Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader and leadership development

The scientific advancement of leader and leadership development has offered various conceptualizations and operationalizations of evaluation criteria. However, because the complex learning that occurs during leader and leadership development is typically ignored, current leader and leadership development evaluation criteria do not fully capture the multidimensional and temporal nature of learning which serves as a critical mediating mechanism between training and more distal outcomes. Further, evaluations of leadership programs tend to focus on individual (i.e., leader development) outcomes without consideration of collective (i.e., leadership development) outcomes. Thus, we present a comprehensive typology of leader and leadership development learning outcomes that elucidates the multidimensional and multilevel nature of such outcomes and provides greater construct definition and precision. Our purpose is to integrate multiple theoretical perspectives, generating a more precise classification to provide researchers and practitioners assistance in 1) designing and evaluating the effectiveness of leader and leadership development, and 2) clarifying the limits of generalizability of both conceptualizations and empirical research across learning outcomes.     

Same difference? Exploring the differential mechanisms linking servant leadership and transformational leadership to follower outcomes

This paper aimed to provide insights into the different mediating mechanisms through which servant leadership (SL) and transformational leadership (TFL) affect followers. We also investigated environmental uncertainty as a moderator of the effects of servant leadership and transformational leadership. Based on the results of two experimental studies and one field study, we concluded that both SL and TFL were related to organizational commitment and work engagement; however, the manner in which they exerted their influence differed. SL worked primarily through follower need satisfaction, whereas TFL worked mainly through perceived leadership effectiveness. The moderating influence of uncertainty was inconsistent across the studies.     

Just how multi-level is leadership research? A document co-citation analysis 1980–2013 on leadership constructs and outcomes

The use of multi-level theories and methodologies in leadership has gained momentum in recent years. However, the leadership field still suffers from a fragmented and unclear evolution and practice of multi-level approaches. The questions of how and to what extent multi-level research has evolved in both leadership phenomena and leadership outcomes, and which informal research networks drove this evolution, remain vastly unexplored. In this study, the extent of literature published between 1980 and 2013 is analyzed using a document co-citation analysis and invisible colleges' framework. This allows us to map the evolution of the multi-level intellectual structure of the leadership field. Specifically, we identify a number of distinct colleges – their conceptualization of leadership and outcomes – and trace their evolution paths over thirty years. We find a considerable fragmentation of the field, with the usage of multi-level leadership conceptualization mostly embraced by more peripheral clusters. Finally we discuss implications for further research with regard to a set of distinct trajectories for the future evolution of multi-level approaches in the leadership domain.     

Are there advantages to seeing leadership the same? A test of the mediating effects of LMX on the relationship between ILT congruence and employees' development

Although there has been an increased interest in implicit leadership theories (ILTs) over the last two decades, only a handful of studies have examined the effects of ILT congruence among leader-follower dyads. Just as important, this research has largely suggested few effects for ILT congruence, focused exclusively on prototype congruence, examined a limited number of potential outcomes, and has failed to examine questions about ILT congruence utilizing the most appropriate statistical approaches. We examine the effects of ILT congruence, with an explicit focus on the possibility that congruence between supervisors and their employees on both prototypes and antiprototypes impacts the LMX developed within their dyads. We predict that LMX, in turn, affects employees' opportunities to engage in developmental activities. Using a sample of 74 matched pairs of supervisors and employees and polynomial regression and response surface methodology, we found that congruence between supervisors' and employees' prototypes positively influenced LMX. We also found limited evidence that LMX explained the effects of this congruence on employees' engagement in developmental activities. Although we found no evidence of antiprototype congruence effects, supervisors who rated antiprototypical traits as characteristic of leaders had lower LMX with their employees.     

