Leadership Effectiveness Inventory Data
Reliability Analysis
After collecting data from the Nordic questionnaires, a reliability test was carried out to ascertain whether the nine scales used could predict overall satisfaction with the manager as a leader. The analysis found the scales reliable and moreover, it was apparent that reducing the questions in the questionnaires could not compromise data reliability. In addition, communication, planning/execution and teamwork were proved to be the best predictors of satisfaction from the analysis.
For this study, data used were answers to 75 questions asked to 472 respondents regarding managerial behavior within the organization. Data sources are shown in Table 1 below.
Source of Data
N
Self
Direct Reports
Peers
Supervisors
In Table 2, descriptive statistics were recorded on individual items with descending means and respective standard deviations.
Mean
Standard
analyzing table 2 above, it is clear that three variables had means of more than 4; satisfied. These variables include Q69, Q3, and Q5 as well. In addition, there were 6 variables with means of less than 3; dissatisfied. These were, Q41, Q71, Q31, Q37, Q52, and finally Q33.
From the above table, minor differences in the means were realized from the four data sources, but with no systematic differences among them. The dependent variable, Q75; Overall, how satisfied are you with this person as a leader recorded a mean of 3.92. Table 3 shows the means of this variable...
According to the Post-hoc testing conducted, the only specific significant difference is supervisors' tendencies to rate managers higher than they rate themselves by approximately half points.
Data Analysis
Represented below in Table 4 are the nine scales in these data by 74 individual variables.
Scale
Number of Variables
Mean
Standard Deviation
Reliability
Alignment
1
3.25
1.04
0.85
Planning/Executing
1
3.45
0.81
0.78
Ensuring Customer Value
1
3.72
0.89
0.81
Coaching
2
3.34
0.89
0.85
Inspiring Teamwork
2
2.26
0.82
0.70
Embracing Change
2
3.42
0.86
0.75
Managing Resources
2
3.27
0.88
0.66
Communication
1
3.73
0.65
0.66
Personal Example
3
3.66
0.71
0.77
In Table 4 above, two of the scales; Managing Resources and Communication have reliabilities slightly lower than the recommended alpha level of 0.7 though, not to the point of unacceptability. The other remaining seven scales are reliable. Even though there were statistically significant differences between the means of the four reporting groups on all the scales except communication, they had no systematic tendencies. Additionally, there…
