Business Employees/Individual Contributors/Members/Adults
The purpose of this study was to use confirmatory factor analysis
techniques to examine the construct validity of one multisource measure of
transformational leadership – the Leadership Practices Inventory for Individual
The self-rating sample consisted of graduate students
pursing an MBA at a large western university (N=416). Supervisor (N=323), peer
(N=687) and subordinate (N=156) raters were completed by individuals selected
in each of these positions by the target manager. Internal reliabilities for this
sample ranged from .73 to .86 for self-ratings, .84 to .90 for supervisor ratings, .81
to .89 for peer ratings, and .79 to .90 for subordinate ratings.
For all rater groups, the five-factor model fit best, followed by
the five-factor model with a higher-order factor, and lastly, the one-factor model.
Constraining the factor loadings to be invariant across rating groups “did not result
in a significant loss of fit, suggesting that different raters (self, supervisor, peer,
and subordinate) held similar conceptualizations of the transformational leadership
constructs measured by the LPI-IC......Results from this study lend support to the
assertion that conceptualizations of transformational leadership are similar for
individuals at different levels in the organization” (p. 27).
“Compared to other leadership constructs, transformational leadership may
be recognized by individuals at all levels of the organization because of its
universality – the fact that regardless of an individual’s station or culture,
conceptualizations of transformational leadership will be similar” (p. 27-28).
“This study is unique in that it establishes the factorial invariance of the
LPI-IC across rater sources” (p. 29)....suggesting that “while dimensions of the
LPI-IC may be highly correlated, they may each be measuring an important and
distinct facet of transformational leadership” (p. 30).
The author concludes: “The finding of factorial invariance supports the use
of the LPI-IC as a multisource feedback measure in business and educational
settings and suggests that raters from difference sources do not necessarily view
leadership performance differently. These findings should be good news to
consultants, educators, and others that frequently use ratings from the LPI and LPI-IC from different organizational constituents in the service of leadership
development, or even pay and promotion decisions (Conger, 1999; Kouzes &
Posner, 1995, 2002; Posner & Kouzes, 1993). The finding of factorial invariance
establishes a necessary prerequisite for comparing scores across raters on different
LPI-IC dimensions” (p. 32).