Leadership Quarterly最新文献

Building actionable theories: The role of causal constructs 建立可操作的理论：因果构念的作用

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-12-22 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101929

Joerg Dietz

What makes leadership and management theories practical? Theories are practical to the extent that practitioners can enact proposed cause (X) − effect (Y) relationships. Accordingly, I distinguish three types of practical theories. Manipulate(X) theories give practitioners levers for action. These theories have causal constructs, whose operationalizations’ levels practitioners can set by themselves. For example, in a theory on charismatic leader signals, practitioners can use fewer or more signals. In select(X) theories, practitioners cannot themselves vary a construct’s levels but select the desired level. An example are trait theories of job performance. They inform practitioners at what trait level to select employees. Lastly, in observe(X) theories, practitioners can only measure levels of a causal construct. For example, managers can measure employee trust, but they cannot fix this trust at a certain level. I focus on manipulate(X) theories because they are actionable and rigorous. I discuss criteria for constructs in such theories (e.g., construct unity) and three flaws undermining the development of manipulate(X) theories: (1) the simplification fallacy involves the abstraction of complex phenomena like culture into single constructs, (2) the endogenous-cause problem, when endogenous constructs are treated as exogenous, and (3) construct conflation, the lumping of several constructs under one label.

是什么让领导力和管理理论变得实用？理论在某种程度上是实用的，从业者可以制定所提出的原因(X) -结果(Y)关系。据此，我将实践理论分为三种类型。操纵(X)理论为实践者提供了行动杠杆。这些理论具有因果结构，实践者可以自己设定其操作水平。例如，在魅力型领导信号理论中，实践者可以使用更少或更多的信号。在选择(X)理论中，从业者不能自己改变结构的层次，而是选择所需的层次。工作表现的特质理论就是一个例子。他们告诉从业者在什么样的特质水平上选择员工。最后，在观察(X)理论中，实践者只能测量因果结构的水平。例如，管理者可以衡量员工的信任，但他们无法将这种信任固定在一定的水平上。我专注于操纵(X)理论，因为它们是可操作的和严格的。我讨论了这些理论中构造的标准（例如，构造统一性）和破坏操纵(X)理论发展的三个缺陷：(1)简化谬误涉及将复杂现象（如文化）抽象为单个构造，(2)内因问题，当内因构造被视为外因时，以及(3)构造合并，将几个构造集中在一个标签下。

{"title":"Building actionable theories: The role of causal constructs","authors":"Joerg Dietz","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101929","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101929","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>What makes leadership and management theories practical? Theories are practical to the extent that practitioners can enact proposed cause (X) − effect (Y) relationships. Accordingly, I distinguish three types of practical theories. <em>Manipulate(X) theories</em> give practitioners levers for action. These theories have causal constructs, whose operationalizations’ levels practitioners can set by themselves. For example, in a theory on charismatic leader signals, practitioners can use fewer or more signals. In <em>select(X) theories</em>, practitioners cannot themselves vary a construct’s levels but select the desired level. An example are trait theories of job performance. They inform practitioners at what trait level to select employees. Lastly, in <em>observe(X) theories</em>, practitioners can only measure levels of a causal construct. For example, managers can measure employee trust, but they cannot fix this trust at a certain level. I focus on manipulate(X) theories because they are actionable and rigorous. I discuss criteria for constructs in such theories (e.g., construct unity) and three flaws undermining the development of manipulate(X) theories: (1) the simplification fallacy involves the abstraction of complex phenomena like culture into single constructs, (2) the endogenous-cause problem, when endogenous constructs are treated as exogenous, and (3) construct conflation, the lumping of several constructs under one label.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"Article 101929"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145813908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Are women less convincing or perceivers biased? Understanding differential reactions towards men and women’s intentions to exert influence 是女性缺乏说服力还是感知者有偏见？了解对男性和女性施加影响意图的不同反应

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-12-10 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101882

Matthieu Jost , Gwendolin B. Sajons , Marianne Schmid Mast

Two important factors for accessing leadership positions are the ability to signal leadership qualities and to be perceived by others as having such qualities. Yet, research shows that women tend to be evaluated less positively when signaling leadership, which can be explained by two mechanisms. First, there may be actual differences in how women and men signal leadership qualities. Second, there may be differences in how women and men are perceived by others when doing so. We tested these two explanations within one setting for the key leadership quality of exerting influence on others. We conducted an experiment with 160 women and 160 men who delivered a speech in which they signaled their ability and intent to perform well in a subsequent real-effort task, with the goal of persuading observers to invest money in their future performance. The speeches (audio and body movements) were transposed onto both women and men avatars. A total of 320 different participants then watched a random subset of six speeches each and made incentivized decisions as to which speaker(s)’ task performance to invest in based on their evaluation of the speeches. Neither actual nor perceived speaker gender predicted speakers’ ability to exert influence in terms of attracting investments. In the context of our study, we thus do not find evidence that women and men differ in their ability to exert influence, or that others are biased towards women when evaluating their speeches.

