RUNNING HEAD: WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT
RUNNING HEAD: WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT
2
The words “Running head” should not be there. That was 6th edition, some three years ago
There should be a space after the title and before your name
Week 3 Assignment
name
School
Class name
Professor:
November 13, 2022
This should be double spaced 0 point before and after – NOT 8 point after
The definition or differences between utilitarian ethics and
deontological ethics
The Definition or Differences Between Utilitarian Ethics and Deontological Ethics
According to the utilitarian theory, choices are made based on how much benefit can be gained by most people. Since the consequences influence the morality of the action, it is also referred to as the consequentialist approach (Mandal et al., 2016). The predicted benefits or harms of a course of action or intervention based on evidence typically serve as the approach's guiding principles. In deontology, the morality of an action is determined by the nature of the activity; harm is wrong regardless of the consequences. Many people refer to this idea as Kantian deontology. Although deontological choices may be suitable for individuals, they do not always benefit society.
Utilitarianism contends that moral standards should be based on outcomes rather than on people's goodwill, but deontological ethics allow people to carry out their ethical obligations by doing so. The appropriate decision becomes more crucial because deontological ethics encourages people to employ their kindness whenever they attempt to do any acts. Utilitarianism, in contrast, asserts that since each moral action has an outcome, the repercussion should also be considered (Moreland, 2021). A deontologist holds that moral obligations should be per goodwill, regardless of whether a choice will benefit the majority of people or not.
The notion that the goal justifies the means is central to utilitarianism (Joshua, 2022). In contrast to the latter, it considers actions' results more valuable. Deontology is based on the Scriptures, which may refer to laws, moral principles, and intuition. According to deontology, both the actions and the results must be ethical. It emphasizes that the morality of the activity has higher weight and that a wrong action outcome is not necessarily the same as the deed itself.
Utilitarian ethics exclusively consider the effects of an activity, but deontological ethics are focused on the aim of an action without concern for the result (Laakasuo & Sundvall 2016). While some claim that the legal code of ethics is based on deontological philosophy, others argue that it is drawn from utilitarian theory. Legal ethics and the professional code of responsibility shouldn't be formed from either, as deontological ethics and utilitarian ethics are opposed.
The utilitarian tenet states that the best course of action should be followed to benefit the most people. Deontology is the branch of ethics that deals with accountability, moral ob.
TỔNG HỢP HƠN 100 ĐỀ THI THỬ TỐT NGHIỆP THPT TOÁN 2024 - TỪ CÁC TRƯỜNG, TRƯỜNG...
RUNNING HEAD WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENTRUNNING HEAD WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT.docx
1. RUNNING HEAD: WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT
RUNNING HEAD: WEEK 3 ASSIGNMENT
2
The words “Running head” should not be there. That was 6th
edition, some three years ago
There should be a space after the title and before your name
Week 3 Assignment
name
School
Class name
Professor:
November 13, 2022
This should be double spaced 0 point before and after – NOT 8
point after
The definition or differences between utilitarian ethics and
deontological ethics
The Definition or Differences Between Utilitarian Ethics and
Deontological Ethics
According to the utilitarian theory, choices are made based on
how much benefit can be gained by most people. Since the
consequences influence the morality of the action, it is also
2. referred to as the consequentialist approach (Mandal et al.,
2016). The predicted benefits or harms of a course of action or
intervention based on evidence typically serve as the approach's
guiding principles. In deontology, the morality of an action is
determined by the nature of the activity; harm is wrong
regardless of the consequences. Many people refer to this idea
as Kantian deontology. Although deontological choices may be
suitable for individuals, they do not always benefit society.
Utilitarianism contends that moral standards should be based on
outcomes rather than on people's goodwill, but deontological
ethics allow people to carry out their ethical obligations by
doing so. The appropriate decision becomes more crucial
because deontological ethics encourages people to employ their
kindness whenever they attempt to do any acts. Utilitarianism,
in contrast, asserts that since each moral action has an outcome,
the repercussion should also be considered (Moreland, 2021). A
deontologist holds that moral obligations should be per
goodwill, regardless of whether a choice will benefit the
majority of people or not.
The notion that the goal justifies the means is central to
utilitarianism (Joshua, 2022). In contrast to the latter, it
considers actions' results more valuable. Deontology is based on
the Scriptures, which may refer to laws, moral principles, and
intuition. According to deontology, both the actions and the
results must be ethical. It emphasizes that the morality of the
activity has higher weight and that a wrong action outcome is
not necessarily the same as the deed itself.
Utilitarian ethics exclusively consider the effects of an activity,
but deontological ethics are focused on the aim of an action
without concern for the result (Laakasuo & Sundvall 2016).
While some claim that the legal code of ethics is based on
deontological philosophy, others argue that it is drawn from
utilitarian theory. Legal ethics and the professional code of
responsibility shouldn't be formed from either, as deontological
ethics and utilitarian ethics are opposed.
The utilitarian tenet states that the best course of action should
3. be followed to benefit the most people. Deontology is the
branch of ethics that deals with accountability, moral
obligation, and commitment. Both utilitarianism and deontology
address the ethical implications of one's activity, regardless of
the result.
There are at least three significant aspects of deontological
ethics. First, one should perform their duties out of pure
obligation. The inherent moral qualities of a particular act or
regulation determine whether it is right or evil. Second, people
should never be viewed as anything more than a means to an
aim; instead, they should be regarded as objects with inherent
moral values. Thirdly, a moral principle is a universalizable
categorical imperative that must be relevant to all individuals in
the same moral circumstance. (Ivy, P. (2021))
According to a utilitarian view of morality, no moral action or
norm is inherently good or bad (Reflection on Ethical Theories,
2021). Instead, whether an action or rule is morally justified or
wrong depends only on the available nonmoral benefits, such as
fulfillment or health, resulting from performing or adhering to
that rule. Based on this approach, moral duty is not intrinsic but
rather instrumental.
References
Ivy, P. (2021). Virtue Theory, Utilitarianism, and Deontological
Ethics
.https://ivypanda.com/essays/virtue-theory-
utilitarianism-and-deontological-ethics/
Virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethic (2021).
IvyPanda.https://ivypanda.com/essays/virtue-theory-
utilitarianism-and-deontological-ethics/ This is literally
another students paper. NEVER, EVER, EVER use this cite
again.
Joshua (2022). Differences Between Utilitarianism and
Deontology.
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/health/difference-
between-utilitarianism-and-deontology/A horrible source
4. Joshua (2022). Differences between utilitarianism and
deontology.
Differences Between.
http://www.differencebetween.net/science/health/difference-
between-utilitarianism-and-deontology/
Laakasuo, M & Sundvall, J. (2016). Are Utilitarian and
Deontological Preferences Unidimensional.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01228/f
ull
Laakasuo, M., & Sundvall, J. (2016). Are utilitarian and
deontological preferences unidimensional.
Frontiers in Psychology, 7, pp. 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01228
Mandal, J., Ponnambath, K. D., & Parija, C. S., (2016).
Utilitarian and deontological ethics in medicine.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4778182/#:~:te
xt=In%20utilitarian%20ethics%2C%20outcomes%20justify,may
%20not%20justify%20the%20means)
Mandal, J., Ponnambath, K. D., & Parija, C. S., (2016).
Utilitarian and deontological ethics in medicine.
Tropical Parasitology, 6(1), pp. 5-7.
https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5070.175024
Moreland, P. J. (2021). Ethics Theories: Utilitarianism Vs.
Deontological Ethics. https://www.equip.org/articles/ethics-
theories-utilitarianism-vs-deontological-ethics/
Moreland, P. J. (2021).
Ethics theories: Utilitarianism vs. deontological ethics.
Christian Research Institute.
Reflection On Ethical Theories: Utilitarianism And
Deontology. (2021), from https://gradesfixer.com/free-essay-
examples/reflection-on-ethical-theories-utilitarianism-and-
deontology/This is another student’s essay. NEVER, EVER use
this again.
5. Reflection on ethical theories: Utilitarianism and
deontology. (2021), from
https://gradesfixer.com/free-essay-examples/reflection-
on-ethical-theories-utilitarianism-and-deontology/
Describe the strengths, weaknesses, and appropriate
applications
Describe the Strengths, Weaknesses, and Appropriate
Applications
Over the years, a wide variety of incentive theories have been
created. Several organizations employ these theories. These
ideas include David McClelland's achievement-based
philosophy, Frederick Herzberg's hygiene motivational model,
and Abraham Maslow's pyramid of wants theory (Ben, 2021).
