Leadership and Social Justice:
A Follower-Centered Perspective
Robert G. Lord
University of Akron
Sept. 2005
Traditional Leadership Paradigm
 Typically focuses on leaders and their effects
 Contrasts transformational vs. transactional
leadership (e.g., Judge & Piccalo, 2004)
Traditional Leadership Paradigm
 Typically focuses on leaders and their effects
 Contrasts transformational vs. transactional
leadership (e.g., Judge & Piccalo, 2004)
Leader Traits
And
Behaviors
Observable
Outcomes
Paradigm Shift in Leadership
 Followers and leaders jointly create outcomes
 But leaders can still affect motivational
constructs in followers



Motives
Social identities
Affect
Paradigm Shift in Leadership
 Followers and leaders jointly create outcomes
 But leaders can still affect motivational
constructs in followers



Motives
Social identities
Affect
Leader
Traits and
Behaviors
Neglected
Subordinate
Processes
Observable
Outcomes
Leadership and Sacrifice
 George McGregor Burns (1978) -- sacrifice and
suffering found among great leaders; important
component of transformational leadership
Leader
Self-Sacrifice
Follower
Collective
Identity
•Outward Focus
•Different Interpretation of
Social world
Transformation of Social Motives by Leaders
 Leader behavior can crate pro-self or pro-social
motivation in followers (De Cremer, 2002, JASP)
 Laboratory study in which participants (leaders)
allocated resources in self-benefiting or selfsacrificing manner
 Compared to self-benefiting leader, self-sacrificing
leader:



Was seen as more legitimate
Elicited more cooperation among group members
(effect mediated by legitimacy)
Was seen as more charismatic
Leaders and Self-Sacrifice: Empirical Research
 Yorges, Weiss & Strickland (1999, JAP)
 Laboratory study showed self-sacrificing vs.
self-benefiting leader conditions affected:
Perceived morality of the leader
 Perceived charisma
 Leader influence (effect was mediated by
morality and charisma)
Practical Importance?

News story day I prepared this talk (21 Nov. )
 Title: GM to return two leased jets amid criticism
 CEO Rick Wagoner was in the capital to testify on the
company's dire financial situation but his testimony
was overshadowed by irate lawmakers who blasted
him for flying on a private jet to ask for public funds
and failing to make personal sacrifices in exchange
for federal assistance.
 Chief executives from Ford Motor Co(F.N), and
Chrysler LLC, who were also there to plead for $25
billion in federal aid, came under fire too for flying to
Washington in private jets.
De Cremer & van Knippenberg (2004)
 Three studies: Scenario experiment,
laboratory experiment, field experiment
 All showed self-sacrifice effectiveness, but
effects were greater for high vs. low selfconfidence leaders
 Moreover, these effects were mediated by
collective identification
De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)
De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)
De Cremer & Van Knippenberg (2004)
 Full mediation of experimental effects on cooperation
by collective identity
 Similar results when perceived charisma was the DV,
but only partial mediation of interaction
 Ldr. sacrifice/benefit  Collective ID  Cooperation
 Point:
 Leader behavior  follower motivational and
affective constructs
 Follower self-identity is particularly important
Four Crucial Questions
 1. Why focus on followers?
 2. Why is the self theoretically interesting?
 3. Why is self-identity an important mediating
construct for leadership effects?
 4. Why focus on self-sacrifice?
Why is the self theoretically interesting?
 Self defined as an overarching knowledge structure
that organizes memory and behavior (Kihlstrom &
Klein,1994)


Trait-like schemas
 organize self and social perceptions
Script-like schemas
 translate sit. cues into self-consistent goals & behavior
 Dynamic, confederation of central and peripheral
schema (Markus & Wurf, 1987)

Working Self-Concept (WSC) currently active portion
that directs processing and behavior
Why is self-identity an important mediating
construct for leadership effects?
Follower
WSC
Leader
Traits and
Behaviors
Follower
Affect &
Cognition
Why focus on self-sacrifice?
Leader
Self-Benefit
Follower
Individual
Identity
Self-focus, isolation,
Competition with others
Leader
Self-Sacrifice
Follower
Collective
Identity
Outward focus, inclusion,
Cooperation with others
Other Research Showing Leaders can
Affect Subordinate Identity
 De Cremer & van Knippenberg (2002)

Leader sacrifice/benefit  Collective ID  Cooperation
 Content of written communication from leader affect accessibility of
follower self-concept (Paul, Costly, Howell & Dorfman, 2001)


Charismatic  collective self-concept
Individual Consideration  private self-concept
 Verbal content and visual delivery can make either individual or collective
self concept more accessible (Chang, 2005)

Leadershipidentitywork motivation
 Kark, Chen & Shamir (2003) (Survey 888 Ps, 76 branch banks)



Transform. Leadpersonal (relational) id dependency
Transform. Leadsocial (collective) id self & collective
efficacy, org. based self-esteem
Identity mediated relationships of Transformational Lead. to
DVs
Summary and Limitations
 Good evidence that:


Leaders can affect others by their pro-self or
pro-social behavior
This process may operate through
subordinates’ self-concept
 Important, but -- doesn’t reveal full range of
follower identity as an interpretive structure
 Illustrate this point with 2 studies of identity
and social justice
Follower-Centered Perspective
 Identity is a critical moderator affecting the
interpretation of social processes
Social
Justice
Work
Outcomes
WSC
Theory in a Nutshell
 Lord, Brown & Selenta (2004) posit two
mechanisms by which identity affects justice
related outcomes:

1. Identity can influence the standard used to
evaluate justice


main effects in predicting outcomes
2. Identity can cause differential weightings of
justice dimensions

moderates justice dimension outcome linkages
Three Identity Levels
 Individual – self differentiated from others
 Relational – self defined through roles and
dyadic connections
 Collective -- self defined through group
membership
Consequences of Active Identity
Identity
Level
SelfDefinition
Self- Worth
Individual
Differences
from others
Unique
qualities
Relational
Role relations
Correct role
behavior
Collective
Group
membership
Fit to group
prototype
Consequences of Active Identity
Identity
Level
SelfDefinition
Self- Worth
Key
Motive
Individual
Differences
from others
Unique
qualities
Selfinterest
Relational
Role relations
Correct role
behavior
Other’s
welfare
Collective
Group
membership
Fit to group
prototype
Collective
welfare
Consequences of Active Identity
Identity
Level
SelfDefinition
Self- Worth
Key
Motive
Social
Exchange
Individual
Differences
from others
Unique
qualities
Selfinterest
Negotiate: direct,
explicit
benefits
Relational
Role relations
Correct role
behavior
Other’s
welfare
Reciprocal: longterm, direct,
implicit benefit
Collective
Group
membership
Fit to group
prototype
Collective
welfare
Generalized:
implicit, indirect
benefit
Three Justice Dimensions
 Distributive –work outcomes (e.g., pay) seen
as being fair
 Interactional – treatment with respect and
dignity
 Procedural – system and processes
determining work outcomes are fair
Key Proposition: Alignment
of Identity and Justice Emphasis
 Individual  Distributive
 Relational  Interactive
 Collective  Procedural
 Individual identity makes comparisons to
others salient source of uniqueness & relative
outcomes signal worth
 Relational identity makes relations and roles
salient & others’ evaluations signal worth
 Collective identity makes group procedures
salient as signals of inclusion & worth
Johnson, Selenta & Lord (2006, OBHDP)
Survey of workplace attitudes and behaviors
examined moderating effects of chronic
identity in N=191 working undergraduates
DV’s were dimensions of Satisfaction and
Organizational Citizenship Behavior,
classified by their relevance to the individual,
dyadic relationship, or group
Identity Measures: 3 5-item Scales
from Selenta & Lord (2005) LSCS
 Comparative Identity (Individual, α = .90)

“I have a strong need to know how I stand in
comparison to my coworkers.”
 Concern for Others (Relational, α = .74)

“Caring deeply about another person such as a
close friend or relative is important to me.”
 Group Achievement Focus (Collective, α = .60)

“I feel great pride when my team or group does
well, even if I’m not the main reason for its
success.”
Other Measures
 Organizational Justice (Colquitt, 2001)
 Distributive (4 items,  = .93)
 Interactive (4 items,  = .91)
 Procedural (7 items,  = .87),
 Outcome Satisfaction (2 items, = .85),
 Supervisory Satisfaction (3 items,  = .90)
 Management Satisfaction (3 items,  = .76)
 Organizational Citizenship Behavior (Williams
& Andersen, 1991)


OCBI (3 items,  = .57)
OCBO(3 items,  = .43)
Key Prediction:
 Chronic identity will moderate the relationship of
justice with attitudinal and behavioral outcomes
in a manner that aligns level of identity with type
of justice and focus of outcome.
 Specifically, the following interactions are
expected:



