Influence of sex differences in leaders' behavior

Jennifer Moss Breen, John E. Barbuto, Gina S. Matkin, Tzu Yun Chin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Sex differences in influence tactics were examined with a sample of 269 followers (67 men, 202 women) at a large midwestern national insurance company who rated the downward influence tactics used by their direct supervisors. Downward influence tactics are behaviors used by leaders to gain compliance from followers. One department within the organization was identified as a source for participants in the study. Participation was voluntary. The age range for the sample was 21 to 65 years, with the largest percentage falling in the 40-49 year range (M=3.8, SD=.8). Hierarchical linear modeling procedures were utilized to analyze the multiple level data (leader and follower) and to examine variables within the organization at different levels of analysis. Leader participants were asked to solicit their followers to complete an influence tactic measure, which consisted of the most reliable subscales taken from the Influence Behavior Questionnaire, Schriesheim and Hinkin Influence Measure, and the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies. The integrated measure resulted in a 45-item scale. It was hypothesized that, overall, followers would report that male leaders would use hard influence tactics more frequently than female leaders. On the other hand, followers would report that female leaders would use soft influence tactics more frequently than male leaders. When differentiating followers by sex, however, we expected that male followers would report more than female followers that their leaders use hard tactics more frequently. Also, we expected that female followers would report (more than male followers) that their leaders use soft tactics more frequently. Overall, followers reported that male leaders used significantly more personal appeal and consultation, so called "soft tactics," with their followers than did female leaders. Female followers reported that their leaders (both male and female) used consultation and inspirational appeal more frequently. In contrast, male followers reported that their leaders used exchange, so called "hard tactics," more frequently.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)499-510
Number of pages12
JournalPsychological Reports
Volume96
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Sex Characteristics
Referral and Consultation
Accidental Falls
Organizations
Insurance
Compliance

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Influence of sex differences in leaders' behavior. / Moss Breen, Jennifer; Barbuto, John E.; Matkin, Gina S.; Chin, Tzu Yun.

In: Psychological Reports, Vol. 96, No. 2, 04.2005, p. 499-510.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Moss Breen, Jennifer ; Barbuto, John E. ; Matkin, Gina S. ; Chin, Tzu Yun. / Influence of sex differences in leaders' behavior. In: Psychological Reports. 2005 ; Vol. 96, No. 2. pp. 499-510.
@article{a5f5b0eb4d1949b49f6938b7c4bf4f96,
title = "Influence of sex differences in leaders' behavior",
abstract = "Sex differences in influence tactics were examined with a sample of 269 followers (67 men, 202 women) at a large midwestern national insurance company who rated the downward influence tactics used by their direct supervisors. Downward influence tactics are behaviors used by leaders to gain compliance from followers. One department within the organization was identified as a source for participants in the study. Participation was voluntary. The age range for the sample was 21 to 65 years, with the largest percentage falling in the 40-49 year range (M=3.8, SD=.8). Hierarchical linear modeling procedures were utilized to analyze the multiple level data (leader and follower) and to examine variables within the organization at different levels of analysis. Leader participants were asked to solicit their followers to complete an influence tactic measure, which consisted of the most reliable subscales taken from the Influence Behavior Questionnaire, Schriesheim and Hinkin Influence Measure, and the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies. The integrated measure resulted in a 45-item scale. It was hypothesized that, overall, followers would report that male leaders would use hard influence tactics more frequently than female leaders. On the other hand, followers would report that female leaders would use soft influence tactics more frequently than male leaders. When differentiating followers by sex, however, we expected that male followers would report more than female followers that their leaders use hard tactics more frequently. Also, we expected that female followers would report (more than male followers) that their leaders use soft tactics more frequently. Overall, followers reported that male leaders used significantly more personal appeal and consultation, so called {"}soft tactics,{"} with their followers than did female leaders. Female followers reported that their leaders (both male and female) used consultation and inspirational appeal more frequently. In contrast, male followers reported that their leaders used exchange, so called {"}hard tactics,{"} more frequently.",
author = "{Moss Breen}, Jennifer and Barbuto, {John E.} and Matkin, {Gina S.} and Chin, {Tzu Yun}",
year = "2005",
month = "4",
doi = "10.2466/PR0.96.2.499-510",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "499--510",
journal = "Psychological Reports",
issn = "0033-2941",
publisher = "Ammons Scientific Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Influence of sex differences in leaders' behavior

AU - Moss Breen, Jennifer

AU - Barbuto, John E.

