The view over one's shoulder: The causes and consequences of leader's envy of followers

We propose a social comparison-based framework in which leaders' meta-perceptions of power relative to their followers can be a source of envy, which can then lead to varied behaviors. We provide a model summarizing the main points of this framework, and develop propositions discussing how and when these effects operate. We start by discussing why perceived power differentials between leader and follower are expected to cause envy in the leader-follower relationship, and the contingencies that might affect such relationships. We then discuss how the aversive character of envy can provoke different types of action on the part of leaders aimed at reducing or eliminating this emotion. Furthermore, we propose different conditions that can increase the likelihood that the leader would choose one of these courses of action over another. Finally, we end with a discussion of the implications of leader-follower social comparisons and envy for research in the leadership field and for practice.     

浅论《嫉妒》的叙述艺术

本文对<嫉妒>的叙述结构的构建、叙述者的构成和叙述语式的特点作了较为详细的分析,从而揭示了这一小说的新奇之处.文中指出,<嫉妒>采用了非线性的网状结构法构建整个作品,从而使文本产生独特的阅读效果;这部小说采用外视角为主、辅之于俯视视角的手法,使文本的叙述者别具一格;作品以竭力排除叙述中的人工因素和主观性词语的方法,构成非人格化的叙述语式,从而使文本留下众多的情感色彩空白点,这些空白点在一定程度上调动了接受者参与创作的积极性.     

The exclusion from welfare benefits: Resentment and survey attrition in a randomized controlled trial in Mexico

Public policy programs must often impose limits on who may be eligible for benefits. Despite research on the impact of exclusion in developed countries, there is little evidence on how people react to being excluded from benefits in developing societies. Utilizing repeated waves of data from an experimental evaluation of Mexico’s foundational PROGRESA antipoverty program, we examine the impact of exclusion and distinguish two separate forms. “Statistical exclusion” occurs where determination of benefits is based on randomized assignment to a treatment and control group. “Needs-based exclusion” occurs when benefits programs are designed to be selective rather than universal, basing eligibility on characteristics, like relative poverty, that are difficult to measure simply and accurately. Focusing on temporal variation in survey non-response as our behavioral outcome, we show that needs-based exclusion has much greater negative effects on continued participation than statistical exclusion. We also show that these effects are concentrated among the wealthy, that is, those furthest from the eligibility cut-off line. These findings reinforce general concerns about the validity of evaluation studies when incentives are at work. We discuss both the behavioral explanations that might underlie these findings as well as some potential approaches to reduce threats to evaluation validity.