Differences in Self/Other Perceptions and Personality

Differences in Self/Other Perceptions and Personality Randall H. Lucius & Carolyn Turknett Turknett Leadership Group Atlanta, GA

Abstract • Personality differences between those who rated themselves higher than how others perceive them (over raters) and those who rated themselves lower than how others perceive them (under raters) on a 360 leadership instrument were studied. • Results found that over raters are more extroverted than under raters, while under raters are more anxious than over raters

Introduction • Most studies of self/other differences in 360 assessments argue over accuracy vs. value of variation from multiple raters • What about individual differences in self/other difference scores? • This study explored personality differences associated with those who over or under rate themselves.

Introduction (cont.) • Past Findings: • MBTI: IS’s have most accurate self perception (Roush & Atwater, 1992) • Self-Esteem: those low in self-esteem less likely to over-rate (Baird, 1977) • Those high in Intelligence, nAch, internal locus of control are more accurate (Mabe & West, 1982). • Gender differences equivocal.

Introduction (cont.) • Importance • Accurate self-perceivers make better decisions (Bass & Yammarino, 1991) • Inaccurate self-perceivers more likely to deny problems, give up, and fear failure (Wohlers & London, 1989) • Moderates leader performance (Atwater & Yammarino, 1992) • Can strain CEO/TMT relationship and affect strategy (Ashford, 1989)

Method • Subjects: 186 executives who participated in the Turknett Executive Development Program. • 25% female • Age range: 37 to 55; Avg=44 • 360 instrument: Coworker Rating Scale (Hagberg, 1984). • measures 47 different behaviors • E.g. decisiveness, thoroughness, forthrightness, consideration, adaptable, self-confidence, motivating others, empowerment

Method (cont.) • Personality: Jackson Personality Inventory (Jackson, 1994) & Personality Research Form (Jackson, 1989). • Difference score computation: • co-worker ratings (superior, peer, subordinate) were averaged together by item and subtracted from self score. • An average difference score across items was computed

Method (cont.) • Difference score computation (cont.): • Two groups were formed: those who tend to overrate themselves and those who underrate. • Differences between over and under raters on the JPI and PRF were assessed via t-tests.

Results • 7 out of 35 possible relationships emerged from the specific scales • 1 of 7 factors also emerged

Results (cont.) • Under raters suffer from a higher amount of anxiety than those who over rate themselves • Over raters scored high on traits related to extroversion • Risk Taking, Sociability, Social Confidence, Play • Over raters also have greater breadth of interests

Discussion • Those who are socially confident and extroverted tend to have inflated images of themselves. • Extroverts are more “action” oriented than “deep thinking” oriented • Extroverts are less introspective than Introverts • may lead to inaccurate self perception

Discussion (cont.) • Those with a large breadth of interests also tend to over rate. • Is related to Extroversion, but also Openness to Experiences • Those who are anxious may undervalue themselves. • Similar findings have been found with individuals low in self-esteem (Baird, 1977; Farh and Dobbins, 1989)

Discussion (cont.) • Knowledge of one’s personality can help practitioners know what to expect. • E.g. for someone who is extroverted, the practitioner can expect them to have inflated images of themselves and prepare 360 feedback accordingly to “soften the blow”

Discussion (cont.) • Extroverts may need more self-awareness training • Highlights importance of using both 360 and personality measures • Introverts may under value themselves and their abilities • The issue for these people may not be their deficiencies as identified in a 360, but rather self confidence.

Discussion (cont.) • Under estimator’s anxiety may also tie in to lack of confidence and regard for self. • While humility is often valued as a positive leadership trait, too much may have negative consequences.

Implications for Future Research • Discussion points need to be more carefully examined before any firm conclusions can be made • More sophisticated methodology should be explored. • E.g. Polynomial regression • Other correlates with over/under rating oneself should be explored • E.g. job performance

Differences in Self/Other Perceptions and Personality