Charismatic leadership viewed from above: the impact of proactive personality

By J. Crant, T. Bateman. 2000

499 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a02216906561ffb79c6813f3e41d38b2f19d7919

How researchers see this paper

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

In Clinical Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The emotional link: Leadership and the role of implicit and explicit emotional contagion processes across multiple organizational levels (2015, background): “Crant and Bateman (2000) showed that a proactive personality was predictive of followers’ perceptions of charisma in a leader, while studies by Sy, Choi, and Johnson (2013) and Ilies, Curşeu, Dimotakis, and Spitzmuller (2013) show the impact of leader emotional expressiveness in enhancing follower…”
Making Things Happen: A Model of Proactive Motivation (2010, background): “Much research has shown that proactive personality is associated with positive outcomes across many domains, such as job performance (Thompson, 2005), career success (Seibert et al., 2001), and charismatic leadership (Crant & Bateman, 2000).”
Job Demands–Resources theory and self-regulation: new explanations and remedies for job burnout (2020, background): “These findings indicate that proactive personality captures “conceptually and empirically, some unique elements of personality not accounted for by the five-factor model” (Crant & Bateman, 2000, p. 66).”
The dynamics of proactivity at work (2008, background): “Although the ensuing literature provides a wealth of evidence about the characteristics of proactive employees (e.g., Crant & Bateman, 2000; Parker & Sprigg, 1999; Seibert, Crant, & Kraimer, 1999; Seibert, Kraimer, & Crant, 2001), the dispositional perspective offers relatively little information…”
A Critical Assessment of Charismatic—Transformational Leadership Research: Back to the Drawing Board? (2013, methodology): “…leadership, where the common usage is to rely on uni-dimensional measurement, such as for the Conger– Kanungo Scale (Conger et al., 2000; Crant & Bateman, 2000; Groves, 2005), the Podsakoff et al. (1990) measure (Pillai et al., 2004; Charbonnier-Voirin et al., 2010), and the scale…”
An entrepreneurial cognition perspective on the internationalization of SMEs (2006, methodology): “Bateman and Crant (1993), Crant (1996) and Crant and Bateman (2000) used a questionnaire of 17 scored items with a scale of 1‐7 points to measure the variable.”
Transformational leadership and employee performance: The role of identification, engagement and proactive personality (2019, background): “Instead of waiting to respond to elements in their work environment, proactive individuals have an active orientation, search for information, explore the environment and try to anticipate future opportunities (Bateman and Crant, 1993; Crant, 2000; Thomas et al., 2010).”
Proactive Personality and Creative Behavior: Examining the Role of Thriving at Work and High-Involvement HR Practices (2020, background): “For instance, Crant and Bateman (2000) found that proactive personality explained an additional 5.7% of variance in charismatic leadership after controlling for the Big 5 traits.”
Leader motives, charismatic leadership and subordinates' work attitude in the profit and voluntary sector (2005, background): “…research shows that pro-activity, locus of control, selfconfidence, dominance, extraversion, agreeableness and openness to experience are related to charismatic leadership (e.g., Crant & Bateman, 2000; Howell & Avolio, 1993; Judge & Bono, 2000; Ployhart, Lim, & Chan, 2001; Ross & Offermann, 1997).”
An Affective Events Model of Charismatic Leadership Behavior: A Review, Theoretical Integration, and Research Agenda (2009, background): “Accordingly, Eagly et al. (2003: 586) acknowledged that “knowing that a particular individual is female or male would not be a reliable indicator of that person’s leadership style.” Other demographic variables have received limited attention in charismatic leadership research. Among the few exceptio”