David McClelland's theory of incentive is based on
accomplishment, Frederick Herzerberg'sHerzberg’s motivation-
based philosophy is centered on hygiene, and Maslow's pyramid
theory of needs (Vitai, 2021).
These three theories have certain things in common. These
philosophies all express consideration for the demands of the
workers (Sharma, 2022). They are all aimed at boosting staff
morale and all incorporate components of recognition. All of
these theories show consideration for the demands of the
workforce. They are all intended to establish the social norm for
the staff and all include components of gratitude.
The five levels of needs in Maslow's Needs Hierarchy are
arranged in a pyramid shape. The categories of motivators and
hygiene elements, which have an impact on motivation, are
represented by Frederick Herzberg's theory of motivation
(Sahoo, 2021). It examines both aspects of satisfaction
which are positive and negative. Three motivational
6. requirements are highlighted by achievement-based motivation
theory: the need for power, achievement, and affiliation.
The needs are ranked in ascending order according to Maslow's
theory of the hierarchy of needs. Motivation-hygiene hypothesis
of Herzberg examines elements that might lead to both positive
and negative satisfaction (Vaughan, 2020). According to the
principle of achievement-based motivation, there is a critical
requirement for feedback on accomplishments and growth.
The primacy of needs is outlined in Maslow's philosophy of the
pyramid of needs (Prince, 2020). The hierarchy of needs is
absent from Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory. According to
the principle of achievement-based motivation, a feeling of
accomplishment is necessary.
References
Ben, O. (2021). Theories of Motivation and Their Application in
Organizations: A Risk Analysis.
https://researchleap.com/theories-motivation-application-
organizations-risk-analysis/
Badubi, R.M. (2017). Theories of motivation and their
application in organizations: A risk analysis.
International Journal of Management Science and
Business Administration, 3(3), 44-51. https://doi.org/
10.18775/ijied.1849-7551-7020.2015.33.2004
7. Prince, T. (2022). Motivation Theories.
https://www.knowledgehut.com/tutorials/project-
management/motivation-theoriesA horrible source
Prince, T. (2022). Motivation theories.
Knowledge Hut.
https://www.knowledgehut.com/tutorials/project-
management/motivation-theories
Sahoo, T. (2021). A Comparative Analysis on Motivational
Theories.
https://www.academia.edu/42952044/A_COMPARATIVE_ANA
LYSIS_ON_MOTIVATIONAL_THEORIES_OF_HERZBERGS_
TWO_FACTOR_THEORY_AND_DOUGLAS_MC_GREGORS_
THEORY_X_and_THEORY_Y
Sahoo, T. (2021). A comparative analysis on motivational
theories. , International Journal For
Innovative Research in Multidisciplinary Field, 6(4),
pp. 205-209.
Sharma, A. (2022). Three Theories of Motivation.
https://www.psychologydiscussion.net/motivation/notes-on-3-
main-theories-of-motivation-psychology/670Another horrible
source
Sharma, A. (2022). Three theories of motivation.
Psychology Discussion.
https://www.psychologydiscussion.net/motivation/notes-on-3-
main-theories-of-motivation-psychology/670
Vaughan, T. (2020). Top 3 Motivation Theories in Management.
https://www.poppulo.com/blog/theories-of-work-
motivationTHIS IS A BLOG!!! And it ios from a weak source
Vaughan, T. (2020). Top 3 motivation theories in management.
Poppulo.https://www.poppulo.com/blog/theories-of-
work-motivation
8. Vitai, K, Z. (2021). Comparative analysis of motivation
theories.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306041772_Comparati
ve_analysis_of_motivation_theories
Kispál-Vitai, Z. . (2016). Comparative analysis of motivation
theories.
International Journal of Engineering and Management
Sciences,
1(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.21791/IJEMS.2016.1.25.
You have no headings, no organization, you have many lousy
references, and your APA is nowhere close to being correct.
That may sound harsh, but it is the truth
·
Exercise 7: Compare and contrast two different
contemporary leaders in regard to their leadership styles: their
strengths, weaknesses, and if they would be equally successful
in other industries. Be objective. Use at least six peer-reviewed
sources. Remember, this should be in the correct 7th edition
APA formatting.
WHITE PAPER
The Challenges Leaders Face Around the World
More Similar than Different
By: William A. Gentry, Regina H. Eckert,
Sarah A. Stawiski, and Sophia Zhao
11. Why look at these challenges?
The life of a modern-day leader clearly is not
easy. Inside their organizations, they need to
lead and motivate a diversified group of people,
work across organizational boundaries, improve
efficiency, and achieve growth. Externally, they
face a complex and globalized environment;
they have to manage the requirements of
government, keep up with competitors, and
meet the expectations of other stakeholders.
And within this global environment, there are
many cultural considerations leaders must face
to be effective. They must work across cultural
boundaries and alongside others who, at times,
are very different from them and have different
ways of getting work completed.
These are difficult challenges, and many leaders
feel ill-prepared to tackle them. Developing
leaders who can face these challenges is tricky
indeed. Of course, some training needs and
content can be derived from organizational
strategy and planned change initiatives. Yet
many leaders have other needs and challenges
that strategy or change initiatives do not
cover. So what are those challenges, and how
can a company ensure that training actually is
designed to meet the development needs of a
specific leader?
To help companies clarify these issues, we
investigated the main challenges leaders face
around the globe and whether the challenges
differ depending upon geographic location.
13. decision-making, and getting up to speed with the job—to be
more effective
at work.
• Inspiring Others—The challenge of inspiring or motivating
others to ensure they
are satisfied with their jobs; how to motivate a workforce to
work smarter.
• Developing Employees—The challenge of developing others,
including topics
around mentoring and coaching.
• Leading a Team—The challenge of team-building, team
development, and team
management; how to instill pride in a team or support the team,
how to lead a
big team, and what to do when taking over a new team.
• Guiding Change—The challenge of managing, mobilizing,
understanding, and
leading change. How to mitigate change consequences,
overcome resistance to
change, and deal with employees’ reaction to change.
• Managing Internal Stakeholders and Politics—The challenge
of managing
relationships, politics, and image. Gaining managerial support
and managing up;
getting buy-in from other departments, groups, or individuals.
Table 1 displays the frequency and rank of the Top 10
challenges in each country.
It may be surprising to find so much consistency in these
challenges, given that
leaders came from all corners of the globe, as well as different
29. ambiguous).4 Leaders need to be adept at
managing, mobilizing, leading, and dealing with change.
Incorporating change management and
enhancing resourcefulness should be at the forefront of
leadership development initiatives. Here are
some suggestions to develop your change leadership skills even
further:
“The nature of the global business environment guarantees
that no matter how hard we work to create a stable and
healthy organization, our organization will continue to
experience dramatic changes far beyond our control.”
—Margaret J. Wheatley, writer and management consultant
“Try it, you might like it.” This old television
commercial slogan can help you incorporate
change. It’s natural that people do not like
change. Leaders should try to transform their
own thinking, and be more open to fresh ideas.
If leaders are able to do that, they can be an
example to others to embrace change as well.
People may witness that shift in attitude and
embrace it.
Embrace emotional reactions to change.
Human cognition and emotion are integrated
systems. When convincing people that change
is needed and desirable, it’s not enough to use
rational arguments. Leaders also need to be
sensitive to employees’ emotions and show
empathy. Engage people emotionally by being
visionary, passionate, and authentic.
Since you cannot be clairvoyant, be clear.
Nobody can tell others what the future will
33. Conclusion
“Human beings are more alike than unalike,
and what is true anywhere is true everywhere . . .”
—Maya Angelou, poet,memoirist, novelist, and civil rights
activist
There is no doubt that the work of
modern-day leaders is complicated
around the world. And our research
shows that the challenges these diverse
leaders face are more similar than
different. Even though they may feel
alone with the problems and challenges
they have, it is likely that one leader’s
challenge is the same as others several
time zones away.
So leaders out there, take solace in
the fact that you are not alone. Help
others who probably have the same
challenges. At the very least, listen.
Give peer feedback if you are asked
for it—you probably have some great
advice since you probably went through
it (or are going through it).
