Blog

Understanding the sometimes distorted relationship between leader personality and behaviour

It is now widely accepted that personality is linked to leadership emergence, behaviour and effectiveness. However, it is argued that the extent to which leader behaviour reflects personality is partly determined by the leader regulating his/her behaviour in an automatic versus controlled fashion. Default tendencies can be overridden by deliberate choices and it the deliberate editing of behaviour that can sometimes distort the leader personality- behaviour picture. It could be argued that the likelihood of someone regulating their behaviour is a function of two factors: personal insight (the extent to which they are aware of their strengths and limitations) and motivation (how much effort they are prepared to exert in order to edit their behaviour to ensure it has the desired impact).  When someone is stressed or tired and their social guard is down, their attention is focused on recovering from the challenging situation and hence they have less mental resources and energy for behavioural editing. In other words, knowledge of their strengths and weaknesses becomes less accessible and they have less motivation for managing their behaviour. In such situations, their true personality often unfolds and this can sometimes mean unproductive behaviours. The implication of this argument is twofold; firstly, it is important that leaders have insight into their strengths and weaknesses as leaders, data which can be gleaned from a leadership assessment, 360 and personality measures such as the NEO and Hogan Development Survey; secondly, it is important that leaders know what situations and psychological states cause them to let their social guard down (such as a high workload or feeling tired) so that they know when potentially unhelpful behaviours may emerge.  

02/02/2012 – posted by Dr Jo Beale

So how does personality influence leadership effectiveness?

There has been a mass of research exploring the link between personality and leadership effectiveness. The general consensus is that personality (which is often thought to comprise five factors - neuroticism, extraversion, openness to new experiences, agreeableness and conscientiousness) determines how effective, and more importantly the type of leader, one is likely to be; someone high on openness is probably strategic, a conscientious leader is likely to be strong operationally, and the extravert and agreeable leader is well suited to relationships.  Yet recent empirical research provides compelling evidence that the personality-leader effectiveness relationship is not direct but rather mediated by leader behaviours.  The rationale for these findings is that personality traits reflect behavioural tendencies, a predisposition to act in a particular way, which subsequently influence leadership style and effectiveness.  These findings carry important implications for leader selection and development; it could be argued that personality questionnaires alone provide an incomplete picture to recruiters and should be supplemented by some behavioural data from past colleagues; a leadership assessment would probably benefit from including a 360 so that the leader has insight into how others perceive them and areas of strength and development based on past behaviour.

02/02/2012 – posted by Dr Jo Beale

How to maintain high levels of employee engagement during difficult economic times

It is widely accepted that employee engagement has a direct effect on employee productivity and organisational performance in the form of ROI, quality and production. It is therefore imperative to focus on employee engagement during difficult economic times.

Yet challenging economic times often mean pay freezes and sometimes increases in workload as a result of a reduction in headcount.  Organisations may fear that this could lead to reduced employee engagement and subsequent declines in quality and production.  However, it is important to remember some of the tenets of prominent motivational theories. Herzberg argues that motivation is determined not only by hygiene factors (salary, working conditions) but also motivators (achievement, recognition, status, promotional opportunities, responsibility). Although hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction, it is actually the presence of motivators that increases job satisfaction, motivation and engagement.  Alderfer developed the Existence Relatedness Growth theory. Existence needs constitute physiological and security needs; relatedness encompasses the need to belong and develop interpersonal relationships; self-esteem and self-actualisation needs are conceptualised as growth needs. More than one level of need can motivate behaviour simultaneously. These two theories suggest that there is an additional lever in which organisations can pull to enhance employee engagement during difficult economic times - provide staff with greater status and responsibility and they are likely to realise their self-esteem needs and reciprocate with enhanced performance. 

30/01/2012 – posted by Dr Jo Beale

Employee Satisfaction DOES NOT mean Employee Engagement

Research from the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) in the US indicates that in 2011 employees were satisfied with their jobs but, on average, only moderately engaged.

So what is the difference between satisfied employees and engaged employees?

The important difference between job satisfaction and engagement is that the former is an attitude and the latter is considered more behavioural. A satisfied employee who is not engaged may not be committed to the organization in the long term and may not go the extra mile for the organization. Therefore engagement is about commitment and connection to the organization, as well as motivation to perform well and put your all into your work. This is what makes engaged employees, rather than simply satisfied employees, the Holy Grail for organizational performance. An engaged employee is more likely to make a sustained positive difference within their role and the organization.

Why would employees be satisfied but not engaged?

The SHRM's research suggests that training and development may play an important part in this, with only around 40% satisfied with their career development opportunities. This may lead to a decrease in motivation to perform to the best of your abilities and also a desire to move on from the organization – both of which may have negative effects on organizational performance.

Employees also seem to want a closer relationship with management and leaders, with a more open and collaborative relationship preferred to the traditional top-down structures. This may require fresh thinking and development for leaders and managers, but could help tap into the talent, skills and ideas of employees within your whole organization.

SHRM's 2011 Job Satisfaction and Engagement Research Report

Click for more information on:
Employee Engagement
Leadership Development
Top Team Development
Assessing and Developing Talent

20/01/2012 – posted by Sarah George

Revalidation Roadshow Seminars

Premier IT, in conjunction with Edgecumbe and a series of revalidation experts, will be running a Revalidation Roadshow throughout 2012. The first round of seminars will take place in March 2012 on the following subject: Getting to Grips with Medical Appraisal and Revalidation a specialist seminar for revalidation project teams

A relaxed and informal seminar to give delegates the opportunity to share experiences, network and discuss the key challenges ahead in the implementation and ongoing management of appraisal and revalidation.

Book your place: http://revalidation.premierit.com/roadshow

19/01/2012 – posted by Chris Marshall