A meso measure? Examination of the levels of analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

46 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Critical review of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Form 5X (MLQ5X), reveals serious problems related to specification of the theoretical level of analysis at which it measures its underlying constructs. Data from two separate samples indicate that items of the commonly used MLQ5X are ambiguous with respect to level of analysis. It appears unclear in many instances whether the items reflect individual, group, or organizational referents. Based upon our analyses and the literature, we present specific propositions concerning the level(s) at which each MLQ5X dimension appears most appropriately conceptualized and measured, along with suggestions for future research and revision of the MLQ5X.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)604-616
Number of pages13
JournalLeadership Quarterly
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2009

Fingerprint

leadership
examination
questionnaire
Levels of analysis
Multi-factor
Questionnaire
Surveys and Questionnaires
Group
literature

Keywords

  • Leadership
  • Levels of analysis
  • Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
  • Applied Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

A meso measure? Examination of the levels of analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). / Schriesheim, Chester; Wu, Joshua B.; Scandura, Teresa.

In: Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 4, 01.08.2009, p. 604-616.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6e45a3d2dc014e168afcaef40a26c7a7,
title = "A meso measure? Examination of the levels of analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)",
abstract = "Critical review of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Form 5X (MLQ5X), reveals serious problems related to specification of the theoretical level of analysis at which it measures its underlying constructs. Data from two separate samples indicate that items of the commonly used MLQ5X are ambiguous with respect to level of analysis. It appears unclear in many instances whether the items reflect individual, group, or organizational referents. Based upon our analyses and the literature, we present specific propositions concerning the level(s) at which each MLQ5X dimension appears most appropriately conceptualized and measured, along with suggestions for future research and revision of the MLQ5X.",
keywords = "Leadership, Levels of analysis, Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)",
author = "Chester Schriesheim and Wu, {Joshua B.} and Teresa Scandura",
year = "2009",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.04.005",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "604--616",
journal = "Leadership Quarterly",
issn = "1048-9843",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A meso measure? Examination of the levels of analysis of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

AU - Schriesheim, Chester

AU - Wu, Joshua B.

AU - Scandura, Teresa

PY - 2009/8/1

Y1 - 2009/8/1

N2 - Critical review of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Form 5X (MLQ5X), reveals serious problems related to specification of the theoretical level of analysis at which it measures its underlying constructs. Data from two separate samples indicate that items of the commonly used MLQ5X are ambiguous with respect to level of analysis. It appears unclear in many instances whether the items reflect individual, group, or organizational referents. Based upon our analyses and the literature, we present specific propositions concerning the level(s) at which each MLQ5X dimension appears most appropriately conceptualized and measured, along with suggestions for future research and revision of the MLQ5X.

AB - Critical review of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire, Form 5X (MLQ5X), reveals serious problems related to specification of the theoretical level of analysis at which it measures its underlying constructs. Data from two separate samples indicate that items of the commonly used MLQ5X are ambiguous with respect to level of analysis. It appears unclear in many instances whether the items reflect individual, group, or organizational referents. Based upon our analyses and the literature, we present specific propositions concerning the level(s) at which each MLQ5X dimension appears most appropriately conceptualized and measured, along with suggestions for future research and revision of the MLQ5X.

KW - Leadership

KW - Levels of analysis

KW - Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67649311244&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67649311244&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.04.005

DO - 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.04.005

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 604

EP - 616

JO - Leadership Quarterly

JF - Leadership Quarterly

SN - 1048-9843

IS - 4

ER -