The mismeasure of man(agement) and its implications for leadership research

Philip M. Podsakoff; Scott B. MacKenzie; Nathan P. Podsakoff; Jeong Yeon Lee

doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.002

The mismeasure of man(agement) and its implications for leadership research

Philip M. Podsakoff, Scott B. MacKenzie, Nathan P. Podsakoff, Jeong Yeon Lee

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

331 Scopus citations

Abstract

The purpose of the present review is to examine the potential problems caused by measurement model misspecification in the field of leadership. First, we discuss the conceptual differences between the four types of measurement models that have been used in leadership research and provide a set of criteria that could be used to decide upon the appropriate model. Following this, we examine the extent of measurement model misspecification by conducting a review of the leadership literature and applying these criteria. Next, we discuss the potential consequences of measurement model misspecification on conclusions made about the structural relationships between constructs. Finally, we discuss the implications of our study for leadership research.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	615-656
Number of pages	42
Journal	Leadership Quarterly
Volume	14
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.002
State	Published - Dec 2003
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Business and International Management
Applied Psychology
Sociology and Political Science
Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Access to Document

10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.002

Cite this

@article{a6927376e45e4a2284f651de30f4acda,

title = "The mismeasure of man(agement) and its implications for leadership research",

abstract = "The purpose of the present review is to examine the potential problems caused by measurement model misspecification in the field of leadership. First, we discuss the conceptual differences between the four types of measurement models that have been used in leadership research and provide a set of criteria that could be used to decide upon the appropriate model. Following this, we examine the extent of measurement model misspecification by conducting a review of the leadership literature and applying these criteria. Next, we discuss the potential consequences of measurement model misspecification on conclusions made about the structural relationships between constructs. Finally, we discuss the implications of our study for leadership research.",

author = "Podsakoff, {Philip M.} and MacKenzie, {Scott B.} and Podsakoff, {Nathan P.} and Lee, {Jeong Yeon}",

year = "2003",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.002",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "14",

pages = "615--656",

journal = "Leadership Quarterly",

issn = "1048-9843",

publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The mismeasure of man(agement) and its implications for leadership research

AU - Podsakoff, Philip M.

AU - MacKenzie, Scott B.

AU - Podsakoff, Nathan P.

AU - Lee, Jeong Yeon

PY - 2003/12

Y1 - 2003/12

N2 - The purpose of the present review is to examine the potential problems caused by measurement model misspecification in the field of leadership. First, we discuss the conceptual differences between the four types of measurement models that have been used in leadership research and provide a set of criteria that could be used to decide upon the appropriate model. Following this, we examine the extent of measurement model misspecification by conducting a review of the leadership literature and applying these criteria. Next, we discuss the potential consequences of measurement model misspecification on conclusions made about the structural relationships between constructs. Finally, we discuss the implications of our study for leadership research.

AB - The purpose of the present review is to examine the potential problems caused by measurement model misspecification in the field of leadership. First, we discuss the conceptual differences between the four types of measurement models that have been used in leadership research and provide a set of criteria that could be used to decide upon the appropriate model. Following this, we examine the extent of measurement model misspecification by conducting a review of the leadership literature and applying these criteria. Next, we discuss the potential consequences of measurement model misspecification on conclusions made about the structural relationships between constructs. Finally, we discuss the implications of our study for leadership research.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0344118812&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0344118812&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.002

DO - 10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.08.002

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0344118812

SN - 1048-9843

VL - 14

SP - 615

EP - 656

JO - Leadership Quarterly

JF - Leadership Quarterly

IS - 6

ER -

The mismeasure of man(agement) and its implications for leadership research

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this