1 / 57

Leadership and Social Justice: A Follower-Centered Perspective

Leadership and Social Justice: A Follower-Centered Perspective. Robert G. Lord University of Akron. Sept. 2005. Traditional Leadership Paradigm. Typically focuses on leaders and their effects Contrasts transformational vs. transactional leadership (e.g., Judge & Piccalo, 2004).

oki
Download Presentation

Leadership and Social Justice: A Follower-Centered Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Leadership and Social Justice: A Follower-Centered Perspective Robert G. Lord University of Akron Sept. 2005

  2. Traditional Leadership Paradigm • Typically focuses on leaders and their effects • Contrasts transformational vs. transactional leadership (e.g., Judge & Piccalo, 2004)

  3. Traditional Leadership Paradigm • Typically focuses on leaders and their effects • Contrasts transformational vs. transactional leadership (e.g., Judge & Piccalo, 2004) Leader Traits And Behaviors Observable Outcomes

  4. Paradigm Shift in Leadership • Followers and leaders jointly create outcomes • But leaders can still affect motivational constructs in followers • Motives • Social identities • Affect

  5. Paradigm Shift in Leadership • Followers and leaders jointly create outcomes • But leaders can still affect motivational constructs in followers • Motives • Social identities • Affect Neglected Subordinate Processes Observable Outcomes Leader Traits and Behaviors

  6. Leadership and Sacrifice • George McGregor Burns (1978) -- sacrifice and suffering found among great leaders; important component of transformational leadership Leader Self-Sacrifice Follower Collective Identity • Outward Focus • Different Interpretation of Social world

  7. Transformation of Social Motives by Leaders • Leader behavior can crate pro-self or pro-social motivation in followers (De Cremer, 2002, JASP) • Laboratory study in which participants (leaders) allocated resources in self-benefiting or self-sacrificing manner • Compared to self-benefiting leader, self-sacrificing leader: • Was seen as more legitimate • Elicited more cooperation among group members (effect mediated by legitimacy) • Was seen as more charismatic

  8. Leaders and Self-Sacrifice: Empirical Research • Yorges, Weiss & Strickland (1999, JAP) • Laboratory study showed self-sacrificing vs. self-benefiting leader conditions affected: • Perceived morality of the leader • Perceived charisma • Leader influence (effect was mediated by morality and charisma) Practical Importance?

  9. News story day I prepared this talk (21 Nov. ) • Title: GM to return two leased jets amid criticism • CEO Rick Wagoner was in the capital to testify on the company's dire financial situation but his testimony was overshadowed by irate lawmakers who blasted him for flying on a private jet to ask for public funds and failing to make personal sacrifices in exchange for federal assistance. • Chief executives from Ford Motor Co(F.N), and Chrysler LLC, who were also there to plead for $25 billion in federal aid, came under fire too for flying to Washington in private jets.

  10. De Cremer & van Knippenberg (2004) • Three studies: Scenario experiment, laboratory experiment, field experiment • All showed self-sacrifice effectiveness, but effects were greater for high vs. low self-confidence leaders • Moreover, these effects were mediated by collective identification

  11. De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)

  12. De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)

  13. De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004) • Full mediation of experimental effects on cooperation by collective identity • Similar results when perceived charisma was the DV, but only partial mediation of interaction • Ldr. sacrifice/benefit  Collective ID  Cooperation

  14. Point: • Leader behavior  follower motivational and affective constructs • Follower self-identity is particularly important

  15. Four Crucial Questions • 1. Why focus on followers? • 2. Why is the self theoretically interesting? • 3. Why is self-identity an important mediating construct for leadership effects? • 4. Why focus on self-sacrifice?

