Search

Abstract CEOs face complex situational demands at each phase of the merger process. We offer an institutional perspective on how pre-merger and post-merger objectives and demands translate into CEO leadership [...]

Proponents of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), most notably McClelland, have argued that the TAT and questionnaires are valid measures of different aspects of achievement motivation. Critics of the TAT have argued that questionnaires but not the TAT are valid measures of the need for achievement. Two meta-analyses of 105 randomly selected empirical research articles found that correlations between TAT measures of need for achievement and outcomes were on average positive; that these correlations were particularly large for outcomes such as career success measured in the presence of intrinsic, or task-related, achievement incentives; that questionnaire measures of need for achievement were also positively correlated with outcomes, particularly in the presence of external or social achievement incentives; and that on average TAT-based correlations were larger than questionnaire-based correlations. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

As much as 59% of the variance in measures of presidential performance may be explained by individual differences in power (positive), affiliation (negative), achievement (negative), and number of nots appearing in presidential speeches and letters (positive). Motives and the interactions of power and nots independently predicted presidential performance. An overall index of the leadership motive syndrome did not predict presidential performance independently of motives and the interaction of power and nots. Three supplementary analyses indicated that the nots index measured a style of using power, institutional versus personalistic, rather than activity inhibition, as had been proposed by McClelland, Davis, Kalin, and Wanner (1972).

Tests of the job characteristics model using the Job Diagnostic Survey have been criticized in the literature for having single-source response bias. To test this criticism, undergraduate and graduate students used the Job Diagnostic Survey to describe their job as 'student' (the pretest). The same students then worked at and described a contrived job using the survey. Results from the current study suggested that personality and instrument characteristics had relatively minimal effects on interscale correlations of the scores in the survey within and across situations. However, response biases attributable to priming, consistency, and implicit theories artificially inflated interscale correlations.

Utilities may be measured directly by questionnaire or indirectly through the statistical analysis of choices individuals make among profiles of jobs or products. In the present research, 211 undergraduate students directly rated the importance to themselves oof 10 factors such as location and starting salary thought to be relevant to students seeking their first full-time jobs. Participants also rated 32 hypothetical job profiles, from which indirect measures of job factor utilities were calculated. Finally, participants rated and ranked four additional job profiles. The present research suggested that both measures of utilities may predict job-choice behavior better than either measure used alone.

Proposes a conceptual framework to guide researchers in the casual modeling of job performance. Determinants of job performance; Role of underlying motives in the determination of work effort and subsequent performance; Assessment of the individual impact performance.