Multi-rater leadership assessments are an invaluable tool for leadership coaching. In particular, they allow one to view a leader from the perspective of different groups of observers (e.g., bosses, peers, direct reports). Each rater has a different relationship and set of experiences with the leader they are evaluating, and those relationships influence their perceptions of that leader’s behaviors. Understanding those differences can help us interpret 360 assessments in a more nuanced and effective way, allowing us to help leaders gain a clearer understanding of how their behaviors are perceived and construed by those around them. In this one-hour webinar, MRG’s David Ringwood and Maria Brown will share new research and insights that shed light on the following questions: What behaviors do different observer groups associate with effective leadership? Are there differences in the behaviors perceived by different observer groups? What do self and observer perceptions tell us about leader blind spots? How can we use this information to interpret feedback more effectively and to inform the way we coach and develop leaders? Our discussion will center on insights obtained from a recent global sample of leaders who were rated by their bosses, peers and direct reports using MRG’s LEA 360™.

1. Characterizing effective
leadership: Insights from
different observer perspectives
Dr. Maria Brown, Head of Research
David Ringwood, VP of Client Development, EMEA

2. Type a question here.
Click the red arrow to
expand the Control Panel.
Host
Lucy Sullivan
Head of Marketing, MRG

3. Management Research Group is a global leader in designing assessments
that foster a deep self-awareness and impact people in profound and meaningful
ways with solutions for Leadership and Personal Development, Sales and Service.
MRG assessments give you the tools to support unique leaders as they chart their
personal paths to success and fulfillment.

4. Dr. Maria Brown David Ringwood
Our Presenters

5. AGENDA
1. Do observer groups differ
in the behaviors they
associate with
– overall leadership effectiveness?
– future potential?
– a leader’s ability to deal with complexity?
2. Do observers from
different groups perceive
different behavior patterns
in the same leaders?
3. Are there differences in
what leaders and their
observers perceive? Do
these blind spots differ by
observer group?

6. Poll
Which observer group are your clients most concerned about?
A. Boss
B. Peers
C. Direct Reports
D. More than one observer group

7. What we already know about observer
differences: Previous research
• Leaders’ interactions with others in an organization differ in terms of context,
frequency, power dynamics, etc.
• People often attempt to influence others’ perceptions (e.g., impression management),
suggesting that behavioral expression might differ depending on the audience (Levy &
Williams, 2004).
How do these factors influence observer perceptions?
• Observers at the same level of an organization tend to give similar performance ratings.
Disagreements across levels provide valuable insights (Hoffman & Woehr, 2009).
What will we find when we specifically look at leadership behaviors?
• In a single-industry study, effectiveness models were found to differ by observer group
(Hooijberg & Choi, 2000)
What will we find with a larger, more diverse sample?

8. Previous MRG Research on Observer
Differences
MRG Research on Interactions Between Observer and Leader Gender (deference to authority example)
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
Female
Observer
Male
Observer
Female Peer
Male Peer
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
Female
Observer
Male
Observer
Female
Direct
Report
Male Direct
Report

9. • 13,783 leaders from over 45 countries
• Data collected 2015-2018
Observer Gender
Leader Gender
Participant Demographics
Observer Type Count Percent
Boss 18,236 13.58
Peer 62,070 46.22
Direct Report 53,972 40.19
Total 134,278 100.00
Leader Generation

