Leadership and Social Justice: A Follower-Centered Perspective

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