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 Leader Traits and Behaviors Neglected Subordinate Processes Observable Outcomes

6. Leader Self-Sacrifice Follower Collective Identity Outward Focus Different Interpretation of Social world Leadership and Sacrifice George McGregor Burns (1978) -- sacrifice and suffering found among great leaders; important component of transformational leadership

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)

13. 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? Leader Traits and Behaviors Follower WSC Follower Affect & Cognition

18. Leader Self-Benefit Leader Self-Sacrifice Follower Individual Identity Follower Collective Identity Self-focus, isolation, Competition with others Outward focus, inclusion, Cooperation with others Why focus on self-sacrifice?

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 Identity Level Self- Definition Self- Worth Individual Differences from others Unique qualities Relational Role relationsCorrect role behavior Collective Group membership Fit to group prototype

25. Consequences of Active Identity Identity Level Self- Definition Self- WorthKey Motive Individual Differences from others Unique qualities Self- interest Relational Role relationsCorrect role behavior Other’s welfare Collective Group membership Fit to group prototype Collective welfare

26. Consequences of Active Identity Identity Level Self- Definition Self- WorthKey Motive Social Exchange Individual Differences from others Unique qualities Self- interest Negotiate: direct, explicit benefits Relational Role relationsCorrect role behavior Other’s welfare Reciprocal: long- term, direct, implicit benefit Collective Group membership Fit to group prototype Collective welfare Generalized: implicit, indirect benefit

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 R 2 from Hierarchical Regressions Predictor: Outcome Satisfaction OCBI Supervisor Satisfaction OCBO Management Satisfaction DJ.53**-.11.14*-.07.10 IJ.09.08.52**.22*.28** PJ.16*.16.24**.04.41** ΔR2ΔR2.45.03.55.05.41 Indiv’l.06.02.14*-.16*.00 Relat’l.03.24*.00.33**.16* Collect.09.19*.04.09.00 ΔR2ΔR2.01.12.02.14.02 IJ x Rel..10 a.08.13*--.18* ΔR2ΔR2.01.02 --.03

34. Interaction of Relational Identity and Interactional Justice in Predicting Supervisor Satisfaction 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 LowHigh Interactional Justice High Low Relational self-concept

35. Interactions Predicting Additional DV s Outcome Satisfaction Mgt. Satisfaction 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 LowHigh Interactional Justice Relational self-concept High Low 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 LowHigh Interactional Justice Relational self-concept High Low

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 + ConstructItemsAlphaSource Leader Member Exch.7.92Graen et al. 1982 Affective Commitment6.79Meyer & Allen, 1997 Continuance Commit.6.84 Coworker Satisfaction4.70Spector, 1997 Company Satisfaction4.85Dunham & Smith, 1979 Perceived Org. Sup.9.95Eisenberger et al., 1986

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) Condition /Measure N Mean for Focal Group Mean for Other Conditions t (53) Individual194.322.617.54, p<.01 Relational194.302.569.04, p<.01 Collective174.292.498.56, p<.01

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 Dependent VariablesBeta Interaction ΔR 2 System Referenced DVs Company Satisfaction.13*.01 Affective Commitment.15*.02 Perceived Org. Support.11*.01 Org. Citizenship Behavior - O-.04.00

44. Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interaction DV = Company Satisfaction 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 Low High Procedural Justice Primed Not primed Collective self-concept

45. Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interactions Affective Commitment Perceived Org. Support 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 LowHigh Procedural Justice 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Low High Procedural Justice

46. Collective Identity Manipulation x PJ Interaction Dependent VariableBeta Interaction ΔR 2 Dyad-Referenced DVs LMX.12*.01 Coworker Satisfaction.16*.02 Personal Referenced DVs Task Satisfaction.18*.02 Continuance Commitment.19*.03

47. Interaction for Dyad-Referenced Outcomes Leader Member Exchange Coworker Satisfaction 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 LowHigh Procedural Justice Collective self-concept Primed Not primed 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 LowHigh Procedural Justice Collective self-concept Primed Not primed

48. Effects of Chronic Identity Levels Individual identity predicted Outcome Satisfaction (-.14*); Task Satisfaction (-.18*) Continuance Commitment (.13 a ) Perceived Organizational Support (-.14*) Relational identity predicted OCBI (.17*) Collective identity predicted Task Satisfaction (.21*) OCBI (.27*) OCBO (.26*)

49. Interaction of Chronic Relational Identity and Interactional Justice DV = Leader Member Exchange 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 LowHigh Interactional Justice Relational self-concept High Low

50. Interaction of Chronic Individual Identity and Distributive Justice DV = Outcome Satisfaction 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 LowHigh Distributive Justice Individual self-concept High Low

51. Conclusions Chronic differences in identity affect: Salience of justice dimensions (interactions) Translation of justice into DVs (main effects) Primed identities affected: Salience of Collective identity (robust effects) Needed: Studies that show leaders can directly affect identity salience or development Ibarra’s (1999) work on identity development shows that leaders  provisional selves

52. Implications for Understanding Leadership Follower cognitions are an important aspect of leadership Identities  effects of justice perceptions Identities may affect perceptions of leaders Identity may also affect: Sense of inclusion (relational, collective) Contribution to collective activities Cooperative behavior Willingness to sacrifice for dyad or group Emotions associated with group outcomes External versus internal focus Interpretation of task and social processes

53. Caveats Identity manipulations may have unintended effects: Blatant primes can boomerang, producing contrasts rather than assimilation (Martin, Strack & Staple, 2001) Primes inconsistent with a leader’s actions or values may not be seen as authentic Identity activation may have different consequences for different subgroups (gender, race, ethnicity) Emphasizing collective identity may accentuate differences, rather than enhancing similarities, for minorities (Kampmeier & Simon, 2001)

54. Questions? Additional Caveats Effects may occur through unconscious as well as conscious processes Justice can also affect identity, Lind (2001) Fundamental Interpersonal Dilemma

55. Johnson & Lord (under review): Effects of justice on identities can be implicit (unconscious) as well as explicit (conscious) Explicit measures (questionnaire) Implicit (word stem or word fragment completion) UNI_ _ _

56. Johnson & Lord (under review): Justice can also affect identity, Lind (2001) Fundamental Interpersonal Dilemma Effects of justice on identities can be implicit (unconscious) as well as explicit Explicit measures (questionnaire) Implicit (word stem or word fragment completion) UNI_ _ _ UNIQUE -- Individual UNITED – Collective UNIPED -- Neutral

57. Indirect Effects of Justice on Behavioral Intentions in Study 2.