Own and others’ personality characteristics influence the emergence of
leadership behavior in teams
Christine Gockel, University of Fribourg
Rebecca Schmidt, Chemnitz University of Technology
Shared Leadership in Teams
• Shared leadership is a “dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or both”. (Pearce & Conger, 2003, p. 1)
• Facets of shared leadership (Pearce & Sims, 2002;
Piecha & Wegge, in prep.)
a) Transformational d) Directive
b) Transactional e) Aversive
c) Empowering f) Laissez-faire
Shared Leadership in Teams
• Shared leadership is a “dynamic, interactive influence process among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of group or organizational goals or both”. (Pearce & Conger, 2003, p. 1)
• Facets of shared leadership (Pearce & Sims, 2002;
Piecha & Wegge, in prep.)
a) Transformational d) Directive
b) Transactional e) Aversive
c) Empowering f) Laissez-faire
Constructive Destructive
Consequences and Antecedents
• Consequences
Influences team effectiveness above and beyond hierarchical leadership (Pearce, Manz, & Sims,
2009; Pearce & Sims, 2002)
Positively influences other team outcomes, e.g., motivation, cohesion, team-empowerment (Balthazard, Waldman, Howell, Atwater, 2004; Hooker
& Csikszentmihalyi, 2003; Solansky, 2008)
• Antecedents
Team internal environment (Carson, Tesluk, & Marrone,
2007)
Coaching by external leader (Carson, Tesluk, & Marrone,
2007)
Personality Characteristics as Antecedents
• How do own and others’ personality characteristics influence the emergence of leadership behaviors?
• Actor-Partner-Interdependence Model (Kenny, Kashy, &
Cook, 2006)
Own
personality
characteristics
Own
leadership
behavior
Actor Effect
Others‘
personality
characteristics
Extraversion as Predictor
• Extraversion = energetic, lively, assertive behavior (“leaderlike”; Judge, Bono, Ilies,
Gerhardt, 2003)
• Impacts constructive leadership behavior:
Own extraversion should increase constructive leadership behaviors.
Others’ extraversion should decrease constructive leadership behaviors.
Agreeableness as Predictor
• Agreeableness = friendliness, tact, sensitivity (Judge, Bono, Ilies, Gerhardt, 2003)
• Impacts destructive leadership behavior:
Own agreeableness should decrease destructive leadership behaviors.
Others’ agreeableness should also decrease destructive leadership behaviors.
Method: Overview
• 25 student teams (3-4 members; N = 98)
79% female, Mage = 21.84, SDage = 2.75
76% study psychology
• Task: Complete research project
• Duration: 5 months
• Measurement points: beginning (t1), midpoint (t2), end (t3)
Measures
Personality Characteristics (Big Five Inventory-25;
Benet-Martínez & John, 1998; German translation by Gerlitz & Schupp, 2005)
• Assessed at t1
• Extraversion (E): α = .90
• Agreeableness (A): α = .65
Measures
Individual leadership behavior (based on Items
from Pearce & Sims, 2002)
• Assessed at t1, t2, and t3
• Types
Constructive leadership (2 items)
Destructive leadership (2 items)
• Source
Self ( subjective rating)
Others ( objective rating)
Constructive Leadership Behavior
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
t1 t2 t3
subjective
objective
Exte
nt
of constr
uctive leaders
hip
behavio
r (s
cale
: 1
-7)
No significant change over time
For subjective ratings: b = .07, t(170) = 1.33, p = .19
For objective ratings: b = -.08, t(170) = -1.89, p = .06
Destructive Leadership Behavior
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
t1 t2 t3
subjective
objective
Exte
nt
of destr
uctive leaders
hip
behavio
r (s
cale
: 1
-7)
Significant changes over time
For subjective ratings: b = -.12, t(170) = -3.15, p = .002
For objective ratings: b = -.10, t(170) = -2.93, p = .004
Constructive Leadership Behavior (t1)
Parameter Model 1
Subjective Rating
Model 2
Objective Rating
Intercept 5.11* (.10) 5.22* (.10)
Own Extraversion .59* (.24) .23+ (.12)
Own Agreeableness -.35 (.29) -.02 (.14)
Others’ Extraversion 1.84* (.64) .43 (.42)
Others’ Agreeableness -1.31* (.58) -.26 (.33)
Fixed Effects Estimates for Models Predicting
Constructive Leadership Behavior at t1
Note. Unstandardized coefficients (and their standard errors) are
displayed. *p < .05; +p < .10
Constructive Leadership Behavior (t1)
Parameter Model 1
Subjective Rating
Model 2
Objective Rating
Intercept 5.11* (.10) 5.22* (.10)
Own Extraversion .59* (.24) .23+ (.12)
Own Agreeableness -.35 (.29) -.02 (.14)
Others’ Extraversion 1.84* (.64) .43 (.42)
Others’ Agreeableness -1.31* (.58) -.26 (.33)
Fixed Effects Estimates for Models Predicting
Constructive Leadership Behavior at t1
Note. Unstandardized coefficients (and their standard errors) are
displayed. *p < .05; +p < .10
Destructive Leadership Behavior (t1)
Parameter Model 1
Subjective Rating
Model 2
Objective Rating
Intercept 1.97* (.11) 1.60* (.09)
Own Extraversion .27 (.25) -.29 (.20)
Own Agreeableness -.67* (.26) .25 (.17)
Others’ Extraversion .44 (.64) -1.00 (.60)
Others’ Agreeableness -.36 (.52) .88+ (.49)
Fixed Effects Estimates for Models Predicting
Destructive Leadership Behavior at t1
Note. Unstandardized coefficients (and their standard errors) are
displayed. *p < .05; +p < .10
Destructive Leadership Behavior (t1)
Parameter Model 1
Subjective Rating
Model 2
Objective Rating
Intercept 1.97* (.11) 1.60* (.09)
Own Extraversion .27 (.25) -.29 (.20)
Own Agreeableness -.67* (.26) .25 (.17)
Others’ Extraversion .44 (.64) -1.00 (.60)
Others’ Agreeableness -.36 (.52) .88+ (.49)
Fixed Effects Estimates for Models Predicting
Destructive Leadership Behavior at t1
Note. Unstandardized coefficients (and their standard errors) are
displayed. *p < .05; +p < .10
Summary
At the beginning of a team project
• Team members showed more constructive leadership behaviors
the higher they were on extraversion,
the higher others were on extraversion,
the lower others were on agreeableness.
• Team members showed more destructive leadership behaviors
the lower they were on agreeableness.
Effects become smaller over time.
Discussion
• Interplay between members’ personalities
• Usefulness of APIM
• Underlying processes?
• Implication:
Leadership in teams is a mutual influence process.
When selecting team members, pay attention to the interaction of all members’ personalities.
Merci!
• James R. Larson, Jr.
• Maik Beege
• Marie Blume
• Anne Brantl
• Iken Gonnermann
• Josefin Karg
• Elisabeth Kormeier
• Iris Roth