Developments in implicit leadership theory and cognitive science: Applications to improving measurement and understanding alternatives to hierarchical leadership

By Sara J. Shondrick, Jessica E. Dinh, R. Lord. 2010

260 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract After reviewing key findings regarding leadership categorization theory, we develop new perspectives regarding the design of behavioral measures of leadership and the implications of shared leadership and complex adaptive leadership conceptualizations of leadership. In particular, by applying recent developments in cognitive science, we explain how an understanding of symbolic, connectionist, and embodied representations of knowledge can benefit behavioral measures of leadership. Additionally, we address some practical issues associated with the measurement of leadership and argue that ratings which tap episodic memory at the event level may be more meaningful than ratings based on semantic memory. Finally, we discuss how notions of shared leadership and of leaders as catalysts for complexity can create unique complications for leadership perceptions, coordinated behavior within a group, and the measurement of leadership.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cd79a7f50854b05464dfb0d67792bd5ae49b48eb

How researchers see this paper

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

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Servant leadership and employee outcomes: the moderating role of subordinates’ motives (2016, background): “These categorizations serve as shortcuts, in line with the long established view of individuals as “cognitive misers” (Fiske, 1980), whereby employees make judgments and evaluations, through a process of automatic and spontaneous categorization against pre-established prototypes of leaders (Shondric”
Implicit Leadership and Followership Theories “in the wild”: Taking stock of information-processing approaches to leadership and followership in organizational settings (2013, background): “Shondrick et al. (2010) have mainly focused on the process of early”
Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings (2015, background): “Moreover, the type of measure usedmay exacerbate the tendency to rely on schematic-based processing as recognition-based approaches trigger the use of prototypes and fuzzy sets whereby the target is compared to the typical leader (Shondrick et al., 2010).”
When managers become leaders: The role of manager network centralities, social power, and followers' perception of leadership (2017, background): “When a manager interacts with followers, leadership perception is activated through followers’ “encoding and retrieval of leader-relevant information,” which followers use as a basis to categorize individuals into leader or non-leader categories (Shondrick et al., 2010, p. 959).”
The Thin Line Between Empowering and Laissez-Faire Leadership: An Expectancy-Match Perspective (2018, background): “In particular, follower evaluations of leaders’ behaviors, to a great extent, depend on their own ILTs, which describe standards of effective leaders’ behaviors, abilities, and traits (Shondrick et al., 2010).”
Alternative Approaches for Studying Shared and Distributed Leadership (2011, unknown): “More recent work highlights how one mechanism by which shared leadership will be rejected is when team members’ implicit leadership theories (ILTs) mean that individuals lack categories for encoding shared leadership behaviours and therefore do not recognize it (Shondrick et al. 2010).”