Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 80, Issue 7–8, pp 489–502 | Cite as

Navigating the Pathway to Leader Emergence in Self-Managed Work Groups Over Time: Should I Self-Promote and Try to Emerge Initially as a Leader?

  • JoAnne Yong-Kwan LimEmail author
Original Article
  • 74 Downloads

Abstract

Despite literature revealing the negative effects of self-promotion on important outcomes for women in interviews, there is limited attention on whether this relationship exists in a peer-to-peer context (e.g., self-managed work groups). Whereas men’s self-promotion is vital to attain interview success, work has shown that self-promoting men are not viewed favorably in a peer-to-peer setting. Moreover, most self-promotion research has focused on a single time point. It is thus a puzzle as to whether and when one should use self-promotion to emerge as a leader in a self-managed work group over time. My study addresses this gap. A longitudinal study spanning a thirteen-week period and involving 165 participants distributed across 44 self-managed work groups was performed. The results showed that, for women, there was a negative effect of self-promotion on leader emergence, and its effects subsequently accumulated. For men, self-promotion was critical to their leader emergence. The findings also indicated that emerging as a leader at the onset of a project serves as a springboard for subsequent leader emergence. Contrary to existing work, gender salience in work groups does not reduce over time. The present findings imply that managers need to be aware of possible biases in leader emergence ratings resulting from self-promotion if such ratings are utilized in their promotion decisions. Despite progressive improvements made with respect to gender-related issues over the years, societal expectations of gender norms in work groups appear to persist.

Keywords

Self-promotion Gender Backlash effects Leader emergence Self-managed work groups Longitudinal study 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

This article contains no conflict of interests. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the university at which the data were collected. Ethical standards were followed in the conduct of the study. All participants provided informed consent prior to participation.

