Leadership in cardiac surgery.

Despite the efficacy of cardiac surgery, less invasive interventions with more uncertain long-term outcomes are increasingly challenging surgery as first-line treatment for several congenital, degenerative and ischemic cardiac diseases. The specialty must evolve if it is to ensure its future relevance. More importantly, it must evolve to ensure that future patients have access to treatments with proven long-term effectiveness. This cannot be achieved without dynamic leadership; however, our contention is that this is not enough. The demands of a modern surgical career and the importance of the task at hand are such that the serendipitous emergence of traditional charismatic leadership cannot be relied upon to deliver necessary change. We advocate systematic analysis and strategic leadership at a local, national and international level in four key areas: Clinical Care, Research, Education and Training, and Stakeholder Engagement. While we anticipate that exceptional individuals will continue to shape the future of our specialty, the creation of robust structures to deliver collective leadership in these key areas is of paramount importance.

Leadership and individual differences: at the cusp of a renaissance

In this introductory editorial, we provide a brief overview of the history of individual difference research in leadership. We explain the major challenges that trait research faced, and why it was revived primarily because of methodological advancements. Next, we argue that leadership individual difference research is at a cusp of a renaissance. We explain why we are at this cusp and what researchers should do reify the renaissance in terms of theoretical extensions of trait models, the application of robust methodological advancements, and the development of process models linking distal (i.e., traits) predictors to proximal predictors (e.g., behaviors, skills, attitudes), and the latter to leader outcomes. We then summarize the papers we accepted for the special issue, and conclude with an optimistic note for leadership individual difference research.

Predictors of leadership: The usual suspects and the suspect traits

In this chapter, I review literature on traits (i.e., individual differences) and their links to leader outcomes. I present an integrated model, the ascription-actuality trait theory, to explain two routes to leader outcomes that stem from traits: the route that objectively matters and the route that appears to matter but objectively may not. I discuss the history of trait research and provide criteria by which we should judge the validity of trait models. Finally, I review trait models that are the most predictive of leadership outcomes and identify those that are non-starters.

An evolutionary model explaining the Neolithic transition from egalitarianism to leadership and despotism.

The Neolithic was marked by a transition from small and relatively egalitarian groups to much larger groups with increased stratification. But, the dynamics of this remain poorly understood. It is hard to see how despotism can arise without coercion, yet coercion could not easily have occurred in an egalitarian setting. Using a quantitative model of evolution in a patch-structured population, we demonstrate that the interaction between demographic and ecological factors can overcome this conundrum. We model the coevolution of individual preferences for hierarchy alongside the degree of despotism of leaders, and the dispersal preferences of followers. We show that voluntary leadership without coercion can evolve in small groups, when leaders help to solve coordination problems related to resource production. An example is coordinating construction of an irrigation system. Our model predicts that the transition to larger despotic groups will then occur when: (i) surplus resources lead to demographic expansion of groups, removing the viability of an acephalous niche in the same area and so locking individuals into hierarchy; (ii) high dispersal costs limit followers' ability to escape a despot. Empirical evidence suggests that these conditions were probably met, for the first time, during the subsistence intensification of the Neolithic.

Between Cultures: The Dyadic and Triadic Therapeutic Alliance in Multicultural Setting

Many researchers have identified the therapeutic alliance (TA) as the main factor that predicts psychotherapeutic success regardless the type of approach or treatment. In a multicultural setting, the construction of the therapeutic alliance is accompanied by elements that specially influence the flow of the interaction. Some examples of these elements are language, cultural beliefs, and traditions. For Hispanic-American clients in Lausanne (Switzerland), this encounter could take place in a dyadic setting, in the presence of a therapist who speaks Spanish and shares or not the client's culture of origin. On the other hand, it can take place in a triadic setting, in the presence of a therapist who does not speak Spanish and an interpreter that serves as a communication bridge. This present project has the purpose of studying the TA between different health professionals and the Hispanic- American clients who are assisted with and without an interpreter in Lausanne's health system. My goal is to study this relationship in the clients' context (many of them are clandestine) and based on their perception and subjective experience through a quantitative and qualitative complementary methodology. Because this project is in progress, this communication will focus on presenting the population's socio-demographic characteristics, the research questionings, methodology, and preliminary results.This project can enhance our knowledge about relationships between two cultures in a therapeutic encounter (psychological/psychiatric or medical). At the same time, it can bring us a better understanding about the migration movements of Hispanic-Americans in Switzerland.

Leadership at the upper echelons : three essays

"IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID", BUT CHARISMA MATTERS TOO: A DUAL PROCESS MODEL OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OUTCOMES. ABSTRACT Because charisma is assumed to be an important determinant of effective leadership, the extent to which a presidential nominee is more charismatic than his opponent should be an important determinant of voter choices. We computed a composite measure of the rhetorical richness of acceptances speeches given by U.S. presidential candidates at their national party convention. We added this marker of charisma to Ray C. Fair's presidential vote-share equation (1978; 2009). We theorized that voters decide using psychological attribution (i.e., due to macroeconomics and incumbency) as well as inferential processes (i.e., due to leader charismatic behavior) when voting. Controlling for the macro-level variables and incumbency in the Fair model, our results indicated that difference between nominees' charisma is a significant determinant of electoral success, particularly in close elections. This extended model significantly improves the precision of the Fair model and correctly predicts 23 out of the last 24 U.S. presidential elections. Paper 2: IT CEO LEADERSHIP, CORPORATE SOCIAL AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE. ABSTRACT We investigated whether CEO leadership predicted corporate financial performance (CFP) and corporate social performance (CSP). Using longitudinal data on 258 CEOs from 117 firms across 19 countries and 10 industry sectors, we found that determinants of CEO leadership (i.e., implicit motives) significantly predicted both CFP and CSP. As expected, the most consistent positive predictor was Responsibility Disposition when interacting with n (need for) Power. n Achievement and n Affiliation were generally negatively related or unrelated to outcomes. CSP was positively related to accounting measures of CFP. Our findings suggest that executive leader characteristics have important consequences for corporate level outcomes. Paper 3. PUNISHING THE POWERFUL: ATTRIBUTIONS OF BLAME AND LEADERSHIP ABSTRACT We propose that individuals are more lenient in attributing blame to leaders than to nonleaders. We advance a motivational explanation building on the perspective of punishment and on system justification theory. We conducted two scenario experiments which supported our proposition. In study 1, wrongdoer leader status was negatively related to blame and the perceived seriousness of the wrongdoing. In study 2, controlling for the Big-Five personality factor and individual differences in moral evaluation (i.e., moral foundations), wrongdoer leader status was negatively related with desired severity of punishment, and fair punishments were perceived as more just for non-leaders than for leaders.