Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings

Accurate behavioral measurement is essential to developing a science of leadership, yet accurate measurement has remained elusive. The use of follower reports of leader behavior creates challenges given that a large body of basic and applied research suggests that behavioral ratings reflect not only recall of actual behaviors, but also inferences based on semantic memory, which may vary among individuals. In this paper, we examine several explanations for rater effects that are associated with follower individual differences, contextual factors, and even research methods, such as the type of measure used, that may bias ratings of leader behavior. We also develop a conceptual model to illustrate these processes. Finally, we offer potential solutions to increase accuracy in follower reports of leader behavior.     

Do you remember? Rater memory systems and leadership measurement

Despite widespread concerns about the use of retrospective accounts of leader behavior and response tendencies associated with raters who tend to rely on semantic memory, little attention has been devoted to developing methods that move measurement processes beyond those based on semantic memory to those based on episodic memory. The results from a series of six studies demonstrate a) questionnaire items can be classified in terms of their emphasis on episodic or semantic memory and the language used in items is associated with different types of memory processes, b) scales based on episodic memory have a greater association with trust than do scales based on semantic memory, c) the procedure that requires raters to indicate whether their response to each item is based on semantic or episodic memory dramatically reduces the impact of liking on leadership ratings, and d) the memory source intervention that encourages raters to rely on episodic memory reduces false alarms in leadership ratings. Taken together, these results demonstrate that rater memory systems are an important component of the leadership rating process and that consideration of the type of memory elicited during that process can be used to improve leadership measurement.     

Tell us about your leadership style: A structured interview approach for assessing leadership behavior constructs

It is widely recognized that leadership behaviors drive leaders' success. But despite the importance of assessing leadership behavior for selection and development, current measurement practices are limited. This study contributes to the literature by examining the structured interview method as a potential approach to assess leadership behavior. To this end, we developed a structured interview measuring constructs from Yukl's (2012) leadership taxonomy. Supervisors in diverse positions participated in the interview as part of a leadership assessment program. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the assumption that leadership constructs could be assessed as distinct interview dimensions. Results further showed that interview ratings predicted a variety of leadership outcomes (supervisors' annual income, ratings of situational leader effectiveness, subordinates' well-being and affective organizational commitment) beyond other relevant predictors. Findings offer implications on how to identify leaders who have a positive impact on their subordinates, and they inform us about conceptual differences between leadership measures.     

Implications of dispositional and process views of traits for individual difference research in leadership

This article assesses the conceptual and methodological limitations associated with traditional dispositional approaches to personality and leadership, and it proposes that more process-oriented approaches will better enable leadership research to explore emergent leadership phenomena such as perception and effectiveness. By reconceptualizing the structure of the self as a dynamic, but stable entity, we maintain that an explicit focus on events as a fundamental level of analysis is needed, which will help reduce the inaccuracies of aggregate retrospective leadership measures that collapse across different situations and time. Event-level research methodologies can also help account for the effects that situational contingencies have on leader behavioral flexibility, the development of leadership skills, and leadership emergence within shared or distributive leadership structures.     

Emergence of shared leadership networks in teams: An adaptive process perspective

Adaptive leadership theory suggests that shared leadership networks grow in a complex manner. We propose that leadership decentralization (the dispersion of leadership), leadership density (the total amount of leadership), and situationally-aligned leadership (SAL: leadership transitions to those who fit situation requirements) are distinct aspects of a shared leadership network and should be examined together to capture the development of shared leadership process. Through a study of 450 participants in 90 teams, we find that each of these three aspects of shared leadership plays a different role during shared leadership network emergence. Specifically, transactive memory systems (TMS) contribute to decentralized leadership structures, which in turn precipitate more dense leadership networks. We also find that TMS contributes to the most situationally aligned team member engaging in leadership. Both leadership density and SAL predict team performance. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results.     

Social cognitive neuroscience and leadership

We provide an overview of how the emerging field of social cognitive neuroscience can be linked to leadership theory and practice. A number of challenges are addressed, including theory development, as well as technical, measurement and methodological issues. In addition, we review recent leadership research that involves neuroscience applications, as well as areas that are closely related to leadership, such as emotional regulation and ethical reasoning and decision-making. Consideration is also given to how neuroscience might inform leadership development processes. We conclude with a discussion of the institutional challenges in conducting leadership research that incorporates neuroscience, and we consider potential limitations of such applications.     