获得领导职位的两个重要因素是表明领导品质的能力和被他人认为具有这种品质的能力。然而，研究表明，女性在表现领导力时往往得不到积极的评价，这可以用两种机制来解释。首先，女性和男性在表达领导品质方面可能存在实际差异。其次，在这样做的时候，别人对男女的看法可能会有所不同。我们在一个环境中测试了这两种解释，以确定对他人施加影响这一关键的领导品质。我们对160名女性和160名男性进行了一项实验，他们在演讲中表明了自己在接下来的实际任务中表现出色的能力和意图，目的是说服旁观者为他们未来的表现投资。演讲（声音和肢体动作）被转换到女性和男性的化身上。然后，总共有320名不同的参与者随机观看了六场演讲，并根据他们对演讲的评价做出激励决定，决定投资哪位演讲者的任务表现。演讲者的实际性别和感知性别都无法预测演讲者在吸引投资方面施加影响的能力。因此，在我们的研究中，我们没有发现证据表明女性和男性在施加影响的能力上存在差异，也没有发现其他人在评价女性的演讲时对她们有偏见。

{"title":"Are women less convincing or perceivers biased? Understanding differential reactions towards men and women’s intentions to exert influence","authors":"Matthieu Jost , Gwendolin B. Sajons , Marianne Schmid Mast","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101882","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101882","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Two important factors for accessing leadership positions are the ability to signal leadership qualities and to be perceived by others as having such qualities. Yet, research shows that women tend to be evaluated less positively when signaling leadership, which can be explained by two mechanisms. First, there may be actual differences in how women and men signal leadership qualities. Second, there may be differences in how women and men are perceived by others when doing so. We tested these two explanations within one setting for the key leadership quality of exerting influence on others. We conducted an experiment with 160 women and 160 men who delivered a speech in which they signaled their ability and intent to perform well in a subsequent real-effort task, with the goal of persuading observers to invest money in their future performance. The speeches (audio and body movements) were transposed onto both women and men avatars. A total of 320 different participants then watched a random subset of six speeches each and made incentivized decisions as to which speaker(s)’ task performance to invest in based on their evaluation of the speeches. Neither actual nor perceived speaker gender predicted speakers’ ability to exert influence in terms of attracting investments. In the context of our study, we thus do not find evidence that women and men differ in their ability to exert influence, or that others are biased towards women when evaluating their speeches.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"Article 101882"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145712282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Strategic leadership in a non-WEIRD context: An integrative review of strategic leaders in China 非怪异背景下的战略领导：对中国战略领导的综合评价

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-21 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101926

Lantao Cao, Sibel Ozgen

Research on Upper Echelons (UE) theory and strategic leadership (SL) has grown substantially. Yet, much of this work remains confined to Western contexts, leaving a gap in understanding how UE theory and SL unfold in non-WEIRD settings—those that are not Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. To address this gap, we focus on China, a non-WEIRD context that contrasts sharply with prevailing Western approaches. Drawing on 273 studies, we develop a contextualized strategic leadership framework that advances understanding of the what, how, when, and why of SL in China. To address the what of SL, we introduce a typology of constructs with China-related salience (attributes that gain salience in China), China-related meaning (attributes that acquire additional nuance), and China-related content (attributes shaped by context). We examine the how and when by highlighting China-related contingencies. We assess how primary studies addressed endogeneity, finding that nearly three-fourths engaged with this issue, with considerable variation in their extensiveness. Our study offers several contributions. First, it provides the first contextually integrated SL review that places the national context at the forefront. Second, it extends SL research beyond a Western-centric lens. Finally, it contributes to broader leadership research by responding to calls for greater consideration of context in leadership studies.