References

  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Alge, B. J., Wiethoff, C., & Klein, H. J. (2003). When does the medium matter? Knowledge-building experiences and opportunities in decision-making teams. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 91(1), 26–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00524-1.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. (2009). Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 491–503.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014201.Google Scholar
  4. Baum, J. R., Olian, J. D., Erez, M., Schnell, E. R., Smith, K. G., Sims, H. P. (1993). Nationality and work role interactions: A cultural contrast of Israeli and U.S. entrepreneurs’ versus managers' needs. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(6), 499–512.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(93)90035-4.Google Scholar
  5. Bell, B. A., Morgan, G., Schoeneberger, J. A., Loudermilk, B., Kromrey, J. D., & Ferron, J. M. (2010). Dancing the sample-size limbo with mixed models: How low can you go? Paper presented at SAS Global Forum, Seattle. Retrieved from http://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings10/197-2010.pdf
  6. Berger, J., Fisek, M., Norman, R., & Zelditch, M. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectations states approach. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  7. Bolino, M. C., & Turnley, W. H. (1999). Measuring impression management in organizations: A scale development based on the Jones and Pittman Taxonomy. Organizational Research Methods, 2(2), 187–206.  https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819922005.Google Scholar
  8. Bolino, M. C., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W. H., & Gilstrap, J. B. (2008). A multi-level review of impression management motives and behaviors. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1080–1109.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308324325.Google Scholar
  9. Bolino, M. C., Klotz, A. C., & Daniels, D. (2014). The impact of impression management over time. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(3), 266–284.  https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2012-0290.Google Scholar
  10. Bozeman, D. P., & Kacmar, K. M. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(1), 9–30.  https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.2669.Google Scholar
  11. Brescoll, V. L. (2012). Who takes the floor and why: Gender, power, and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(4), 622–641.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839212439994.Google Scholar
  12. Bunderson, J. S. (2003). Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(4), 557–591.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3556637.Google Scholar
  13. Carli, L. L. (2010). Gender and group behavior. In J. C. Chrisler & D. R. McCreary (Eds.), Handbook of gender research in psychology (pp. 337–358). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Chidambaram, L., Lim, J. Y.-K., & Carte, T. A. (2008). Gender, media and leader emergence: Examining the impression management strategies of men and women in different settings. Paper presented at 14th Proceedings of Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS). Toronto, Ontario: Canada. Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2008/238.
  15. Cooper, C. D. (2005). Just joking around? Employee humor expression as an ingratiatory behavior. The Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 765–776.Google Scholar
  16. Dalal, R. S., Lam, H., Weiss, H. M., Welch, E. R., & Hulin, C. L. (2009). A within-person approach to work behavior and performance: Concurrent and lagged citizenship-counterproductivity associations, and dynamic relationships with affect and overall job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(5), 1051–1066.Google Scholar
  17. Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94(3), 369–389.Google Scholar
  18. DeNisi, A. S. (1996). Cognitive processes in performance appraisal: A research agenda with implications for practice. London: Routledge Publishing, Ltd..Google Scholar
  19. DeNisi, A. S., Cafferty, T. P., & Meglino, B. M. (1984). A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33(3), 360–396.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(84)90029-1.Google Scholar
  20. DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., & Ashford, S. J. (2015). Interpersonal perceptions and the emergence of leadership structures in groups: A network perspective. Organization Science, 26(4), 1192–1209.  https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0963.Google Scholar
  21. Dinh, J. E., Lord, R. G., Gardner, W. L., Meuser, J. D., Liden, R. C., & Hu, J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 36–62.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005.Google Scholar
  22. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and the emergence of leaders: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(5), 685–710.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.685.Google Scholar
  23. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573.Google Scholar
  24. Erez, A., Lepine, J. A., & Elms, H. (2002). Effects of rotated leadership and peer evaluation on the functioning and effectiveness of self-managed teams: A quasi-experiment. Personnel Psychology, 55(4), 929–948.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00135.x.Google Scholar
  25. Feldman, J. M. (1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(2), 127–148.Google Scholar
  26. Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41.  https://doi.org/10.2307/256496.Google Scholar
  27. Gersick, C. J. G. (1989). Marking time: Predictable transitions in task groups. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 274–309.  https://doi.org/10.2307/256363.Google Scholar
  28. Gruenfeld, D. H., Mannix, E. A., Williams, K. Y., & Neale, M. A. (1996). Group composition and decision making: How member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1996.0061.Google Scholar
  29. Harris, K. J., Kacmar, K. M., Zivnuska, S., & Shaw, J. D. (2007). The impact of political skill on impression management effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 278–285.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.278.Google Scholar
  30. Harris, K. J., Gallagher, V. C., & Rossi, A. M. (2013). Impression management (IM) behaviors, IM culture, and job outcomes. Journal of Managerial Issues, 25(2), 154–171.Google Scholar
  31. Heilman, M. E., Wallen, A. S., Fuchs, D., & Tamkins, M. M. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(3), 416–427.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.3.416.Google Scholar
  32. Higgins, C. A., Judge, T. A., Ferris, G. R., Higgins, C. A., Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2003). Influence tactics and work outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 89–106.  https://doi.org/10.1002/job.181.Google Scholar
  33. Hoffman, L. (2015). Longitudinal analysis: Modeling within-person fluctuation and change. New York: Routledge Academic.Google Scholar
  34. Johnson, T., Spizman, R. F., & Pollak, L. (2002). Women for hire: The ultimate guide to getting a job. New York: Perigee.Google Scholar