10. Leader Industry Count Percent
Other 1,395 10.12
Accounting/Banking/Financial Services 1,213 8.80
Consulting Services 1,161 8.42
Health Care/Medical Services 993 7.20
General Manufacturing 973 7.06
Education 956 6.94
Wholesale/Retail Trade 750 5.44
Food Products/Processing 670 4.86
Mining/Oil-Gas Production/Chemicals 567 4.11
Transportation 562 4.08
Contracting/Construct 534 3.87
Insurance 501 3.63
High Tech (computer related) 441 3.20
Communications/Telecommunications 433 3.14
Business/Information Systems 401 2.91
Social Services 319 2.31
Pharmaceutical/Medical Products 277 2.01
Utilities 269 1.95
Entertainment/Rec/Sports 229 1.66
Research/Scientific Services 152 1.10
Printing/Publishing/Advertising 128 0.93
Aerospace 96 0.70
Hospitality/Travel/Tourism 90 0.65
Biotechnology 57 0.41
Real Estate/Land Development 37 0.27
Farming/Fishing/Forestry 28 0.20
Law/Legal Services 28 0.20
Not reported 523 3.79
Total 13,783 100.00
Leader Job Function Count Percent
Other 3,603 26.14
Administration/Operations 1,964 14.25
Marketing/Sales 1,719 12.47
Technical/Eng/Research 1,284 9.32
Accounting/Finance 1,037 7.52
Data Processing/Systems 899 6.52
HR/Personnel 802 5.82
Manufacturing 440 3.19
Customer Service 296 2.15
Distribution/Fulfillment 192 1.39
Not reported 1,547 11.22
Total 13,783 100.00
Participant Demographics
Leader Management Level

11. Leadership Effectiveness Analysis:
22 Behaviors
Creating a vision
 Conservative
 Innovative
 Technical
 Self
 Strategic
Developing
followership
 Persuasive
 Outgoing
 Excitement
 Restraint
Implementing the
vision
 Structuring
 Tactical
 Communication
 Delegation
Following through
 Control
 Feedback
Achieving results
 Management
Focus
 Dominant
 Production
Team playing
 Cooperative
 Consensual
 Authority
 Empathy

12. 1. Sensitivity to People’s Feelings
2. Understands Org. Resources
3. Gets People Enthusiastic
4. Credibility with Superiors
5. Credibility with Peers/Subordinates
6. Willingness to Listen
7. Sees Big Picture
8. Straightforward Communicator
9. Effective Thinking
10. Business Aptitude
11. Builds Relationships with Customers
12. Develops People
13. Gets Things Done Through People
14. Effectiveness as Leader/Manager
15. Future Potential
16. Financial Understanding
17. Can Contribute to Team Performance
18. Capacity to Work with Diversity
19. Can Make Effective Decisions
20. Can Turn Around Difficult Situations
21. Insight Into People
22. Fast Learner
23. Delivers Results
24. Demonstrates Ethical Leadership
25. Takes Initiative
26. Conflict Management
27. Ability to Coach Others
28. Promotes Employee Engagement
29. Self-aware
30. Tolerance for Ambiguity
Leadership Effectiveness Analysis:
Leadership Competencies

13. [Footer text to come] Page No 13
Do the leadership behaviors
related to effectiveness
differ by observer group?
Overall effectiveness, future potential and tolerance
for ambiguity

14. [Footer text to come] Page No 14
Behaviors related
to Overall
Leadership
Effectiveness
By observer group

15. Behaviors that bosses associate with overall
leadership effectiveness
24
8
8
8
7
7
6
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
0
0Tactical
Delegation
Feedback
Conservative
Structuring
Outgoing
Authority
Dominant
Cooperation
Production
Consensual
Restraint
Innovative
Self
Technical
Excitement
Control
Empathy
Persuasive
Communication
Management Focus
Strategic
0 5 10 15 20
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 46%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Overall Effectiveness

16. Behaviors that peers associate with overall
leadership effectiveness
19
10
9
7
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
0Delegation
Tactical
Conservative
Production
Structuring
Feedback
Outgoing
Dominant
Innovative
Restraint
Authority
Control
Cooperation
Persuasive
Self
Consensual
Excitement
Management Focus
Technical
Empathy
Communication
Strategic
0 5 10 15
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 61%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Overall Effectiveness

