The moderating effect of leadership on the relationship between personality and performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To examine how personality and leadership influence efficiency in the nursing service environment. BACKGROUND: Leadership and personality contribute to the success and failure of a unit. However, how they interact to influence performance is still understudied. METHODS: We used matched pairs sample design to survey 135 head nurses and 1353 registered nurses on validated instruments of demographic characteristics, leadership styles and personality during June and July of 2014. Efficiency was calculated using Data Envelopment Analysis. Tobit regression was used for analysis. RESULTS: High conscientiousness and low neuroticism were significantly associated with higher efficiency. Particularly, under the initiating structure leadership style, high conscientiousness, high extraversion, high agreeableness, high openness and low neuroticism were related to higher efficiency. Openness would improve efficiency under a low consideration leadership style. CONCLUSIONS: Most personality traits were related to higher efficiency under the initiating leadership style. Only openness would improve leaders' efficiency under a high initiating structure and a low consideration leadership style. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Considering personality as one factor of selecting head nurses, selecting the right person can improve the fit between individuals and organisations, which in turn, improves job performance. Training head nurses to develop better leadership styles in nurses is another way to enhance efficiency.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".