When do leaders sacrifice?: The effects of sense of power and belongingness on leader self-sacrifice

Past research on leader self-sacrifice has focused entirely on the effects of this leader behavior on followers and its implications for organizations. The present research focused on antecedents of leader self-sacrifice. We argued that self-sacrifice is positively influenced by leaders' sense of belongingness to the group they supervise. Furthermore, leaders' subjectively sensed power can serve as a moderator of this effect. We expected this because a high sense of power is known to facilitate goal pursuit. Given that organizational goals often prescribe serving the interests of the organization, leaders' sense of belongingness should promote self-sacrifice particularly among leaders low in subjective power; leaders high in subjective power should display self-sacrifice regardless of their sense of belongingness. Two field studies supported these predictions. A final experiment supported a critical assumption underlying our argument in showing that the sense of power × sense of belongingness interaction is restricted to situations that prescribe cooperative goals. When situations prescribe competitive goals, this interaction was absent.     

What explains cultural differences in leadership styles? On the agricultural origins of participative and directive leadership

Why do we observe either participative or directive leadership in organizations? I test an evolutionary-informed theory suggesting that organizational leadership is currently less participative (i.e., close supervision, rare delegation) among societies that used intensive forms of agriculture in the past. Intensification caused increased social complexity and skewed power distribution, promoting the emergence of directive leaders and eventually shaping followers' preferences for and perceptions of leadership. Combining evidence, secondary data, and methods developed in economics, anthropology, and applied psychology, I document a negative relationship between traditional agricultural intensity and followers' participative leadership prototypes. I then study the link between traditional agriculture and reliance on delegation to subordinates across firms. I discuss competing hypotheses, explore the interplay between traditional agriculture and organizational-level factors, and show that traditional agricultural intensity does not predict most other leadership prototypes and management practices. Implications for leadership theory–with a focus on evolutionary approaches–are finally discussed.     

At the crux of dyadic leadership: Self–other agreement of leaders and direct reports — Analyzing 360-degree feedback

The purpose of this research is to investigate the use of dyads instead of whole rating groups for analyzing 360° feedback. A Center for Creative Leadership sample of direct subordinates was matched with their focal leaders (J = 4810 dyads). Two CCL Benchmark scales (Building & Mending Relationships and Problems with Interpersonal Relationships) were used to determine if this dyadic pairing produced high self–other agreement (SOA). Using Within and Between Analysis (WABA), results suggest the viability of detecting unitary, whole dyadic effects only under specific boundary conditions. Other conditions produced highly dispersed dyadic results. Thus, dyadic convergence is not a universal phenomenon in these data. Tying the dyadic results back to the original rater group's consistency as reported in Markham, Smith et al. (2014), those rater groups with high internal agreement form clearer dyadic pairings when compared to rater groups that were moderate or low in agreement. Implications and future directions are discussed.     

Do leadership role occupancy and transformational leadership share the same genetic and environmental influences?

Using data collected from 107 pairs of identical and 89 pairs of fraternal female twins, this study examined the genetic and environmental associations between transformational leadership and leadership role occupancy. Results show that 78% of the covariance between the two leadership variables was attributable to overlapping genetic factors, while 22% of the covariance to overlapping environmental factors. In particular, 13% (2%) of the variance in leadership role occupancy was accounted for by the same genetic (environmental) factors related to transformational leadership. Unique sets of genetic and environmental variables, which are not associated with transformational leadership, explained 16% and 69% of the variance in leadership role occupancy, respectively. The results suggest that multiple manifestations of leadership (i.e., transformational leadership and leadership role occupancy) are differentially heritable. Although the association between these two variables is largely due to overlapping genetic rather than environmental factors, unique (i.e., non-overlapping) genetic and environmental influences still play an important role in impacting these leadership variables.     

Diabolical dictators or capable commanders? An investigation of the differential effects of autocratic leadership on team performance

Autocratic leader behavior is often seen as negative for team morale and performance. However, theories on social hierarchy suggest that autocratic leadership may also positively affect morale and performance through the creation of a psychologically appealing, hierarchically-ordered environment of predictability and security. We propose that autocratic leadership can foster team psychological safety when team members accept the hierarchy within the team. In contrast, when members challenge the hierarchy and engage in intrateam power struggles, autocratic leaders' centralizing power behaviors will clash with team members' competition for power and frustrate members, impairing psychological safety and performance. We find support for these ideas in a study of 60 retail outlets (225 employees and their managers) in the financial services industry. As expected, when team power struggles were low, autocratic leadership was positively related to team psychological safety, and thereby indirectly positively related to team performance. When team power struggles were high, autocratic leadership was negatively related to team psychological safety and thereby indirectly negatively related to team performance. These effects were also found when controlling for leader consideration.     

