Annebel H. B. De Hoogh

Reality at Odds With Perceptions Narcissistic Leaders and Group Performance

Although narcissistic individuals are generally perceived as arrogant and overly dominant, they are particularly skilled at radiating an image of a prototypically effective leader. As a result, they tend to emerge as leaders in group settings. Despite people’s positive perceptions of narcissists as leaders, it was previously unknown if and how leaders’ narcissism is related to the performance of the people they lead. In this study, we used a hidden-profile paradigm to investigate this question and found evidence for discordance between the positive image of narcissists as leaders and the reality of group performance. We hypothesized and found that although narcissistic leaders are perceived as effective because of their displays of authority, a leader’s narcissism actually inhibits information exchange between group members and thereby negatively affects group performance. Our findings thus indicate that perceptions and reality can be at odds and have important practical and theoretical implications.

Ethical leadership and followers' helping and initiative: The role of demonstrated responsibility and job autonomy

In this multisource study, we investigated a mediated moderation model proposing the moderating role of job autonomy and the mediating role of responsibility in the relationship of ethical leadership (subordinate rated) with helping and initiative (supervisor rated). In line with expectations, a study among 147 leader–follower dyads demonstrated that perceived job autonomy moderated the relationship of ethical leadership with both helping and initiative such that this relationship was positive when job autonomy was high, but not significant when job autonomy was low. This moderated relationship was mediated by the extent followers demonstrate responsibility at work. Responsibility fully mediated the moderated relationship of ethical leadership with follower initiative and partially mediated the moderated relationship of ethical leadership with follower helping behaviour.

Competencies Through the Eyes of Psychologists: A closer look at assessing competencies

Competencies have become a leading construct in human resource practices. However, empirical research on competencies has lagged behind resulting in a gap between practice and science. In this study, the focus was on the nature of competencies by examining the relationships of three competency dimensions with cognitive ability, personality and performance during assessment center exercises. Data of 932 applicants participating in a 1-day selection procedure were used. Results showed that to assess the competency dimension Thinking psychologists focus on cognitive ability. To assess the competency dimension Feeling psychologists rely on performance during interview simulation exercises and on measures of personality. In assessing the dimension Power psychologists focus mainly on personality, although they also rely on cognitive ability and performance during interview simulation exercises.

Competency Management: Balancing Between Commitment and Control

This study investigated the relationships between commitment and control approaches and the use of competency management by adopting the theory of planned behavior. Questionnaires were filled out by 43 human resource experts working in different organizations. We expected components of the theory of planned behavior to mediate the relationship between commitment and control approaches and the use of competency management (behavior). Regression analysis showed that perceived behavioral control mediated the relation between commitment approach and behavior. Furthermore, the data revealed that attitude towards competency management was more positive and perceived behavioral control was higher when competency management was implemented with a commitment instead of a control approach. Subjective norm was strongly related to behavior. Based on the results, for competency management to be frequently used, we argue for increased behavioral control, and for an organizational climate in which competency management is widely accepted.

Narcissistic leaders and their victims: Followers low on self-esteem and low on core self-evaluations suffer most

Narcissistic leaders are self-absorbed and hold beliefs of entitlement and superiority. Their aggressive tendencies in the face of criticism and inclinations to validate their self-worth by derogating others may lead others to perceive them as being abusive. Here, we test the relationship between leader narcissism and followers’ perceptions of abusive supervision. Drawing upon research related to the behavioral plasticity hypothesis, we propose that followers with low self-esteem will perceive narcissistic leaders as more abusive than those with high self-esteem. Followers low on self-esteem are more insecure, more in need of approval from their supervisor and are more likely to interpret the haughty, derogatory attitude of narcissistic leaders as abusive. Such followers also make for ‘easier targets’ and thus may actually suffer more abusive behavior from their narcissistic leaders. In a first multi-source study of 85 leaders and 128 followers, we found support for the moderating role of follower self-esteem in the relationship between leader narcissism and perceived abusive supervision: Narcissistic leaders were rated as more abusive by followers who were low on self-esteem, but not those higher on self-esteem. In a second multi-source field study among 177 leader-follower dyads, we tested a moderated mediation model and showed that this finding also holds for the broader concept of follower core self-evaluations as a moderator. Abusive supervision, in turn, was related to lower follower performance and followers experiencing more burnout symptoms. Thus, followers low on self-esteem or low on core self-evaluations seem to suffer most from narcissistic leaders as they perceive them to be abusive and, in turn, these followers show reduced performance and more burnout symptoms when working for such leaders. This research thus identifies an important moderator that might help reconcile previous inconsistent findings regarding perceptions of narcissistic leaders.

