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)
Traditional Leadership Paradigm
Typically focuses on leaders and their effects Contrasts transformational vs. transactional
leadership (e.g., Judge & Piccalo, 2004)
Leader TraitsAnd
Behaviors
ObservableOutcomes
Paradigm Shift in Leadership
Followers and leaders jointly create outcomes But leaders can still affect motivational
constructs in followers Motives Social identities Affect
Paradigm Shift in Leadership
Followers and leaders jointly create outcomes But leaders can still affect motivational
constructs in followers Motives Social identities Affect
Leader Traits andBehaviors
NeglectedSubordinateProcesses
ObservableOutcomes
LeaderSelf-Sacrifice
FollowerCollective
Identity
•Outward Focus•Different Interpretation of Social world
Leadership and Sacrifice
George McGregor Burns (1978) -- sacrifice and suffering found among great leaders; important component of transformational leadership
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
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?
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.
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
De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)
De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)
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
Point: Leader behavior follower motivational and
affective constructs Follower self-identity is particularly important
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?
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
Why is self-identity an important mediating construct for leadership effects?
Leader Traits andBehaviors
Follower WSC
Follower Affect & Cognition
Leader Self-Benefit
LeaderSelf-Sacrifice
Follower IndividualIdentity
FollowerCollective
Identity
Self-focus, isolation,Competition with others
Outward focus, inclusion,Cooperation with others
Why focus on self-sacrifice?
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) Leadershipidentitywork motivation
Kark, Chen & Shamir (2003) (Survey 888 Ps, 76 branch banks) Transform. Leadpersonal (relational) id dependency Transform. Leadsocial (collective) id self & collective
efficacy, org. based self-esteem Identity mediated relationships of Transformational Lead. to
DVs
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
Follower-Centered Perspective
Identity is a critical moderator affecting the interpretation of social processes
Social Justice
WorkOutcomes
WSC
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
Three Identity Levels
Individual – self differentiated from others Relational – self defined through roles and
dyadic connections Collective -- self defined through group
membership
Consequences of Active Identity
Identity
Level
Self-
Definition
Self- Worth
Individual Differences from others
Unique
qualities
Relational Role relations Correct role behavior
Collective Group membership
Fit to group prototype
Consequences of Active Identity
Identity
Level
Self-
Definition
Self- Worth Key Motive
Individual Differences from others
Unique
qualities
Self-interest
Relational Role relations Correct role behavior
Other’s welfare
Collective Group membership
Fit to group prototype
Collective welfare
Consequences of Active Identity
Identity
Level
Self-
Definition
Self- Worth Key Motive
Social Exchange
Individual Differences from others
Unique
qualities
Self-interest
Negotiate: direct, explicit
benefits
Relational Role relations Correct role behavior
Other’s welfare
Reciprocal: long-term, direct, implicit benefit
Collective Group membership
Fit to group prototype
Collective welfare
Generalized:
implicit, indirect benefit
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
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
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
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.”
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)
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
Beta weights and R2 from Hierarchical Regressions
Predictor:Outcome
SatisfactionOCBI
Supervisor Satisfaction
OCBOManagement Satisfaction
DJ .53** -.11 .14* -.07 .10
IJ .09 .08 .52** .22* .28**
PJ .16* .16 .24** .04 .41**
ΔR2 .45 .03 .55 .05 .41
Indiv’l .06 .02 .14* -.16* .00
Relat’l .03 .24* .00 .33** .16*
Collect .09 .19* .04 .09 .00
ΔR2 .01 .12 .02 .14 .02
IJ x Rel. .10a .08 .13* -- .18*
ΔR2 .01 .01 .02 -- .03
Interaction of Relational Identity and Interactional Justice in Predicting Supervisor Satisfaction
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low High
Interactional Justice
High Low
Relationalself-concept
Interactions Predicting Additional DV s
Outcome Satisfaction Mgt. Satisfaction
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Low High
Interactional Justice
Relationalself-concept
High
Low
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low High
Interactional Justice
Relationalself-concept
High
Low
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
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
Study 2: Manipulation of Active Identity
261 employed students completed self-administered self-concept manipulation, predictors and DVs
Study 1 Measures +
Construct Items Alpha Source
Leader Member Exch. 7 .92 Graen et al. 1982
Affective Commitment 6 .79 Meyer & Allen, 1997