Individual Identity x Distributive Justice will
predict individually referenced outcomes
Relational Identity x Interactional Justice will
predict relational outcomes
Collective Identity x Procedural Justice will
predict collective outcomes
Beta weights and R2 from Hierarchical Regressions
Predictor:
Outcome
Satisfaction
OCBI
Supervisor
Satisfaction
OCBO
Management
Satisfaction
DJ
.53**
-.11
.14*
-.07
.10
IJ
.09
.08
.52**
.22*
.28**
PJ
.16*
.16
.24**
.04
.41**
ΔR2
.45
.03
.55
.05
.41
Indiv’l
.06
.02
.14*
-.16*
.00
Relat’l
.03
.24*
.00
.33**
.16*
Collect
.09
.19*
.04
.09
.00
ΔR2
.01
.12
.02
.14
.02
.10a
.08
.13*
--
.18*
.01
.01
.02
--
.03
IJ x Rel.
ΔR2
Interaction of Relational Identity and Interactional
Justice in Predicting Supervisor Satisfaction
4.5
Relational
self-concept
4
High
Low
3.5
3
2.5
Low
Interactional Justice
High
Interactions Predicting Additional DV s
 Outcome Satisfaction
 Mgt. Satisfaction
4
4.5
3.5
Relational
self-concept
4
Relational
self-concept
3
High
Low
3.5
High
Low
2.5
3
2
Low
High
Interactional Justice
2.5
Low
High
Interactional Justice
Recap: Study 1
 Alignment proposition was supported for
Relational Identity, which moderated effects
of Interactional Justice in predicting:



Outcome Satisfaction
Supervisor Satisfaction
Management Satisfaction
 No inconsistent interactions were significant,
e.g., Relational Identity did not interact with
DJ or PJ
 Relational Identity has strong main effects on
OCBI and OCBO
Potential Mechanisms for Identity Effects
 Chronic self-schema can:


Bias the development over time of related
schema -- salient areas of justice
Influence momentary cognitions and affect
 Causality is unclear in correlational research
designs such as that of Study 1
 Study 2 attempted to manipulate the
momentary accessibility of alternative
identities using a priming paradigm
Study 2: Manipulation of Active Identity
 261 employed students completed self-administered
self-concept manipulation, predictors and DVs
 Study 1 Measures +
Construct
Items
Alpha
Source
Leader Member Exch.
7
.92
Graen et al. 1982
Affective Commitment
6
.79
Meyer & Allen, 1997
Continuance Commit.
6
.84
Coworker Satisfaction
4
.70
Spector, 1997
Company Satisfaction
4
.85
Dunham & Smith, 1979
Perceived Org. Sup.
9
.95
Eisenberger et al., 1986
Identity Manipulation
 1. Ps read vignette about a stockbroker in
which values, attitudes, and behaviors were
aligned with self-concept level
 2. Ps provided written self-descriptions of:



Distinguishing talents and abilities (Individual)
Close relationships with others (Relational)
Groups to which they belonged (Collective)
Manipulation first validated on separate
sample (N=55)
Condition
/Measure
Mean for
Focal
Group
Mean for
Other
Conditions
4.32
2.61
t (53)
7.54, p<.01
Individual
N
19
Relational
19
4.30
2.56
9.04, p<.01
Collective
17
4.29
2.49
8.56, p<.01
Hierarchical Regression Steps
 Step 1
 Chronic Identity Level (LSCS: I, R, C)
 Justice Dimensions (DJ, IJ, PJ)
 Dummy variable codes for WSC manipulations



I (1) vs R & C (both 0)
R (1) vs I & C (both 0)
C (1) vs I & R (both 0)
 Step 2
 Interaction of WSC x Justice Dimension:

I x DJ; R x IJ; or C x PJ
Results: Predictions Not Supported for
Relational or Individual Identity Manipulations
 Relational Identity x Interactional Justice

No significant interactions on Dyad
Referenced DVs
 Individual Identity x Distributive Justice