上层梯队（UE）理论和战略领导（SL）的研究有了长足的发展。然而，这方面的大部分工作仍然局限于西方背景，在理解UE理论和SL如何在非weird环境中展开方面留下了空白——那些不是西方的、受过教育的、工业化的、富裕的和民主的环境。为了解决这一差距，我们将重点放在中国，这是一个与主流西方方法形成鲜明对比的非怪异背景。借鉴273项研究，我们开发了一个情境化的战略领导框架，以促进对中国SL是什么、如何、何时以及为什么的理解。为了解决SL的问题，我们引入了一种与中国相关的显著性（在中国获得显著性的属性）、与中国相关的意义（获得额外细微差别的属性）和与中国相关的内容（由上下文塑造的属性）的结构类型。我们通过强调与中国相关的突发事件来研究如何以及何时。我们评估了初级研究如何解决内生性问题，发现近四分之三的研究涉及这个问题，其广泛性存在相当大的差异。我们的研究提供了几个贡献。首先，它提供了第一个上下文集成的SL审查，将国家背景置于最前沿。其次，它将SL研究扩展到以西方为中心的视角之外。最后，它通过响应在领导力研究中更多考虑背景的呼吁，为更广泛的领导力研究做出了贡献。

{"title":"Strategic leadership in a non-WEIRD context: An integrative review of strategic leaders in China","authors":"Lantao Cao, Sibel Ozgen","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101926","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101926","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Research on Upper Echelons (UE) theory and strategic leadership (SL) has grown substantially. Yet, much of this work remains confined to Western contexts, leaving a gap in understanding how UE theory and SL unfold in non-WEIRD settings—those that are not Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. To address this gap, we focus on China, a non-WEIRD context that contrasts sharply with prevailing Western approaches. Drawing on 273 studies, we develop a <em>contextualized strategic leadership framework</em> that advances understanding of the <em>what</em>, <em>how</em>, <em>when</em>, and <em>why</em> of SL in China. To address the <em>what</em> of SL, we introduce a typology of constructs with <em>China-related salience</em> (attributes that gain salience in China), <em>China-related meaning</em> (attributes that acquire additional nuance), and <em>China-related content</em> (attributes shaped by context). We examine the <em>how</em> and <em>when</em> by highlighting China-related contingencies. We assess how primary studies addressed endogeneity, finding that nearly three-fourths engaged with this issue, with considerable variation in their extensiveness. Our study offers several contributions. First, it provides the first contextually integrated SL review that places the national context at the forefront. Second, it extends SL research beyond a Western-centric lens. Finally, it contributes to broader leadership research by responding to calls for greater consideration of context in leadership studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"36 6","pages":"Article 101926"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145579793","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Social exchange theory in leadership research: A problematizing review 社会交换理论在领导力研究中的应用

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101924

Karryna Madison , Nathan Eva , Helen De Cieri , Zen Goh

Leadership scholars frequently use social exchange theory to explain leader-follower relations and the influence of leadership behaviors and styles. Yet, the richness of social exchange theory often contrasts with how it is applied in leadership research. Thus, our problematizing review interrogates how leadership research has operationalized social exchange theory and what has been lost in the process. We surfaced six assumptions that structure how leadership research applies the theory: exchange is defined as transactional, unidirectional and leader-initiated, static, inferred through indirect proxies, enacted by identity-neutral actors, and decontextualized. We show how these assumptions depart from social exchange theory’s original emphasis on emergent reciprocity, negotiated power, and structural embeddedness. Building on this critique, we propose a future research agenda that reconnects leadership research with social exchange theory’s sociological roots, which positions exchange as a dynamic, emergent, and uncertain process influenced by individual identities, negotiated through social interactions, and structured by organizational and cultural contexts.

领导学者经常用社会交换理论来解释领导与追随者的关系以及领导行为和风格的影响。然而，社会交换理论的丰富性往往与它在领导力研究中的应用形成鲜明对比。因此，我们的问题化评论探讨了领导力研究如何运作社会交换理论，以及在这个过程中失去了什么。我们提出了领导研究如何应用这一理论的六个假设：交换被定义为事务性的、单向的和领导者发起的、静态的、通过间接代理推断的、由身份中立的行动者实施的和非情境化的。我们展示了这些假设如何偏离社会交换理论最初强调的紧急互惠、协商权力和结构嵌入性。在这一批判的基础上，我们提出了一个未来的研究议程，将领导力研究与社会交换理论的社会学根源重新联系起来，将交换定位为一个动态的、新兴的、不确定的过程，受个人身份的影响，通过社会互动协商，并由组织和文化背景构成。