  16. Why is the self theoretically interesting? • Self defined as an overarching knowledge structure that organizes memory and behavior (Kihlstrom & Klein,1994) • Trait-like schemas • organize self and social perceptions • Script-like schemas • translate sit. cues into self-consistent goals & behavior • Dynamic, confederation of central and peripheral schema (Markus & Wurf, 1987) • Working Self-Concept (WSC) currently active portion that directs processing and behavior

  17. Why is self-identity an important mediating construct for leadership effects? Follower WSC Follower Affect & Cognition Leader Traits and Behaviors

  18. Why focus on self-sacrifice? Leader Self-Benefit Follower Individual Identity Self-focus, isolation, Competition with others Leader Self-Sacrifice Follower Collective Identity Outward focus, inclusion, Cooperation with others

  19. Other Research Showing Leaders can Affect Subordinate Identity • De Cremer & van Knippenberg (2002) • Leader sacrifice/benefit  Collective ID  Cooperation • Content of written communication from leader affect accessibility of follower self-concept (Paul, Costly, Howell & Dorfman, 2001) • Charismatic  collective self-concept • Individual Consideration  private self-concept • Verbal content and visual delivery can make either individual or collective self concept more accessible (Chang, 2005) • Leadershipidentitywork motivation • Kark, Chen & Shamir (2003) (Survey 888 Ps, 76 branch banks) • Transform. Leadpersonal (relational) id dependency • Transform. Leadsocial (collective) id self & collective efficacy, org. based self-esteem • Identity mediated relationships of Transformational Lead. to DVs

  20. Summary and Limitations • Good evidence that: • Leaders can affect others by their pro-self or pro-social behavior • This process may operate through subordinates’ self-concept • Important, but -- doesn’t reveal full range of follower identity as an interpretive structure • Illustrate this point with 2 studies of identity and social justice

  21. Follower-Centered Perspective • Identity is a critical moderator affecting the interpretation of social processes Social Justice Work Outcomes WSC

  22. Theory in a Nutshell • Lord, Brown & Selenta (2004) posit two mechanisms by which identity affects justice related outcomes: • 1. Identity can influence the standard used to evaluate justice • main effects in predicting outcomes • 2. Identity can cause differential weightings of justice dimensions • moderates justice dimension outcome linkages

  23. Three Identity Levels • Individual – self differentiated from others • Relational – self defined through roles and dyadic connections • Collective -- self defined through group membership

  24. Consequences of Active Identity

  25. Consequences of Active Identity

  26. Consequences of Active Identity

  27. Three Justice Dimensions • Distributive –work outcomes (e.g., pay) seen as being fair • Interactional – treatment with respect and dignity • Procedural– system and processes determining work outcomes are fair

  28. Key Proposition: Alignment of Identity and Justice Emphasis • Individual  Distributive • Relational  Interactive • Collective  Procedural • Individual identity makes comparisons to others salient source of uniqueness & relative outcomes signal worth • Relational identity makes relations and roles salient & others’ evaluations signal worth • Collective identity makes group procedures salient as signals of inclusion & worth

  29. Johnson, Selenta & Lord (2006, OBHDP) Survey of workplace attitudes and behaviors examined moderating effects of chronic identity in N=191 working undergraduates DV’s were dimensions of Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behavior, classified by their relevance to the individual, dyadic relationship, or group

  30. Identity Measures: 3 5-item Scales from Selenta & Lord (2005) LSCS • Comparative Identity (Individual, α = .90) • “I have a strong need to know how I stand in comparison to my coworkers.” • Concern for Others (Relational, α = .74) • “Caring deeply about another person such as a close friend or relative is important to me.” • Group Achievement Focus (Collective, α = .60) • “I feel great pride when my team or group does well, even if I’m not the main reason for its success.”

  31. Other Measures • Organizational Justice (Colquitt, 2001) • Distributive (4 items,  = .93) • Interactive (4 items,  = .91) • Procedural (7 items,  = .87), • Outcome Satisfaction (2 items, = .85), • Supervisory Satisfaction (3 items,  = .90) • Management Satisfaction (3 items,  = .76) • Organizational Citizenship Behavior (Williams & Andersen, 1991) • OCBI (3 items,  = .57) • OCBO(3 items,  = .43)

  32. Key Prediction: • Chronic identity will moderate the relationship of justice with attitudinal and behavioral outcomes in a manner that aligns level of identity with type of justice and focus of outcome. • Specifically, the following interactions are expected: • Individual Identity x Distributive Justice will predict individually referenced outcomes • Relational Identity x Interactional Justice will predict relational outcomes • Collective Identity x Procedural Justice will predict collective outcomes