For those who work in training and
development, knowing the challenges
leaders face can be the catalyst for
developmental initiatives aimed at
helping leaders. Developmental
initiatives are more effective if
they are in line with the challenges
leaders face. So, we suggest that a
majority of the content could be the
35. 15
About the Research
Participants
Data is from participants of the Leadership
Development Program (LDP)® of the Center for Creative
Leadership. Each participant completed assessments
and background forms usually between two and eight
weeks before his or her respective program. Our final
sample consisted of 763 practicing managers from
seven different locations: 99 participants from China
(60 of those from mainland China, 39 from Hong Kong);
106 from Egypt, 100 participants from India; 112 from
Singapore; 94 from Spain; 106 participants from the
United Kingdom; and 146 participants from the United
States. In each location, there was about a 60–40 split
between male and female participants (except India,
where it was 84% male). Most (93.8%) participants
were at the middle, upper middle, and executive
levels of management. They had, on average, 4.15
years tenure in their current job and 9.38 years tenure
in their current organization. Most (84.9%) worked
in the private sector from eight different industries
(communication, utilities, education, finance, insurance,
banking, government, health, human services,
manufacturing, transportation, wholesale/retail trade).
Procedure
As part of their “prework” before coming to their
respective leadership development program,
participants filled out several assessment and
background biographical forms. Part of this prework
asked each participant to answer the following open-
ended question: “What are the three most critical
leadership challenges you are currently facing?”
37. Endnotes
1Gentry, W. A., Harris, L. S., Baker, B. A., & Leslie,
J. B. (2008). Managerial skills: What has changed
since the late 1980s. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 29, 167–181.
2Gentry, W. A., & Sosik, J. J. (2010). Developmental
relationships and managerial promotability in
organizations: A multisource study. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 77, 266–278.
3Yukl, G. A. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
4Stiehm, J. H. (2002). The U.S. Army War College:
Military Education in a Democracy. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press.
5Mintzberg, H. (1985). The organization as a political
arena. Journal of Management Studies, 22, 133–154.
6 Ferris, G. R., Treadway, D. C., Kolodinsky, R. W.,
Hochwarter, W. A., Kacmar, C. J., Douglas, C., & Frink,
D. D. (2005). Development and validation of the
political skill inventory. Journal of Management, 31,
126–152. Page 127.
7 Ferris, G. R., Davidson, S. L., & Perrewé, P. L.
(2005). Political Skill at Work: Impact on Work
Effectiveness. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black
Publishing
8 Gentry, W. A., & Leslie, J. B. (2012). Developing
Political Savvy. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative
Leadership.
9 Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming Qualitative
Information. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
10 Due to the high number of categories, a
computation of Kappa statistics is not applicable.
This white paper is based on findings from the following study:
39. Regina H. Eckert, PhD, is a CCL senior research scientist
in the EMEA region. Her work focuses on leadership,
careers and diversity, including gender, ethnic, and
cultural diversity. Currently she is managing research
projects that explore managerial careers in 21st century
Europe and 360-degree feedback for development in
multinational work environments. She works at the
intersection of science and practice, publishing and
presenting her work for academic and practitioner
audiences worldwide. Regina’s writings are featured
in CCL’s Handbook of Leadership Development ( Jossey-
Bass, 2010). Prior to joining CCL, Regina consulted with
companies across Europe in the automotive, healthcare,
manufacturing, and food industries on projects of
diversity and career progression, organizational
culture change, expatriate coaching, and team-based
management. She holds a degree in psychology from
the University of Munich, Germany, and a PhD in
management from Aston Business School, UK.
Sarah A. Stawiski, PhD, is a senior research scientist at
CCL in San Diego, CA. Sarah’s work focuses on evaluating
the impact of leadership development programs and
understanding individual and organizational factors
that influence workplace attitudes and behaviors. Other
interests include small group processes, ethical decision-
making, and corporate social responsibility. Before
coming to CCL, Sarah worked for Press Ganey Associates,
a healthcare quality-improvement firm. She holds a BA in
psychology from the University of California, San Diego,
and an MA and PhD in applied social psychology from
Loyola University Chicago.
Sophia Zhao, PhD, is a research scientist at CCL. Her
40. work focuses on understanding leadership needs in
specific sectors, regions and populations, and solutions
that address the needs. Her current research interests
are senior leadership challenges, women’s leadership,
and coaching. She holds a BA in economics from Fudan
University and a PhD from NUS Business School, National
University of Singapore.
To learn more about this topic or the Center for Creative
Leadership’s programs and products,
please contact our Client Services team.
+1 800 780 1031 +1 336 545 2810 [email protected]
Issued November 2013/Reprinted March 2016
CCL - Americas
www.ccl.org
+1 800 780 1031 (US or Canada)
+1 336 545 2810 (Worldwide)
[email protected]
Greensboro, North Carolina
+1 336 545 2810
Colorado Springs, Colorado
+1 719 633 3891
San Diego, California
+1 858 638 8000
CCL - Europe, Middle East, Africa
www.ccl.org/emea
41. Brussels, Belgium
+32 (0) 2 679 09 10
[email protected]
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
+251 118 957086
[email protected]
Johannesburg, South Africa
+27 (11) 783 4963
[email protected]
Moscow, Russia
+7 495 662 31 39
[email protected]
CCL - Asia Pacific
www.ccl.org/apac
Singapore
+65 6854 6000
[email protected]
Gurgaon, India
+91 124 676 9200
[email protected]
Shanghai, China
+86 21 6881 6683
[email protected]
Affiliate Locations: Seattle, Washington • Seoul, Korea •
College Park, Maryland • Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Ft. Belvoir, Virginia • Kettering, Ohio • Huntsville, Alabama •
San Diego, California • St. Petersburg, Florida
Peoria, Illinois • Omaha, Nebraska • Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan •
Mt. Eliza, Victoria, Australia
43. Citation for published item:
Alabdulhadi, A. and Schyns, B. and Staudigl, L.F. (2017)
'Implicit leadership theory.', in Leadership and
change for the health professional. London: Open University
Press, pp. 20-36.
Further information on publisher's website:
http://www.mheducation.co.uk/leadership-and-change-for-the-
health-professional
Publisher's copyright statement:
Additional information:
Use policy
The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third
parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or
charge, for
personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro�t
purposes provided that:
• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source
• a link is made to the metadata record in DRO
• the full-text is not changed in any way
The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without
the formal permission of the copyright holders.
Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.
44. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY,
United Kingdom
Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971
http://dro.dur.ac.uk
http://www.dur.ac.uk
http://www.mheducation.co.uk/leadership-and-change-for-the-
health-professional
http://dro.dur.ac.uk/20268/
http://dro.dur.ac.uk/policies/usepolicy.pdf
http://dro.dur.ac.uk
Chapter topics
• Development of the implicit leadership theory concept
• The perceptual mechanism of implicit leadership theories
• The content of implicit leadership theories
• Context: does it matter?
• Implications of implicit leadership theories in leadership
practice
• Trends emerging from implicit leadership theories
Implicit leadership theory
Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns
and Lena F. Staudigl
3
Introduction
For over a hundred years, leadership has been an interesting
topic for scholars
and practitioners who have tried to understand what makes a
45. good leader and
effective leadership. Even today, the word ‘leadership’ appears
in the media
almost every day and seems likely to remain the centre of
attention, at least for
the foreseeable future. This is due to the inherent belief that
leadership is impor-
tant for organisations and individuals to overcome challenges
and make positive
outcomes materialise. However, at the same time, leadership
continues to be a
fuzzy term which most people find difficult to define, and hence
the nature of
leadership and what makes good leaders are still hugely
disputed. Therefore, it is
this importance and ambiguity of leadership that probably will
make curious
researchers study it for years to come.
The traditional literature shows that the early endeavours at
leadership
research focused on finding lists of traits that defined good
leaders, assuming
that effective results would automatically be guaranteed if a
leader possessed
those traits. Stogdill (1948) reviewed more than 124 studies in
this stream, pub-
lished between 1904 and 1947, and found that the potential lists
of leader traits
seemed endless, and he asserted that any set of traits could be
effective in one
situation but not necessarily in others. Consequently, the
following waves of lead-
ership studies provided theories that linked leadership
behaviours and leadership
situations, arguing that a leadership style should be relevant to
46. the situation to
ensure effectiveness (Kerr and Jermier 1978; Hersey and
Blanchard 1982; Vroom
and Jago 1988) and at the same time acknowledging that
leadership is a trainable
behaviour. However, all these studies focused heavily on
leaders and viewed
leadership as a static objective reality. The contemporary
approach in leadership
research has overcome these limitations. Two main aspects in
this approach
mark a departure from the traditional leader-centric approach: it
is recognised,
Implicit leadership theory 21
first, that leaders do not equate to leadership, and, second, that
leadership is a
dynamic process that cannot be fully understood without
studying the other side
of the coin – followers.