{"title":"Social exchange theory in leadership research: A problematizing review","authors":"Karryna Madison , Nathan Eva , Helen De Cieri , Zen Goh","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101924","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101924","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Leadership scholars frequently use social exchange theory to explain leader-follower relations and the influence of leadership behaviors and styles. Yet, the richness of social exchange theory often contrasts with how it is applied in leadership research. Thus, our problematizing review interrogates how leadership research has operationalized social exchange theory and what has been lost in the process. We surfaced six assumptions that structure how leadership research applies the theory: exchange is defined as transactional, unidirectional and leader-initiated, static, inferred through indirect proxies, enacted by identity-neutral actors, and decontextualized. We show how these assumptions depart from social exchange theory’s original emphasis on emergent reciprocity, negotiated power, and structural embeddedness. Building on this critique, we propose a future research agenda that reconnects leadership research with social exchange theory’s sociological roots, which positions exchange as a dynamic, emergent, and uncertain process influenced by individual identities, negotiated through social interactions, and structured by organizational and cultural contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"36 6","pages":"Article 101924"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145546292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

How does collective leadership emerge? A dual-process theory formalized using agent-based modeling 集体领导是如何产生的？使用基于代理的建模形式化了双过程理论

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-11 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101912

Bryan P. Acton , Roseanne J. Foti , Andreas D. Pape , Robert G. Lord

Collective leadership emergence—how influence patterns naturally form in groups without formal designation—is a fundamental social dynamic. Understanding this interactive process unfolding over time is hindered by theory proliferation, creating disconnected perspectives and fragmented knowledge. To address this, we utilize agent-based modeling (ABM) to develop formal, testable theories of the dynamic “how” and “why” behind emergence. We synthesize literature identifying foundational components: observable Behavioral Acts, distinct Internal Structures guiding behavior, and crucial Contextual Factors. Building on this, we formalize two distinct theoretical frameworks capturing different proposed mechanisms underlying emergence, focusing on how internal structures process information. Using a shared ABM architecture, we systematically compare these frameworks under varying Contextual Factors, specifically environmental uncertainty and resource cost. Simulations reveal that the distinct mechanisms produce divergent leadership patterns whose relative influence varies systematically with context. This finding supports integrating these perspectives into a comprehensive, context-contingent dual-process theory. Our work demonstrates how ABM can overcome theory fragmentation by enabling formalization, comparison, and integration of process theories via explicit modeling of contextual contingencies, offering a nuanced understanding of collective leadership emergence.

集体领导的出现——影响模式如何在没有正式指定的群体中自然形成——是一种基本的社会动态。随着时间的推移，对这一互动过程的理解受到理论扩散的阻碍，产生了不连贯的观点和碎片化的知识。为了解决这个问题，我们利用基于代理的建模（ABM）来开发正式的、可测试的理论，来解释出现背后的动态“如何”和“为什么”。我们综合了确定基本组成部分的文献：可观察的行为行为，指导行为的独特内部结构，以及关键的上下文因素。在此基础上，我们形式化了两种截然不同的理论框架，捕捉了不同的提出机制，关注内部结构如何处理信息。使用共享的ABM架构，我们系统地比较了这些框架在不同的上下文因素下，特别是环境不确定性和资源成本。模拟表明，不同的机制产生了不同的领导模式，其相对影响随环境而系统变化。这一发现支持将这些观点整合到一个全面的、情境条件的双过程理论中。我们的工作展示了ABM如何通过明确的情境偶然性建模，实现过程理论的形式化、比较和整合，从而克服理论碎片化，为集体领导的出现提供了细致入微的理解。