17. Behaviors that direct reports associate with overall
leadership effectiveness
16
13
12
9
7
6
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1Delegation
Feedback
Tactical
Production
Structuring
Conservative
Outgoing
Control
Persuasive
Authority
Dominant
Restraint
Innovative
Cooperation
Consensual
Self
Management Focus
Excitement
Empathy
Communication
Technical
Strategic
0 5 10 15
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 65%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Overall Effectiveness

18. Common Themes
• Strategic
• Management focus
• Communication
• Empathy
• Excitement
• Technical
Rater Group Differences
• Bosses associate persuasiveness and
control with overall effectiveness
• Peers and Direct Reports associate
effectiveness with consensual and
lower emphasis on self
Behaviors Related to Overall Leadership
Effectiveness

19. Questions

20. [Footer text to come] Page No 20
Behaviors related
to Future
Potential
By observer group

21. Behaviors that bosses associate with future
potential
23
13
8
8
8
6
5
5
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
0Tactical
Delegation
Feedback
Consensual
Empathy
Structuring
Cooperation
Dominant
Outgoing
Restraint
Conservative
Self
Authority
Technical
Control
Excitement
Persuasive
Production
Communication
Innovative
Management Focus
Strategic
0 5 10 15 20
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 30%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Future Potential

22. Behaviors that peers associate with future potential
21
10
9
7
7
6
5
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
0Delegation
Feedback
Structuring
Tactical
Conservative
Outgoing
Dominant
Consensual
Persuasive
Cooperation
Restraint
Empathy
Control
Self
Excitement
Production
Authority
Innovative
Technical
Management Focus
Communication
Strategic
0 5 10 15 20
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 42%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Future Potential

23. Behaviors that direct reports associate with future
potential
19
17
10
9
6
5
5
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
0Delegation
Feedback
Structuring
Conservative
Tactical
Outgoing
Dominant
Cooperation
Persuasive
Consensual
Control
Production
Restraint
Self
Empathy
Authority
Innovative
Excitement
Communication
Management Focus
Technical
Strategic
0 5 10 15
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 47%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Future Potential

24. Common Themes
• Strategic
• Management focus
• Innovative
• Communication
Rater Group Differences
• Bosses associate production,
persuasiveness and control with
future potential
• Bosses and Direct Reports associate
excitement with future potential
• For Peers and Direct Reports,
deference to authority and technical
expertise relate to potential
Behaviors Related to Future Potential

25. [Footer text to come] Page No 25
Behaviors related
to tolerance for
ambiguity
By observer group

26. Behaviors that bosses associate with tolerance for
ambiguity
28
12
11
8
6
6
5
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1Empathy
Self
Delegation
Tactical
Consensual
Control
Feedback
Cooperation
Dominant
Outgoing
Conservative
Production
Excitement
Structuring
Communication
Authority
Persuasive
Technical
Restraint
Innovative
Management Focus
Strategic
0 10 20
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 25%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Tolerance for Ambiguity

27. Behaviors that peers associate with tolerance for
ambiguity
26
11
9
8
7
6
6
6
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0Delegation
Tactical
Control
Empathy
Self
Consensual
Conservative
Production
Feedback
Outgoing
Dominant
Cooperation
Excitement
Structuring
Authority
Communication
Restraint
Persuasive
Innovative
Technical
Management Focus
Strategic
0 5 10 15 20 25
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 36%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Tolerance for Ambiguity

28. Behaviors that direct reports associate with
tolerance for ambiguity
20
17
11
8
7
6
5
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1Delegation
Control
Production
Tactical
Feedback
Self
Cooperation
Structuring
Outgoing
Consensual
Dominant
Conservative
Empathy
Excitement
Authority
Persuasive
Innovative
Restraint
Communication
Management Focus
Technical
Strategic
0 5 10 15 20
Relative Importance Index
(Total variance explained = 40%)
Direction of
Relationship
positive
inverse
Relative Importance for Tolerance for Ambiguity