Calder (1977) pointed to the dynamism of leadership by arguing
that it is not
an objective reality that exists out there but a conception that
resides in people’s
minds. In light of this conceptual theorisation, leadership is a
socially constructed
process which can be defined as ‘the process of being perceived
as a leader’ (Lord
and Maher 1993: 11). All individuals, including both followers
and leaders, have
their own images about leaders and what leaders are like (see
Figure 3.1). These
47. subjective images of leaders are known in the literature as
implicit leadership
theories (ILTs). ILTs can be defined as ‘the image that a person
has of a leader in
general or of an effective leader’ (Schyns and Meindl 2005: 21).
This chapter aims
to explain the ILT concept as well as the underlying cognitive
processes of leader-
ship perception and provide an answer to important questions,
such as ‘What is
the role of ILTs in producing positive leadership outcomes?’
And ‘What are the
practical implications of ILTs?’
Development of the implicit leadership theory concept
The concept of implicit leadership theories was introduced in
the literature by
Eden and Leviatan in 1975 to describe individuals’ internal
beliefs and expecta-
tions of leaders (Eden and Leviatan 1975; Eden, Leviatan,
Schyns, et al. 2005).
The concept developed following a study that Eden and
Leviatan (1975) con-
ducted on a sample of students. The participants were asked to
rate a fictitious
leader of ‘plant X’ about whom they were given little
information. The results
showed that almost exactly the same factor structure emerged
even in conditions
in which participants claimed that they had responded at
random. Consequently,
Eden and Leviatan concluded that people have implicit
leadership theories that
they use to describe leaders. That is, people have certain traits
and behaviours
48. they associate with leaders which they use whenever they
interact with others to
decide whether they are leader-like or not. In this way, people
can understand
social processes such as leadership based on internal
representations they hold.
Thus, it is the individual’s interpretation of traits and
behaviours, rather than the
objective reality, that influences leadership (Lord and Maher
1990). If a person is
not categorised as leader-like by others, that person will not be
regarded as
equally effective as a person who is perceived as leader-like. In
this case, a leader
will not be able to exert the necessary influence on followers to
fulfil wanted
Leadership
perception
ILTs
Figure 3.1 Leadership is a socially constructed
process. People’s ILTs shape the way they see
leaders
22 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
goals (Lord and Maher 1993; DeRue and Ashford 2010). For
example, if people
have an image of a leader as being extravert, and their leader is
an introvert, they
will likely regard that person as less leader-like and will grant
them less influence
49. over them as followers. In the following section, we illustrate
the underlying
mechanism of ILTs and how the cognitive process works in the
followers’ minds
when perceiving potential leaders.
The perceptual mechanism of implicit leadership theories
Implicit leadership theories are based on the fundamental notion
that leadership
operates within constraints offered by followers. One constraint
is the followers’
expectations that can affect leaders’ effectiveness (Lord and
Maher 1993). That is,
when leaders are not meeting their followers’ expectations, they
will find it harder
to be accepted as leaders (DeRue and Ashford 2010). There are
two types of pro-
cesses which shape leadership perception: recognition-based
processes and
inferential processes (Lord, Foti and De Vader 1984).
Recognition-based pro-
cesses are used to interpret incoming social information through
categorisation
while inferential processes are used to reflect on salient events
(e.g. success or
failure) through attribution. We will explain these processes in
more detail in the
following sections.
Recognition-based processes: categorisation
The first process, categorisation, is based on the cognitive
concepts of schemas
and prototypes. Schemas are the pre-existing cognitive models
which individuals
50. use to interpret incoming information about stimuli (including
objects and people).
Individuals’ subsequent judgements about the stimuli are then
affected by the
schema (Rosch 1999). To go back to the example from above, if
a person does not
meet the leader-schema (here: being an extravert), others are
less likely to cate-
gorise this person as leader. Prototypes are commonly used
forms of schemas
which summarise the most salient characteristics of members in
some category
(e.g. leaders). In other words, prototypes summarise the most
common features
or attributes of a category, whether that category concerns
objects or people
(Phillips and Lord 1982). Again, based on this prototype, people
make a judgement
about whether or not a person introduced as ‘leader’ is
prototypical for this category,
with possibly negative implications if the person is not
considered prototypical.
Lord et al. (1982) proposed that people use the same cognitive
categorisation
process discussed above when processing information about
leader behaviour.
Therefore, when a behaviour is shown by a leader, people refer
to their existing
schema and prototype of leaders to assess whether that
behaviour is matching
before the categorisation is made, depending on the outcome of
this comparison
process. This process is known in the literature as leadership
categorisation. To
keep the same example, if they see a leader talking to others,
51. they might then
assume – based on their prototype of leaders in general – that
this person is extra-
vert and therefore a typical leader. It has to be noted that this
process is very
quick and does not require a lot of cognitive effort. Indeed, it
mostly happens
unconsciously.
Implicit leadership theory 23
ILT can be differentiated on different levels (Lord, Foti and De
Vader 1984),
summarised in Table 3.1. On the highest, most abstract level
(i.e. superordinate
level), leaders are differentiated from non-leaders, that is, the
aim is to find char-
acteristics that most people consider relevant for leaders and
that make them
distinct from people who are not considered leader-like.
However, people also
hold more specific implicit leadership theories about leaders in
different contexts,
such as business or sport, and so on (i.e. basic level). For
example, people might
consider attributes such as being diplomatic, communicative,
and formal as char-
acteristic of political leaders but will find different attributes
characteristic of a
leader of surgeons or nurses in healthcare. Based on the
authors’ implicit leader-
ship theories, maybe politicians will be considered less caring
towards others
than leaders in a hospital environment. Implicit leadership
52. theories can also exist
at a lower (i.e. subordinate) level, in which gender and
hierarchy are used, for
example, to further differentiate between leaders. The more the
target leader
shows prototypical characteristics (characteristics positively
associated with
leaders), the more he or she is perceived as a leader and
consequently gains the
support of his or her followers (DeRue and Ashford 2010;
Haslam, Reicher and
Platow 2011). Interestingly, once a person is perceived and
categorised as a
leader, followers’ memory may become biased and selectively
focus on schema-
consistent information (Phillips and Lord 1982). In other words,
followers may
perceive some attributes in the categorised leader because they
are consistent
with the leader category, even if they are not specifically shown
by that leader. To
continue and refine the example above, if a person’s implicit
leadership theories
about a nurse leader are as extravert and caring, then they are
likely to derive
from observing their nurse leader talking to a patient not only
that he/she is
extravert but also that he/she is caring without actually having
observed that
specific behaviour.
Inferential processes: attribution
In the second type of process, the inferential process, an
individual attributes
leadership to an observed person depending on how a causal
53. judgement has been
made to a salient event such as organisational success or failure.
Generally,
people can either make environmental or personal attributions
to success (or
failure). If a personal attribution is made, the leader is
considered the origin of that
success (or failure). Lord and colleagues (1984) asserted that
individuals tend to
Table 3.1 ILTs on different levels
ILT Level Aspect Example
Superordinate level Leaders vs. non-leaders Is he/she a leader at
all?
Basic level Leaders in different
domains
Business, sport, politics; different aspects are
important for different types of leaders
Subordinate level Further differentiations Gender, hierarchy;
female football coach, male
nurse manager
24 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
view the prototypical leader as the cause of organisational
success. Reciprocally,
success may also enhance the perception of a leader’s
prototypicality. Relevant
to the inferential process, Meindl and colleagues (1985) found
54. that in the case of
extremely high or low performance (even more so when this
performance is
unexpected and therefore needs an explanation), people tend to
attribute success
or failure to leaders while ignoring other influencing factors,
such as environ-
mental factors or followers. For example, when an unpredictable
crisis hits a
business and swallows huge profits, the CEO often leaves
because people find
that leader responsible for such failure. Or in an NHS context,
we often see that
leaders of NHS Trusts are under pressure to resign after a major
failure. This
phenomenon, according to Meindl, is called the romance of
leadership and
describes people’s rosy view and exaggeration of a leader’s role
in salient events
(see Figure 3.2). The biggest issue here is that this might
prevent a closer look at
more system-immanent reasons for failure, thus making it more
likely that
another failure will happen.
It is important to note that perceiving leaders is a repetitive
process that could
occur in people’s minds many times across situations. DeRue
and Ashford (2010)
explained this dynamic nature by proposing that leader and
follower identities
are not static cognitions that reside within individuals’ self-
concept. Rather, they
suggest that granting leader identity to someone initiates
follower identities for
others, and conversely claiming leader identity for oneself
55. results in granting
follower identities to others. This constant process of
‘claiming’ and ‘granting’
identities which results from the social interaction among
individuals means that
these identities could shift over time or across situations. For
example, in a hospital
context, nurses might lead the discussion on hygiene standards,
thus claiming
leadership, while surgeons might lead the discussion on
improvements in intensive
care, where nurses might then be granted a follower identity.
