Leader performance and prototypicality: Their inter-relationship and impact on leaders' identity entrepreneurship

Research has demonstrated that leader performance and leader prototypicality are both predictors of leader endorsement. While performance and prototypicality have generally been considered to be independent, this paper suggests that performance and prototypicality are interdependent and have a bi-directional impact both on each other and on leaders' capacity to engage in identity entrepreneurship (i.e., to define shared group norms and ideals). Two experimental studies indicate that followers infer leaders' prototypicality from their performance and that a leader's prototypicality determines perceptions of performance (indicating reversed causality). Moreover, there is evidence that both performance and prototypicality enhance leaders' capacity to act as identity entrepreneurs. These findings extend our understanding of the mutually dependent causal relationship between followers' perceptions that a leader is one of us' and that he or she is doing it well'. They also provide the first experimental evidence that these factors are joint determinants of leaders' identity entrepreneurship. Copyright (c) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  M. Augoustinos,et al.  ‘Too black or not black enough’: Social identity complexity in the political rhetoric of Barack Obama , 2012 .

[2]  David E. Rast,et al.  The social identity theory of leadership: Theoretical origins, research findings, and conceptual developments , 2012 .

[3]  D. Knippenberg.  Embodying who we are: leader group prototypicality and leadership effectiveness , 2011 .

[4]  Tom Postmes,et al.  The Induction of Shared Identity: The Positive Role of Individual Distinctiveness for Groups , 2011, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[5]  Stephen E. Humphrey,et al.  TRAIT AND BEHAVIORAL THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP: AN INTEGRATION AND META-ANALYTIC TEST OF THEIR RELATIVE VALIDITY , 2011 .

[6]  Daan van Knippenberg,et al.  License to Fail? How Leader Group Prototypicality Moderates the Effects of Leader Performance on Perceptions of Leadership Effectiveness , 2008 .

[7]  D. Abrams,et al.  Innovation credit: when can leaders oppose their group's norms? , 2008, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  D. Cremer,et al.  How leader prototypicality affects followers' status: The role of procedural fairness , 2008 .

[9]  Dominic J. Packer,et al.  On Being Both With Us and Against Us: A Normative Conflict Model of Dissent in Social Groups , 2008, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[10]  S. Giessner,et al.  "License to Fail": Goal definition, leader group prototypicality, and perceptions of leadership effectiveness after leader failure , 2008 .

[11]  S. Alexander Haslam,et al.  Identity Entrepreneurship and the Consequences of Identity Failure: The Dynamics of Leadership in the BBC Prison Study , 2007 .

[12]  T. Postmes,et al.  Creative innovation or crazy irrelevance? The contribution of group norms and social identity to creative behavior , 2007 .

[13]  T. Postmes,et al.  Social identity and the recognition of creativity in groups. , 2006, The British journal of social psychology.

[14]  S. Reicher,et al.  Social identity and the dynamics of leadership: Leaders and followers as collaborative agents in the transformation of social reality , 2005 .

[15]  Daan van Knippenberg,et al.  Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: the moderating role of leader prototypicality. , 2005 .

[16]  S. Alexander Haslam,et al.  Motivating Individuals and Groups at Work: A Social Identity Perspective on Leadership and Group Performance , 2004 .

[17]  S. Reicher,et al.  On the Science of the Art of Leadership , 2003 .

[18]  Ulrike Weber,et al.  Towards tolerance: Representations of superordinate categories and perceived ingroup prototypicality , 2003 .

[19]  M. Platow,et al.  A Social Identity Analysis of Leadership Endorsement: The Effects of Leader Ingroup Prototypicality and Distributive Intergroup Fairness , 2001 .

[20]  Michael A. Hogg,et al.  A Social Identity Theory of Leadership , 2001 .

[21]  J. Turner,et al.  Social Identity and the Romance of Leadership: The Importance of being Seen to be ‘Doing it for Us’ , 2001 .

[22]  S. Reicher,et al.  Self and nation : categorization, contestation and mobilization , 2001 .

[23]  S. Reicher,et al.  Self‐category constructions in political rhetoric; an analysis of Thatcher's and Kinnock's speeches concerning the British miners' strike (1984–5) , 1996 .

[24]  M. Platow,et al.  PREDICTING INTERGROUP FAIRNESS AND INGROUP BIAS IN THE MINIMAL GROUP PARADIGM , 1990 .

[25]  Sanford B. Ehrlich,et al.  The Romance of Leadership and The Evaluation of Organizational Performance , 1987 .

[26]  Eliot R. Smith.  Beliefs, attributions, and evaluations: Nonhierarchical models of mediation in social cognition. , 1982 .

[27]  James S. Phillips,et al.  Schematic information processing and perceptions of leadership in problem-solving groups. , 1982 .

[28]  Robert G. Lord,et al.  The effect of performance cues and leader behavior on questionnaire ratings of leadership behavior , 1978 .

[29]  R. Lord,et al.  Implicit leadership theory: A potential threat to the internal validity of leader behavior questionnaires , 1977 .

[30]  E P HOLLANDER,et al.  Conformity, status, and idiosyncrasy credit. , 1958, Psychological review.