Advertisement

Idiosyncrasy Credit Model of Leadership

  • Ingo Winkler
Chapter
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)

Abstract

The idiosyncrasy credit model of leadership (e.g., Hollander 1958, 1960, 1980, 1992, 1993, 2006, 2008) builds upon the awareness that leadership is an outcome of shared interpersonal perceptions. To become a leader in a given group is the result of an interaction process. This process is market by an assessment of the various contributions of the group members, in which positive (negative) contributions lead to an increased (decreased) level of status of an individual group member (Hollander 1958). The degree of status of a given group member can be compared to a bank balance in the context of this theory (Jacobs 1971). As a consequence, this credit is referred to as idiosyncrasy credit. An idiosyncrasy credit is defined as the “positively disposed impressions” an individual acquires from other group members (Hollander 1958, p. 120, 1960, p. 247). This group-awarded credit allows idiosyncratic behavior to a certain degree before group sanctions are applied (Hollander 1958).

Keywords

Group Leader Leader Behavior Leader Election Innovative Behavior Individual Group Member 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Alvarez R (1968) Informal reactions to deviance in simulated work organizations: A laboratory experiment. American Sociological Review 33(6):895–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bryman A (1986) Leadership and organizations. Routledge & Kegan Paul, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Geis FL, Boston MB, Hoffman N (1985) Sex of authority role models and achievement by men and women: leadership performance and recognition. J Pers Soc Psychol 49(12):636–653Google Scholar
  4. Goldman M, Fraas LA (1965) The effects of leader selection on group performance. Sociometry 28(1):82–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hollander EP (1958) Conformity, status, and idiosyncrasy credit. Psychol Rev 65(2):117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hollander EP (1960) Competence and conformity in the acceptance of influence. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 61(3):361–365Google Scholar
  7. Hollander EP (1961) Some effects of perceived status on response to innovative behavior. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 63(2):247–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hollander EP (1978) Leadership dynamics: a practical guide to effective relationships. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Hollander EP (1980) Leadership and social exchange processes. In: Gergen KJ, Greenberg MS, Willis RH (eds) Social exchange: advances in theory and research. Plenum, New York, pp 103–118Google Scholar
  10. Hollander EP (1992) The essential interdependence of leadership and followership. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 1(2):71–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hollander EP (1993) Legitimacy, power, and influence. In: Chemers M, Ayman R (eds) Leadership theory and research: perspectives and research directions. Academic, San Diego, CA, pp 29–48Google Scholar
  12. Hollander EP (2006) Influence processes in leadership-followership. Inclusion and the idiosyncrasy credit model. In: Hantula D (ed) Advances in social and organizational psychology. A tribute to Ralph Rosnow. Erlbaum, Mahawa, NJ, pp 293–314Google Scholar
  13. Hollander EP (2008) Inclusive leadership. The essential leader-follower relationship. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Hollander EP, Julian JW (1970) Studies in leader legitimacy, influence, and innovation. In: Berkowitz LL (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology. Academic, New York, pp 33–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hollander EP, Julian JW (1978) A further look at leader legitimacy, influence, and innovation. In: Berkowitz LL (ed) Group processes. Academic, New York, pp 153–165Google Scholar
  16. Hughes RL, Ginnett RC, Curphy GJ (1996) Leadership. Enhancing the lessons of experience. Irwin, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. Insko CA, Gilmore R, Moehle D, Lipsitz A, Drenan S, Thibaut JW (1982) Seniority in the generational transition of laboratory groups: the effects of social familiarity and task experience. J Exp Soc Psychol 18(6):557–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacobs TO (1971) Leadership and exchange in formal organizations. Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, VAGoogle Scholar
  19. Kenny DA, Zaccaro SJ (1983) An estimate of variance due to traits in leadership. J Appl Psychol 68(4):678–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stein RT, Heller T (1983) The relationship of participation rates to leadership status: a meta-analysis. In: Blumberg HH, Hare AP, Kent V, Davies MF (eds) Small groups and social interaction. Wiley, Chicester, pp 401–406Google Scholar
  21. Yukl GA (2006) Leadership in organizations. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. Border Region StudiesUniversity of Southern DenmarkSønderborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations