FUTURE WOMEN LEADERS SEMINAR
By
John Antonakis Professor of Organizational Behavior Faculty of Business and Economics
University of Lausanne
16-21 January 2011 © 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 2/ 33
Leadership—let’s face it!
“In the 2004 election, Democratic Wisconsin Senator Russell D. Feingold . . . held
the seat sought by Republican challenger Tim J. Michels. The graphic was one set of
faces used by researchers at Princeton University to judge voters' perceptions of
political candidates” (http://www.princeton.edu/~atodorov/Research-in-
Media/National-Geographic.htm)--Todorov et al. (2005).
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 3/ 33
• They found that individuals exposed to pictures of candidates in a Congressional
or Senate race (2 candidates--the winner and the runner up), predicted 71.6%
(n=95) and 66.8% (n=600) of the races respectively (based on the perceived
competence of the candidate!).
• Note, subjects did not know the candidates, and in one variant of the experiment,
they were exposed to the pictures for only 1s!
• Inferences of competence also predicted margin of victory!
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 4/ 33
I repeated this experiment in Switzerland, with twist (Antonakis & Dalgas, 2009):
1. I used 57 pairs of faces from the French parliamentary elections (2 elections ago),
where we matched an incumbent (who lost) with a challenger (who won); we
pretty much replicated the results of Todorov. Adults (n=684) had an accuracy of
72% on the individual level (and inferences of competence correlated significantly
with margin of victory)!
2. We compared the results with 681 children (from 6-13 years) and 160 older
participants (mean age 30 years)…..let’s see some interesting findings:
E.g. of faces:
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 5/ 33
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 6/ 33
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Children did as well as the adults did (71% hit rate).
these experiments?
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Children did as well as the adults did (71% hit rate). What can we deduce from
by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 7/ 33
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
Who would you like to be the captain of your boat?
at can we deduce from
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 8/ 33
When communicating the price of a wine, why do subjects evaluate the same wine as
better when it is more “expensive”? Do they say this to please the experimenter or do
they really believe what they think? (Plassman et al,. 2008)
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 9/ 33
(Video: Water)
How does the “faces” and “wine” experiment link to leadership in general?
Is it all in the face (or other effects, e.g., being tall, a man, etc.)? Can leadership be taught?
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 10/ 33
Peterson & Luthans (2006)
x y z
a y y x
x y y
x x x
x x x
x y z
x y y
x y y
x x x
x y z
x z
x y
y
z
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 11/ 33
Barling et al. (1996)
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 12/ 33
Dvir et al. (2002)
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 13/ 33
Experimental evidence is amassing in this under-explored area of leadership research,
as our data suggest too (Antonakis, Fenley, & Liechti, 2010). We recently did an
experiment with a sample of 35 to 58 year old managers (average 42 years old
average). At Time 1, we measured subjects’ leadership. Subjects were then randomly
assigned to a control or treatment condition (Time 2). At Time 3, we measured
leadership prototypicality (how typical the participant is of a leader) and found
significant effects for the experimental group.
That is, controlling for pre-existing leadership style, measured at Time 1, we found that
indeed, leadership can be taught!
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 14/ 33
Exercise: Building the ideal leader
Think of someone who had a profound influence on you. This person could be
your mother or father, a teacher, a coach, a manager, a politician, and entrepreneur, etc.
Answer the following questions:
1. Who was this person?
2. How often did you interact with this person?
3. How did that person make you feel?
4. Think of 4-5 types of behaviors (linked to the power they used, their technical
expertise, how they treated you, etc.) that this leader displayed that you thought
made him/her an ideal leader.
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 15/ 33
Leadership “of” and “in” organizations
The style of leadership used will depend on the outcome at hand.
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 16/ 33
….and the context (culture) matters a great deal.
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 17/ 33
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 18/ 33
The leadership model
Transactional leadership
o exchange process, contingent reinforcement and punishment
Transformational leadership
o raising follower self-esteem and beliefs, and transforming them to reach an
ideal, values driven and visionary
Instrumental leadership
o predicated on expertise implicated in organizational adaptation and follower
path-goal facilitation
Videos: Paper, Poet
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 19/ 33
Six transformational factors:
(a) Identifying and articulating a vision – looking for new opportunities, projecting
a vision for the future, knowing the direction that will be taken, being inspiring,
and getting others behind the mission.
(b) Fostering the acceptance of group goals - promoting group cooperation and
teamwork, gets the team behind the same goal, develops a team spirit.
(c) High performance expectations – setting challenging goals and giving
articulating high-performance expectations, expecting top performance.
