This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Haslam, S. A. Articles by Veenstra, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Social Identity and the Romance of Leadership: The Importance of being Seen to be ‘Doing it for Us’

School of Psychology, The University of Exeter, A.Haslam{at}exeter.ac.uk

Michael J. Platow

School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University

John C. Turner

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Katherine J. Reynolds

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Craig McGarty

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Penelope J. Oakes

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Susan Johnson

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Michelle K. Ryan

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Kristine Veenstra

Division of Psychology, The Australian National University

Previous research by Meindl (e.g. 1993) on the ‘romance of leadership’ suggests that individuals in leadership roles are perceived to be more charismatic to the extent that the organization they lead undergoes a crisis turnaround (e.g. moving from loss to profit) rather than a crisis decline (e.g. moving from profit to loss). Building on a social identity approach to leadership and previous research by Haslam and Platow (in press-a), this paper argues that this pattern should be tempered by the degree to which a leader’s behavior serves to affirm and promote an ingroup identity shared with followers. Consistent with this analysis, an experimental study (N = 120) revealed that, independent of organizational performance, a (male) leader was seen as more charismatic in an intergroup context when his previous behavior had been identity-affirming or even-handed rather than identity-negating. Even-handed leaders also tended to be seen as particularly charismatic when they were associated with crisis turnaround, while identity-affirming leaders were protected from negative attributions in the context of crisis decline. These results suggest that social identity and self-categorization processes have a complex role to play in the emergence and perception of charismatic leadership.

Key Words: charisma • leadership • organizations • self-categorization • social identity

