Procedural fairness and endorsement of prototypical leaders: Leader benevolence or follower control?

This research explored why strongly identifying followers endorse prototypical leaders by addressing the role of procedural fairness in this process. We introduced the distinction between procedural fairness rules relating to leader benevolence (i.e., whether the leader supports the group’s interests) and follower control (i.e., whether followers can influence the leader’s decisions). We predicted that strongly identifying group members endorse prototypical leaders because they perceive such leaders as acting in line with benevolence related fairness rules rather than because such leaders are perceived as giving followers control. An organizational field study and a laboratory experiment revealed support for these ideas. Our results thus provide insights into why prototypical leaders are endorsed among strongly identifying followers. They also have implications for the procedural fairness literature in showing that frequently studied procedural fairness rules (e.g., voice) do not explain endorsement of leaders believed to support the group’s interests.     

Current themes in organizational change

Research in leadership effectiveness has paid less attention to the role of leader fairness than probably it should have. More recently, this has started to change. To capture this development, we review the empirical literature in leadership and fairness to define the field of leadership and fairness, to assess the state of the art, and to identify a research agenda for future efforts in the field. The review shows that leader distributive, procedural, and especially interactional fairness are positively associated with criteria of leadership effectiveness. More scarce and scattered evidence also suggests that fairness considerations help explain the effectiveness of other aspects of leadership, and that leader fairness and other aspects of leadership, or the leadership context, may interact in predicting leadership effectiveness. We conclude that future research should especially focus on interaction effects of leader fairness and other aspects of leadership, and on the processes mediating these effects.     

Cooperation with leaders in social dilemmas: On the effects of procedural fairness and outcome favorability in structural cooperation

The present research examined the effectiveness of leadership in influencing cooperation in social dilemmas by focusing on the procedural fairness and favorability of leaders’ outcome decisions. We predicted that leader’s influence on cooperation would be determined by the fairness of the procedures used, but only so when received outcomes were unfavorable. Across two experimental studies, support for this hypothesis was found. Both in Study 1 (using accuracy as a manipulation of procedural fairness) and Study 2 (using voice as a manipulation of procedural fairness), it was found that procedural fairness influenced contributions in a public good dilemma only if outcomes were unfavorable (i.e., participants received less than an equal share), whereas procedural fairness did not influence level of contributions when outcomes were favorable (i.e., participants received more than an equal share).     

Rewarding leadership and fair procedures as determinants of self-esteem

In the present research, the authors examined the effect of procedural fairness and rewarding leadership style on an important variable for employees: self-esteem. The authors predicted that procedural fairness would positively influence people's reported self-esteem if the leader adopted a style of rewarding behavior for a job well done. Results from a scenario experiment, a laboratory experiment, and an organizational survey indeed show that procedural fairness and rewarding leadership style interacted to influence followers' self-esteem, such that the positive relationship between procedural fairness and self-esteem was more pronounced when the leadership style was high in rewarding behavior. Implications in terms of integrating the leadership and procedural fairness literature are discussed.     

Selfish or servant leadership? Evolutionary predictions on leadership personalities in coordination games

We study the personalities of emergent leaders in two coordination games in groups of four players each with monetary incentives. Our results support the evolutionary hypothesis that leadership is a social good for the group: leadership benefits followers but is potentially costly for the individual taking on the leader role. Across the two economic games leaders do less well - earn less money - on average than followers. Furthermore, social participants choose to lead more often than selfish participants and there is no relationship between leadership behavior and personal dominance. Our results support the idea that leadership can be servant rather than selfish and we note the implications of this finding.     

A motivated information processing perspective on the antecedents of empowering leadership

Empowering leadership is an important influence on team effectiveness. This makes the question of what the antecedents of team empowering leadership are an important issue to consider. To address this question, we propose a motivated information processing perspective that holds that engaging in empowering leadership is based on social information processing, and that there are individual differences in how elaborate that information processing is. We argue that a key consideration in shifting control from the leader to the team is the extent to which empowering leadership is driven by leaders’ consideration of their trust in the team (i.e., an instance of social information processing), and that leader need for closure (a trait capturing the disposition to carefully consider decisions and actions) moderates the relationship between leader trust in team and empowering leadership. A survey of N = 156 work teams supported these hypotheses.     

