Interpretation of multi-source feedbacks can be complicated when discrepant notations appear. Anecdotal experiences of the authors and other published studies suggest that differences between self-assessments and other leader evaluations are not uncommon (Ostroff et al. 2004) and can lead to strong emotional reactions from people who receive discrete reactions. Leaders tend to overestimate their own leadership qualities relative to follower ratings (Atwater and Yammarino, 1992; Fleenor et al. 1996). Where there are shifts, leaders can express surprise, dismay, disbelief or emotional distress if they experience such differences. In this study, we use quantitative data to examine the existence of these differences in leadership and followers, the magnitude of differences (i.e. less positive leader ratings than followers or leader ratings less positive than followers) and the extent to which differences are related to the culture of the organization. Finding that discrepancies between line managers and evaluations of transformation management service providers are related to the evaluations of providers of the organization`s culture raises other questions. First, if superiors have difficulty assessing their own behaviour, do they also have prejudices in the perception of their suppliers or the organizational social context? For example, some superiors may avoid accurate introspection and avoid or may not be able to interpret specific assessments or interpretations of the organizational culture and climate in which they operate (Ashkanasy et al.
2000). In addition, their own behaviour (based on bias or misperception) may contribute to less than an optimal organizational context. The bias of common sources could also take this finding into account; However, a number of factors reduce the likelihood of this statement, and we discuss this issue in the restrictions section. Surface tests that assess the link between congruence/incongruity between denob self-assessment and supervisor transformation management providers` assessment and consensus culture were first investigated. The results suggest that an agreement between the superiors and the ratings of the processors did not affect the consensus (a1 – $0.13, t – $1.071, p – 0.291). However, the incongruity between superiors and the ratings of suppliers of transformative management had a significant curved relationship with consensus (a4 – 1.18, t – 3.281, p -0.002), so that evaluations between superiors and suppliers have become increasingly insurmountable and that evaluations of a consensual culture have increased. Other analyses have shown that the direction of the gap between the supervisor`s and supplier`s transformative management assessments has had a significant impact on the consensus culture (a3 -0.51, t – 2,741, p – 0.010). Consistent with our third hypothesis, the consensus culture was greater, while evaluations of transformative leadership providers were low and supervisors` self-assessment for transformative leadership was high than if the ratings of transformative leadership providers were high, combined with low self-assessments of transformative management by supervisors. While executives are able to continuously obtain adequate and accurate information about the opinions of their subscribers, they may not effectively integrate this information and make the necessary behavioural changes in the event of a discrepancy. There may also be more general prejudices.
For example, socio-psychological studies have found that individuals, when assessing their general skills, tend to rank above the median, suggesting that most people have positive unrealistic opinions about themselves (Buunk and Van Yperen, 1991; Taylor and Brown, 1988).