References

• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1989). The multifactor leadership questionnaire. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
• Brown, P. M., & Turner, J. C. (2001). Stereotypes and social explanation. In C. McGarty, V. Yzerbyt, & R. Spears (Eds.), Stereotypes as explanations: The formation of meaningful beliefs about social groups. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bryman, A. (1982). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.
• Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
• De Cremer, D. (in press). Charismatic leadership and co-operation in social dilemmas: A matter of transforming motives?Journal of Applied Social Psychology.
• Duck, J. M., & Fielding, K. S. (1999). Leaders and subgroups: One of us or one of them?Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2, 203-230.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Gemmill, G., & Oakley, J. (1992). Leadership: An alienating social myth?Human Relations, 45, 113-129.[Abstract]
• Haslam, S. A. (2001). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. London: Sage.
• Haslam, S. A., McGarty, C., Brown, P. M., Eggins, R. A., Morrison, B. E., & Reynolds, K. J. (1998). Inspecting the emperor’s clothes: Evidence that randomly-selected leaders can enhance group performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and Practice, 2, 168-184.[CrossRef]
• Haslam, S. A., & Platow, M. (in press-a). Social identity and the link between leadership and followership: How affirming an ingroup identity translates personal vision into group action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
• Haslam, S. A., & Platow, M. (in press-b). Your wish is our command: The role of shared social identity in translating a leader’s vision into a follower’s task. In M. A. Hogg & D. Terry (Eds.), Social identity processes in organizations. New York: Taylor & Francis.
• Haslam, S. A., Powell, C., & Turner, J. C. (2000). Social identity, self-categorization and work motivation: Rethinking the contribution of the group to positive and sustainable organizational outcomes. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 49, 319-339.[CrossRef]
• Hewstone, M. (1989). Causal attribution: From cognitive process to collective beliefs. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Hogg, M. A. (1996). Intragroup processes, group structure and social identity. In W. P. Robinson (Ed.), Social groups and identities: The developing legacy of Henri Tajfel (pp. 65-93). Oxford: Butterworth-Heineman.
• Hogg, M. A. (in press). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review.
• Hollander, E. P. (1985). Leadership and power. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 485-537). New York: Random House.
• Hollander, E. P. (1993). Legitimacy, power, and influence: A perspective on relational features of leadership. In M. M. Chemers & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions (pp. 29-47). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
• Hollander, E. P. (1995). Organizational leadership and followership. In P. Collett & A. Furnham (Eds.), Social psychology at work: Essays in honour of Michael Argyle (pp. 69-87). London: Routledge.
• Hollander, E. P., & Julian, J. W. (1970). Studies in leader legitimacy, influence and innovation. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 485-537). New York: Random House.
• House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the U.S. presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 364-396.[CrossRef]
• Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. (1988). The leadership challenge: How to get things done in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. (1990, January). The credibility factor: What followers expect from their leaders. Management Review, 29-33.
• Lord, R. G., Brown, D. J., & Freiberg, S. J. (1999). Understanding the dynamics of leadership: The role of follower self-concepts in the leader/follower relationship. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 167-203.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1990). Perceptions of leadership and their implications in organizations. In J. S. Carroll (Ed.), Applied social psychology and organizational settings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. London: Unwin Hyman.
• Meindl, J. R. (1993). Reinventing leadership: A radical, social psychological approach. In J. K. Murnigham (Ed.) Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 89-118). Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Meindl, J. R., & Ehrlich, S. B. (1987). The romance of leadership and the evaluation of organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 91-109.[CrossRef]
• Meindl, J. R., Ehrlich, S. B., & Dukerich, J. M. (1985). The romance of leadership. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 78-102.[CrossRef]
• Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgement. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Nye, J. L., & Simonetta, L. G. (1996). Followers’ perceptions of group leaders. The impact of recognition-based and inference-based processes. In J. Nye & A. Brower (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 124-153). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Oakes, P. J. (1987). The salience of social categories. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 117-141). Oxford: Blackwell.
• Oakes, P. J., Turner, J. C., & Haslam, S. A. (1991). Perceiving people as group members: The role of fit in the salience of social categorizations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 125-144.
• Pears, I. (1992). The gentleman and the hero: Wellington and Napoleon in the nineteenth century. In R. Porter (Ed.), Myths of the English (pp. 216-236). Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Pfeffer, J. (1977). The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review, 2, 104-112.[CrossRef]
• Pillai, R., & Meindl, J. R. (1991). The impact of a performance crisis on attributions of charismatic leadership: A preliminary study. Best paper proceedings of the 1991 Eastern Academy of Management Meetings. Hartford, CT: Eastern Academy of Management.
• Plato (380BC/1993). The republic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Platow, M. J., Hoar, S., Reid, S., Harley, K., & Morrison, D. (1997). Endorsement of distributively fair or unfair leaders in interpersonal and intergroup situations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 465-494.[CrossRef]
• Platow, M., Reid, S., & Andrew, S. (1998). Leadership endorsement: The role of distributive and procedural behavior in interpersonal and intergroup contexts. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 1, 35-47.[Abstract]
• Platow, M. J., & van Knippenberg, D. (in press). The effects of leader ingroup prototypicality and distributive fairness on leadership endorsements. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
• Platow, M. J., van Knippenberg, D., & Haslam, S. A. (2000). Self-categorization and charismatic leadership: A special gift that followers bestow on leaders for embodying a shared identity. Unpublished manuscript, La Trobe University, Australia.
• Reicher, S. D., Drury, J., Hopkins, N., & Stott, C. (in press). A model of crowd prototypes and crowd leadership. In C. Barker (Ed.), Leadership and social movements. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Reicher, S. D., & Hopkins, N. (1996). Seeking influence through characterizing self-categories: An analysis of anti-abortionist rhetoric. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 297-311.
• Reicher, S. D., & Hopkins, N. (2001). Self and nation: Categorization, contestation and mobilisation. London: Sage.
• Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 28-49). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1977). Constraints on administrative discretion: The limited influence of mayors on city budgets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12, 475-498.
• Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1984). Corporate attributions as strategic illusions of management control. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 238-254.
• Sarros, J. C., & Butchatsky, O. (1996). Leadership: Australia’s top CEOs—Finding out what makes them the best. Sydney: HarperCollins.
• Tajfel, H. (1972). La catégorisation sociale (Social categorization). In S. Moscovici (Ed.), Introduction à la psychologie sociale (pp. 272-302). Paris: Larousse.
• Tajfel, H. (1978). Interindividual behavior and intergroup behavior. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups (pp. 27-60). London: Academic Press.
• Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
• Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 15-40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 2, pp. 77-122). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Turner, J. C. (1987). The analysis of social influence. In J. C. Turner, M. A. Hogg, P. J. Oakes, S. D. Reicher, & M. S. Wetherell (Eds.), Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory (pp. 68-88). Oxford: Blackwell.
• Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
• Turner, J. C. (1999). Some current themes in research on social identity and self-categorization theories. In N. Ellemers, R. Spears, & B. Doosje (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 6-34). Oxford: Blackwell.
• Turner, J. C. (2001). Foreword to S. A. Haslam, Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach (pp. x-xiii). London: Sage.
• Turner, J. C., & Haslam, S. A. (2001). Social identity, organizations and leadership. In M. E. Turner (Ed.), Groups at work: Advances in theory and research (pp. 25-65). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Weber, M. (1946). The sociology of charismatic authority. In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Milles (Eds. and Trans.), Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 245-252). New York: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1921)

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Haslam, S. A. Articles by Veenstra, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?