AU - Matkin, Gina S.

AU - Chin, Tzu Yun

PY - 2005/4

Y1 - 2005/4

N2 - Sex differences in influence tactics were examined with a sample of 269 followers (67 men, 202 women) at a large midwestern national insurance company who rated the downward influence tactics used by their direct supervisors. Downward influence tactics are behaviors used by leaders to gain compliance from followers. One department within the organization was identified as a source for participants in the study. Participation was voluntary. The age range for the sample was 21 to 65 years, with the largest percentage falling in the 40-49 year range (M=3.8, SD=.8). Hierarchical linear modeling procedures were utilized to analyze the multiple level data (leader and follower) and to examine variables within the organization at different levels of analysis. Leader participants were asked to solicit their followers to complete an influence tactic measure, which consisted of the most reliable subscales taken from the Influence Behavior Questionnaire, Schriesheim and Hinkin Influence Measure, and the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies. The integrated measure resulted in a 45-item scale. It was hypothesized that, overall, followers would report that male leaders would use hard influence tactics more frequently than female leaders. On the other hand, followers would report that female leaders would use soft influence tactics more frequently than male leaders. When differentiating followers by sex, however, we expected that male followers would report more than female followers that their leaders use hard tactics more frequently. Also, we expected that female followers would report (more than male followers) that their leaders use soft tactics more frequently. Overall, followers reported that male leaders used significantly more personal appeal and consultation, so called "soft tactics," with their followers than did female leaders. Female followers reported that their leaders (both male and female) used consultation and inspirational appeal more frequently. In contrast, male followers reported that their leaders used exchange, so called "hard tactics," more frequently.

AB - Sex differences in influence tactics were examined with a sample of 269 followers (67 men, 202 women) at a large midwestern national insurance company who rated the downward influence tactics used by their direct supervisors. Downward influence tactics are behaviors used by leaders to gain compliance from followers. One department within the organization was identified as a source for participants in the study. Participation was voluntary. The age range for the sample was 21 to 65 years, with the largest percentage falling in the 40-49 year range (M=3.8, SD=.8). Hierarchical linear modeling procedures were utilized to analyze the multiple level data (leader and follower) and to examine variables within the organization at different levels of analysis. Leader participants were asked to solicit their followers to complete an influence tactic measure, which consisted of the most reliable subscales taken from the Influence Behavior Questionnaire, Schriesheim and Hinkin Influence Measure, and the Profiles of Organizational Influence Strategies. The integrated measure resulted in a 45-item scale. It was hypothesized that, overall, followers would report that male leaders would use hard influence tactics more frequently than female leaders. On the other hand, followers would report that female leaders would use soft influence tactics more frequently than male leaders. When differentiating followers by sex, however, we expected that male followers would report more than female followers that their leaders use hard tactics more frequently. Also, we expected that female followers would report (more than male followers) that their leaders use soft tactics more frequently. Overall, followers reported that male leaders used significantly more personal appeal and consultation, so called "soft tactics," with their followers than did female leaders. Female followers reported that their leaders (both male and female) used consultation and inspirational appeal more frequently. In contrast, male followers reported that their leaders used exchange, so called "hard tactics," more frequently.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=20744432364&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=20744432364&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2466/PR0.96.2.499-510

DO - 10.2466/PR0.96.2.499-510

M3 - Article

C2 - 15941127

AN - SCOPUS:20744432364

VL - 96

SP - 499

EP - 510

JO - Psychological Reports

JF - Psychological Reports

SN - 0033-2941

IS - 2

ER -