Seeing eye to eye: A meta-analysis of self-other agreement of leadership

The agreement between a leader's self-rating of leadership and ratings from the leader's subordinates, peers, and superiors (i.e., self-other agreement) is critical to understanding leadership, but questions remain regarding the extent to which leaders are aware of their behaviors. This meta-analysis investigates whether leader-observer agreement is influenced by type of observer and type of leadership. First, we examined the convergence (i.e., correlation) between leader- and observer-ratings along several dimensions of leadership (e.g., initiating structure, consideration, contingent reward, and transformational leadership). Our results indicated that leader-observer correlations were generally moderate and of similar magnitudes for task- and relation-oriented behaviors (with the exception of a strong correlation for contingent reward). Next, we compared leaders' and observers' mean-level ratings (i.e., Cohen's d), and found that leaders generally reported lower or similar levels of task-oriented behaviors but higher levels of relation-oriented behaviors. Last, several variables (e.g., sampling method and study purpose) moderated leader-observer convergence. Implications of these findings for research, theory, and practice are discussed.     

Impact of rater personality on transformational and transactional leadership ratings

This study addresses the role of rater personality in ratings of transformational and transactional leadership. In a naturalistic field study, we found that rater personality (i.e., agreeableness, openness, extraversion, and conscientiousness) was positively associated with ratings of transformational leadership, but significant rater personality effects were not found in an experimental study where leadership behavior was invariant. These results suggest that disagreements among raters about leaders' behaviors are not due solely to random error and may instead reflect true differences either in (a) the behaviors leaders exhibit toward individual followers or (b) personality-related differences between followers in attention to and recall of leadership behaviors. We also found that personality (of subordinates and peers) was not randomly distributed across leaders, though clustering effects were generally small. Practically, our results suggest that (a) individual reports of leadership may be better at predicting leadership outcomes than aggregated group reports – especially those related to individual attitudes and behaviors – though they are rarely used in the literature; (b) aggregation is complicated because rater personality is associated with leadership ratings and is not randomly distributed across leaders; and (c) corrections for measurement error based on inter-rater agreement may not be appropriate due to non-random unique rater variance.     

Strategic leadership research: Moving on

During the last 20 years, the field of strategic leadership has undergone both a rejuvenation and a metamorphosis. We argue that the essence of strategic leadership involves the capacity to learn, the capacity to change, and managerial wisdom. Against this backdrop, we first review issues related to under what conditions, when, and how strategic leadership matters. Next, we selectively review three streams of theory and research. The first is strategic leadership theory and its antecedent, Upper Echelon theory. The second stream of theory and research focuses on what Bryman has labeled the “new” leadership theories. These include charismatic, transformational, and visionary theories of leadership. The last stream of research we classify as the “emergent” theories of leadership. Among these are theories that explore behavioral and cognitive complexity as well as social intelligence. Finally, we attempt to suggest how the “new” and “emergent” theories can be integrated within what we claim is the essence of strategic leadership.     

Conceptualizing leadership perceptions as attitudes: Using attitude theory to further understand the leadership process

Leadership is one of the most examined factors in relation to understanding employee well-being and performance. While there are disparate approaches to studying leadership, they share a common assumption that perceptions of a leader's behavior determine reactions to the leader. The concept of leadership perception is poorly understood in most theoretical approaches. To address this, we propose that there are many benefits from examining leadership perceptions as an attitude towards the leader. In this review, we show how research examining a number of aspects of attitudes (content, structure and function) can advance understanding of leadership perceptions and how these affect work-related outcomes. Such a perspective provides a more multi-faceted understanding of leadership perceptions than previously envisaged and this can provide a more detailed understanding of how such perceptions affect outcomes. In addition, we examine some of the main theoretical and methodological implications of viewing leadership perceptions as attitudes to the wider leadership area. The cross-fertilization of research from the attitudes literature to understanding leadership perceptions provides new insights into leadership processes and potential avenues for further research.     

Leading well: Challenges to researching leadership in occupational health psychology – and some ways forward

ABSTRACT

Studies on the effects of leadership in occupational health psychology build on the assumption that leaders influence their followers’ health and well-being. Although this assumption has received support, this introductory paper to a special issue of Work & Stress on leadership argues that a number of questions regarding leadership and follower health and well-being remain unanswered. We identify four issues that we argue warrant further attention. First, what is “good” leadership? Particular leadership types are associated with increases in employee performance, but since this will involve higher effort expenditure, adverse outcomes for employee health are to be expected. Although many types of leadership are associated with favourable outcomes, we still need to identify the leadership characteristics can be identified that account for these positive outcomes. Second, how can good leadership be promoted? There is a need to develop interventions that are effective in promoting desirable leadership styles. Third, what are the inter-mediate and long-term effects of leadership on follower health? Finally, we need to understand the boundary conditions for good leadership, including the resources available to leaders. Based on these considerations, we conclude that further research is needed to fully understand the effects of leadership on employee health and well-being.     

