Exemplifying “Us”: Integrating social identity theory of leadership with cognitive models of categorization

Identity leadership theorizing suggests that leadership effectiveness derives from a potential leader’s perceived ability to create, embody, promote, and embed a shared group identity. However, little is known about how people integrate this information to form a judgment of a leader. We use cognitive modeling to operationalize leadership judgments as exemplar-and prototype-based categorization processes. Analysis of attribute rating data for 80 highly recognizable Americans revealed that leadership judgments were well-characterized by an exemplar-based model. Judgments were based overwhelmingly on promoting shared collective interests and embedding group identity. The pattern of attribute weightings was consistent for judgments of a general leadership role (i.e., as a competent leader) as well as judgments for a specific leadership role (i.e., as an effective US president). We discuss the implications of these findings for our understanding of identity leadership as well as for integrated social-cognitive models of individuals’ judgements of and responses to leaders.     

Eight puzzles of leadership science

In the early 1900s, David Hilbert introduced a set of 23 mathematical problems. These problems caught the imagination of mathematicians around the world for the coming century and beyond. The advantage of such defined scientific puzzles is to galvanize coordinated efforts to pursue key scientific questions, whose answers can also address the grand challenges faced by society. Consequently, science can advance more quickly in a theory-driven, rigorous, open and collaborative manner, with meaningful implications for stakeholders. In the current editorial, I propose eight puzzles that could similarly motivate and guide leadership science. Whereas this list is not exhaustive--rather it is just eight starting points--beginning to solve such puzzles will accelerate our science and deliver on shared promises to our stakeholders. I then present actionable guidelines necessary to solve these puzzles and conclude by discussing the role The Leadership Quarterly will play in facilitating the pursuit of solutions to these puzzles.     

Is a disease leader attractive? Six tests of whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected follower preferences for attractiveness,health and other traits in political and non-political leaders

Attractive political candidates receive more votes on Election Day compared to their less attractive competitors. One well-cited theoretical account for this attractiveness effect (White et al., 2013) holds that it reflects an adaptive psychological response to disease threats. Voters are predicted to upregulate preferences for attractiveness because it constitutes a cue to health. The global COVID-19 pandemic constitutes an ecologically relevant and realistic setting for further testing this prediction. Here, we report the results from six tests of the prediction based on two large and nationally representative surveys conducted in Denmark (n = 3297) at the outbreak of the pandemic and one year later. Utilizing experimental techniques, validated individual difference measures of perceived disease threat and geographic data on COVID-19 severity, we do not find that disease threats like the COVID-19 pandemic upregulate preferences for attractive and healthy political or non-political leaders. Instead, respondents display heightened preferences for health in socially proximate relations (i.e. colleagues). Moreover, individuals who react aversively to situations involving risks of pathogen transmission (scoring high in Germ Aversion) report higher importance of a wide range of leadership traits, rather than for health and attractiveness in particular. Results are discussed in relation to evolutionary accounts of leadership and followership.     

Perceptions of ethical climate and organizational justice as antecedents to employee performance: The mediating role of employees' attributions of leader effectiveness

The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the mediating role of employee attributions of leader effectiveness on relationships between perceptions of (a) ethical climate and (b) organizational justice and both positive and negative types of performance. We argue that these relatively under-investigated perceptions are critical antecedents to effective productivity in the workplace. Accordingly, this study is the first to examine the associations of both ethical climate and organizational justice on both positive and negative performance within the context of mediation via employee attributions of leader effectiveness. Based on online survey data from 2486 Romanian employees, our SEM-based findings reveal that the attribution of leader effectiveness functions as a mediator between the associations of ethical climate and justice perceptions on two distinct types of performance: (1) Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) and (2) Counterproductive Work Behaviors (CWB).Additionally, the results revealed that trait negative affect moderates the mediating role of leader effectiveness with OCB but not with CWB. This study contributes to the recent and growing interest in the mediating role of attributions regarding work performance. Several theoretical contributions and practical implications are discussed concerning leader-specific attributions, employee empowerment, and employee performance. Most prominently, we discuss why individuals with strong trait negative affect may engage in CWB without the influence of ethical climate or organizational justice.     

