ψ   Psychology Research on the Web   

Couples needed for online psychology research

Help us grow:

Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research - Vol 69, Iss 4

Random Abstract
Quick Journal Finder:
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research is published by the Educational Publishing Foundation in collaboration with the Division of Consulting Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 13). The mission of this journal is to facilitate the exchange of knowledge and ideas regarding the field of consultation to the community of psychologists and others interested in consultation.
Copyright 2017 American Psychological Association
  • A teachable approach to leadership.
    Although excellent tools and methodologies for developing leadership skills/competencies exist, there is an absence of a practical and easily teachable model for the development of leadership that is research-based, yet practical, and can be easily understood and applied by leaders, managers, and administrators. Starting with a definition of leadership that focuses on getting results rather than on idealized and abstract processes, this article presents an approach that provides a framework for developing a strategy for applying leadership skills/competencies to achieve organizational objectives in a wide variety of situations and contexts. Furthermore, the development of leadership skills is best achieved when this teachable model of leadership is introduced using pedagogical principles that (a) employ inductive, inquiry-based/discovery learning that emphasizes “homegrown” theories; (b) provide opportunities for realistic and real-world practice; (c) provide opportunities for real-time feedback and process debriefing; and (d) ensure participant accountability. The success of this approach is illustrated by describing a leadership-development program where it was used. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • Learning agility: Its evolution as a psychological construct and its empirical relationship to leader success.
    The concept of learning agility has grown markedly in popularity during the past few years as an approach to assist human-resource professionals and organizational executives with their talent decisions. Nevertheless, there remains much confusion about what is learning agility, how to measure it, when to use it, and the extent of its relationship to leader success. The purpose of this article is to clarify this relatively new approach to high-potential talent identification and development. Initially, the historical roots of learning agility are traced. Its conceptual origin, formulation as a psychological construct, expansion as a leadership assessment, and theoretical underpinnings are described. Subsequently, 19 field studies investigating the empirical linkage between learning agility and leader success are reviewed. The findings of a meta-analysis show it has a robust relationship with both leader performance (r¯ = 0.47) and leader potential (r¯ = 0.48). Finally, five issues facing the application and study of learning agility are discussed. The goal is to increase practitioners’ understanding of this popular method of talent management as well as to spur additional scholarly research of the construct. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • Agency, conscientiousness, and leadership emergence in Asia: How managers in countries with and without British influence differ from each other.
    The current study investigated differences in personality characteristics for emerging managers across several Asian countries as well as the United Kingdom. We hypothesized that managers from countries with a historical British influence would score similarly to managers from the United Kingdom on a measure of agency and that managers from countries with no historical British influence would score higher on a measure of conscientiousness than would managers from the British-influenced countries. To test our hypotheses, we sampled 4,519 managers across eight Asian countries that completed the Hogan Personality Inventory. We found support for our hypotheses, which suggests that historical economic and political factors can have long-lasting effects on the predominant management style of a country or region. We discuss the relevance of these results for multinational corporations and future researchers. These results can support organizations engaged in international expansion, management due-diligence programs for international mergers and acquisitions, cross-border contract negotiations, the preparation of expatriates, the development of regional managers with cross-country purview, and the development of global high-potential evaluation programs. These results can also support consulting psychologists and other professionals by providing context to coaching and development engagements that involve managers who operate in, or interact with stakeholders from, the countries we examined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • Evaluating coaching behavior in managers, consultants, and coaches: A model, questionnaire, and initial findings.
    This is a study of coaching behaviors both as reported by executive coaches, consultants, and managers and by the coaches’ clients. We present a conceptual model of coaching behaviors that is comprehensive, intuitive, and easily quantifiable. We then introduce a questionnaire, based on the model, that has been in use for several decades. The latest version of this Coaching Behaviors Questionnaire can help researchers generate evidence about perceived behaviors in the coaching relationship. In fact, we report on an initial large-scale study of coaching behaviors using the questionnaire among 537 coaches, 196 consultants, and 559 manager-coaches as well as 221 clients of coaching. The study demonstrates significant differences in perceived behavior by subjects who differ in age, gender, and nationality. Significant differences are also found for those that identify themselves as “managers” versus “consultants” versus “coaches” and for those looking at the behaviors from the other side of the relationship, the clients of coaching. Some of the differences can be attributed to the fact that more experienced coaches will perceive themselves to develop different coaching behaviors. It is shown how an instrument such as this could be used to have observers rate coaching behaviors and even, ultimately, assess the skills of those practicing such coaching behaviors. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

  • What characterizes effective management teams? A research-based approach.
    Most organizations use management teams at different levels in the hierarchy to oversee and coordinate their businesses. Such teams typically make decisions, solve problems, coordinate tasks, and keep one another informed, and they can strongly influence the performance of an organization. Hence it is vital to identify factors that are associated with effective management-team performance. Based on a review of international research on management and decision-making teams from the early 1980s through today, we have identified a number of variables that seem to be important for the effectiveness of management teams. The variables are organized into 4 different categories: (a) input factors, which are relatively stable characteristics of the team and its environment (team purpose, team tasks, team size, team composition, and reward systems); (b) process factors, which refer to how the team works (meeting goals, focused communication, handling of task and relationship conflict, dialogical communication, political behavior, behavioral integration, external relationships, team learning behavior, and team leadership); (c) emergent states, which are cognitive, motivational, and affective states that emerge from the team members’ interaction (team psychological safety, team cohesion, and functional team norms); and (d) output factors, which describe the different kinds of outcomes achieved by the team (task performance and individual well-being and growth). In this paper, we discuss the empirical research behind each of the variables and how the variables are associated with management-team effectiveness. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
    Citation link to source

Back to top

Back to top