Out of sight and out of mind? A literature review of occupational safety and health leadership and management of distributed workers

Distributed workers – those who work autonomously and remotely from their organisation’s main locations for at least some of their work-time – are an important and growing proportion of the workforce that share common characteristics of temporal and spatial distance. Yet, many leadership styles and management practices assume face-to-face interaction, potentially rendering them less helpful in trying to ensure good occupational safety and health (OSH) outcomes for distributed workers. We conducted a systematic literature review to examine the leadership and management of OSH for distributed workers. Twenty-three papers were identified. Eleven papers identified established leadership styles, including leader-member exchange, (safety specific) transformational and considerate leadership. Twenty papers examined management. Findings from these 20 papers were interpreted as representing resources, deployed through management and utilised by managers to ensure OSH for distributed workers, including communication technologies, social support and a good safety climate. Despite limited research in this area, findings indicate the importance of both leadership and management in ensuring OSH for distributed workers. Findings suggest a fertile area for future enquiry.     

‘One MBA?’ How context impacts the development of post-MBA career outcomes

Using survey data from alumni of one of the UK's earliest and largest MBA programmes we explore how career capital, career outcomes and career satisfaction are impacted by learner context. We adopt comparative capitalisms theory to investigate whether graduates from a standardised programme marketed as ‘One MBA’ report broadly similar career outcomes irrespective of their work and study location. We find that despite the rhetoric around globalisation in management education there are differences that fit the theories of comparative capitalisms literature; thus supporting the view that, despite the global nature of MBA branding, context still plays a role in shaping learning and career outcomes as evidenced by differences reported here. Significant findings are reported in terms of the reported development of career capital ‘knowing how’; career satisfaction and perceived organisational support, however differences in terms of the achievement of objective career success (promotion and career mobility) were less pronounced.     

Emotional labor and leadership: A threat to authenticity?

Building on the emotional labor and authentic leadership literatures, we advance a conceptual model of leader emotional displays. Three categories of leader emotional displays are identified: surface acting, deep acting and genuine emotions. The consistency of expressed leader emotions with affective display rules, together with the type of display chosen, combines to impact the leader's felt authenticity, the favorability of follower impressions, and the perceived authenticity of the leader by the followers. Emotional intelligence, self-monitoring ability, and political skill are proposed as individual differences that moderate leader emotional display responses to affective events. We also look at followers' trust in the leader and leader well-being as key outcomes. Finally, we explore the influence on leader emotional labor of contextual dimensions of the environment, including the omnibus (national and organizational culture, industry and occupation, organizational structure, time) and discrete (situational) context. Directions for future research are discussed.     

What do people desire in their leaders? The role of leadership level on trait desirability

Do individuals desire different traits in leaders dependent on the leader's position in the organizational hierarchy? To address this question, participants first rated the traits they perceived their current supervisor possessed, traits they desired in their supervisor, and traits they viewed were characteristic of a leader in that role (Study 1). Next, participants rated the desirability of these same traits for 6 high-level and 6 low-level leaders (Study 2). Finally, to force them to prioritize traits, participants designed ideal high-level or low-level leaders by “purchasing” leadership traits using limited budgets of tokens (Study 3). Overall, participants highly and consistently desired trustworthiness and intelligence across leaders, yet they differentially desired other traits depending on the level of leadership. In addition, the desired–current discrepancy predicted leader–member exchange, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment, even after controlling for the prototype–current discrepancy. We discuss the implications of these findings for leadership selection, development, and promotion.     