29. Common Themes
• Strategic
• Management Focus
• Innovative
• Restraint
• Technical
Rater Group Differences
• Bosses and Peers associate
persuasiveness and deference to
authority with tolerance for
ambiguity
• Peers and direct reports associate
clarity of communication with
tolerance for ambiguity
Behaviors Related to Tolerance for
Ambiguity

30. Key takeaways: Observer groups and the
behaviors that convey competence
• There are certain behaviors that specific observer groups
associate with leadership effectiveness in different areas
• There are more similarities in the leadership behaviors that
signal effectiveness for each group than there are differences

31. [Footer text to come] Page No 31
How exactly do perceptions
of leadership behaviors
differ by observer group?
Understanding the link between
behavior and effectiveness ratings

32. Behaviors perceived by each observer group when
looking at the same group of leaders
Creating
a Vision
Developing
Followership
Implementing
the Vision
Following
Through
Achieving
Results
Team
Playing
30
40
50
60
70
Boss (n=18,236) Peer (n=62,070) Direct Report (n=53,972)
Leadership Effectiveness Analysis

33. Comparison of boss and peer perceptions
Structuring
Innovative
Outgoing
Restraint
Persuasive
Feedback
Technical
Management Focus
Strategic
Excitement
Dominant
Production
Consensual
Control
Cooperation
Tactical
Conservative
Communication
Empathy
Self
Authority
Delegation
1.02 1.05 1.08 1.11
Odds a member of one group scores
higher than a member of the other group
Boss higher
Peer higher
No difference (p > 0.05)
Effect Sizes

34. Comparison of boss and direct report perceptions
Persuasive
Communication
Tactical
Strategic
Empathy
Outgoing
Technical
Structuring
Control
Restraint
Excitement
Self
Innovative
Cooperation
Consensual
Delegation
Production
Feedback
Authority
Dominant
Management Focus
Conservative
1.00 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08
Odds a member of one group scores
higher than a member of the other group
Boss higher
Direct Report higher
No difference (p > 0.05)
Effect Sizes

35. Comparison of peer and direct report perceptions
Self
Control
Excitement
Authority
Restraint
Persuasive
Outgoing
Structuring
Empathy
Technical
Strategic
Delegation
Tactical
Communication
Consensual
Innovative
Cooperation
Feedback
Conservative
Management Focus
Production
Dominant
1.00 1.05 1.10
Odds a member of one group scores
higher than a member of the other group
Peer higher
Direct Report higher
No difference (p > 0.05)
Effect Sizes

36. Key takeaways: Differences in the behaviors
perceived by observer groups
• Greatest number of differences between direct reports and the
other two observer groups
• Differences between groups tend to be small yet informative for
interpreting feedback

37. [Footer text to come] Page No 37
Do leaders have different
blind spots with each
observer group?
Interpreting 360 ratings with a
eye on development

38. Poll
We define blind spots as areas where self ratings differ from observer ratings. Which
observer group is associated with the greatest number of leader blind spots?
A. Bosses
B. Peers
C. Direct Reports
D. The groups are similar in number of blind spots

39. Behaviors perceived by each observer group when
looking at the same group of leaders
Creating
a Vision
Developing
Followership
Implementing
the Vision
Following
Through
Achieving
Results
Team
Playing
30
40
50
60
70
Boss (n=18,236) Peer (n=62,070) Direct Report (n=53,972)
Leadership Effectiveness Analysis

40. Behaviors perceived by self and observers
Creating
a Vision
Developing
Followership
Implementing
the Vision
Following
Through
Achieving
Results
Team
Playing
30
40
50
60
70
Boss (n=18,236) Direct Report (n=62,070) Peer (n=53,972) Self (n=13,734)
Leadership Effectiveness Analysis

41. Comparison of self and boss perceptions
Restraint
Strategic
Excitement
Empathy
Dominant
Control
Outgoing
Tactical
Cooperation
Feedback
Persuasive
Delegation
Consensual
Innovative
Self
Management Focus
Structuring
Production
Conservative
Technical
Authority
Communication
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
Odds a member of one group scores
higher than a member of the other group
Boss higher
Self higher
No difference (p > 0.05)
Effect Sizes

