Research in leadership, self, and identity: A sample of the present and a glimpse of the future

Researchers in leadership effectiveness are paying increasing attention to the role of follower self-concept and identity as a mediator and moderator of the effectiveness of leadership. In this introductory article, we provide a short outline of this rapidly growing field of research, briefly introduce the articles presented in this special issue on leadership, self, and identity, and highlight key themes for future research that we feel emerge from these studies. These themes include greater attention to the dynamic interplay between leaders and followers, the incorporation of theories of fairness, and the role of leader self-concept. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Uncertainty reduction, self-enhancement, and ingroup identification

Two experiments tested the prediction that uncertainty reduction and self-enhancement motivations have an interactive effect on ingroup identification. In Experiment 1 (N = 64), uncertainty and group status were manipulated, and the effect on ingroup identification was measured. As predicted, low-uncertainty participants identified more strongly with a high- than low-status group, whereas high-uncertainty participants showed no preference; and low-status group members identified more strongly under high than low uncertainty, whereas high-status group members showed no preference. Experiment 2 (N = 210) replicated Experiment 1, but with a third independent variable that manipulated how prototypical participants were of their group. As predicted, the effects obtained in Experiment 1 only emerged where participants were highly prototypical. Low prototypicality depressed identification with a low-status group under high uncertainty. The implications of these results for intergroup relations and the role of prototypicality in social identity processes are discussed.

Effective leadership in salient groups: Revisiting leader-member exchange theory from the perspective of the social identity theory of leadership

Two studies compared leader-member exchange (LMX) theory and the social identity theory of leadership. Study 1 surveyed 439 employees of organizations in Wales, measuring Work group salience, leader-member relations, and perceived leadership effectiveness. Study 2 surveyed 128 members of organizations in India, measuring identification not salience and also individualism/collectivism. Both studies provided good support for social identity predictions. Depersonalized leader-member relations were associated with greater leadership effectiveness among high- than low-salient groups (Study 1) and among high than low identifiers (Study 2). Personalized leadership effectiveness was less affected by salience (Study 1) and unaffected by identification (Study 2). Low-salience groups preferred personalized leadership more than did high-salience groups (Study 1). Low identifiers showed no preference but high identifiers preferred depersonalized leadership (Study 2). In Study 2, collectivists did not Prefer depersonalized as opposed to personalized leadership, whereas individualists did, probably because collectivists focus more on the relational self.

Reactions to positive deviance: Social identity and attribution dimensions

This research examines whether evaluations of positive deviates (i.e. high achieving group members) are influenced by the attributions they make for their performance. We argue that ingroup positive deviates who make group attributions help enhance the ingroup's image and thus attract favorable evaluations. In Experiment 1, ingroup positive deviates who made group attributions were generally evaluated more favorably than ingroup positive deviates who made individual attributions. There was also evidence that the positive deviates' attribution style influenced group and self-evaluations. Evaluations of outgroup positive deviates were not influenced by their attribution style. In Experiment 2, an ingroup positive deviate who was successful and attributed that success to the group was upgraded relative to an ingroup positive deviate who made individual attributions. Group evaluations were also higher when the positive deviate made group attributions. This pattern did not emerge when the positive deviate failed. The results are discussed from a social identity perspective.