How Do Regulations Affect SMEs? A Review of the Qualitative Evidence and a Research Agenda

The effects of regulations on small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) have garnered significant political attention internationally, yet, in the academic literature, these effects remain contested. This article presents findings from a systematic literature review of qualitative evidence on the effects of regulation on SMEs. It sets out the strengths of qualitative approaches in relation to more prominent and influential quantitative approaches. It conducts a thematic synthesis of the qualitative research to develop a conceptual framework that provides a processual, embedded understanding of the effects of regulations on SMEs. The conceptual framework highlights four key, interconnected processes: identification–interpretation; strategization; negotiation; and adaptation. This conceptual framework generates insights into dynamic and potentially indirect effects of regulations in relation to a complex array of influences external to and within the business. On the basis of these insights a new research agenda is proposed.     

State extraversion and emergent leadership: Do introverts emerge as leaders when they act like extraverts?

Extraverts are more likely than introverts to emerge as leaders, however little is known about the explicit behaviours that cause such an advantage and what introverts can do to overcome their relative disadvantage. Utilising an experiment (n = 601) in a group context, we assessed the effects of manipulating state extraversion on peer-rated emergent leadership, self-rated emergent leadership, and post-activity affect. Participants completed a big five personality measure and were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: a control condition, an ‘act extraverted’ treatment, or an ‘act introverted’ treatment. Results confirmed extraverts' emergent leadership advantage but demonstrated that state extraversion was the proximal cause of emergent leadership, with both extraverts and introverts emerging as leaders when instructed to act extraverted. Acting introverted i) had a particularly deleterious effect on self-rated emergent leadership regardless of trait extraversion, ii) caused a reduction in positive affect for ambiverts and extraverts but not for introverts, and iii) caused an increase in negative affect for ambiverts and extraverts but not for introverts.     

Born to lead? A twin design and genetic association study of leadership role occupancy

We address leadership emergence and the possibility that there is a partially innate predisposition to occupy a leadership role. Employing twin design methods on data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, we estimate the heritability of leadership role occupancy at 24%. Twin studies do not point to specific genes or neurological processes that might be involved. We therefore also conduct association analysis on the available genetic markers. The results show that leadership role occupancy is associated with rs4950, a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) residing on a neuronal acetylcholine receptor gene (CHRNB3). We replicate this family-based genetic association result on an independent sample in the Framingham Heart Study. This is the first study to identify a specific genotype associated with the tendency to occupy a leadership position. The results suggest that what determines whether an individual occupies a leadership position is the complex product of genetic and environmental influences, with a particular role for rs4950.     

Revisiting the mediating role of trust in transformational leadership effects: Do different types of trust make a difference?

This study examines the mediating effects of cognitive and affective trust on the relationship between follower perceptions of transformational leadership behavior and their work outcomes. Using data obtained from 318 supervisor–subordinate dyads from a manufacturing organization located in mainland China, structural equation modeling results revealed that affective trust fully mediated the relationships between transformational leadership and the work outcomes of followers, including their affective organizational commitment, organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), and job performance. In contrast, cognitive trust negatively mediated the relationship between transformational leadership and follower job performance, and had insignificant effects on their affective organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviors. These findings highlight the importance of affective trust as a mechanism which translates transformational leadership into positive work outcomes for the organization.     

When do leaders matter? Ownership,governance and the influence of CEOs on firm performance

Leadership and strategic management research suggests that the extent to which CEOs influence performance largely depends on the presence or absence of certain factors. These factors may include the characteristics of the task at hand, subordinates, the organization itself or the external environment. Among these factors, a fundamental contingency that has received little empirical attention is an organization's ownership and governance structure—that is, who owns and monitors the organization. In this paper, we outline how different ownership and governance structures can present the opportunity for, or limit, leader influence and empirically examine the extent to which CEO effects on financial performance depend on these structures. Examining organizations in the same industry but with different ownership and governance structures, our results suggest that these structures are closely aligned with the degree to which CEOs influence firm performance. Our findings support the notion that leaders matter most when ownership and governance structures correspond with a weak or ambiguous institutional logic. This study contributes new insight into the “opportunity structure” of CEO influence, that is, the organizational factors that shape leader discretion and, hence, condition the CEO's level of influence over firm performance.