Fairness Perceptions and Trust as Mediators on the Relationship Between Leadership Style,Unit Commitment,and Turnover Intentions of Canadian Forces Personnel

Whether fairness perceptions and leader trust mediate the relationship between leadership style and commitment and turnover was evaluated among Canadian Forces personnel (N = 1,443). Correlational analyses and structural equation modeling results provided support for the proposed meditational model. However, the influence of transactional leadership on commitment and turnover was due to its direct influence on fairness perceptions, whereas the influence of transformational leadership on these outcomes was based on its direct and indirect influence on both fairness perceptions and leader trust. It thus appears that both types of leadership style influence commitment and turnover, but the mechanism through which their effects occur may be distinct. The implications of these findings for theory, research, and practice are discussed.     

Revisiting the mediating role of leader–member exchange in transformational leadership: the differential impact model

Transformational leadership (TFL) has been proposed as an essential antecedent of leader–member exchange (LMX), which in turn affects outcomes in organizations. We extend this mediation hypothesis in two ways by proposing a differential impact model, which we test on three organizational outcomes: employee job satisfaction, employee organizational commitment, and leader effectiveness. First, we extend LMX’s mediational impact—which has previously only been tested for employee outcomes—to leader effectiveness. Second, we argue that this mediation will be stronger for outcomes that are more proximal rather than distal to dyadic relations between leader and followers (high proximity: job satisfaction; medium proximity: organizational commitment; low proximity: leader effectiveness). Meta-analytic structural equation modelling based on 132 studies revealed that LMX mediates TFL’s relationships with employee outcomes (more strongly for job satisfaction than for commitment), but not with leader effectiveness, whereas TFL showed a stronger direct link to leader effectiveness. The findings suggest that TLF and LMX contribute differentially to organizational outcomes depending on their proximity to dyadic relations between leaders and followers. The differential impact model uncovers leadership effectiveness processes, integrates influential leadership theories, and highlights the importance of distinguishing between different outcome measures and the processes facilitating them.     

领导正直的概念、测量及其展望

领导正直（leader integrity）作为一种道德品质,长期以来被认为是有效领导者的关键特征。近年来, 道德丑闻和管理者违法乱纪事件频频发生,引发了学术界对领导正直问题的关注。然而,学界对领导正直 的内涵、测量及其作用机制的研究尚处于起步阶段,关于领导正直的文献综述更是寥寥无几。本文从领导 正直的概念、测量、影响因素、作用机制和实施效果等方面,对国内外相关研究进行系统梳理和探讨。未 来研究应从领导正直的概念与维度的完善、影响因素的拓展和作用机制的深入识别等方面展开努力。     

When does procedural fairness promote organizational citizenship behavior? Integrating empowering leadership types in relational justice models

We examined how procedural fairness interacts with empowering leadership to promote employee OCB. We focused on two core empowering leadership types—encouraging self-development and encouraging independent action. An experiment revealed that leaders encouraging self-development made employees desire status information more (i.e., information regarding one’s value to the organization). Conversely, leaders encouraging independent action decreased employees’ desire for this type of information. Subsequently, a multisource field study (with a US and German sample) showed that encouraging self-development strengthened the relationship between procedural fairness and employee OCB, and this relationship was mediated by employees’ self-perceived status. Conversely, encouraging independent action weakened the procedural fairness-OCB relationship, as mediated by self-perceived status. This research integrates empowering leadership styles into relational fairness theories, highlighting that multiple leader behaviors should be examined in concert and that empowering leadership can have unintended consequences.     

A MULTILEVEL INVESTIGATION OF LEADER– MEMBER EXCHANGE,INFORMAL LEADER EMERGENCE,AND INDIVIDUAL AND TEAM PERFORMANCE

This study examines the antecedents and outcomes of informal leader emergence in work teams. Drawing upon research in vertical and shared leadership, we hypothesized that the relationship between leader‐‐member exchange (LMX) quality and employees’ emergence as informal leaders is moderated by team shared vision such that there is a positive (negative) LMX—leader emergence relationship for teams with high (low) shared vision. Informal leader emergence, in turn, was expected to relate to higher individual and team performance. Results based on multisource and multimethod data collected at 3 points in time (361 followers in 74 work teams) provided support for these hypotheses. The findings highlight the role played by formal leaders and team shared vision in jointly promoting or inhibiting informal leader emergence and thereby impacting individual performance and team effectiveness.     