  33. Beta weights and R2 from Hierarchical Regressions

  34. Interaction of Relational Identity and Interactional Justice in Predicting Supervisor Satisfaction 4.5 Relational self-concept 4 High Low 3.5 3 2.5 Low High Interactional Justice

  35. Outcome Satisfaction Mgt. Satisfaction 4.5 4 Relational self-concept Relational self-concept 4 3.5 High Low High Low 3 3.5 3 2.5 2.5 2 Low High Low High Interactional Justice Interactional Justice Interactions Predicting Additional DV s

  36. Recap: Study 1 • Alignment proposition was supported for Relational Identity, which moderated effects of Interactional Justice in predicting: • Outcome Satisfaction • Supervisor Satisfaction • Management Satisfaction • No inconsistent interactions were significant, e.g., Relational Identity did not interact with DJ or PJ • Relational Identity has strong main effects on OCBI and OCBO

  37. Potential Mechanisms for Identity Effects • Chronic self-schema can: • Bias the development over time of related schema -- salient areas of justice • Influence momentary cognitions and affect • Causality is unclear in correlational research designs such as that of Study 1 • Study 2 attempted to manipulate the momentary accessibility of alternative identities using a priming paradigm

  38. Study 2: Manipulation of Active Identity • 261 employed students completed self-administered self-concept manipulation, predictors and DVs • Study 1 Measures +

  39. Identity Manipulation • 1. Ps read vignette about a stockbroker in which values, attitudes, and behaviors were aligned with self-concept level • 2. Ps provided written self-descriptions of: • Distinguishing talents and abilities (Individual) • Close relationships with others (Relational) • Groups to which they belonged (Collective)

  40. Manipulation first validated on separate sample (N=55)

  41. Hierarchical Regression Steps • Step 1 • Chronic Identity Level (LSCS: I, R, C) • Justice Dimensions (DJ, IJ, PJ) • Dummy variable codes for WSC manipulations • I (1) vs R & C (both 0) • R (1) vs I & C (both 0) • C (1) vs I & R (both 0) • Step 2 • Interaction of WSC x Justice Dimension: • I x DJ; R x IJ; or C x PJ

  42. Results: Predictions Not Supported for Relational or Individual Identity Manipulations • Relational Identity x Interactional Justice • No significant interactions on Dyad Referenced DVs • Individual Identity x Distributive Justice • No significant interaction on Personal Referenced DVs

  43. Collective Manipulation x PJ Interaction

  44. 4.5 Collective self-concept 4 Primed Not primed 3.5 3 2.5 Low High Procedural Justice Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interaction • DV = Company Satisfaction

  45. Affective Commitment Perceived Org. Support 4.5 3.5 4 3 3.5 2.5 2 3 2.5 1.5 Low Low High High Procedural Justice Procedural Justice Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interactions

  46. Collective Identity Manipulation x PJ Interaction

  47. Leader Member Exchange Coworker Satisfaction 4.5 4 Collective self-concept Collective self-concept 4 3.5 Primed Not primed Primed Not primed 3.5 3 2.5 3 2.5 2 Low High Low High Procedural Justice Procedural Justice Interaction for Dyad-Referenced Outcomes

  48. Effects of Chronic Identity Levels • Individual identity predicted • Outcome Satisfaction (-.14*); • Task Satisfaction (-.18*) • Continuance Commitment (.13a) • Perceived Organizational Support (-.14*) • Relational identity predicted • OCBI (.17*) • Collective identity predicted • Task Satisfaction (.21*) • OCBI (.27*) • OCBO (.26*)

  49. 4 Relational self-concept 3.5 High Low 3 2.5 2 Low High Interactional Justice Interaction of Chronic Relational Identity and Interactional Justice • DV = Leader Member Exchange

  50. 4 Individual self-concept 3.5 High Low 3 2.5 2 Low High Distributive Justice Interaction of Chronic Individual Identity and Distributive Justice • DV = Outcome Satisfaction

More Related