Does leadership still not need emotional intelligence? Continuing “The Great EI Debate”

The study of emotional intelligence (EI) in the field of leadership, and in the organizational sciences in general, has often been characterized by controversy and criticism. But the study of EI has nonetheless persisted by developing new measures and models to address these concerns. In a prior letter exchange by Antonakis, Ashkanasy, and Dasborough (2009), two author teams debated the role of EI in the leadership literature, but also set an agenda for research and reconciliation for the future. The present exchange revisits these arguments using evidence accumulated over the past decade. Specifically, the authors debate not only the evidence for the predictive power of EI for workplace outcomes, but also the validity of EI as a construct, the measurement of EI, and the appropriateness of analytical tests for establishing the value of EI. Although the author teams agree on the value of the study of emotions and the need for rigorous research in this area, they nonetheless propose alternative agendas and priorities for the future. Further, they conclude that the issues identified in this exchange are not unique to the study of EI; but should also serve to inform the study of other personality factors and leadership more broadly.     

Leadership with Imperfect Monitoring

This paper provides experimental evidence on how monitoring intensity shapes the impact of leadership instruments like leading-by-example and punishment. The results show that, with low monitoring intensity, neither leading-by-example nor punishment increases cooperation if the leader can already send nonbinding signals about desired behavior. We identify two different reasons for this effect. Regarding leading-by-example, it is the cautiousness of the leader. Leaders are reluctant to recommend cooperative behavior and act accordingly, even though followers are particularly reciprocal in this context. Regarding punishment, it is the level of monitoring that matters. Monitoring of individual follower behavior increases the cooperation of leaders and followers across all treatments, but in particular, if the leader can punish uncooperative behavior. This result implies that monitoring in itself does not have a negative impact on the inclination to cooperate. It suggests that any motivational crowding out effect derives from a leader’s choice of monitoring, as it signals low trust in the followers. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications.     

The effect of charismatic leaders on followers’ memory,error detection,persuasion and prosocial behavior: A cognitive science approach

Adopting a cognitive and follower-centric approach to charismatic leadership, we hypothesized that followers show lower levels of cognitive effort, reflected in superficial processing of factually correct information when listening to and viewing a charismatic leader. We conducted two experiments, using a 2 (charismatic versus neutral) × 2 (female versus male leader) between-subjects design and videos of trained actors delivering a speech. We examined the effects of leader charisma on (1a) followers’ ability to detect factually false information, (1b) accuracy to remember information from the leader (study 1, N = 100), (2a) the persuasiveness of factual messages, (2b) followers’ prosocial behavior and (2c) the mediating effect of the leader’s persuasiveness on followers’ prosocial behavior (study 2, N = 140). We did not find support for the effect of leader charisma on detecting false information, the persuasiveness of messages, or increased prosocial behavior among followers. We found an effect of leader charisma on memory. Participants recognized fewer messages in the charismatic compared to the neutral leader conditions. Exploratory analyses provided mixed results for an interaction effect of leader charisma and sex on detecting and remembering false information. Our studies offer first insights into the cognitive outcomes of the charismatic signaling process.     

Testing the generalizability of the white leadership standard in the post-Obama era

Over a decade ago, Rosette, Leonardelli, and Phillips (2008) conducted a study on race and business leader prototypes and discovered that participants held an implicit “white leadership standard”. As revealed in that study, such a standard introduces racial bias into the leadership categorization process, and places employees from racial minority groups at a disadvantage as they seek to attain leadership roles. However, in the last decade, broader trends and events in American society (e.g., the Obama presidency; the Harris Vice Presidency; an increase in minority business leader representation; changing demographics) have altered the socio-cultural context in which implicit leadership theories (ILTs) develop, hence offering the possibility that leadership models may have become amenable to change. The present study set out to retest the theoretical hypotheses of Rosette et al. (2008) in a direct/close replication study to examine the extent to which the findings generalize to a new sample within this new era. Across four experimental studies, results reveal more racially inclusive leadership perceptions than previously observed, as well as a weakened and context-dependent white leadership standard.