تعاملات متقابل بین ادراک گروهی از کاریزمای رهبر و خلق و خوی گروه از طریق سرایت روحیه
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|3367||2013||14 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||9400 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : The Leadership Quarterly, Available online 6 March 2013
Departing from the static perspective of leader charisma that prevails in the literature, we propose a dynamic perspective of charismatic leadership in which group perceptions of leader charisma influence and are influenced by group mood. Based on a longitudinal experimental study conducted for 3 weeks involving 116 intact, self-managing student groups, we found that T1 group perceptions of leader charisma mediate the effect of leader trait expressivity on T2 positive and negative group moods. T2 positive and negative group moods influence T3 distal charisma perceptions by affecting T2 proximal perceptions of leader effectiveness. The current findings offer critical insights into (a) the reciprocal relationship between group perceptions of leader charisma and group mood, (b) the dynamic and transient nature of group perceptions of leader charisma, (c) the importance of understanding negative mood in charismatic leadership, and (d) the mechanism through which charismatic leadership perceptions can be formed and sustained over time.
Researchers and practitioners alike have been interested in charismatic leaders because of their influence on group outcomes (Bass, 1998 and Bass and Riggio, 2006). Charismatic leaders conjure images of masterful leaders orchestrating and channeling the mood of followers in unison to triumph over seemingly insurmountable challenges and to achieve performance beyond expectations. Although the efficacy of charismatic leaders is postulated to operate through this affect elicitation in groups, the body of research examining the emotional aspects of charisma is surprisingly small (Erez et al., 2008 and Jung and Sosik, 2006) despite hundreds of studies on the correlation and effects of charisma (e.g., see meta analyses of DeGroot et al., 2000 and Fuller et al., 1996). Only a few studies have examined the link between leader charisma and follower affect (i.e., Bono and Ilies, 2006, Cherulnik et al., 2001, Damen et al., 2008, Johnson, 2008 and Johnson, 2009), and only one study has examined this link at the group level (Erez et al., 2008), which is the focus of the current research. Empirical research demonstrates that the interpersonal dynamics of dyads is qualitatively different compared with that of groups (Laughlin, Hatch, Silver, & Boh, 2006) because groups are governed by group norms and a complex network of past relationships among multiple members. The extent that the effects of charismatic leadership are manifested through group mood makes understanding the fundamental nature of this relationship imperative. Leader charisma is identified as a driver of follower mood (Cherulnik et al., 2001) and group mood (Erez et al., 2008). The expressive communication style associated with charismatic leadership is presumed to precipitate this effect (Bono and Ilies, 2006, Johnson, 2008 and Johnson, 2009), although empirical validation of this relationship is rare. Thus, we investigate the extent to which leader expressivity (as a trait) explains the emergence of group mood by shaping group perceptions of leader charisma. Conversely, social constructionist views of leadership argue that experiences of groups constitute an antecedent of shared perceptions of leadership (Meindl, 1995), making it likely that group mood will influence group perceptions of charisma. Therefore, the idea that group perceptions of leader charisma influence group mood and group mood influences group perceptions of leader charisma is possible, resulting in a reciprocal feedback loop between leader charisma and group mood. Extant research has only focused on one or the other side of this equation, leaving the issue on which between leader charisma and group mood is the cause and which is the consequence unresolved. A reliance on correlational and non-longitudinal experimental designs has exacerbated this problem (Bono and Ilies, 2006, Cherulnik et al., 2001, Damen et al., 2008, Erez et al., 2008 and Johnson, 2008). In the current study, we test these relationships with intact, self-managing work groups (i.e., with existing norms and interaction histories) using a longitudinal experimental design unfolding over 3 weeks that offers both ecological validity and methodological rigor. Thus, we propose a recursive feedback loop between group perceptions of leader charisma and group mood (see Fig. 1 for the overall conceptual framework). As a result, this study makes several contributions to the current literature. First, we examine the effects of leader trait expressivity as a driver of group perceptions of leader charisma and group mood, answering the call to examine leader traits that influence perceptions of charisma (Walter & Bruch, 2008) and group mood (Erez et al., 2008). Second, we investigate for the first time the reciprocal and dynamic relationship between group perceptions of leader charisma and group mood in a longitudinal design, highlighting the transient nature of charisma perceptions and exploring the extent to which a single affective event can change group perceptions of leader charisma. This investigation departs from past research that primarily characterized leader charisma as a stable construct that endures over time. Third, although previous research largely ignored the role of negative moods among charismatic leaders, we examine the extent to which charismatic leaders are equally effective at sending positive and negative moods, providing a more complete understanding of charismatic leadership. Fourth, this research is the first to test the differential consequences of positive and negative group moods on distal group perceptions of leader charisma through the proximal group perceptions of leader effectiveness. This research reveals the extent to which positive and negative group moods amplify and attenuate distal group perceptions of leader charisma as well as the responsible mechanisms.