Leadership: What is it and how it is implicated in strategic change?

In this article, I focus on the role of leaders and how they affect social change. The importance of leadership, as a strategic process, will become evident from two points of view: those of leaders and followers. I highlight the importance of the latter because leadership theories are generally leader-focused and ignore central questions like "why do some individuals emerge as leaders and how they are attributed charisma?" "Why are some individuals influential as leaders whereas others are not?" "Why do followers trust some leaders more than they do others?" It is important that leaders understand how they are legitimized because as it will become evident, leaders must reflect the collective aspirations of their constituencies (followers)--whether these aspirations are follower or leader induced--in order to influence them toward a common ideal while instituting veritable social change. Leadership does not exist in a void. Therefore, looking at the leadership process from the eyes of followers will be addressed in various aspects of this article. Also based on a universalist-generalist perspective not tied to any particular domain (e.g., political, military, sport, educational, etc.), I will also focus on what leaders do, or more specifically what leaders should do, by reviewing what leadership is in terms of its antecedents and consequences. My review will be rooted in various competing but complementary research traditions that have dotted the historical landscape of leadership research, culminating in a brief analysis of the 2004 U.S. presidential race

Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory

The concept of leader distance has been subsumed in a number of leadership theories; however, with few exceptions, leadership scholars have not expressly defined nor discussed leader distance, how distance is implicated in the legitimization of a leader, and how distance affects leader outcomes. We review available literature and demonstrate that integral to untangling the dynamics of the leadership influencing process is an understanding of leader-follower distance. We present distance in terms of three independent dimensions: leader-follower physical distance, perceived social distance, and perceived task interaction frequency. We discuss possible antecedents of leader-follower distance, including organizational and task characteristics, national culture, and leader/follower implicit motives. Finally, we use configural theory to present eight typologies (i.e., coexistence of a cluster or constellation of independent factors serving as a unit of analysis) of leader distance and propose an integrated cross-level model of leader distance, linking the distance typologies to leader outcomes at the individual and group levels of analysis

When does charisma matter for top-level leaders? Effect of attributional ambiguity

One stream of leadership theory suggests leaders are evaluated via inferential observer processes that compare the fit of the target to a prototype of an ideal (charismatic) leader. Attributional theories of leadership suggest that evaluations depend on knowledge of past organizational performance, which is attributed to the leader's skills. We develop a novel theory showing how inferential and attributional processes simultaneously explain top-level leader evaluation and ultimately leader retention and selection. We argue that observers will mostly rely on attributional mechanisms when performance signals clearly indicate good or poor performance outcomes. However, under conditions of attributional ambiguity (i.e., when performance signals are unclear), observers will mostly rely on inferential processes. In Study 1 we tested our theory in an unconventional context-the U.S. presidential election-and found that the two processes, due to the leader's charisma and country economic performance, interact in predicting whether a leader is selected. Using a business context and an experimental design, in Study 2 we show that CEO charisma and firm performance interact in predicting leader retention, confirming the results we found in Study 1. Our results suggest that this phenomenon is quite general and can apply to various performance domains

Instrumental leadership: Measurement and extension of transformational-transactional leadership theory.

Leaders must scan the internal and external environment, chart strategic and task objectives, and provide performance feedback. These instrumental leadership (IL) functions go beyond the motivational and quid-pro quo leader behaviors that comprise the full-range-transformational, transactional, and laissez faire-leadership model. In four studies we examined the construct validity of IL. We found evidence for a four-factor IL model that was highly prototypical of good leadership. IL predicted top-level leader emergence controlling for the full-range factors, initiating structure, and consideration. It also explained unique variance in outcomes beyond the full-range factors; the effects of transformational leadership were vastly overstated when IL was omitted from the model. We discuss the importance of a "fuller full-range" leadership theory for theory and practice. We also showcase our methodological contributions regarding corrections for common method variance (i.e., endogeneity) bias using two-stage least squares (2SLS) regression and Monte Carlo split-sample designs

Predicting elections: Child's play!

In two experiments, children and adults rated pairs of faces from election races. Naïve adults judged a pair on competence; after playing a game, children chose who they would prefer to be captain of their boat. Children's (as well as adults') preferences accurately predicted actual election outcomes. For a podcast on our paper: English: http://www2.unil.ch/visio/?p=80 French: http://www2.unil.ch/visio/?p=8

Leadership process models: A review and synthesis

In organizational research, studying "processes" is important for uncovering and understanding the underlying causal mechanisms in a predictor-mediator-outcome logic. Processes answer "how" and "why" questions and provide more complete explanations about phenomena. Our focus in this review is on studies of leadership processes, which we systematically analyze to report on the state-of-the science. In doing so, we present a two-dimensional target-centric taxonomy to integrate previous research: The taxonomy distinguishes the target's level (i.e., individual follower, team, organizational, and extra-organizational) as well as the type of leadership processes that affect either the target's development or leverage of resources. Our review indicates that the predominantly studied leadership "meta" process model looks at the effect of leader traits or behaviors on performance-related outcomes through cognitive, affective, or behavioral leveraging factors. This "meta" model points to several important and understudied processes including a leader's influence on the target's development or work context. We also identify two largely overlooked yet critical issues for leadership process research: Modeling the role of time and that of multiple processes through which leadership effects manifest themselves in organizations. Using our taxonomy, we provide several reflection points that can guide the development of genuine and thoughtful leadership process theories. We conclude by urging future leadership process research to embrace multi-process, multi-level, and time-sensitive models