the California Psychological Inventory. When scores of these measures were correlated with and regressed on the background data scales, it was found that relevant individual variables, such as narcissism and power motives, and relevant situational variables, such as alienation and exposure to negative peer groups, were related to scores on both types of integrity tests. However, a stronger pattern of validity evidence was obtained for the personality-based measures and, in all cases, situational variables were found to be better predictors than individual variables. The implications of these findings for the validity of inferences drawn from overt and personality-based integrity tests are discussed.

Creativity and problem solving: Cognition, adaptability, and wisdom

Many programs for gifted and talented students try to provide a foundation for later creative achievement. Creative achievement, however, depends on the individuals ability to solve novel, ill‐defined problems. In this article, we examine cognitive capacities that contribute to creative problem solving. It is argued that problem solving requires expertise and information processing skills. We also note that other characteristics may be needed to maintain creative problem‐ solving efforts, such as adaptability and wisdom. The implications of these observations for the development of creative talent also are considered.

Item selection counts : A comparison of empirical key and rational scale validities in theory-based and non-theory-based item pools

Little explicit attention has been given to the impact of item pools on the validities and cross-validities of different background data scoring approaches. This study tests the idea that pools of items theoretically related to the performance of interest will outperform pools of items with no hypothesized relationship with the criterion. Validities and cross-validities of rational scales and empirical keys created from theory- and non-theory-based item pools were compared for 3 criteria. When size of the item pools was held constant, theory-based empirical keys (correlational and vertical percent) and rational scales showed larger validities and cross-validities than non-theory-based empirical keys (correlational and vertical percent) and showed minimal shrinkage in cross-validities. Even when item pool for the non-theory-based keys was expanded to include all items in the instrument, the theory-based keys showed comparable or slightly better validities and cross-validities for 2 of the 3 criteria, including college GPA, which was separated from the predictors by 4 years.