The state of leadership assessment in organizations: introducing a values-centric approach
Isabel Ortiz-Marcos et al.
What the paper says
Purpose This paper aims to examine how leadership assessment is implemented in contemporary organizations and clarifies the role of values-related practices, with a specific focus on employees' perceived value alignment with their immediate leader at the dyadic level. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on a multi-edition study of 330 organizations across 4 survey waves conducted between 2020 and 2023, we combine quantitative and qualitative evidence to describe current models, tools and routines used to assess leadership and to identify observable trends. Findings The 360-degree model remains the most widely used approach and assessments are most often conducted annually. Surveys, structured meetings and their combination are prevalent. Values-based conversations are reported by 62%–75% of organizations. The share reporting high perceived leader–follower value alignment (above 70%) increased from 51% to 63% between the third and fourth editions. Descriptive analyses indicate that systematic, development-linked practices and inclusive promotion criteria tend to co-occur with higher perceived alignment. Practical implications Organizations can embed values-focused dialogs within development plans while mitigating rater bias and similarity-based favoritism through calibration, behaviorally anchored criteria, monitoring for diversity and justice and temporal separation between developmental conversations and formal ratings. These steps help align developmental value with fairness and decision usefulness. Originality/value The study integrates dyadic perceived value alignment as a complementary, measurable component of leadership assessment, distinguishing it from person–organization fit and leader–organization alignment, as well as from ethical or authentic leadership. Dyadic alignment captures followers' perceptions that their values broadly align with those of their immediate leader, which can amplify or weaken the impact of different leadership styles. The multi-edition, cross-organizational evidence contributes a concise map of how values-related elements are incorporated into assessment routines.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.