{"title":"How does collective leadership emerge? A dual-process theory formalized using agent-based modeling","authors":"Bryan P. Acton , Roseanne J. Foti , Andreas D. Pape , Robert G. Lord","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101912","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101912","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Collective leadership emergence—how influence patterns naturally form in groups without formal designation—is a fundamental social dynamic. Understanding this interactive process unfolding over time is hindered by theory proliferation, creating disconnected perspectives and fragmented knowledge. To address this, we utilize agent-based modeling (ABM) to develop formal, testable theories of the dynamic “how” and “why” behind emergence. We synthesize literature identifying foundational components: observable Behavioral Acts, distinct Internal Structures guiding behavior, and crucial Contextual Factors. Building on this, we formalize two distinct theoretical frameworks capturing different proposed mechanisms underlying emergence, focusing on how internal structures process information. Using a shared ABM architecture, we systematically compare these frameworks under varying Contextual Factors, specifically environmental uncertainty and resource cost. Simulations reveal that the distinct mechanisms produce divergent leadership patterns whose relative influence varies systematically with context. This finding supports integrating these perspectives into a comprehensive, context-contingent dual-process theory. Our work demonstrates how ABM can overcome theory fragmentation by enabling formalization, comparison, and integration of process theories via explicit modeling of contextual contingencies, offering a nuanced understanding of collective leadership emergence.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"Article 101912"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145509521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Leadership in layers: An integrative review on skip-level leadership and an agenda for future research 领导的层次：跨跃式领导的综合回顾和未来研究的议程

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-10 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101930

Pauline Schilpzand , Randolfh Nerona , Yiqiong Li , Simon Lloyd D. Restubog , Yasin Rofcanin

In this integrative review, we spotlight the skip-level leader − an often-overlooked yet highly influential figure in organizations. Although empirical interest in skip-level leaders has grown across disciplines, research to date remains dispersed, inconsistent in conceptualization, and disconnected from the broader organizational literature. To provide a clear and comprehensive understanding of skip-level leaders, we organize our review around four key emergent functions, skip level leaders’: 1) direct relationship with employee outcomes, 2) indirect relationship with employee outcomes via direct supervisors, 3) interactive relationship via skip-level leader attributes, and 4) the relationship of employee attributes with skip-level leader attributes (i.e., upward relationship). We present these functions both graphically and thematically as a roadmap for future research. Importantly, existing scholarship on skip-level leadership research is dominated by non-causal studies, limiting the field’s ability to draw robust causal inferences. We critically evaluate the methodological rigor of this literature, and propose remedies to strengthen future scholarship. By systematically reviewing and synthesizing prior work, we bring greater visibility to skip-level leaders as key actors in leadership science and aim to stimulate deeper inquiry into the diverse ways they shape organizational dynamics.

在这篇综合综述中，我们重点介绍了跳级领导——一个经常被忽视但在组织中极具影响力的人物。尽管对跳级领导的实证研究兴趣已经跨越多个学科，但迄今为止的研究仍然分散，概念化不一致，并且与更广泛的组织文献脱节。为了对跳级领导有一个清晰而全面的认识，我们围绕跳级领导的四个关键突发功能来组织我们的回顾：1)与员工成果的直接关系，2)通过直接主管与员工成果的间接关系，3)通过跳级领导属性的互动关系，以及4)员工属性与跳级领导属性的关系（即向上关系）。我们将这些函数以图形和主题的方式呈现，作为未来研究的路线图。重要的是，现有的跨层领导力研究以非因果研究为主，限制了该领域得出强有力的因果推论的能力。我们批判性地评估这一文献的方法严谨性，并提出补救措施，以加强未来的奖学金。通过系统地回顾和综合先前的工作，我们将跳级领导者作为领导科学的关键角色带来更大的可见度，并旨在激发对他们塑造组织动态的各种方式的更深入的探究。

{"title":"Leadership in layers: An integrative review on skip-level leadership and an agenda for future research","authors":"Pauline Schilpzand , Randolfh Nerona , Yiqiong Li , Simon Lloyd D. Restubog , Yasin Rofcanin","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101930","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101930","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this integrative review, we spotlight the skip-level leader − an often-overlooked yet highly influential figure in organizations. Although empirical interest in skip-level leaders has grown across disciplines, research to date remains dispersed, inconsistent in conceptualization, and disconnected from the broader organizational literature. To provide a clear and comprehensive understanding of skip-level leaders, we organize our review around four key emergent functions, skip level leaders’: 1) direct relationship with employee outcomes, 2) indirect relationship with employee outcomes via direct supervisors, 3) interactive relationship via skip-level leader attributes, and 4) the relationship of employee attributes with skip-level leader attributes (i.e., upward relationship). We present these functions both graphically and thematically as a roadmap for future research. Importantly, existing scholarship on skip-level leadership research is dominated by non-causal studies, limiting the field’s ability to draw robust causal inferences. We critically evaluate the methodological rigor of this literature, and propose remedies to strengthen future scholarship. By systematically reviewing and synthesizing prior work, we bring greater visibility to skip-level leaders as key actors in leadership science and aim to stimulate deeper inquiry into the diverse ways they shape organizational dynamics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"Article 101930"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145492158","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Leader-follower value congruence: A systematic review of the literature and a future research agenda 领导者-追随者价值一致性：文献的系统回顾和未来的研究议程