Bases of power in relation to leader behavior: A field investigation

Hypotheses addressing the relationships between bases of power and transformational and transactional leadership, and propositions concerning the extent to which perceptions of leader power and behavior were shared by a leader's followers, were addressed in this study. Two hundred eighty employees reporting to 118 supervisors in 45 organizations provided data for the investigation. Results provided support for hypothesized relationships between personal power and transformational leadership as well as between positional power and transactional leadership. In addition, ratings of both leader power and leader behavior were found to be individually-based phenomena; that is, followers of a focal leader did not share perceptions about that leader's power or behavior. Implications for managerial practice and future research are discussed.We thank Bruce Avolio, Bernard Bass, and Gary Yukl for their helpful comments.     

Deadly combinations: how leadership contexts undermine the activation and enactment of followers’ high core self-evaluations in performance

Employees with high core self-evaluations (CSE) generally perform well in their jobs. The enactment of CSE in performance occurs within contexts, and leadership is one form of context that influences the activation and expression of CSE. Drawing on theories of CSE and leader–member exchange (LMX), we characterized the leadership context as the interaction between leader CSE and LMX quality. Examination of 173 followers and their 31 leaders in a manufacturing organization showed a positive association between follower CSE and performance when the context comprised high leader CSE and high LMX. Conversely, leadership contexts comprising high leader CSE and low LMX, or low leader CSE and high LMX, resulted in a negative relationship between follower CSE and performance. We also show that low CSE followers have relatively high performance under some circumstances. Thus, we contribute to understanding how some leadership contexts undermine high CSE followers’ performance and promote low CSE followers’ performance.     

Personality and the Perception of Transformational Leadership: The Impact of Extraversion,Neuroticism, Personal Need for Structure,and Occupational Self‐Efficacy1

This experimental study examined the influence of followers' personal characteristics on their perception of leadership. Participants were 175 students who self‐rated several personality scales (extraversion, neuroticism, personal need for structure, and occupational self‐efficacy) at Time 1. Two weeks later, participants were divided into two groups and were presented a vignette about a transformational or a nontransformational leader. Subsequently, respondents were asked to rate the described leader's behavior on the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Results revealed that followers high in extraversion tended to perceive more transformational leadership, and showed a more positive evaluation of transformational leadership than did followers with low extraversion. Moreover, perceived transformational leadership predicted the acceptance of a leader, but followers' personality traits did not moderate the relationship between perceived transformational leadership and acceptance.     

From self‐defeating to other defeating: Examining the effects of leader procrastination on follower work outcomes

This research examines the influence of leader procrastination on employee attitudes and behaviours. While previous studies have typically viewed procrastination as a form of self‐defeating behaviour, this research explores its effects on others in the workplace. In Study 1, using data collected from 290 employees, we demonstrate the discriminant and relative predictive validity of leader procrastination on leadership effectiveness compared with laissez‐faire leadership and directive leadership. In Study 2, based on dyadic data collected in three phases from 250 employees and their 23 supervisors, we found that leader procrastination was associated with follower discretionary behaviour (organizational citizenship behaviour and deviant behaviour). Additionally, job frustration was found to mediate the relationship between leader procrastination and follower outcomes. The quality of the leader–follower relationship, as a boundary condition, was shown to mitigate the detrimental effects of leader procrastination. Together, the findings suggest that leader procrastination is a distinct form of negative leadership behaviour that represents an important source of follower job frustration.

Practitioner points

• Leader procrastination is different from laissez‐faire and directive leadership and can be detrimental to followers.
• Job frustration mediates the relationship between leader procrastination and follower discretionary behaviour.
• Organizations should facilitate high‐quality LMX relationships as a method for mitigating the negative effects of leader procrastination.

