Personality, Leadership Style, and Theoretical Orientation as Predictors of Group Co-Leadership Satisfaction

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to predict group co-leader satisfaction using personality, leadership style, and perceived compatibility of theoretical orientation. Fifty-four co-leader pairs (n = 108 group leaders) completed the NEO–Five Factor Inventory, Leadership Characteristics Inventory, Co-Therapy Relationship Questionnaire, and Co-Therapist Inventory. Co-leaders’ perceptions of theoretical compatibility, and differences in co-leader confrontational style, best predicted co-leader relationship satisfaction. In addition, co-leaders who selected their own co-therapist and those in experienced pairs were significantly more satisfied. Implications and recommendations for future research and for selection of co-leadership pairs and supervision of co-led groups are discussed.

Keywords:

• co-leadership
• compatibility
• leadership behavior
• personality
• satisfaction

Notes

Significant at p < .05; p < .01.

CI = Average Score for Co-Therapist Inventory; NEO–FFI = NEO-Five Factor Inventory; CTRQ = Co-Therapy Relationship Questionnaire; LCI = Leadership Characteristics Inventory; TSDQ = Therapist Self-Description Questionnaire; DN = Difference Score for Neuroticism (NEO); DE = Difference Score for Extraversion (NEO); DO = Difference Score for Openness to Experience (NEO); DA = Difference Score for Agreeableness (NEO); DC = Difference Score for Conscientiousness (NEO); AN = Average Score for Neuroticism (NEO); AE = Average Score for Extraversion (NEO); AO = Average Score for Openness to Experience (NEO); AA = Average Score for Agreeableness (NEO); AC = Average Score for Conscientiousness (NEO); CT1 = Average Theoretical Compatibility (CTRQ); L1 = Difference Score for Confrontation (LCI); L2 = Difference Score for Verbal Activity (LCI); L3 = Difference Score for Empathy (LCI); L4 = Difference Score for Structure Preference (LCI).

Note. R² = .075 for the entire equation.

Note. R² = .205 for the entire equation.

Note. R² = .284 for the entire equation.

Significant at *p < .05.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Karen Bridbord

Karen Bridbord, Ph.D., is an independent organizational consultant and executive coach, based in New York.

Janice DeLucia-Waack

Janice DeLucia-Waack, Ph.D., is an associate professor in the Department of Counseling, School, and Educational Psychology and director of the School Counseling Program at the University at Buffalo, State University of New York.