No significant interaction on Personal
Referenced DVs
Collective Manipulation x PJ Interaction
Beta
Interaction
ΔR2
Company Satisfaction
.13*
.01
Affective Commitment
.15*
.02
Perceived Org. Support
.11*
.01
Org. Citizenship Behavior - O
-.04
.00
Dependent Variables
System Referenced DVs
Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interaction
 DV = Company Satisfaction
4.5
4
Collective
self-concept
3.5
Primed
Not
primed
3
2.5
Low
High
Procedural Justice
Procedural Justice by Collective Identity Interactions
 Affective Commitment
 Perceived Org. Support
4.5
3.5
4
3
3.5
2.5
3
2
2.5
1.5
Low
High
Procedural Justice
Low
High
Procedural Justice
Collective Identity Manipulation x PJ Interaction
Beta
Interaction
ΔR2
LMX
.12*
.01
Coworker Satisfaction
.16*
.02
Task Satisfaction
.18*
.02
Continuance Commitment
.19*
.03
Dependent Variable
Dyad-Referenced DVs
Personal Referenced DVs
Interaction for Dyad-Referenced Outcomes
Leader Member Exchange
 Coworker Satisfaction
4.5
4
3.5
Collective
self-concept
4
Collective
self-concept
3
Primed
Not
primed
3.5
Primed
Not
primed
3
2.5
2.5
2
Low
High
Procedural Justice
Low
High
Procedural Justice
Effects of Chronic Identity Levels
 Individual identity predicted
 Outcome Satisfaction (-.14*);
 Task Satisfaction (-.18*)
 Continuance Commitment (.13a)
 Perceived Organizational Support (-.14*)
 Relational identity predicted
 OCBI (.17*)
 Collective identity predicted
 Task Satisfaction (.21*)
 OCBI (.27*)
 OCBO (.26*)
Interaction of Chronic Relational Identity and
Interactional Justice
 DV = Leader Member Exchange
4
Relational
self-concept
3.5
High
Low
3
2.5
2
Low
High
Interactional Justice
Interaction of Chronic Individual
Identity and Distributive Justice
 DV = Outcome Satisfaction
4
Individual
self-concept
3.5
High
Low
3
2.5
2
Low
High
Distributive Justice
Conclusions
 Chronic differences in identity affect:
 Salience of justice dimensions (interactions)
 Translation of justice into DVs (main effects)
 Primed identities affected:
 Salience of Collective identity (robust effects)
 Needed: Studies that show leaders can
directly affect identity salience or
development

Ibarra’s (1999) work on identity development
shows that leaders  provisional selves
Implications for Understanding Leadership
 Follower cognitions are an important aspect of
leadership


Identities  effects of justice perceptions
Identities may affect perceptions of leaders
 Identity may also affect:
 Sense of inclusion (relational, collective)
 Contribution to collective activities
 Cooperative behavior
 Willingness to sacrifice for dyad or group
 Emotions associated with group outcomes
 External versus internal focus
 Interpretation of task and social processes
Caveats
Identity manipulations may have unintended effects:
 Blatant primes can boomerang, producing contrasts
rather than assimilation (Martin, Strack & Staple, 2001)
 Primes inconsistent with a leader’s actions or values may
not be seen as authentic
 Identity activation may have different consequences for
different subgroups (gender, race, ethnicity)

Emphasizing collective identity may accentuate differences, rather
than enhancing similarities, for minorities (Kampmeier & Simon,
2001)
Questions?
 Additional Caveats

Effects may occur through unconscious as
well as conscious processes
 Justice can also affect identity,

Lind (2001) Fundamental Interpersonal
Dilemma
Johnson & Lord (under review):
 Effects of justice on identities can be implicit
(unconscious) as well as explicit (conscious)


Explicit measures (questionnaire)
Implicit (word stem or word fragment
completion)
 UNI_ _ _



Johnson & Lord (under review):
 Justice can also affect identity,
 Lind (2001) Fundamental Interpersonal Dilemma
 Effects of justice on identities can be implicit
(unconscious) as well as explicit


Explicit measures (questionnaire)
Implicit (word stem or word fragment completion)
 UNI_ _ _
 UNIQUE -- Individual
 UNITED – Collective
 UNIPED -- Neutral
Indirect Effects of Justice on Behavioral Intentions in Study 2.
Attitudes
Predictors
Behaviors
Trust
Satisfaction
Cooperation
Theft
Age
Sex
Ethnicity
-.01
-.08
.05
.02
-.16
.07
.01
.19
-.45
.01
.03
-.18
Justice
.26**
(.11, .41)
.27**
(.14, .40)
.75**
(.53, .97)
-.17**
(-.05, -.29)
.02
.25
.13
-.20
.42*
.10
-.13
.02
.01
.32**
-.14
-.05
-.15
.31
.12
-.74**
-.16
.69*
.13
-.30
-.06
.68*
.08
-1.38**
.96**
-.02
-.24
.06
.08
.15
.38*
.03
-.07
.03
.12
-.16
.14
-.21
-.02
.13
.07
-.29
-.87**
.54*
-.37
.14
-.60*
.28
.49
-.06
-1.28**
.05
-.14
.49
-.19
-.03
.17*
.22*
.46*
-.05
Step 1
Covariates
Manipulation
Alternate Step 2s
A. Identity
Explicit
Individual
Relational
Collective
Implicit
Individual (word)
Interdependent (word)
Individual (RT)
Interdependent (RT)
Manipulation
Justice
B. Regulatory Focus
Explicit
Promotion
Prevention
Implicit
Promotion (word)
Prevention (word)
Promotion (RT)
Prevention (RT)
Manipulation
Justice