Self-other rating agreement and leader effectiveness

This study examined relationships between two models of self-other rating agreement and leader effectiveness. Using differences between self- and subordinate ratings, managers (N = 2,056) were first categorized into four groups: over-estimators (who rated themselves higher than others rated them); under-estimators (who rated themselves lower than others rated them); in-agreement/good raters (whose self-ratings were favorable and similar to the ratings of others); and, in-agreement/poor raters (whose self-ratings were unfavorable and similar to the ratings of others) (Atwater & Yammarino, in press). Then, managers were classified using a six group model (Brutus, Fleenor, & Taylor, 1996), which introduced a further distinction-over-estimators/good, and under-estimators/poor. With the four group model, superiors appeared to rate in-agreement/good raters and under-estimators as more effective than over-estimators. However, with the six group model, in-agreement/good raters and under-estimator/good raters were not seen as more effective than over-estimator/good raters. The results suggested that six groups are necessary to fairly compare agreement groups.