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 20/ 33
(d) Providing individualized support – considering others’ feelings, respecting
others, being thoughtful about others
(e) Intellectual stimulation - challenging followers to think differently, making
followers rethink their ideas, looking at old problems in new way.
(f) Providing an appropriate model – setting an example, leading by doing (rather
than telling), being a good role model.
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 21/ 33
Three transactional factors include:
(a) Contingent reward – giving frequent and positive feedback, gives
special recognition for good work, complimenting others for
exceptional performance.
(b) Contingent punishment – showing disapproval and communicating displeasure
for sub-standard performance, pointing out mistakes
(c) Non-contingent punishment - blaming others when it is not their fault, being
critical even when work is good, not giving praise for good performance,
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 22/ 33
Four Instrumental leadership factors include:
(Strategic leadership)
1. Environmental monitoring:—understanding constraints and deficiencies in the
organizational environment, evaluating resource availability,
recognizing follower and organizational limitations, and
taking advantage of opportunities presented in the
environment.
2. Strategy formulation and implementation:—refers to the development and
realization of programs and tactical policies to support the strategic vision, and setting
specific organizational-wide objectives.
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 23/ 33
(Follower work facilitation)
3. Path-goal facilitation:—compensating for followers’ abilities and environmental
conditions, increasing the probability that follower achieve their goals by removing
obstacles to goal attainment, ensuring that resources are
sufficient for goal attainment, providing path-goal
clarifications, and facilitating goal achievement.
4. Outcome monitoring:—refers to monitoring follower performance, correcting
follower errors, assisting followers when outcomes are unintended, and providing
information to followers concerning how such errors can be avoided in the future. © 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 24/ 33
Laissez-faire leadership comprises 1 factor
Laissez-faire leadership:—avoids making decisions, abdicates responsibility.
Note: Leader can exhibit the full-range of behaviors in a directive or participative
manner, depending on the context (e.g., national culture).
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 25/ 33
Quick reminder on correlation coefficients, which indicate the strength of a linear
relation between two variables (for models with correct statistical controls, the
coefficient is causal and not just correlational):
r = .70
a positive
and strong
relation
r = .50
a positive
an moderate
relation
r = .30
a positive
and modest
relation
r = .00
no relation
r = -.30
a negative
and modest
relation
r = -.50
a negative
an moderate
relation
r = -.70
a negative
and strong
relation
50
10
01
50
50 100 150x
50
100
150
50 100 150x
501
001
50
50 100 150x
50
100
150
50 100 150x
50
10
01
50
60 80 100 120 140x
50
10
01
50
40 60 80 100 120 140x
50
10
01
50
40 60 80 100 120 140x
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 26/ 33
Links between styles and outcomes
n=418 leaders, n=3,150 raters, 9 companies, 30 countries (Antonakis et al., 2010)
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 27/ 33
258 PDG, 117 firms, 7 years, 19 countries, 10 business sector
(Jacquart & Antonakis 2010)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
low med high
nPower
Return on Average Equity
Responsibility high low
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 28/ 33
Converging evidence from other research groups (meta-analyses)
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 29/ 33
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 30/ 33
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 31/ 33
Video Clips: See where you can note the leadership factors:
Transformational 1. Articulating vision and inspiration 2. Fostering group goals 3. High-performance expectations 4. Individualized support 5. Intellectual stimulation 6. Role-modeling Instrumental 6.Environmental monitoring 7.Strategy formulation 8.Path-goal facilitation 9.Outcome monitoring Transactional 10.Contingent reward 11.Contingent punishment 12.Non-contingent punishment Video: (Boat, Lawyer brief, Mona Lisa, Glengary, Executive Suite, QE + other videos time permitting)
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 32/ 33
Aristotle argued that a leader must gain the confidence of followers by using:
• Transactional leadership
o “contracts” and “torture”
• Transformational leadership
o Appealing to their emotions (páthos)--video
o Moral perspective of life (éthos)--video
o Reasoned argument (lógos)--video
This model is remarkably similar current scientific models (Antonakis et al. 2003).
© 2011 by John Antonakis. All rights reserved. p. 33/ 33
I will conclude with a quote from Warren Bennis from my book (The nature of
leadership): "Perhaps the best exchange on the limits of power is from Shakespeare’s
Henry IV, Pt. I.
Glendower boasts to Hotspur: 'I can call spirits from the vasty deep.'
And Hotspur responds: 'Why, so can I, or so can any [person]; But will they come
when you do call for them?'
Whatever the arena, genuine leaders find ways to make others want to come when
they are called."