jagomart
digital resources
picture1_The 360 Degree Leader Pdf 164662 | Ada361832


 123x       Filetype PDF       File size 1.31 MB       Source: apps.dtic.mil


File: The 360 Degree Leader Pdf 164662 | Ada361832
ari research note 99 21 feedback on 360 degree leader azimuth check assessment conducted at fort clayton panama angela i karrasch kansas state university consortium research fellows program stanley m ...

icon picture PDF Filetype PDF | Posted on 23 Jan 2023 | 2 years ago
Partial capture of text on file.
         ARI Research Note 99-21 
         Feedback on 360 Degree Leader AZIMUTH Check Assessment 
                 Conducted at Fort Clayton, Panama 
                       Angela I. Karrasch 
                      Kansas State University 
                  Consortium Research Fellows Program 
                        Stanley M. Halpin 
                     U.S. Army Research Institute 
                   Fort Leavenworth Research Unit 
                      Stanley M. Halpin, Chief 
                         March 1999 
                                199904140 1 8 
                    U.S. Army Research Institute 
                 for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 
                  Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 
       P1IC qyALHT OliHgOTED 4 
        U.S. Army Research Institute 
        for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 
        A Directorate of the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command 
                              EDGAR M. JOHNSON 
                              Director 
       Technical review by 
       Robert E. Solick 
                      NOTICES 
       DISTRIBUTION: This Research Note has been cleared for release to the Defense 
       Technical Information Center (DTIC) to comply with regulatory requirements. It has 
       been given no primary distribution other than to DTIC and will be available only through 
       DTIC or the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). 
       FINAL DISPOSITION: This Research Note may be destroyed when it is no longer 
       needed. Please do not return it to the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral 
       and Social Sciences. 
       NOTE: The views, opinions, and findings in this Research Note are those of the 
       author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, 
       policy, or decision unless so designated by other authorized documents. 
                                                REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 
          1. REPORT DATE (dd-mm-yy)             2. REPORT TYPE                  3. DATES COVERED (from... to) 
          March 1999                            Final                           October 1998-March 1999 
           4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE                                                 5a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER 
           Feedback on 360 Degree Leader AZIMUTH Check Assessment 
           Conducted at Fort Clayton, Panama                                     5b. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 
                                                                                 63007A  
          6. AUTHOR(S)                                                          5c. PROJECT NUMBER 
          Angela I. Karrasch (Kansas State University) and Stanley M. Halpin    A792 
           (U.S. ArmyResearch Institute)                                        5d. TASK NUMBER 
                                                                                 1141  
                                                                                5e. WORK UNIT NUMBER 
                                                                                TAS  
           7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)                   8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 
           U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 
           ATTN: TAPC-ARI-RK 
           5001 Eisenhower Avenue 
           Alexandria, VA 22333-5600 
           9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)               10. MONITOR ACRONYM 
           U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences  ARI 
           5001 Eisenhower Avenue 
           Alexandria, VA 22333-5600                                             11. MONITOR REPORT NUMBER 
                                                                                 Research Note 99-21 
           12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 
           Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 
           13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 
           Angela I. Karrasch is a Consortium Research Fellow with the Fort Leavenworth Research Unit, U.S. Army Research Institute 
           14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words): 
             This report documents military and civilian leaders' reactions to a multi-rater assessment of their leadership behaviors. The 
           80 targeted leaders were commissioned and non-commission military officers, and GS-9 to GS14 civilian leaders at Fort 
           Clayton, Panama. After completing the Leader Azimuth Check and receiving feedback, they were asked to complete a survey 
           designed to assess 1) perceptions of trust and the fairness in the multi-rater process, 2) reported understanding of the multi- 
          rater process, 3) beliefs about the accuracy and appropriateness of the sources of feedback and 4) self-efficacy and intentions 
           for change in leadership behaviors. An overview of the responses to the survey are recorded in this report. Subordinates were 
           overwhelmingly viewed as the most valuable source of feedback. Eighty three percent reported that they would use their 
           feedback to monitor and develop their leadership. Motivation to change leadership behavior was best predicted by the extent to 
           which leaders believed the feedback they received was new information. Trust in the confidentiality of the multi-rater process 
           was high, as was the reported understanding in the purpose and methods of the 360. Perceptions of fairness and satisfaction 
           were moderate to high. Perceptions of fairness and accuracy predicted satisfaction with the multi-rater process. Other 
          predictors are mentioned in the report. Implications and recommendations are provided. 
           15. SUBJECT TERMS 
           Leader Azimuth Check, multi-rater assessment, multi-rater process 
                      SECURITY CLASSJRCATtQN OF              19. LIMITATION OF   20. NUMBER       21. RESPONSIBLE PERSON 
           16. REPORT      17. ABSTRACT     18. THIS PAGE    ABSTRACT            OF PAGES         (Name and Telephone Number) 
           Unclassified                     Unclassified     Unlimited           31               Angela I. Karrasch 
                           Unclassified                                                           (913)684-9753 
           Feedback on a 360 degree Leader AZIMUTH Check assessment 
           conducted at Fort Clayton, Panama 
           Contents 
                                                                      Page 
           INTRODUCTION 1 
           METHODOLOGY '. 1 
           SUBORDINATE FEEDBACK MOST VALUABLE 2 
           MOTIVATION TO CHANGE 3 
           ACCEPTANCE OF MULTI-RATER PROCESS 4 
           IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 
           APPENDICES 
           A. Leader AZIMUTH Check 6 
           B. Follow-up Survey 11 
           C. Table of Means and Correlations 14 
                                             ii 
The words contained in this file might help you see if this file matches what you are looking for:

...Ari research note feedback on degree leader azimuth check assessment conducted at fort clayton panama angela i karrasch kansas state university consortium fellows program stanley m halpin u s army institute leavenworth unit chief march for the behavioral and social sciences approved public release distribution is unlimited pic qyalht olihgoted a directorate of total personnel command edgar johnson director technical review by robert e solick notices this has been cleared to defense information center dtic comply with regulatory requirements it given no primary other than will be available only through or national service ntis final disposition may destroyed when longer needed please do not return views opinions findings in are those author should construed as an official department position policy decision unless so designated authorized documents report documentation page date dd mm yy type dates covered from october title subtitle contract grant number b element c project armyresearc...

no reviews yet
Please Login to review.