DeRue and Ashford also proposed that the implicit theories of
leadership held
by individuals affect the process of granting/claiming leader
identity. The more
congruence between the focal leader and a follower’s ILT, the
more he or she will
grant the leader identity to that leader. So, again, a caring and
extravert nurse
Leadership
perception
via recognition-
based processes
Failure/success
of organisation
via inferential
processes
ILT
56. Figure 3.2 In recognition-based processes, people’s leadership
perception
is based on their schemas or ILTs. Moreover, people tend to
attribute
extremely high or low performance to leaders via inferential
processes
Implicit leadership theory 25
might find it easier to lead when these characteristics chime
with the implicit
leadership theories of her followers.
Overall, the perceptual process and relational nature of
leadership construc-
tion show that leadership is an outcome of followers’ perception
and that follow-
ers are equally as important as leaders in creating and
developing leadership. If
followers refer to their ILTs in categorising (and evaluating)
leaders, it is impor-
tant then to understand what images (ILTs) followers have of
leaders. The follow-
ing section will describe research into the content of ILTs.
The content of implicit leadership theories
The influence of ILTs on the perception of leadership has
encouraged many
researchers to investigate the content of implicit leadership
theories (see Table 3.2
for a summary). Lord et al. (1984) examined the structure of the
leadership cate-
57. gories by asking a group of undergraduate students in the
United States to name
attributes that they would use to describe leaders and non-
leaders. Another inde-
pendent group was then asked to rate the prototypicality of
those attributes on a
5-point scale. The researchers found a pool of 59 attributes
describing leaders
(e.g. intelligent, honest, educated, and dedicated) and
subsequently distinguished
between two main categories of ILT traits: prototypic (i.e.
positively associated
with leadership) and anti-prototypic (i.e. negatively associated
with leadership).
The more a leader shows prototypic traits, the more he or she
will be perceived as
leader-like by their followers.
Another research study conducted by Offermann and colleagues
(1994) examined
the content of implicit leadership theories by asking
undergraduate American
students to name up to 25 traits of leaders and direct
supervisors (i.e. immediate
hierarchical superior). This resulted in a pool of 160 traits with
a considerable
overlap with the 59 items generated by Lord and colleagues’
(1984) study. A dif-
ferent group of students were asked to rate, on a 10-point scale,
the 160 traits
generated as characteristic or non-characteristic of leaders,
effective leaders or
supervisors. Based on the analysis, the authors identified eight
distinct dimen-
sions underlying implicit leadership theories. These dimensions
are: sensitivity,
58. dedication, tyranny, charisma, attractiveness, masculinity,
intelligence and strength.
They differentiated between prototypic and anti-prototypic
dimensions. The
study also generated a 41-item scale which was validated using
a sample of full-
time employees. This scale was later refined by Epitropaki and
Martin (2004) who
found six dimensions are the most representative of ILTs in UK
organisational
settings: sensitivity, dedication, intelligence, and dynamism
(prototypic), tyranny
and masculinity (anti-prototypic).
Schyns and Schilling (2011) challenged the assumption in the
majority of pre-
vious studies that implicit leadership theories are about
describing the attributes
of effective leaders. They suggested that the perceptions of
leaders in general,
unlike effective leaders, may contain negative as well as
positive attributes. The
results indeed supported their claim and showed that implicit
leadership theories
can be negative as well as positive. Using a Dutch sample of
working adults, they
found 15 categories that describe leaders in general (e.g. team
player, organised,
26 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
communicative, unpleasant, disinterested, and weak). Based on
the participants’
own rating of the effectiveness of the reported attributes,
59. Schyns and Schilling
conclude that implicit leadership theories of leaders in general
and of effective
leaders are not the same. In other words, implicit leadership
theories about effec-
tive leaders are only a subcategory of implicit leadership
theories, rather than
reflecting implicit leadership theories as a whole. Knowing that
leaders in general
can be perceived negatively has important practical implications
since negative
perceptions may hinder leaders’ influence on followers.
It has to be noted that all the above studies have been conducted
in a Western
cultural context. In contrast, based on a similar approach to
Offermann et al.
(1994), Ling and colleagues (2000) collected attributes
describing leaders from
Chinese participants, including employees and college students.
Interestingly, the
researchers found no correspondence of their findings to the
eight dimensions of
leadership that Offermann et al. (1994) found for the US
participants. The study
revealed four dimensions describing Chinese implicit leadership
theories: personal
morality, goal efficiency, interpersonal competence, and
versatility. The highest
ratings were given to the interpersonal competence dimension
which the research-
ers find consistent with the Chinese cultural value of
collectivism. Therefore, they
Table 3.2 Studies addressing the content of ILT
60. Country Sample Key findings Reference
USA Total of 263
undergraduate
students
59 attributes generated;
categorised as: prototypic vs.
anti-prototypic attributes
Lord et al. (1984)
USA Three samples of
undergraduate
students, and one
sample of working
adults
Eight dimensions of ILTs:
dimensions: sensitivity, dedication,
intelligence, strength, charisma,
and attractiveness (prototypic),
masculinity and tyranny
(anti-prototypic); developed
a 41-item scale measuring ILT
Offermann et al.
(1994)
UK Two independent
samples of British
employees
Six dimensions of ILT: sensitivity,
dedication, intelligence, and
dynamism (prototypic), and tyranny
61. and masculinity (anti-prototypic)
Epitropaki and
Martin (2004)
The
Netherlands
A sample of 76
working adults
15 categories (effective and
ineffective) for leaders in general,
e.g. team player, organised,
communicative, unpleasant,
disinterested, and weak
Schyns and
Schilling (2011)
China Samples of Chinese
college students
and working adults
Four dimensions of ILT: personal
morality, goal efficiency,
interpersonal competence, and
versatility
Ling et al. (2000)
Implicit leadership theory 27
suggested that the difference found in the Chinese ILT is due to
62. culture. The Chinese
study indicates that ILTs can show differences in different
contexts.
The next section will explain in more detail how context is
important in explain-
ing differences in ILTs. The societal, organisational, and
individual contexts will
be discussed respectively. Taking into account cultural
differences in implicit
leadership theories is hugely relevant in contexts such as the
NHS where people
from different cultures work together. Based on some of what
we highlighted
above, different implicit leadership theories can lead to
differences in who is
granted leadership – and that can be different within the same
team.
Context: does it matter?
Research has shown that implicit leadership theories are
contingent upon context
(Lord 2005). That is, ILTs may be different across societies,
organisations, and
even individuals. So, a careful understanding of implicit
leadership theories cannot
be assured without considering the context in which ILTs
operate.
Differences across societies
Cross-cultural research has demonstrated how societies differ in
perceptions of
leaders and leadership (House, Hanges, Javidan, et al. 2004). A
major cross-
63. cultural research project investigating how people from
different cultures viewed
leadership, is the GLOBE project (House, Hanges, Javidan, et
al. 2004). The project
studied 62 nations to examine the relationship between societal
culture, organisa-
tional practices, and leadership. The study empirically divided
those 62 societies
into ten clusters, based on several factors such as geography,
language, religion,
and historical accounts. The primary aim of the study was to
explore the intersec-
tion of culture and perception of leadership, and to find which
ILTs (in terms of
21 leadership attributes) might be shared across the countries
under study.
GLOBE researchers used a standard questionnaire to measure
the implicit theories
of effective leadership to form what they called culturally
endorsed leadership
theory (CLT). This theory basically describes the common
beliefs about leaders
across specific societal cultures. The results revealed six
dimensions of these
implicit leadership theories about effective leaders: charismatic,
team-oriented,
self-protective, participative, human-oriented, and autonomous.
Interestingly, the
results have shown that while charismatic leadership attributes
are perceived as
important in all cultures, other attributes are perceived to be of
different impor-
tance between cultures (House, Hanges, Javidan, et al. 2004).
For example, the
Nordic European countries view charismatic, participative, and
team-oriented
64. behaviours as the most important for effective leadership, while
the Middle East
profile shows that self-protective, humane-oriented, and
autonomous behaviours
are the most essential for effective leadership.
In the same vein, research by Gerstner and Day (1994) looked at
the prototyp-
ical image of business leaders across eight cultures. The
participants were stu-
dents from eight different countries, namely, France, Germany,
Honduras, India,
the United States, Taiwan, China, and Japan. The participants
were presented
with a questionnaire consisting of a list of 59 attributes of
leaders that had been
28 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
identified previously by Lord and colleagues (1984). For each
attribute, partici-
pants were asked to assign a prototypicality rating for a
business leader. The
results showed that not a single leadership attribute appeared in
the top five
attributes across all eight cultures. It is noteworthy here that
neither this study
nor the GLOBE could capture all the idiosyncrasies across
cultures due to the
quantitative nature of the research (Dastmalchian, Javidan and
Alam 2001).
