Advertisement

Journal of Business and Psychology

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 453–469 | Cite as

Do You See Me as I See Me? The Effects of Impression Management Incongruence of Actors and Audiences

  • Wayne S. CrawfordEmail author
  • K. Michele (Micki) Kacmar
  • Kenneth J. Harris
Original Paper
  • 334 Downloads

Abstract

Based on the idea that both actor and audience member are present in impression management (IM), we argue that the effectiveness of IM usage can only be determined when ratings from both the actor and the audience are considered. Further, we use self-verification theory to explain how IM incongruence may impact workplace outcomes. To test our arguments, we employed congruence analysis (Cheung in Organizational Research Methods 12, 6–33, 2009a). Our approach differs from the majority of extant IM research that employs measures of IM only from the actor’s perspective. By incorporating assessments from the actor and the audience, we bring research on IM back to its theoretical roots and offer a rationale for the varied and inconsistent findings reported in the literature. Using a sample of 175 employees and their supervisors, we examined and compared IM ratings of subordinates’ ingratiation, self-promotion, and exemplification from both the employee and supervisor. Additionally, we investigate the ability of those ratings, individually and together, to predict both subordinate and supervisor ratings of key organizational outcomes. Implications for practice and suggestions for future research also are provided.

Keywords

Impression management Self-presentation Congruence analysis Structural equation modeling 

References

  1. Aquino, K., Lewis, M., & Bradfield, M. (1999). Justice constructs, negative affectivity, and employee deviance: A proposed model and empirical test. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 1073–1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atwater, L., Wang, M., Smither, J. W., & Fleenor, J. W. (2009). Are cultural characteristics associated with the relationship between self and others’ ratings of leadership? Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 876–886.Google Scholar
  3. Atwater, L. E., Ostroff, C., Yammarino, F. J., & Fleenor, J. W. (1998). Self-other agreement: Does it really matter? Personnel Psychology, 51(3), 577–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atwater, L. E., & Yammarino, F. J. (1992). Does self-other agreement on leadership perceptions moderate the validity of leadership and performance predictions? Personnel Psychology, 45, 141–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baron, R. A. (1986). Self-presentation in job interviews: When there can be “too much of a good thing.”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 16–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baumeister, R. F., & Jones, E. E. (1978). When self-presentation is constrained by the target's knowledge: Consistency and compensation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(6), 608–618.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, T. E., & Martin, S. (1995). Trying to look bad at work: Methods and motives for managing poor impressions in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 174–199.Google Scholar
  8. Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, J. B. (2008). A multi-level review of impression management motives and behaviors. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1080–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (1999). Measuring impression management in organizations: A scale development based on the Jones and Pittman taxonomy. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (2003). Counternormative impression management, likeability, and performance ratings: The use of intimidation in an organizational setting. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bolino, M. C., Varela, J. A., Bande, B., & Turnley, W. H. (2006). The impact of impression-management tactics on supervisor ratings of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bosco, F. A., Aguinis, H., Singh, K., Field, J. G., & Pierce, C. A. (2015). Correlational effect size benchmarks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 431–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bozeman, D. P., & Kacmar, K. M. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brissett, D., & Edgley, C. (1990). Life as a theater: A dramaturgical sourcebook (2nd Ed.). New York, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  15. Buchanan, D., & Badham, R. (1999). Power, politics, and organizational change. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1979). The Michigan organizational assessment questionnaire. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  17. Cheung, G. W. (2009a). Introducing the latent congruence model for improving the assessment of similarity, agreement, and fit in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 6–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cheung, G. W. (2009b). A multiple-perspective approach to data analysis in congruence research. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 63–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2012). A direct comparison approach for testing measurement invariance. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 167–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cialdini, R. B., & DeNicholas, M. E. (1989). Self-presentation by association. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 626–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cole, D. A., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Manifest variable path analysis: Potentially serious and misleading consequences due to uncorrected measurement error. Psychological Methods, 19(2), 300–315.Google Scholar
  23. Coleman Gallagher, V., Harris, K. J., & Valle, M. (2008). Understanding the use of intimidation as a response to job tension: Career implications for the global leader. Career Development International, 13(7), 648–666.Google Scholar
  24. De La Ronde, C., & Swann, W. B. (1998). Partner verification: Restoring shattered images of our intimates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 374–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Edwards, J. R. (1993). Problems with the use of profile similarity indices in the study of congruence in organizational research. Personnel Psychology, 46, 641–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Edwards, J. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 51–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1577–1613.Google Scholar
  28. Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowland, K. M., & Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: Test of a model. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58(1), 101–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gardner, W. L., & Martinko, M. J. (1988). Impression management in organizations. Journal of Management, 14, 321–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gilbert, D. T., & Krull, D. S. (1988). Seeing less and knowing more: The benefits of perceptual ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(2), 193–202.Google Scholar
  31. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.Google Scholar
  32. Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., Zivnuska, S., & Shaw, J. D. (2007). The impact of political skill on impression management effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 278–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Heidemeier, H., & Moser, K. (2009). Self–other agreement in job performance ratings: A meta-analytic test of a process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 353–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Higgins, C. A., & Judge, T. A. (2004). The effect of applicant influence tactics on recruiter perceptions of fit and hiring recommendations: A field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 622–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Huang, G. H., Zhao, H. H., Niu, X. Y., Ashford, S. J., & Lee, C. (2013). Reducing job insecurity and increasing performance ratings: Does impression management matter? Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(5), 852–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jehn, K. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Johns, G. (1981). Difference score measures of organizational behavior variables: A critique. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27, 443–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jones, E., & Pittman, T. (1982). Towards a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J.Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (pp. 231–262). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  39. Judge, T. A., & Bretz, R. D. (1994). Political influence behavior and career success. Journal of Management, 20, 43–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kacmar, K. M., Harris, K. J., & Nagy, B. G. (2007). Further validation of the Bolino and Turnley impression management scale. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 9(1), 16–21.Google Scholar
  41. Leary, M. R., & Allen, A. B. (2011). Self-presentational persona: Simultaneous management of multiple impressions. Journal of personality and social psychology, 101(5), 1033–1049.Google Scholar
  42. Liden, R. C., & Mitchell, T. R. (1988). Ingratiatory behaviors in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 13, 572–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McFarland, L. A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2003). Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods. Journal of Management, 29(5), 641–661.Google Scholar
  44. Matta, F. K., Scott, B. A., Koopman, J., & Conlon, D. E. (2015). Does seeing “eye to eye” affect work engagement and organizational citizenship behavior? A role theory perspective on LMX agreement. Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1686–1708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mehrabian, A. (1972). Nonverbal communication. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  46. Meredith, W. (1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus (version 7.31) [computer software]. Los Angeles: Author.Google Scholar
  48. Nguyen, N. T., Seers, A., & Hartman, N. S. (2008). Putting a good face on impression management: Team citizenship and team satisfaction. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 9(2), 148–168.Google Scholar
  49. Provis, C. (2010). The ethics of impression management. Business Ethics: A European Review, 19, 199–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rosenfeld, P., Giacalone, R. A., & Riordan, C. A. (1995). Impression management in organizations: Theory, measurement, practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: the costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(3), 629–645.Google Scholar
  52. Schlenker, B. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  53. Seashore, S. E., Lawler, E. E., Mirvis, P., & Cammann, C. (1982). Observing and measuring organizational change: A guide to field practice. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  54. Shulman, D. (2007). From hire to liar: The role of deception in the workplace. Ithaca, NY: ILRPress.Google Scholar
  55. Sin, H. P., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2009). Understanding why they don’t see eye to eye: An examination of leader–member exchange (LMX) agreement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(4), 1048–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Soper, D.S. (2016). A-priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models [Software]. Available from http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc.
  57. Stevens, C. K., & Kristof, A. L. (1995). Making the right impression: A field study of applicant impression management during job interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 587–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Swann, W. B. (1983). Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self. Social Psychological Perspectives on the Self, 2, 33–66.Google Scholar
  59. Swann, W. B. (1987). Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1038–1051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Swann, W. B. (1999). Resilient identities: Self, relationships, and the construction of social reality. Basic books: New York.Google Scholar
  61. Swann, W. B. (2011). Self-verification theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology, 2, 23–42.Google Scholar
  62. Swann, W. B., Chang-Schneider, C., & McClarty, K. L. (2007). Do people’s self-views matter? Self-concept and self-esteem in everyday life. American Psychologist, 62(2), 84–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Swann, W. B., Milton, L. P., & Polzer, J. T. (2000). Should we create a niche or fall in line? Identity negotiation and small group effectiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(2), 238–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Swann, W. B., Pelham, B. W., & Krull, D. S. (1989). Agreeable fancy or disagreeable truth? Reconciling self-enhancement and self-verification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(5), 782–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Swann, W. B., Rentfrow, P. J., & Guinn, J. S. (2003). Self-verification: The search for coherence. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 367–383). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  66. Swann, W. B., Stein-Seroussi, A., & Giesler, R. B. (1992). Why people self-verify. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 392–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wayne, S. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wayne, S. J., & Kacmar, K. M. (1991). The effects of impression management on the performance appraisal process. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48, 70–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wayne, S. J., & Liden, R. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: A longitudinal study. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 232–260.Google Scholar
  70. Westland, J. C. (2010). Lower bounds on sample size in structural equation modeling. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9, 476–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Williams, L. J., & Anderson, S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., & Nowak, A. (2002). Affect and processing dynamics: Perceptual fluency enhances evaluations. Emotional Cognition: From Brain to Behaviour, 44, 111–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Zivnuska, S., Kacmar, K. M., Witt, L. A., Carlson, D. S., & Bratton, V. K. (2004). Interactive effects of impression management and organizational politics on job performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(5), 627–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne S. Crawford
    • 1
    Email author
  • K. Michele (Micki) Kacmar
    • 2
  • Kenneth J. Harris
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Management, College of BusinessUniversity of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Management, McCoy College of Business AdministrationTexas State UniversitySan MarcosUSA
  3. 3.School of BusinessIndiana University SoutheastNew AlbanyUSA

Personalised recommendations