42. Comparison of self and peer perceptions
Restraint
Dominant
Strategic
Excitement
Tactical
Empathy
Outgoing
Control
Feedback
Consensual
Cooperation
Persuasive
Innovative
Delegation
Self
Management Focus
Structuring
Conservative
Technical
Production
Authority
Communication
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
Odds a member of one group scores
higher than a member of the other group
Peer higher
Self higher
No difference (p > 0.05)
Effect Sizes

43. Comparison of self and direct report observations
Strategic
Empathy
Restraint
Management Focus
Excitement
Cooperation
Control
Tactical
Dominant
Consensual
Innovative
Persuasive
Feedback
Delegation
Self
Outgoing
Conservative
Production
Structuring
Authority
Technical
Communication
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
Odds a member of one group scores
higher than a member of the other group
Direct Report higher
Self higher
No difference (p > 0.05)
Effect Sizes

44. Key takeaways: Leader blind spots
• More differences between self and observer ratings than between
observer groups
• Some common blind spots across all observer groups
Self ratings higher
• Self*
• Delegation
Behavior is associated with one of the three
competencies discussed above.
Self ratings lower
• Communication*
• Deference to authority*
• Technical*
• Structuring
• Production*
*

45. Putting it all together
Observer perspectives on leadership
behaviors and effectiveness

46. Summary of Findings
• Observer groups differ in some of the behaviors they associate
leadership competence.
• However, there is also a great deal of overlap in these
associations.
• Observers perceive some behavior differences in the same
leaders.
• The are many areas where perceptions differ between self and
observers. These specific areas can differ across observer groups.

47. Coaching Insights
• Leaders interact with individuals who have different ideas about
effectiveness in different areas.
• To better interpret effectiveness ratings and help leaders develop
their leadership effectiveness, it is important to know what
observers from different groups…
o Expect from leaders
o Tend to perceive when they observe a leader’s behavior
• Identifying the blind spots that leaders have with particular
groups can highlight areas on which to focus developmental
efforts.

48. Questions | Comments | Recommendations

49. Resources and References
• Hoffman, B. J., & Woehr, D. J. (2009). Disentangling the meaning of
multisource performance rating source and dimension factors. Personnel
Psychology, 62(4), 735-765.
• Hooijberg, R., & Choi, J. (2000). Which leadership roles matter to whom?
An examination of rater effects on perceptions of effectiveness. The
Leadership Quarterly, 11(3), 341-364.
• Levy, P. E., & Williams, J. R. (2004). The social context of performance
appraisal: A review and framework for the future. Journal of
management, 30(6), 881-905.
For further insights:
www.mrg.com/research

50. Coming Up: Webinars
PRODUCT PREVIEW: MOMENTUM
Thursday, March 1, 2018
10:00am – 11:00am EST | 3:00pm – 4:00pm GMT
SUCCESS AT EVERY LEVEL: HIPO DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES FOR
ACCELERATED SUCCESSION PLANNING
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
10:00am – 11:00am EST | 2:00pm – 3:00pm GMT
Registration is open now:
www.mrg.com/events

51. Coming Up: Certifications
Live classes:
• February: LEA 360™ Full Suite, IDI & PD in Sydney, Australia
• March: LEA 360™ Full Suite, IDI in Chicago
Certification: Individual Directions Inventory™ & Personal Directions®
Begins Tuesday, March 27, 2018
10:00am – 12:00pm EST
Certification: LEA 360™ Full Suite
Begins Thursday, April 19, 2018
10:00am – 12:00pm EST
Registration is open now:
www.mrg.com/events

52. [Footer text to come] Page No 52
Thank you for joining us.
Stay in touch.
connect@mrg.com