     

变革型领导与交易型领导的权变分析

变革型领导与交易型领导是当前领导研究的热点。一般认为,变革型领导是比交易型领导更为有效的领导方式。然而从权变的观点出发,变革型领导与交易型领导的有效性还要受到情境因素、被领导者因素的影响。该文分析了替代领导、领导与下属的关系以及组织文化对变革型领导和交易型领导与领导效能关系的调节作用,并讨论了今后的领导行为研究中应该注意的问题。     

Identity Mediators: Leadership and Identity Construction in Campaign Speeches of American Presidential Candidates' Spouses

We explore the nature and evolution of the role of candidates' spouses in U.S. presidential election campaigns through a lens of social psychological theorizing that sees leadership as emerging from activities of identity construction of leaders and followers. Our discursive analysis examines how aspiring First Lady speeches at party national conventions construct both their husbands and the particular national identity construction most presently politically relevant in a way that strategically aligns the two. Building on previous social identity work on leadership, we show how it is not only the leader or their followers who are active participants in leadership construction but that there may also be a role for “third parties” who link prospective leaders with followers. We propose that, as “entrepreneurs” of identity, leaders may use others as “identity mediators” to co‐construct and mediate both the leader's identity and the identity of those they seek to lead.     

Discouraging unethicality versus encouraging ethicality: Unraveling the differential effects of prevention‐ and promotion‐focused ethical leadership

Theory on the impact of ethical leadership has traditionally been based on a deontological approach to morality. Underlying this perspective is the assumption that all leader behaviors that encourage “normatively appropriate conduct” will influence followers in a similar fashion. Put differently, the current consensus seems to suggest that actions that focus on preventing unethical behavior—attending to “the wrong”—will have the same impact as actions that focus on promoting ethical behavior—attending to “the right.” Taking a within‐person approach, we draw upon social exchange theory to challenge this consensus and build theory that suggests a follower's felt trust from their leader will be differentially impacted by prevention‐ versus promotion‐focused ethical leadership. We also explore how these different types of ethical leadership may indirectly, through felt trust, impact citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. Finally, we consider how the role of the “moral manager” may interact with the “moral person” by identifying leader moral hypocrisy as an important between‐person moderator of these effects. Given the importance of ethical decision‐making in organizations and the calls for increased ethical leadership, our findings have important implications for both theory and practice.     

The Effects of Leader Fairness and Pay Outcomes on Superior/Subordinate Relations1

This study assessed the effects of procedurally fair leadership and payment outcomes on subordinate reactions to the supervisor in a pay-for-performance task. Procedurally fair leadership was operationalized by the extent to which supervisors enacted three specific behaviors: facilitation of voice, accuracy, and adherence to formal policies and procedures. The payment outcomes were high and low cash payments for performance evaluated as above or below average. Subordinate reactions to these treatments focused on perceptions of supervisory fairness (both procedural and distributive) and the subordinate's relationship with his or her supervisor (in terms of both satisfaction and commitment). Procedurally fair leadership showed a main effect on subordinate perceptions of leader fairness and on their relationship with the leader. No other effects were noted. Implications are discussed.     

Paradoxical Leader Behaviors: Leader Personality and Follower Outcomes

We examined leaders’ Big Five personality traits as the antecedents and followers’ in-role and innovative performance behaviors as outcomes of paradoxical leader behavior (PLB) in people management. We also examined the moderating effect of followers’ psychological capital on PLB and its relationship with followers’ outcomes. We drew on the trait theory of leadership, social learning theory, and the conservation of resources theory to derive our hypotheses. We tested our predictions with a sample of 131 managers and 609 followers. By and large, we found support for our predictions. More specifically, leaders’ traits of extraversion and openness to experience were positively related to followers’ PLB ratings. Conversely, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism among leaders were negatively related to followers’ PLB ratings. PLB in turn was positively related to followers’ in-role and innovative performance behaviors. Followers’ psychological capital was found to moderate the relationship between PLB and followers’ in-role performance such that the relationship was stronger when followers’ psychological capital was high than when it was low. The implications of these findings were discussed.