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-10 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101922

Allan Lee , Alexander Newman , Gregory R. Maio , Rohit S. Piplani , William S. Harvey

Leadership research has increasingly explored the alignment of values between leaders and followers—commonly referred to as leader–follower value congruence. This review critically examines the theoretical foundations, methodological approaches, and empirical findings associated with this construct. We distinguish between perceived and actual value congruence, identifying a disproportionate focus on perceived congruence (60.19%) and less of a focus on actual congruence (37.86%), with only two studies looking at both perceived and actual congruence (1.94%). While both forms assess value alignment, they differ in how they are measured and conceptualized. Perceived congruence—typically assessed through follower self-reports—is closely tied to relational and attitudinal outcomes yet suffers from conceptual ambiguity and endogeneity bias. In contrast, actual congruence—captured through direct comparisons of leader and follower value profiles—offers more objective insights but remains underutilized. Drawing from the self–other agreement literature, we propose new typological frameworks that consider not only the presence or absence of congruence, but also the accuracy of alignment perceptions. We argue that perceived and actual value congruence are distinct but interrelated constructs whose interaction may shape leadership processes in unique ways. By clarifying these distinctions this review lays the groundwork for a more integrated and methodologically rigorous research agenda on value (mis)alignment in leadership.

领导力研究越来越多地探讨了领导者和追随者之间价值观的一致性——通常被称为领导者和追随者价值观的一致性。这篇综述批判性地考察了与这一结构相关的理论基础、方法方法和实证研究结果。我们区分了感知和实际价值一致性，发现对感知一致性的不成比例的关注（60.19%）和对实际一致性的关注较少（37.86%），只有两项研究同时关注感知和实际一致性（1.94%）。虽然这两种形式都评估价值一致性，但它们在如何度量和概念化方面有所不同。感知一致性——通常通过追随者自我报告来评估——与关系和态度结果密切相关，但受到概念模糊和内生性偏见的影响。相比之下，真正的一致性——通过直接比较领导者和追随者的价值观——提供了更客观的见解，但仍未得到充分利用。从自我-他人协议文献中，我们提出了新的类型学框架，不仅考虑一致性的存在或不存在，而且考虑对齐感知的准确性。我们认为，感知和实际价值一致性是不同的，但相互关联的结构，其相互作用可能以独特的方式塑造领导过程。通过澄清这些区别，本综述为领导中的价值（错误）一致性的更综合和方法严谨的研究议程奠定了基础。

{"title":"Leader-follower value congruence: A systematic review of the literature and a future research agenda","authors":"Allan Lee , Alexander Newman , Gregory R. Maio , Rohit S. Piplani , William S. Harvey","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101922","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101922","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Leadership research has increasingly explored the alignment of values between leaders and followers—commonly referred to as leader–follower value congruence. This review critically examines the theoretical foundations, methodological approaches, and empirical findings associated with this construct. We distinguish between perceived and actual value congruence, identifying a disproportionate focus on perceived congruence (60.19%) and less of a focus on actual congruence (37.86%), with only two studies looking at both perceived and actual congruence (1.94%). While both forms assess value alignment, they differ in how they are measured and conceptualized. Perceived congruence—typically assessed through follower self-reports—is closely tied to relational and attitudinal outcomes yet suffers from conceptual ambiguity and endogeneity bias. In contrast, actual congruence—captured through direct comparisons of leader and follower value profiles—offers more objective insights but remains underutilized. Drawing from the self–other agreement literature, we propose new typological frameworks that consider not only the presence or absence of congruence, but also the accuracy of alignment perceptions. We argue that perceived and actual value congruence are distinct but interrelated constructs whose interaction may shape leadership processes in unique ways. By clarifying these distinctions this review lays the groundwork for a more integrated and methodologically rigorous research agenda on value (mis)alignment in leadership.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"36 6","pages":"Article 101922"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145485609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Leader interpersonal emotion Management: An Input-Process-Output framework and research agenda 领导人际情绪管理：输入-过程-输出架构与研究议程

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-05 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101927

