79 research outputs found
Leaders as agents of continuity: Continuity of Identity and Resistance to Organizational Change
No full textLeadership, Identity, and Influence: Relational concerns in the use of influence tactics
No full text
Acting fairly to be the boss: Procedural justice as a tool to affirm power relationships with subordinates
No full textActing fairly to be the boss: Procedural justice as a tool to affirm power relationships with subordinates
No full text
Leadership and Fairness: The state of the art.
No full textResearch in leadership effectiveness has paid less attention to the role of leader fairness than probably it should have. More recently, this has started to change. To capture this development, we review the empirical literature in leadership and fairness to define the field of leadership and fairness, to assess the state of the art, and to identify a research agenda for future efforts in the field. The review shows that leader distributive, procedural, and especially interactional fairness are positively associated with criteria of leadership effectiveness. More scarce and scattered evidence also suggests that fairness considerations help explain the effectiveness of other aspects of leadership, and that leader fairness and other aspects of leadership, or the leadership context, may interact in predicting leadership effectiveness. We conclude that future research should especially focus on interaction effects of leader fairness and other aspects of leadership, and on the processes mediating these effects
Relational considerations in the use of influence tactics.
No full textIt is proposed that the existing relationship between the influencing agent and the target of influence plays a central role in the choice of using hard and soft influence tactics. In a field study, 3 key aspects of the relation between agent and target were examined. and the results generally supported our hypotheses. First, the more unfairly people felt they were treated, the more often they wielded influence, especially using harder influence tactics. Second. the better the influencing agent liked the target. the relatively less often he or she used hard tactics. Finally, the more the influencing agent felt dependent upon the target, the fewer influence tactics, both hard and soft, were used. The discussion focuses on both the practical and theoretical implications of these findings
- …
