Why inconsistent leadership is regarded as procedurally unfair: the importance of social self‐esteem concerns

By David de Cremer. 2003

135 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/014b5d6c520ce49a548645de32d8a9e0de2bb26d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Leadership, self, and identity: A review and research agenda (2004, background): “An experimental study by De Cremer (2003b) showed that leader consistency, or the extent to which leaders use procedures uniformly and reliably across people and over time, is related to follower selfesteem.”
Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Ambivalence and Task Performance: The Cross-Domain Buffering Role of Social Support (2019, background): “Research has demonstrated that leaders who are perceived as inconsistent are evaluated as less procedurally fair and engender feelings of uncertainty about future interactions (De Cremer, 2003).”
Main and interactive effects of weekly transformational and laissez‐faire leadership on followers’ trust in the leader and leader effectiveness (2019, unknown): “This finding is not in line with our predictions or with previous research (e.g., De Cremer, 2003; Mullen et al., 2011).”
Organizational Justice and Behavioral Ethics: Promises and Prospects (2009, methodology): “De Cremer and his colleagues found strong support for this effect in one fi eld study and two experiments (De Cremer, 2003, Studies 2–3).”
Leadership and fairness: The state of the art (2006, background): “De Cremer (2003) demonstrated experimentally that leader procedural fairness and follower self-esteem interact (stronger effects for followers lower in self-esteem; cf. Vermunt, van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, & Blaauw, 2001) in predicting leadership endorsement.”
Trust, confidence, and equity affect the legitimacy of natural resource governance (2016, background): “The link between justice and voluntary cooperation and compliance has been demonstrated in numerous studies and social dilemma experiments (De Cremer 2003, De Cremer and Tyler 2005).”
Self-uncertainty and responsiveness to procedural justice (2005, background): “Specifically, we are interested in the role of the self, a topic that has recently been pushed to the forefront of the justice empirical agenda (Brockner et al., 1998; De Cremer, 2003; Shroth & Shah, 2000; Van den Bos, 2001a; Vermunt, van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, & Blaauw, 2001).”
Is More Fairness Always Preferred? Self-Esteem Moderates Reactions to Procedural Justice (2007, background): “For example, De Cremer (2003) and colleagues (De Cremer et al., 2004) found that reactions to the fairness of a leader were stronger for people with low rather than high state social selfesteem, and De Cremer and Sedikides (2005) reported that reactions to procedural justice were stronger for those ”
When and why leaders put themselves first: leader behaviour in resource allocations as a function of feeling entitled (2005, background): “For this reason, it might therefore also be the case that if leaders display strong identification with followers under conditions of heightened social identity salience, then their allocations would be more in line with the equality rule (cf. De Cremer, 2003b; Duck & Fielding, 2003).”