Empowering leadership and managers' career perceptions: Examining effects at both the individual and the team level

In a multilevel model of leadership behavior, we investigated whether and how empowering leadership affects individuals' career perceptions. We developed a conceptual model that links empowering leadership at the individual level and at the group level (mean as well as dispersion) to individuals' career self-efficacy and career satisfaction. To test our model, we used questionnaire data from a multilevel data set of 2493 employees in leadership positions nested in 704 teams from a large German corporation. Hierarchical linear regression analyses showed that empowering leadership at the individual level was positively related to career self-efficacy, which in turn mediated the relationship between empowering leadership and career satisfaction. Empowering leadership at the group level was positively related to career self-efficacy when it was conceptualized as leadership differentiation (i.e., the standard deviation of empowering leadership ratings), but not when it was conceptualized as leadership climate (i.e., mean empowering leadership ratings). Career self-efficacy in turn mediated the relationship between empowering leadership differentiation and career satisfaction. Finally, we found a negative relationship between empowering leadership differentiation and career satisfaction.     

The relational nature of leadership identity construction: How and when it influences perceived leadership and decision-making

This paper empirically tests leadership identity construction theory (DeRue & Ashford, 2010), conceptually framing claiming and granting leadership as a negotiated process that influences leadership perceptions and decision-making in interdependent contexts. In Study 1a, an avatar video-based experimental vignette (replicated in Study 1b with a non-video scenario), we found that when a team member accepted an actor's leadership claim, observers' leadership ratings of the actor increased, whereas when the team member rejected the claim, observers' leadership ratings of the fellow team member increased. However, when an actor granted leadership, the fellow team member's response did not influence leadership ratings. Study 2 extended the conceptual model by identifying how claiming and granting influence leadership perceptions – through perceived competence – and when claiming and granting exert greatest influence, finding that women observers vary more in their responses to claiming and granting. The negotiated relational leader identity process ultimately influenced observer decision-making.     

The loci and mechanisms of leadership: Exploring a more comprehensive view of leadership theory

Through a qualitative review of the leadership literature, we derive two fundamental principles for codifying the last century of leadership theory and research: the locus and mechanism of leadership. Our systematic review and categorization of past theories suggests that further development of the follower, collective and context loci, and the affect mechanism is needed. Building on these insights, we propose that by simultaneously considering all five loci and four mechanisms in their theories, leadership scholars can advance a more comprehensive and integrative understanding of the leadership phenomenon. We then demonstrate the potential of using the locus and mechanism framework for examining and expanding current and future leadership theory including work on shared and strategic leadership.     

Economic assumptions and economic context: Implications for the study of leadership

Separated by longstanding differences, mainstream leadership scholarship and economics have rarely conversed. In this paper, we contribute to the emerging conversation between the two fields by (1) summarizing how economic assumptions about leadership may broadly inform leadership scholarship, and (2) offering a framework for conceptualizing the economic context in which leaders operate. We argue that inclusion of economic context in models of leadership antecedents, processes and outcomes is likely to offer rich insights for leadership selection, behavior, performance outcomes, and evaluation. We review recent studies that integrate economics and leadership and further consider how economic approaches both inform and refine current areas of interest to leadership scholars (e.g., shared leadership and values-based ethical, servant, and authentic approaches) and point to new pathways of focus in mainstream leadership (e.g., leader discretion).     

Extending the boundaries of strategic leadership research

This special issue was developed to extend the boundaries of strategic leadership research, to help bridge the micro-macro divide regarding theories of strategic leadership, and to bring together theories that have emerged independently. In this introductory editorial, we provide an overview of the research on strategic leadership and emphasize the need for further integration of research from the organizational behavior, industrial and organizational psychology, organizational economics, behavioral strategy, and strategic management fields. We then introduce and summarize the eleven articles we accepted for this special issue by classifying them into two broad themes: (a) Chief executive officer (CEO) characteristics and (b) the dynamics of interactions among the CEO, the top management team, and the board. Finally, we propose recent theoretical and empirical foci for advancing strategic leadership research and offer a research agenda for future research highlighting several important research questions related to extending the dialogue among scholars across the different leadership and strategy domains.     