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This study also has limitations, particularly in relation to the sample used to test the hypotheses. Although the groups in this study were intact work groups, the work context was a college course, creating a number of limitations to the generalizability of findings. In many ways, these groups share the characteristics of an experimental setting. For example, mood was manipulated in the leaders, creating a potentially and unnaturally high level of mood among them. In other ways, the groups resemble groups in field research with intact relationships in that they had group norms and pre-existing impressions of one another before the experiment took place. Although this setting was chosen to maximize internal validity (by enabling us to manipulate mood) and achieve a certain level of external validity (by using intact groups), the findings may not be fully generalizable to work groups in business organizations. Researchers may carry out field investigations using organizational teams to validate further the recursive feedback loop observed in this study. Our results are consistent with past research, indicating that group mood is a function of primitive mood contagion that tends to operate automatically and subconsciously (Hatfield et al., 1994). The evidence for primitive mood contagion as the mechanism for group mood is well established in a variety of work contexts (e.g., Bartel and Saavedra, 2000, Hatfield et al., 1994, Johnson, 2008, Totterdell, 2000 and Totterdell et al., 1998). However, group mood may also be a function of conscious processes such as emotional comparison (Bartel & Saavedra, 2000) and emotion as social information (EASI) processes (van Kleef, De Dreu, & Manstead, 2010). For example, followers can consciously process and interpret the moods of their leaders and empathize with them so that they come to experience the same mood. Although such conscious mood processing is plausible, several reasons implicate primitive mood contagion as the mechanism. First, our study procedure used a cover story and deception so that both leaders and followers lacked awareness of the role of mood in shaping group processes and outcomes. Our post-study-funneled interviews confirm that mood is not salient to participants, which argues against conscious mood contagion processes. Second, our study examined mood, which is more diffuse and lacks awareness of the causal factor (in this case, leaders) compared with discrete emotions. These mood characteristics are consistent with the automatic and subconscious processes of primitive mood contagion. By contrast, the EASI model is focused on discrete emotions that tend to operate at a conscious level (van Kleef et al., 2010). Third, compared with primitive mood contagion, conscious models of mood contagion (i.e., emotional comparison) are more likely to elicit counter mood contagion (e.g., awareness of the joy expressed by the triumphant group triggers anger in the losing group) (Epstude & Mussweiler, 2009). Our research found only concordant mood contagion, which provides further support to the primitive mood contagion. We did not examine the various outcomes associated with charisma and group mood because of our focus on the reciprocal relationships between group perceptions of leader charisma and group mood. The literature provides abundant empirical evidence that charismatic and transformational styles of leadership drive group effectiveness (Bass, 1988 and Bass and Riggio, 2006). Studies on group mood have also provided preliminary evidence that positive group mood is related to citizenship behaviors, task coordination, and group performance (Barsade, 2002, George, 1995, Ilies et al., 2007 and Sy et al., 2005). It is possible that charismatic leaders improve group performance by generating a positive affective climate in the group. Nevertheless, expressive leaders are capable of enhancing both positive and negative moods among group members because these leaders are perceived to be more charismatic. Whether positive or negative mood enhances performance remains controversial. Both positive and negative moods may offer distinct benefits and shortcomings for group decision making and performance management. For example, although the bulk of the literature provides evidence of positive effects of positive mood (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005), emerging research presents that negative mood may also have positive consequences for group outcomes such as creative performance (George & Zhou, 2007) and effort expenditure (Sy et al., 2005). Researchers may explore the possibility that charismatic and non-charismatic leaders can shape different forms of group mood that may have significant implications for subsequent unfolding group processes. That said, the present study illustrates the critical role of leaders as architects of affective experiences of groups, which have consequences for leaders. Leadership is an affect-laden process. Leading may require emoting, and to the extent that leader charisma enhances leaders' subsequent influence and ability to lead, what leaders emote may determine how effectively they lead.