Bo Shao

Leader interpersonal emotion management (IEM), such as leader humorous behaviors and the provision of emotional support, represents a distinct yet integrative leadership construct that highlights leaders’ deliberate efforts to manage others’ emotions. It extends beyond existing leader behavioral constructs by emphasizing the management of others’ emotions as a fundamental behavioral mechanism underpinning effective leadership. Research on IEM has made notable progress over the past few decades; however, critical limitations remain that hinder further development of the literature. In this article, I clarify the conceptualization of leader IEM as the behavioral processes through which leaders manage the emotions of relevant stakeholders and integrate existing research findings into an input-process-output (IPO) framework. This framework comprises three key components: (a) inputs, which consist of ability, motivation, and opportunity factors; (b) processes, which capture broad strategies and specific tactics organized hierarchically; and (c) outputs, which include both immediate and extended outcomes at multiple levels. I further evaluate methodological rigor and propose directions for future research.

领导者人际情绪管理（IEM），如领导者的幽默行为和提供情感支持，代表了一种独特而综合的领导结构，突出了领导者刻意管理他人情绪的努力。它超越了现有的领导行为结构，强调管理他人的情绪是支撑有效领导的基本行为机制。在过去的几十年里，IEM的研究取得了显著的进展；然而，关键的局限性仍然阻碍了文献的进一步发展。在本文中，我澄清了领导者IEM的概念，即领导者管理相关利益相关者情绪并将现有研究成果整合到投入-过程-产出（IPO）框架中的行为过程。该框架包括三个关键部分：(a)投入，包括能力、动机和机会因素；(b)过程，其中包括按等级组织的广泛战略和具体战术；(c)产出，包括多个层面的直接成果和延伸成果。我进一步评估方法的严谨性，并提出未来研究的方向。

{"title":"Leader interpersonal emotion Management: An Input-Process-Output framework and research agenda","authors":"Bo Shao","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101927","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101927","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Leader interpersonal emotion management (IEM), such as leader humorous behaviors and the provision of emotional support, represents a distinct yet integrative leadership construct that highlights leaders’ deliberate efforts to manage others’ emotions. It extends beyond existing leader behavioral constructs by emphasizing the management of others’ emotions as a fundamental behavioral mechanism underpinning effective leadership. Research on IEM has made notable progress over the past few decades; however, critical limitations remain that hinder further development of the literature. In this article, I clarify the conceptualization of leader IEM as <em>the behavioral processes through which leaders manage the emotions of relevant stakeholders</em> and integrate existing research findings into an input-process-output (IPO) framework. This framework comprises three key components: (a) inputs, which consist of ability, motivation, and opportunity factors; (b) processes, which capture broad strategies and specific tactics organized hierarchically; and (c) outputs, which include both immediate and extended outcomes at multiple levels. I further evaluate methodological rigor and propose directions for future research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"37 1","pages":"Article 101927"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145441938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The face of leadership: inferences, impressions, and behavioral consequences 领导的面貌：推论、印象和行为后果

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-11-05 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101925

Brett H. Neely Jr , Nathan Eva , Karryna Madison , Mark van Vugt

Facial cues are powerful inputs in impression formation, yet their role in leadership contexts remains contested. Does a leader’s face offer meaningful insight into their qualities and potential, or merely reflect observers’ stereotypes? To address this question, we conducted a multidisciplinary review of 131 empirical articles spanning psychology, management, political science, and related fields. We organized findings around five guiding research questions: theoretical perspectives, trait inferences, leadership outcomes, contextual moderators, and methodological approaches. Across studies, we find that observers commonly infer competence, dominance, trustworthiness, and warmth from leader faces, and that these impressions predict perceptions of effectiveness, leadership emergence, and behavioral outcomes. However, we also identify critical limitations: many studies rely on Western samples, invoke theory without testing mechanisms, and rarely validate trait inferences against objective data. Contextual factors such as threat or cultural norms are often overlooked, and intersectionality is largely absent. Methodologically, studies vary in rigor and causal inference is often weak. We integrate these insights into a conceptual framework and offer a future research agenda that encourages theory-driven, context-sensitive, and methodologically robust work. By clarifying what faces cue, when these cues matter, and how they are studied, this review advances a more integrated science of leader perception.