A meta-analytic review and future research agenda of charismatic leadership

Charismatic leadership is a critical construct that draws much attention from both academic and practitioner literatures. Despite the positive attention received by the charisma construct, some have criticized its conceptualization and measurement. These critiques have, in turn, cast doubt on what we know regarding the antecedents and outcomes of charismatic leadership. In this review, we adopt a recently developed definition of charismatic leadership and then conduct a meta-analysis of its antecedents and objective outcomes. Following an examination of 76 independent studies and 36,031 individuals, results indicate that the Big Five traits and cognitive ability vary in their association with charismatic leadership. Other findings show that dimensions of charismatic leadership predict outcomes of interest, such as supervisor-rated task performance, supervisor-rated citizenship behaviors, and group or organization performance. Several shortcomings are identified, however, in testing theoretical and methodological moderating variables. The present research ultimately provides a roadmap for new frontiers in theoretical, measurement and empirical work on charismatic leadership.     

化被动为主动:共享型领导对员工主动变革行为的影响及作用机制研究

如何让员工将其工作角色外的行为,如主动变革行为,视为其角色内的行为越来越受到学者和管理者的关注。主动变革行为是指个体通过自愿的和建设性的努力来影响组织功能改变的行为,属于一种挑战性的组织公民行为。尽管以往研究对员工主动变革行为的影响因素进行了一些探讨,但主要聚焦于正式垂直领导和个体因素,鲜有研究关注团队情景因素对其的作用效果。通过问卷调查法,以69个部门和262名员工的配对数据为样本,本研究考察了共享型领导对员工主动变革行为的影响及作用机制。跨层次分析结果表明:(1)共享型领导对员工主动变革行为有积极影响;(2)主动变革行为的角色定义与和谐工作激情会分别中介共享型领导与员工主动变革行为之间的关系;(3)领导-成员交换质量会分别调节共享型领导与员工角色宽度自我效能与和谐工作激情之间的关系,领导-成员交换质量越高,共享型领导对员工角色宽度自我效能与和谐工作激情的积极作用越显著;(4)领导-成员交换质量会调节共享型领导通过角色宽度自我效能对员工主动变革行为的间接作用,领导-成员交换质量越高,这一间接作用越显著。     

The role of leadership self-efficacy and stereotype activation on cardiovascular,behavioral and self-report responses in the leadership domain

This research examines female leaders' responses to the gender–leader stereotype and the role of leadership self-efficacy in these responses. Using the biopsychosocial model of threat and challenge, this laboratory experiment examined women's cardiovascular, behavioral (i.e., performance), and self-report responses to the negative female leader stereotype as a function of leadership efficacy. Female participants, selected on leadership efficacy scores, served as leaders of ostensible three-person groups within an immersive virtual environment. Half were explicitly primed with the negative stereotype. As predicted, women with high, as opposed to low, percepts of leadership self-efficacy exhibited cardiovascular patterns of threat when performing the leadership task, and they performed better in the explicit stereotype activation condition compared to those not explicitly primed. Additionally, this threat was consistent with positive reactance responses on behavioral and self-report measures. Low efficacy leaders were not threatened, but they did show stereotype priming effects by assimilating to the negative stereotype on the self-report and behavioral measures. This research provides greater insight into stereotype reactance effects and highlights the role of self-efficacy in moderating stereotype threat and stereotype priming effects.     

‘Let's share!’ The mediating role of employees' self-determination in the relationship between transformational and shared leadership and perceived knowledge sharing among peers

Building on social-exchange and self-determination theory, this study aimed to contribute to the scholarly literature on leadership and knowledge sharing by simultaneously testing how shared and transformational leadership and their interrelatedness may foster employees' perceptions of knowledge sharing behaviour among peers. Additionally, we investigated the mediating role of employees' basic psychological needs satisfaction (in terms of autonomy, competence and relatedness, respectively) as an additional explanatory mechanism to reveal how shared and transformational leadership may foster individuals' perceptions of knowledge sharing behaviour among peers. We employed PLS structural equation modelling to analyse survey data obtained from professionals in an R&D unit of a knowledge-intensive firm. We found shared leadership to be the most important factor enhancing employees' perceptions of knowledge sharing among peers, both directly and indirectly through employees' satisfaction of the need for autonomy. Transformational leadership was found to foster employees' knowledge sharing ultimately, through shared leadership and the need for autonomy satisfaction. We concluded that shared forms of leadership supplemented with transformational leadership on the part of formal leaders are important in contemporary work environments as they can foster employees' perceptions of knowledge sharing among peers and contribute towards employees' self-determination, which ultimately enhances perceptions of knowledge sharing among peers.