WHAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DIFFERENT TO ... - SUPERIORS COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING

When superiors consider what must have been changed in order for emplo yees to have shown different (better or worse) achievements is called counterfactual thinking (see Kahneman & Miller, 1986; Kahneman & Tvers ky, 1982; Wells & Gavanski, 1989). Counterfactual thinking can have po sitive affective consequences, makes the need for change apparent, and may lead to improved performance (Roese, 1997). In this study N = 60 superiors were instructed to produce counterfactual thoughts to mental ly simulate antecedents of co-workers, performance which might have le d to better or worse achievement. The findings show that superiors str ess their own influence in changing those employees who are average. I mproving poor performances is seen as the duty of the employees themse lves. To mentally simulate the ''better'' employees superiors introduc e new antecedents, whereas they mentally subtract real obstacles when simulating negative developments. The results are discussed in terms o f their practical implications. Key words: attribution, leadership, co unterfactual thinking.