What Are We Measuring? Convergence of Leadership with Interpersonal and Non-interpersonal Personality

Vries, Reinout E. de

doi:10.1177/1742715008095188

Cited by 26 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although strong relations between charismatic leadership and supportive leadership have been observed (De Vries, 2008;De Vries, Roe, & Taillieu, 2002), these may mask different patterns of relations with personality variables. In the study by De Vries (2008), the strongest correlate of charismatic leadership was extraversion, whereas the strongest correlate of supportive leadership (which was called leader's consideration in that particular study) was agreeableness.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self–other agreement problem

Vries

2012

The Leadership Quarterly

Self Cite

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self–other agreement problem

Vries

2012

The Leadership Quarterly

Self Cite

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A primary focus within this research domain is the question what leader traits and behaviors determine leader effectiveness (e.g., DeRue et al 2011; De Vries et al 2002). Such features of leaders are usually conceptualized into various styles of leadership, that can be distinguished using a number of dimensions, two of which have received a lot of empirical support (De Vries 2008; Redeker et al 2014), specifically how active versus passive a leader operates (also referred to as the agency, control, or dominance dimension) and how supportive (or: constructive) versus unsupportive (or: destructive) a leader acts toward subordinates (also referred to as the communion, love, or affiliation dimension). In the present contribution, we focus on the four leadership styles that represent these dimensions, namely despotic leadership (destructive/active), laissez-faire leadership (destructive/passive), charismatic leadership (constructive/active), and participative leadership (constructive/passive)1 (Redeker et al 2014).…”

Section: Leadership and Organizational Conspiracy Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational Conspiracy Beliefs: Implications for Leadership Styles and Employee Outcomes

Prooijen

Vries

2015

J Bus Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeBelief in conspiracy theories about societal events is widespread among citizens. The extent to which conspiracy beliefs about managers and supervisors matter in the micro-level setting of organizations has not yet been examined, however. We investigated if leadership styles predict conspiracy beliefs among employees in the context of organizations. Furthermore, we examined if such organizational conspiracy beliefs have implications for organizational commitment and turnover intentions.Design/Methodology/ApproachWe conducted a survey among a random sample of the US working population (N = 193).FindingsDespotic, laissez-faire, and participative leadership styles predicted organizational conspiracy beliefs, and the relations of despotic and laissez-faire leadership with conspiracy beliefs were mediated by feelings of job insecurity. Furthermore, organizational conspiracy beliefs predicted, via decreased organizational commitment, increased turnover intentions.ImplicationsOrganizational conspiracy beliefs matter for how employees perceive their leaders, how they feel about their organization, and whether or not they plan to quit their jobs. A practical implication, therefore, is that it would be a mistake for managers to dismiss organizational conspiracy beliefs as innocent rumors that are harmless to the organization.Originality/ValueThree novel conclusions emerge from this study. First, organizational conspiracy beliefs occur frequently among employees. Second, participative leadership predicts decreased organizational conspiracy beliefs; despotic and laissez-faire leadership predict increased organizational conspiracy beliefs due to the contribution of these destructive leadership styles to an insecure work environment. Third, organizational conspiracy beliefs harm organizations by influencing employee commitment and, indirectly, turnover intentions.

show abstract

“…In addition, charismatic leaders express the sentiment of the group to motivate employees for their cause, and employees high in Honesty-Humility are less egoistic (De Vries, De Vries, De Hoogh, & Feij, 2009) and therefore more likely to appreciate the charismatic leader's group focus. Finally, leaders who score high on Honesty-Humility are more likely to show charismatic leadership (De Vries, 2008), supporting the similarity perspective between followers high in Honesty-Humility and charismatic leaders.…”

Section: Follower Preference For Charismatic Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 54%

Followers’ HEXACO personality traits and preference for charismatic, relationship-oriented, and task-oriented leadership

Breevaart

Vries

2019

J Bus Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the current study was to examine the HEXACO personality traits in relation to followers' preference for charismatic, relationship-oriented, and task-oriented leadership. Based on the similarity perspective, we expected followers high on Honesty-Humility, Extraversion, and Openness to Experience to prefer a charismatic leader, and those followers high on conscientiousness and low on Openness to Experience to prefer a task-oriented leader. In addition, from a need fulfillment perspective, we expected followers high on Emotionality to prefer a task-and a relationship-oriented leader. We examined these expectations using paper vignette methodology in a sample of 272 undergraduates. The results showed that most participants preferred a relationshiporiented leader over a charismatic or task-oriented leader. In addition, we found support for all our hypotheses, with the exception of the relations between Honesty-Humility and preference for charismatic leadership, and Conscientiousness and preference for task-oriented leadership. Our findings contribute to the nomological network of the role of follower characteristics in the leaderfollower relationship. Implications and suggestions for research on charismatic leadership are provided.

show abstract

What Are We Measuring? Convergence of Leadership with Interpersonal and Non-interpersonal Personality

Cited by 26 publications

References 47 publications

Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self–other agreement problem

Personality predictors of leadership styles and the self–other agreement problem

Organizational Conspiracy Beliefs: Implications for Leadership Styles and Employee Outcomes

Followers’ HEXACO personality traits and preference for charismatic, relationship-oriented, and task-oriented leadership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About