  35. Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives of the self (pp. 231–261). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  36. Karakowsky, L., & Siegel, J. P. (1999). The effects of proportional representation and gender orientation of the task on emergent leadership behavior in mixed-gender work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 620–631.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.4.620.Google Scholar
  37. Kent, R. L., & Moss, S. E. (1994). Effects of sex and gender role on leader emergence. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1335–1346.  https://doi.org/10.2307/256675.Google Scholar
  38. Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011). Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 616–642.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023557.Google Scholar
  39. Leary, M. R. (1989). Self-presentational processes in leader emergence and effectiveness. In R. A. Giacalone & P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Impression management in the organization. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Lemoine, G. J., Aggarwal, I., & Steed, L. B. (2016). When women emerge as leaders: Effects of extraversion and gender composition in groups. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 470–486.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.12.008.Google Scholar
  41. Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  42. Lord, R. G. (1985). An information processing approach to social perceptions, leadership and behavioral measurement in organizations. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 7, pp. 87–128). Greenwich: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  43. Lord, R. G., de Vader, C. L., & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits and leadership perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 402–410.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.71.3.402.Google Scholar
  44. Maher, K. J. (1995). The role of cognitive load in supervisor attributions of subordinate behavior. In M. J. Martinko (Ed.), Attribution theory: An organizational perspective (pp. 193–209). Delray Beach, Florida: St. Lucie Press.Google Scholar
  45. Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Ilies, R. (2009). The development of leader-member exchanges: Exploring how personality and performance influence leader and member relationships over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(2), 256–266.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.09.002.Google Scholar
  46. Neubert, M. J., & Taggar, S. (2004). Pathways to informal leadership: The moderating role of gender on the relationship of individual differences and team member network centrality to informal leadership emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(2), 175–194.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.02.006.Google Scholar
  47. Nyquist, L., & Spence, J. (1986). Effects of dispositional dominance and sex role expectations on leadership behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(1), 87–93.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.1.87.Google Scholar
  48. Pescosolido, A. T. (2001). Informal leaders and the development of group efficacy. Small Group Research, 32(1), 74–93.  https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640103200104.Google Scholar
  49. Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 637–655.  https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00233.Google Scholar
  50. Ritter, B. A., & Yoder, J. D. (2004). Gender differences in leader emergence persist even for dominant women: An updated confirmation of role congruity theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 187–193.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00135.x.Google Scholar
  51. Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 629–645.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.629.Google Scholar
  52. Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 157–176.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.157.Google Scholar
  53. Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2012). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. New York: Gulford Press.Google Scholar
  54. Rudman, L. A., & Phelan, J. E. (2008). Backlash effects for disconfirming gender stereotypes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 61–79.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.04.003.Google Scholar
  55. Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 165–179.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008.Google Scholar
  56. Scopelliti, I., Loewenstein, G., & Vosgerau, J. (2015). You call it “self-exuberance”; I call it “bragging”: Miscalibrated predictions of emotional responses to self-promotion. Psychological Science, 26, 903–914.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615573516.Google Scholar
  57. Singer, J. D., & Willett, J. W. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurence. Cambridge: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Tagger, S., Hackew, R., & Saha, S. (1999). Leadership emergence in autonomous work teams: Antecedents and outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 52(4), 889–926.Google Scholar
  59. Tobak, S. (2015). Why self-promotion is a terrible idea. http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/245233
  60. Tsai, W.-C., Chen, C.-C., & Chiu, S.-F. (2005). Exploring boundaries of the effects of applicant impression management tactics in job interviews. Journal of Management, 31(1), 108–125.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304271384.Google Scholar
  61. Turnley, W. H., & Bolino, M. C. (2001). Achieving desired images while avoiding undesired images: Exploring the role of self-monitoring in impression management. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(2), 351–360.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.2.351.Google Scholar
  62. Valacich, J. S., Jung, J. H., & Looney, C. A. (2006). The effects of individual cognitive ability and idea stimulation on idea-generation performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(1), 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.10.1.1.Google Scholar
  63. van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(2), 486–492.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.686740.Google Scholar
  64. van Knippenberg, B., & van Knippenberg, D. (2005). Leader self-sacrifice and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of leader prototypicality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 25–37.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.25.Google Scholar
  65. Watson, C. (1998). When a woman is the boss. Dilemmas in taking charge. Group and Organization Studies, 13(2), 163–181.Google Scholar
  66. Watson, C., & Hoffman, L. R. (2004). The role of task-related behavior in the emergence of leaders. The dilemma of the informed woman. Group & Organization Management, 29(6), 659–685.Google Scholar
  67. Wayne, S. J., & Liden, R. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: A longitudinal study. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 232–260.  https://doi.org/10.2307/256734.Google Scholar
  68. Wickham, K. R., & Walther, J. B. (2007). Perceived behaviors of emergent and assigned leaders in virtual groups. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 3(1), 1–17.  https://doi.org/10.4018/jec.2007010101.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Singapore University of Social SciencesSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations