Scott N. Taylor, University of New Mexico, and David S. Bright, Wright State University, published “Open-Mindedness and Defensiveness in Multisource Feedback Processes: A Conceptual Framework” in Online First in The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. Professor Taylor and Professor Bright provided a reflection upon the article in their responses below.
Who is the target audience for this article?
Both scholars and practitioners. Specifically, our work is most relevant to those who work with or conduct research on leader/employee/ organizational development, leader and employee assessment, and resistance to change.
What inspired you to be interested in this topic?
We are interested in how organizations can better help leaders grow and development by being more open. We have witnessed the effectiveness of many approaches to reach that goal. We also found that the topic of openness and defensiveness related to multisource feedback had not be sufficiently explored in the literature.
Were there findings that were surprising to you?
That there was not a conceptual framework available to scholars and practitioners that rests on creating conditions of open-mindedness to feedback to help evaluate multisource feedback assessment effectiveness.
How do you see this study influencing future research and/or practice?
Hopefully it will inspire scholars to ask a new set of research questions related to multisource feedback assessment. For practitioners, we hope our paper is a catalyst for change in how multisource feedback assessments and the coaching that goes with them is conducted. The end result of both of these will be better leader development in organizations.
How does this study fit into your body of work/line of research?
Scott researches leadership development and tools used to help leaders develop, like multisource feedback assessment. David studies organizational change and development. We brought our interests together to look at how organizations can look at a widely used tool (multisource feedback assessment) differently and what the implications would be if they did so. That said, we think our work and the principles we discuss have application to many other approaches and tools used for leader development and organizational change.
How did your paper change during the review process?
We became more clear on how to convey our message. We became more focused on the organizational development (OD) perspective of our work rather than just a focus on the individual.
What, if anything, would you do differently if you could go back and do this study again?
Not a thing. It was a great learning journey, and we look forward to further testing and explore what we have written up for JABS.