Nevertheless, they confirm that people in different cultures
perceive leadership
differently.
65. Applying this research to the UK health sector, for example, we
can imagine
that with its huge diversity of employees from different cultural
backgrounds, it
is important to consider how these cultures may differ in their
expectations of the
same leader. Statistics from 2014 show that the NHS and
community health
services in England employ people from more than 200
countries. In the NHS, 26%
of doctors are foreign nationals. India provided the highest
number after Britain
and the Philippines provided the third highest number of NHS
staff. Staff are also
employed from other countries such as Poland, Nigeria,
Zimbabwe, Portugal,
Pakistan, and Spain (Siddique 2014). We may find in such
diverse contexts that,
for example, a German nurse might expect his/her nurse leader
to be participa-
tive and expects to be consulted in decision-making while a
nurse with a Middle
Eastern background might not expect this at all.1 This can lead
to some confusion
or even frustration in the first few months until both the nurse
and the nurse
leader have found a way to effectively communicate their
expectations to each
other.
Differences across organisations
With respect to the organisational context, Lord and colleagues
(1984) argued
that implicit leadership theories differ across contexts (i.e. basic
66. level). That is,
followers may expect certain attributes and behaviours from
business leaders,
while expecting other kinds of behaviour from military,
political or sport leaders,
for example. Therefore, leaders working in one specific
business context should
be aware that they are expected to behave differently from those
in a different
organisational context. The same notion can be applied to
various industries,
departments and hierarchies inside an organisation. For
example, it has been
found that employees working in different professions (service
versus manufac-
turing) hold different ILTs (Epitropaki and Martin 2004; see
also Paris, Howell,
Dorfman, et al. 2009, for another example). Consequently, in
our hospital example,
nurses and surgeons might differ considerably in their
expectations of leaders,
thus possibly leading to conflicting expectations and problems
in the claiming
and granting process that characterises leadership.
Differences across individuals
Although a group of people might share a common prototype of
leadership, there
are many factors contributing to individual variations within
this prototype.
Keller (1999, 2003) studied individual differences in developing
ILTs and found
that parental traits and prior interaction with parents, as early
leadership figures,
influence the perception of ideal leaders. Moreover, she found
67. that personality
Implicit leadership theory 29
traits such as agreeableness, extraversion, conscientiousness,
openness, and self-
monitoring influence ideal implicit leadership theories as
individuals tend to
project their own traits onto idealised leadership images.
Gender is another factor that explains ILT differences held by
individuals.
Epitropaki and Martin (2004) found implicit leadership theories
held by male
employees are different from those of female employees. This is
supported by a
comparative study conducted in 27 countries which found that
the preferred
attributes of leaders held by female leaders differed from those
held by male
leaders (Paris, Howell, Dorfman, et al. 2009). In general, female
managers showed
more preference for participative, team-oriented, and
charismatic leadership
behaviours. Thus, in any given team, male and female followers
might differ in
their expectations of their leaders.
Overall, the above studies show that implicit leadership theories
are highly
contextual. The fact that ILTs can vary across countries,
industries, organisa-
tions, departments and even individuals has two important
implications. The first
68. is to encourage ILT researchers to add contextual factors in
their studies and to
be careful about generalising results from one context to
another. The second is
to warn organisational leaders not to be too confident about
their assumptions of
their followers’ expectations, as differences exist not only
between their own
implicit leadership theories and those of their followers but also
differences
among their followers’ implicit leadership theories may be
substantial. This raises
a call for leaders to be curious about their followers’ ILTs and
to open lines of
communication with them to discover their perceptions and
expectations of
leaders and ultimately for leaders to flexibly react to
expectations towards them.
This is likely to be an important step towards an improved
leadership process
(DeRue and Ashford 2010; Schyns, Tymon, Kiefer, et al. 2012).
Implications of implicit leadership theories in leadership
practice
Based on our considerations above, we will now outline some of
the implications
of a match/mismatch of implicit leadership theories within
teams or between
implicit leadership theories and leader behaviour.
First, it has been argued that leadership effectiveness is
contingent upon the
quality of the relationship between leaders and followers. This
dyadic reciprocal
exchange is described in the literature under the label Leader-
69. Member Exchange
(LMX), and it is linked to many positive personal and
organisational outcomes
(Dulebohn, Bommer, Liden, et al. 2012). Studies found that
ILTs are relevant in
LMX relationships as followers perceived more quality
relationships with leaders
who matched their ILTs (Engle and Lord 1997; Epitropaki and
Martin 2005).
Accordingly, it is important for leaders to fulfil followers’
expectations as this will
probably be instrumental in establishing good relationships and
ultimately in
achieving positive work outcomes associated with high-quality
relationships.
Understanding the effect of ILTs on LMX is especially
important in the health
sector. This is because good healthcare requires collaboration
between individu-
als with different professional and often cultural backgrounds in
order to achieve
the best care for the patient. Thus, understanding implicit
leadership theories
30 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
can help to identify different expectations towards leaders, and
consequently
improve the quality of communication, cooperation and
interaction between all
members involved.
A second practical implication is that leaders who match
followers’ ILTs will
70. receive a positive evaluation and consequently will secure a
better chance of
being promoted (Schyns 2006). An example of research
investigating this issue is
research into female leadership. Here, it has been found that, for
women, matching
followers’ ILTs to get promoted can be particularly difficult.
This is because in
general the image of successful managers overlaps more with
male than with
stereotypical female characteristics, and thus women receive
unfavourable eval-
uation as potential leaders (Schein 1973, 1975). Consequently,
even women leaders
eventually find themselves in a ‘lose–lose situation’, according
to Ryan and
Haslam (2005). They explained that if a woman leader behaved
according to the
female stereotype, she would not be seen as acting as leader-
like, and if she
behaved to conform to the ‘leader’ stereotype, she would not be
perceived as acting
like a proper woman. Thus, deviating from either the gender or
leader stereo-
types will lead to negative evaluations. This might explain why
women, in many
cases, are markedly under-represented in leadership positions.
In the context of
the NHS, an example might be that a typical nurse might be
expected to be female
and a typical surgeon to be male. This has huge implications for
interactions
between leaders and followers, where expectations are not met.
Specifically,
diversity of leadership is important in order for the best people
to be promoted
71. and not just those who match a stereotype but also for
‘untypical’ leaders to come
forward and claim leadership (Schyns 2006).
Organisations should, therefore, ensure that all qualified staff
are offered equal
promotion opportunities, independent of prevailing implicit
leadership theories.
Similarly, organisations should be aware that selecting leaders
based on followers’
evaluation could be considerably biased, and potentially lead to
an under-promotion
of ‘untypical’ leaders who would be equally qualified to lead.
Third, the biases caused by ILT may extend their influence
beyond the attribution
of leadership into decision-making behaviour. In an
experimental study, Felfe
and Petersen (2007) tested the effect of romance of leadership
on managerial
decision-making. As mentioned earlier, the romance of
leadership is a specific ILT
which refers to an over-emphasis of the leader factor and it de-
emphasises all
other situational factors in determining the reason for success or
failure (Meindl,
Ehrlich and Dukerich 1985). It was found that participants high
in the romance of
leadership tended to approve of projects if the leader’s
probability of success was
high, even if the situation in which the leader was acting (as
described in a
scenario) was more unfavourable. Therefore, management
should know that
romanticisers, whenever involved in decision-making, tend to
ignore situational
72. factors and will potentially make uncalculated risky decisions
that may lead to
failure. Consequently, it could be helpful for organisations to
design training
programmes to teach those involved in decision-making how to
evaluate projects
realistically and to minimise interference from their cognitive
biases when making
critical decisions. Think again about hospital failures where, as
a consequence of
high romance of leadership, a healthcare trust might vote to
select a strong
leader, assuming that this will solve all issues, even though
many issues might
Implicit leadership theory 31
be system immanent, and therefore to rely too strongly on
leadership can mask
those issues.
A fourth implication is that organisations may consider
interventions which
enhance effectiveness by dealing with followers’ potentially
exaggerated expec-
tations of leaders. For example, offering followership training
programmes to
train followers to maintain realistic expectations of leaders
could be a good
strategy to improve effectiveness (Schyns and Schilling 2011).