Continuance Commit. 6 .84
Coworker Satisfaction 4 .70 Spector, 1997
Company Satisfaction 4 .85 Dunham & Smith, 1979
Perceived Org. Sup. 9 .95 Eisenberger et al., 1986
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)
Manipulation first validated on separate sample (N=55)
Condition /Measure
N
Mean for Focal Group
Mean for Other
Conditions
t (53)
Individual 19 4.32 2.61 7.54, p<.01
Relational 19 4.30 2.56 9.04, p<.01
Collective 17 4.29 2.49 8.56, p<.01
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
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
Collective Manipulation x PJ Interaction
Dependent Variables Beta
InteractionΔR2
System Referenced DVs
Company Satisfaction .13* .01
Affective Commitment .15* .02
Perceived Org. Support .11* .01
Org. Citizenship Behavior - O -.04 .00
Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interaction
DV = Company Satisfaction
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low High
Procedural Justice
Primed
Not primed
Collectiveself-concept
Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interactions
Affective Commitment Perceived Org. Support
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low High
Procedural Justice
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Low High
Procedural Justice
Collective Identity Manipulation x PJ Interaction
Dependent Variable Beta
Interaction ΔR2
Dyad-Referenced DVs
LMX .12* .01
Coworker Satisfaction .16* .02
Personal Referenced DVs
Task Satisfaction .18* .02
Continuance Commitment .19* .03
Interaction for Dyad-Referenced Outcomes
Leader Member Exchange Coworker Satisfaction
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Low High
Procedural Justice
Collectiveself-concept
Primed
Not primed
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Low High
Procedural Justice
Collectiveself-concept
Primed
Not primed
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*)
Interaction of Chronic Relational Identity and Interactional Justice
DV = Leader Member Exchange
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Low High
Interactional Justice
Relationalself-concept
High
Low
Interaction of Chronic Individual Identity and Distributive Justice DV = Outcome Satisfaction
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Low High
Distributive Justice
Individualself-concept
High
Low
Conclusions
Chronic differences in identity affect: Salience of justice dimensions (interactions) Translation of justice into DVs (main effects)
Primed identities affected: Salience of Collective identity (robust effects)
Needed: Studies that show leaders can directly affect identity salience or development Ibarra’s (1999) work on identity development
shows that leaders provisional selves
Implications for Understanding Leadership
Follower cognitions are an important aspect of leadership Identities effects of justice perceptions Identities may affect perceptions of leaders
Identity may also affect: Sense of inclusion (relational, collective) Contribution to collective activities Cooperative behavior Willingness to sacrifice for dyad or group Emotions associated with group outcomes External versus internal focus Interpretation of task and social processes
Caveats
Identity manipulations may have unintended effects: Blatant primes can boomerang, producing contrasts
rather than assimilation (Martin, Strack & Staple, 2001) Primes inconsistent with a leader’s actions or values may
not be seen as authentic Identity activation may have different consequences for
different subgroups (gender, race, ethnicity) Emphasizing collective identity may accentuate differences, rather
than enhancing similarities, for minorities (Kampmeier & Simon, 2001)
Questions?
Additional Caveats Effects may occur through unconscious as
well as conscious processes Justice can also affect identity,
Lind (2001) Fundamental Interpersonal Dilemma
Johnson & Lord (under review):
Effects of justice on identities can be implicit (unconscious) as well as explicit (conscious) Explicit measures (questionnaire) Implicit (word stem or word fragment
completion) UNI_ _ _
Johnson & Lord (under review):
Justice can also affect identity, Lind (2001) Fundamental Interpersonal Dilemma
Effects of justice on identities can be implicit (unconscious) as well as explicit Explicit measures (questionnaire) Implicit (word stem or word fragment completion)
UNI_ _ _ UNIQUE -- Individual UNITED – Collective UNIPED -- Neutral
Step 1Covariates
Age -.01 .02 .01 .01Sex -.08 -.16 .19 .03
Ethnicity .05 .07 -.45 -.18Manipulation
Justice .26** .27** .75** -.17**(.11, .41) (.14, .40) (.53, .97) (-.05, -.29)
Alternate Step 2sA. IdentityExplicit
Individual .02 -.20 -.13 .32**Relational .25 .42* .02 -.14Collective .13 .10 .01 -.05
ImplicitIndividual (word) -.15 -.16 -.06 .96**
Interdependent (word) .31 .69* .68* -.02Individual (RT) .12 .13 .08 -.24
Interdependent (RT) -.74** -.30 -1.38** .06Manipulation
Justice .08 .15 .38* .03
B. Regulatory FocusExplicit
Promotion -.07 .12 .14 -.02Prevention .03 -.16 -.21 .13
ImplicitPromotion (word) .07 -.37 .49 -.14Prevention (word) -.29 .14 -.06 .49
Promotion (RT) -.87** -.60* -1.28** -.19Prevention (RT) .54* .28 .05 -.03
ManipulationJustice .17* .22* .46* -.05
Predictors Trust Satisfaction
Behaviors
Cooperation Theft
Attitudes
Indirect Effects of Justice on Behavioral Intentions in Study 2.