Utility Assessment of Specificity in Upward Feedback Instruments for Leadership Development (Paperback) (ISBN-13: 9781288285679)

Recently, organizations have been modifying performance appraisal systems to collect data from multiple sources to guide the development of supervisors. Upward feedback programs focus on development rather than appraisal by supplementing traditional downward feedback with subordinate feedback. The utility of two upward feedback instruments was assessed in this study; one is a commercially available instrument, the Leadership Practices Inventory (Posner and Kouzes, 1988) and the other is the recently developed, non-proprietary Upward Feedback Instrument (Patton, 2002). The Upward Feedback Instrument was designed to measure leadership behaviors at a more specific level. It was thought that greater feedback specificity would lead to greater intentions to change behavior and consequently, greater actual behavior change. This research developed and administered a utility assessment to supervisors and their subordinates in order to determine the performance of the respective instruments. Although the feedback specificity did not provide greater intentions to change, discretion, perceived organizational support, and perceptions of accuracy and usefulness were found to significantly affect intentions to change and actual behavior change.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.