Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the rater levels(supervisor, peers, and subordinates) perspectives in leadership ratings. Ratees were 150 executive candidates, and raters were 1 supervisor, 2 peers, and 10 subordinates of each ratee. Ratee's leadership was evaluated by four styles of leadership from the competing values model(Quinn, 1988): Market, clan, hierarchy, and adhocracy. Results revealed low correlations between rater levels, and the causes of the low correlations were both the different magnitude of the rating errors between rater levels and their different perspectives. Supervisors adopted achievement and innovation, subordinates adopted relation and stability, and peers adopted all of the perspectives. The need for social-organizational approaches in multi-rater leadership ratings were discussed.