面部线索是印象形成的有力输入，但它们在领导情境中的作用仍有争议。领导者的脸是否能让人有意义地了解他们的品质和潜力，还是仅仅反映了观察者的刻板印象？为了解决这个问题，我们对131篇涉及心理学、管理学、政治学和相关领域的实证文章进行了多学科综述。我们围绕五个指导性研究问题组织了研究结果：理论视角、特质推论、领导力结果、情境调节因子和方法方法。在研究中，我们发现，观察者通常会从领导者的面孔中推断出能力、支配力、可信度和温暖度，这些印象可以预测对有效性、领导力涌现和行为结果的看法。然而，我们也发现了关键的局限性：许多研究依赖于西方的样本，在没有测试机制的情况下调用理论，并且很少根据客观数据验证特征推断。诸如威胁或文化规范等背景因素往往被忽视，而交叉性在很大程度上是不存在的。在方法上，研究的严谨性各不相同，因果推理往往很弱。我们将这些见解整合到一个概念框架中，并提供一个未来的研究议程，鼓励理论驱动，上下文敏感和方法稳健的工作。通过澄清什么是线索，这些线索何时起作用，以及如何研究这些线索，这篇综述推进了一门更综合的关于领导者感知的科学。

{"title":"The face of leadership: inferences, impressions, and behavioral consequences","authors":"Brett H. Neely Jr , Nathan Eva , Karryna Madison , Mark van Vugt","doi":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101925","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101925","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Facial cues are powerful inputs in impression formation, yet their role in leadership contexts remains contested. Does a leader’s face offer meaningful insight into their qualities and potential, or merely reflect observers’ stereotypes? To address this question, we conducted a multidisciplinary review of 131 empirical articles spanning psychology, management, political science, and related fields. We organized findings around five guiding research questions: theoretical perspectives, trait inferences, leadership outcomes, contextual moderators, and methodological approaches. Across studies, we find that observers commonly infer competence, dominance, trustworthiness, and warmth from leader faces, and that these impressions predict perceptions of effectiveness, leadership emergence, and behavioral outcomes. However, we also identify critical limitations: many studies rely on Western samples, invoke theory without testing mechanisms, and rarely validate trait inferences against objective data. Contextual factors such as threat or cultural norms are often overlooked, and intersectionality is largely absent. Methodologically, studies vary in rigor and causal inference is often weak. We integrate these insights into a conceptual framework and offer a future research agenda that encourages theory-driven, context-sensitive, and methodologically robust work. By clarifying what faces cue, when these cues matter, and how they are studied, this review advances a more integrated science of leader perception.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48434,"journal":{"name":"Leadership Quarterly","volume":"36 6","pages":"Article 101925"},"PeriodicalIF":9.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145447290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Leader risk mitigates the effects of pay inequality on team coordination: An experiment 领导风险减轻薪酬不平等对团队协调的影响：一项实验

IF 9.7 1区管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT

Leadership Quarterly

Pub Date : 2025-10-28 DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2025.101928

Aurelie Dariel , Nikos Nikiforakis , Simon Siegenthaler

Effective team coordination is essential for organizational success, yet it often hinges on whether individuals are willing to follow a leader. We study how pay and risk inequality influence teams’ willingness to follow their leaders in a setting where leaders coordinate team expectations and decisions through their actions. Using a game-theoretic model, we predict that pay inequality undermines leaders’ ability to coordinate their teams, but that risk inequality can offset this negative effect if leaders face greater personal risk. We test and validate these predictions in a large experiment that systematically varies pay and risk inequality. Pay inequality reduces coordination, especially when leaders enjoy both a bonus and lower risk, but this effect disappears when leaders take on substantial risk. Risk-averse team members and those who believe their teammates are inequality-averse are especially sensitive to changes in pay and risk inequality. Our findings highlight how inequality in leadership incentives affects coordination.

有效的团队协作对组织的成功至关重要，但它往往取决于个人是否愿意跟随领导者。我们研究了在领导者通过行动协调团队期望和决策的情况下，薪酬和风险不平等如何影响团队追随领导者的意愿。利用博弈论模型，我们预测薪酬不平等会削弱领导者协调团队的能力，但如果领导者面临更大的个人风险，风险不平等可以抵消这种负面影响。我们通过系统性地改变薪酬和风险不平等的大型实验，测试并验证了这些预测。薪酬不平等会减少协调，尤其是当领导者既享有奖金又享有较低风险时，但当领导者承担重大风险时，这种影响就会消失。厌恶风险的团队成员，以及那些认为自己的队友厌恶不平等的人，对薪酬和风险不平等的变化尤其敏感。我们的研究结果强调了领导激励的不平等如何影响协调。

引用次数: 0