Research indicates that managers’ leadership behaviors influence subordinate health and job satisfaction. In addition, studies show associations between managers' health and job satisfaction and their leadership behaviors (Nyberg et al.,2005; Arnold, 2017; Inceoglu et al., 2018;Swedish Agency for Work Environment Expertise, 2020). However, there are few studies concerning differences of ratings between managers’ self ratings and other groups’ ratings whereby the results and differences are studied in terms of associations to health and job satisfaction outcomes(Fleenor et al., 2010; Hasson et al., 2020). Although there are several instruments for evaluating the outcomes of leadership behaviors with the purpose of contributing to leadership development, multi-source feedback surveys focus mostly on managers’ or subordinates’ performance outcomes (Fleenor et al., 2010; Hasson et al., 2020). The mining industry, which is the empirical case in this study, has high levels of work-related health problems in relation to both physical work environment factors and safety problems and occupational injuries (European Commission, 2010). However, the technological development in the mining industry has led to an increased importance of both organizational and social working conditions, including leadership (Johansson et al., 2019).
The purpose of this study is to explore the (dis-)agreements between managers’ self-ratings of their own leadership behaviors and their superior managers’ and subordinates’ ratings of the managers’ leadership behaviors,as well as how (dis-)agreements therein affect the managers’ and subordinates’ health and job satisfaction, in the mining industry. The design and methodology were to collect data by using surveys distributed to managers (n=53), their superior managers (n=36), and their subordinates (n=461) within a mining industry. The surveys included self-rated items about background variables, leadership behaviors, health, and job satisfaction. Four leadership indices were used covering relation-,structure- and change-oriented behaviors (Ekwall et al., 1991; Yukl, 2019), and the Healthy and Effective Leadership-model (Larsson & Vinberg, 2010;Larsson, 2017). The ratings were analyzed using descriptive-, correlation-, and logistic regression analyses.
Findings are that subordinates rated their managers’ leadership behaviors significantly lower than the managers and the superior managers did. Correlation analysis showed that a larger disagreement between the managers’ and subordinates' ratings for four leadership behavior indices was significantly negatively associated with subordinates’ health and job satisfaction, but not the managers’. Results were partially supported by logistic regression analyses when controlling for background variables. When the subordinates gave higher ratings for their mangers’ leadership behaviors than the managers did (underestimation), there were higher odds for subordinates to access good health and high job satisfaction, regarding several behavior indices. Similarly, when these two groups rated the managers at a similar level (balanced rating), the odds were also higher for subordinate good health and high job satisfaction for several indices, compared to when managers gave themselves higher ratings than the subordinates did (overestimation).
Regarding originality and contributions, the findings point at the importance of self-other agreement regarding leadership behaviors, as well as how disagreement of ratings between managers and their subordinates are associated with these groups’ health and job satisfaction. It is of value for organizations to not only have ratings from just one group, either managers or subordinates, but instead to work with self-other (dis-)agreement ratings of leadership behaviors and different outcomes. Considering the importance of leadership for employee health and job satisfaction, the present findings may indicate a greater need for organizational resources that support sustainable leadership development. The use of self-other feedback tools can be a driver for change, not least in that the use of such tools can provide managers with insights into how their leadership behaviors are perceived. Such tools can initiate reflection processes, be material that is used for dialogue with work environment experts, human resources experts, superior managers, and subordinate groups, and they can also result in action-plans regarding what behaviors need to be strengthened.