This can reduce
the gap between followers’ expectations and leaders’ actual
behaviour and conse-
quently maximise the cooperation among them. Schyns et al.
73. (2012) suggest a
drawing exercise to raise awareness of implicit leadership
theories in different
contexts which could be used as a starting point for follower
training or team-
building exercises. Here, leaders and followers can be asked to
draw a leader and
present their drawings to the other group. Differences can be
discussed among
members of both groups. The idea is that this helps both leaders
and followers to
understand how expectations towards leaders might be different
between leaders
and followers, and that discussions can be used to encourage
better leadership
processes.
Lastly, given that ILTs differ across cultures, it is crucial for
expatriate managers
who work in global companies to understand that what is
considered effective
behaviour or an attribute in one culture will probably not be
considered so in
other cultures. For example, thinking of the GLOBE study and
the differences
found with regard to expectations to participate in leadership
decision-making
processes outlined earlier, leaders who show a participative
style might be
regarded quite differently across cultures. The same notion
applies to leaders
working in organisations or sectors that have a diverse range of
employees. The
great diversity found in some sectors (as explained earlier in the
UK health sector)
illustrates how challenging and important it is for leaders to
74. understand that
employees who come from different backgrounds will have
different images of
leaders and will probably perceive the same leader differently.
Imagine, for
instance, how careful the leader should be when communicating
with team mem-
bers with very different cultural backgrounds what needs to be
done.
Trends emerging from implicit leadership theories
Recent research has extended the notion of implicit leadership
theories to other
areas, such as implicit followership theories, implicit
relationship theories, and
implicit voice theories. As all are interesting in the context of
leadership, we will
briefly discuss these concepts here.
De Vries and van Gelder (2005), as well as Sy (2010), have
introduced the term
implicit followership theories (IFT), arguing that people have
images not only of
leaders but also of followers. Sy (2010) found six dimensions
relating to the content
of IFTs: industry, enthusiasm, good citizen, conformity,
insubordination and
incompetence. Similar to ILTs, it would be important to
examine the effect of IFT
similarity and discrepancy on organisational outcomes. Since
leadership, in most
cases, results from the interaction between leaders and
followers, both ILTs and
IFTs could play an important role in the leadership process.
Therefore, looking at
75. 32 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
leadership models which integrate both IFTs and ILTs is worth
pursuing in future
research and could help improve communication and
collaboration between leaders
and followers.
Another concept introduced by Mary Uhl-Bien (2005) is the
concept of implicit
relationship theories (IRTs). She argued that employees hold
assumptions and
expectations regarding developing and maintaining work
relationships. In the
workplace, individuals may hold either entity or incremental
relational theories,
and, based on that, they will approach work relationships
differently. Those who
are entity theorists tend to judge whether a relational partner is
compatible based
on a quick assessment of the other’s traits. Incremental theorists
believe that,
regardless of a relational partner’s compatibility, relationships
can be developed
over time. In other words, entity theorists will focus more on
personal traits and
perceived similarity when developing work relationships
whereas incremental
theorists will focus more on the effort required to grow the
relationship itself. The
influence of IRTs may not be limited to the dyadic relationship
between followers
and leaders but rather could have implications for the
76. impressions, interactions,
and conflicts among team members. Further research examining
this concept
could lead to important contributions for relevant leadership
theories such as
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX), which, as we have shown
above, is related to
important organisational outcomes.
Relevant to the ILT literature is the concept of implicit voice
theories, which
describe the beliefs individuals have about the appropriateness
of speaking up to
authorities in hierarchical organisations. In particular, self-
protective implicit
voice theories could make employees remain silent in order to
avoid the risks
believed to be associated with speaking up, such as the fear of
embarrassment
(Detert and Edmondson 2011). Followers’ perceptions of their
leaders’ behav-
iours may contribute to this silence. That is, understanding that
employees might
not raise concerns not (only) because of conditions in their
particular work envi-
ronment (e.g. negative leadership) but also because of deep-
rooted assumptions
they hold can provide another point of intervention to improve
climate for voice.
Organisations could lose many improvement opportunities
because implicit voice
theories prevent employees from suggesting new ideas or
complaining about
job-related problems. Imagine how this becomes even more
important in the
healthcare sector where speaking up can, directly or indirectly,
77. improve the quality
of patient care and save lives.
Conclusion
We have seen that implicit leadership theories influence
people’s perception of
their leaders’ behaviours and their attributions of traits to
leaders. They are
highly contextual and can vary across cultures, organisations,
and individuals.
Especially in the healthcare sector where teams are often
diverse in terms of
culture, education, and expertise, leaders should not ignore
different implicit
leadership theories or expectations of them as they cannot
achieve success without
the cooperation and support of followers, and that can be
gained, in part, through
carefully taking into account followers’ expectations. Hospitals
and trusts should
Implicit leadership theory 33
pay more attention to the pivotal influence of implicit
leadership theories on
organisational processes such as leaders’ evaluation, decision-
making, and followers’
relationship with leaders.
Key concepts discussed
• ‘Leadership’, as a socially constructed process by the
perceiver, remains a fuzzy term
78. which researchers are still trying to define.
• In this context, implicit leadership theories (ILTs), a concept
developed 40 years ago,
describes the stereotypes people hold about leaders. ILTs play a
vital part if we want to
understand how leaders are being perceived.
• A leader might not be categorised as leader-like and regarded
as less effective if he or
she does not meet a follower’s expectations or ILTs.
• Overall, followers’ perceptions about leaders are as important
as the leaders themselves
when it comes to developing leadership. Recognition-based
processes and inferential
processes shape people’s leadership perceptions.
• The content of ILTs depends on whether the focus is on
effective leaders or leaders in
general. The following six dimensions are the most
representative in UK organisational
settings: sensitivity, dedication, intelligence, strength, tyranny,
and masculinity.
• The content of ILTs also depends on the societal,
organisational, and individual
contexts.
• In leadership practice, being aware of the following ILT-
related aspects can be helpful:
(1) People’s ILTs can influence the quality of the relationship
between leaders and fol-
lowers. (2) Matching followers’ ILTs can have positive
consequences for the leader, such
as positive evaluation or higher chances of promotion. (3) Some
79. people might have a
tendency to over-emphasise the role of the leader and to de-
emphasise all other situa-
tional factors when determining the reason for success or
failure. (4) Offering follower-
ship training programmes to train followers can help to prevent
perceptual biases and
unrealistic expectations towards leaders. (5) Effective behaviour
in one culture might
not be perceived as being effective in other cultures.
• Implicit followership theories, implicit relationship theories
and implicit voice theories
are extensions of ILTs in other areas.
Key readings
DeRue, D.S. and Ashford, S.J. (2010) Who will lead and who
will follow? A social process of
leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of
Management Review, 35(4):
627–47.
This article talks about the dynamic nature of claiming and
granting leader and follower
identities as well as relevant antecedents to this process.
Lord, R.G. and Maher, K.J. (1993) Leadership and Information
Processing Linking Perceptions
and Performance. London: Routledge.
This book gives an excellent overview of information
processing in relation to leadership,
citing primary, often experimental research.
Schyns, B., Tymon, A., Kiefer, T. and Kerschreiter, R. (2012)
New ways to leadership development:
a picture paints a thousand words. Management Learning,
80. 1350507612456499.
In this article, the authors used a drawing exercise as a learning
tool to assess leaders’
and followers’ ILTs (including contextual information) with the
aim of widening the scope of
leadership development.
34 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
Examples of studies
Edmonstone, J. (2011) Developing leaders and leadership in
healthcare: a case for rebalancing?
Leadership in Health Services, 24: 8–18.
This article describes the emerging critique of leader
development in healthcare (as opposed
to leadership development) as well as an alternative approach
by emphasising the context
and relationships within leadership.
West, M., Armit, K., Loewenthal, L., Eckert, R., West, T. and
Lee, A. (2015) Leadership and Leader-
ship Development in Healthcare: The Evidence Base. London,
Faculty of Medical Leadership
and Management. Available at:
http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/leadership-and-
leadership-development-health-care
This review summarises challenges faced by NHS organisations
regarding leadership and
describes key messages in relation to leadership at different
levels of analysis, such as the
leadership task and the most effective leadership behaviours at
individual, team, board and
national levels.
81. Wong, C.A., Cummings, G.G. and Ducharme, L. (2013) The
relationship between nursing leader-
ship and patient outcomes: a systematic review update. Journal
of Nursing Management,
21(5): 709–24.
This systematic review focuses on studies that examine the
relationship between nursing
leadership practices and patient outcomes.
