Who will Lead and Who will Follow? a Social Process of Leadership Identity Construction in Organizations

By D. S. Derue, Susan J. Ashford. 2010

1,299 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fbac4f0b87d63854040b33a749dded3cc0d1e525

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

1. R. Lord
2. R. Kark
3. Jens Rowold
4. Deanne N. den Hartog
5. P. D. Harms
6. B. Schyns
7. D. Day
8. D. Miščenko

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. Bruce J. Avolio
2. R. Lord
3. S. Hannah
4. R. Kark
5. Fred Walumbwa
6. O. Epitropaki
7. D. Day
8. D. van Knippenberg

Citations in the corpus

• Mentoring Impact on Leader Efficacy Development: A Field Experiment (2011, methodology): “DeRue and Ashford (2010) proposed that solidification of a leader identity ultimately requires endorsement from others, including one’s mentor, peers, or followers.”
• A Meta-Analysis of Different Forms of Shared Leadership–Team Performance Relations (2016, background): “Traditional definitions of leadership are not necessarily clear or consistent (Bass & Bass, 2009), and what it takes to be a leader, as well as who is a leader “in any given social context, is ambiguous, dynamic, and contextual” (DeRue & Ashford, 2010: 630).”
• The Thin Line Between Empowering and Laissez-Faire Leadership: An Expectancy-Match Perspective (2018, background): “An ongoing feedback loop between leaders and followers about the empowerment given and perceived might be necessary to find the right level of empowerment within the dyadic relationship (cf. DeRue & Ashford, 2010).”
• The dysfunctions of power in teams: A review and emergent conflict perspective (2017, background): “Indeed, in such team task contexts, DeRue and Ashford (2010) suggest that members frequently make claims upon one another to legitimize and/or promote one ’ s own power and in fl uence, and the others in the team have the choice to grant these claims or not.”
• Destructive Leadership: A Critique of Leader-Centric Perspectives and Toward a More Holistic Definition (2016, neutral): “Conformers and colluders must ‘‘grant’’ flawed leaders influence and ‘‘claim’’ their follower roles in these processes (Derue and Ashford 2010).”
• Identity work in organizations and occupations: Definitions, theories, and pathways forward (2018, background): “Foundational: Stryker and Serpe (1982) - DeRue and Ashford (2010) - Jain et al.”
• Growing Followers: Exploring the Effects of Leader Humility on Follower Self‐Expansion, Self‐Efficacy, and Performance (2018, neutral): “However, if expressing humility is viewed as a “follower-centered” style (Owens and Hekman, 2012), one cannot claim leader humility as “leadership” if the social construction process of followers’ identity changes is not wellexplored (Dansereau et al., 2013; cf. DeRue and Ashford, 2010).”
• Alternative Approaches for Studying Shared and Distributed Leadership (2011, neutral): “…individuals internalize an identity as leader or follower: shared leadership-structure schemas result when there is a mutual understanding that granting leader identity to one individual does not prevent others from also claiming and being granted a leader identity (Scott DeRue and Ashford 2010).”