Useful websites
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cutting-edge-leadership
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqyOI4R07Cw
Note
1 This example is based on very broad cultural differences and
implicit leadership theories are
individually different and thus cultural norms might or might
not apply to individuals from
each culture.
References
Calder, B.J. (1977) An attribution theory of leadership, in B.M.
Staw and G.R. Salancik (eds) New
Directions in Organisational Behavior. Chicago, IL: St. Clair
Press.
Dastmalchian, A., Javidan, M. and Alam, K. (2001) Effective
leadership and culture in Iran: an
empirical study. Applied Psychology, 50(4): 532–58.
DeRue, D.S. and Ashford, S.J. (2010) Who will lead and who
will follow? A social process of leadership
82. identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management
Review, 35(4): 627–47.
Detert, J.R. and Edmondson, A.C. (2011) Implicit voice
theories: taken-for-granted rules of
self-censorship at work. Academy of Management Journal,
54(3): 461–88.
de Vries, R.E. and van Gelder, J.-L. (2005) Leadership and need
for leadership, in B. Schyns and
J.R. Meindl (eds) Implicit Leadership Theories: Essays and
Explorations. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age, pp. 277–303.
Dulebohn, J.H., Bommer, W.H., Liden, R.C., Brouer, R.L. et al.
(2012) A meta-analysis of antecedents
and consequences of leader-member exchange: integrating the
past with an eye toward the
future. Journal of Management, 38(6): 1715–59.
doi:10.1177/0149206311415280.
Implicit leadership theory 35
Eden, D. and Leviatan, U. (1975) Implicit leadership theory as a
determinant of the factor structure
underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 60(6): 736–41.
Eden, D. and Leviatan, U. (2005) From implicit personality
theory to implicit leadership theory: a
side-trip on the way to implicit organization theory, in B.
Schyns and J.R. Meindl (eds) Implicit
Leadership Theories: Essays and Explorations. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age, pp. 3–14.
83. Engle, E.M. and Lord, R.G. (1997) Implicit theories, self-
schemas, and leader-member exchange.
Academy of Management Journal, 40(4): 988–1010.
Epitropaki, O. and Martin, R. (2004) Implicit leadership
theories in applied settings: factor structure,
generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89(2): 293–310.
Epitropaki, O. and Martin, R. (2005) From ideal to real: a
longitudinal study of the role of implicit
leadership theories on leader-member exchanges and employee
outcomes. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 90(4): 659–76. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.659.
Felfe, J. and Petersen, L.-E. (2007) Romance of leadership and
management decision making.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
16(1): 1–24. doi:10.1080/
13594320600873076.
Gerstner, C.R. and Day, D.V. (1994) Cross-cultural comparison
of leadership prototypes. The
Leadership Quarterly, 5(2): 121–34.
Haslam, S.A., Reicher, S. and Platow, M. (2011) The New
Psychology of Leadership Identity,
Influence, and Power. Hove: Psychology Press. Available at:
http://public.eblib.com/choice/
publicfullrecord.aspx?p=589563 (accessed 4 March 2015).
Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1982) Leadership style:
attitudes and behaviors. Training and
Development Journal, 36(5): 50–52.
84. House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. et al.
(2004) Culture, Leadership, and
Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. London:
Sage.
Keller, T. (1999) Images of the familiar: individual differences
and implicit leadership theories.
The Leadership Quarterly, 10(4): 589–607.
Keller, T. (2003) Parental images as a guide to leadership
sensemaking: an attachment perspec-
tive on implicit leadership theories. The Leadership Quarterly,
14(2): 141–60.
Kerr, S. and Jermier, J.M. (1978) Substitutes for leadership:
their meaning and measurement.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22(3): 375–
403.
Ling, W., Chia, R.C. and Fang, L. (2000) Chinese implicit
leadership theory. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 140(6): 729–39.
Lord, R.G. (2005) Preface: Implicit leadership theory, in B.
Schyns and J.R. Meindl (eds) Implicit
Leadership Theories: Essays and Explorations. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age, pp. ix–xiv.
Lord, R.G., Foti, R.J. and De Vader, C.L. (1984) A test of
leadership categorization theory: internal
structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions.
Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance, 34(3): 343–78.
Lord, R.G., Foti, R.J. and Phillips, J.S. (1982) A theory of
leadership categorization, in J. Hunt et al.
85. (eds) Leadership: Beyond Establishment Views. Carbondale, IL:
Southern Illinois University
Press, pp. 104–21.
Lord, R.G. and Maher, K.J. (1990) Perceptions of leadership
and their implications in organizations,
in Applied Social Psychology and Organizational Settings.
London: Routledge, pp. 129–54.
Lord, R.G. and Maher, K.J. (1993) Leadership and information
processing linking perceptions and
performance, in People and Organizations. London: Routledge.
Meindl, J.R., Ehrlich, S.B. and Dukerich, J.M. (1985) The
romance of leadership. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 67: 78–102.
Offermann, L.R., Kennedy, J.K. and Wirtz, P.W. (1994) Implicit
leadership theories: content, structure,
and generalizability. The Leadership Quarterly, 5(1): 43–58.
Paris, L.D., Howell, J.P., Dorfman, P.W. and Hanges, P.J.
(2009) Preferred leadership prototypes
of male and female leaders in 27 countries. Journal of
International Business Studies, 40(8):
1396–405.
36 Ahmad Alabdulhadi, Birgit Schyns and Lena F. Staudigl
Phillips, J.S. and Lord, R.G. (1982) Schematic information
processing and perceptions of leader-
ship in problem-solving groups. Journal of Applied Psychology,
67(4): 486–92.
86. Rosch, E. (1999) Principles of categorization, in E. Margolis
and S. Lawrence (eds) Concepts:
Core Readings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 189–206.
Ryan, M.K. and Haslam, S.A. (2005) The glass cliff: evidence
that women are over-represented in
precarious leadership positions. British Journal of Management,
16(2): 81–90.
Schein, V.E. (1973) The relationship between sex role
stereotypes and requisite management
characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(2): 95–100.
Schein, V.E. (1975) Relationships between sex role stereotypes
and requisite management
characteristics among female managers. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 60(3): 340–44.
Schyns, B. (2006) The role of implicit leadership theories in the
performance appraisals and
promotion recommendations of leaders. Equal Opportunities
International, 25(3): 188–99.
doi:10.1108/02610150610687836.
Schyns, B. and Meindl, J.R. (2005) An overview of implicit
leadership theories and their application
in organisation practice, in B. Schyns and J.R. Meindl (eds)
Implicit Leadership Theories:
Essays and Explorations. Greenwich, CT: Information Age, pp.
15–36.
Schyns, B. and Schilling, J. (2011) Implicit leadership theories:
think leader, think effective?
Journal of Management Inquiry, 20(2): 141–50.
doi:10.1177/1056492610375989.
87. Schyns, B., Tymon, A., Kiefer, T. and Kerschreiter, R. (2012)
New ways to leadership development:
a picture paints a thousand words. Management Learning, 44(1):
11–24.
Siddique, H. (2014) Figures show extent of NHS reliance on
foreign nationals. The Guardian.
26 January. Available at:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/26/nhs-foreign-
nationals-
immigration-health-service.
Stogdill, R.M. (1948) Personal factors associated with
leadership: a survey of the literature. The
Journal of Psychology, 25(1): 35–71.
Sy, T. (2010) What do you think of followers? Examining the
content, structure, and conse-
quences of implicit followership theories. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 113(2): 73–84. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.06.001.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2005) Implicit theories of relationships in the
workplace, in B. Schyns and J. R. Meindl
(eds) Implicit Leadership Theories: Essays and Explorations.
Greenwich, CT: Information
Age, pp. 103–33.
Vroom, V.H. and Jago, A.G. (1988) The New Leadership:
Managing Participation in Organizations.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
1
89. Fax: +34 93 253 4343
E-mail: [email protected]
2
CONTEXTUALIZING LEADERSHIP: A TYPOLOGY OF
GLOBAL LEADERSHIP ROLES
Abstract
While the global leadership literature has grown rapidly over
recent years, the context in which
global leadership occurs remains ill-defined and under-
conceptualized. This lack of contextualization
risks equating global leadership roles that are qualitatively very
different and prevents sufficient clarity for
empirical sampling. To foster more cohesive theoretical and
empirical work, we develop a typology of
global leadership roles that considers context as a critical
contingency factor. Drawing on role and
complexity leadership theories, we propose four ideal-typical
global leadership roles (incremental,
operational, connective, and integrative global leadership) that
differ in their (1) task complexity –
characterizing the variety and flux within the task context, and