Toot Your Own Horn? Leader Narcissism and the Effectiveness of Employee Self-Promotion:

Self-promotion is a form of impression management aiming to present to others a positive image of oneself by emphasizing one’s strengths, contributions, or accomplishments. In the workplace, self-promotion is often targeted at leaders, with employees trying to show a positive image and impress their leader. Self-promotion does not always impress observers though, and we propose that leaders high on narcissism are more likely to be impressed by employee self-promotion than those low on narcissism for two reasons. First, narcissists endorse and engage in self-promotion themselves, and the similarity-attraction principle suggests that people more easily develop affective regard for and show more positive behavior towards those who are more like them, resulting in having a better relationship with them. Second, because narcissists are instrumental and exploitative, they are particularly sensitive to self-promotors’ message that they are an important and influential group member who potentially forms a useful asset to the leader. In turn, we expect high leader-member exchange (LMX) and perceived importance to be positively related to leader evaluations of employee performance. We tested this model twice, once using two scenario experiments and once in a multisource field study among 311 leader-follower dyads. Overall, the results suggest that, as expected, the relationship between self-promotion and both perceived LMX and perceived importance of the employee depends on leader narcissism.

Narcissistic leaders: An asset or a liability? Leader visibility, follower responses, and group-level absenteeism.

Although narcissists often emerge as leaders, research has thus far shown inconsistent results on the relationship between leader narcissism and effectiveness in the eyes of followers. Here we draw on leader distance theory (Shamir, 1995) and implicit leader theory (Lord & Maher, 1991) to propose that followers’ assessment of a narcissistic leader and followers’ overall job attitudes depend on the leader’s visibility to the followers. The more opportunities followers have to observe narcissistic leaders the more they will experience these leaders’ toxic behavior (e.g., exploitativeness) and the less they will perceive the leader as effective. To test our hypotheses we collected multisource, longitudinal data from 175 retail stores and obtained subjective (followers’ perceptions of leader effectiveness and their overall job attitudes) as well as objective (leaders’ organizational experience at time of hire, employee absenteeism trends) indices of leader functionality. Results showed that narcissistic leaders had less organizational experience at the time they were hired. Moreover, when followers had fewer opportunities to observe their leader, leader narcissism was positively related to perceived leadership effectiveness and job attitudes. However, when followers had more opportunity to observe their leader, the positive relationship disappeared. Finally, leader narcissism was neither positively nor negatively associated with absenteeism, whereas absenteeism declined over time under non-narcissistic leaders. These findings advance our knowledge of how followers respond to narcissistic leaders and how these leaders function in organizational settings where they have legitimate positions of power.

Effects of Leader Unpredictability on Team Power Struggles and Performance

Unpredictable leaders provide an intimidating face to their group’s opponents. However, within their own team, the effects of leader unpredictability on intrateam dynamics and outcomes are not yet fully understood. Here we investigate the possibility that unpredictable leaders may create intrateam power struggles and harm individual and team performance, especially when teams have low interdependence. In a first laboratory study, we find support for this notion that leader unpredictability causes followers to engage in intrateam power struggles, which impede their individual task performance. These effects are most likely when team goal interdependence is low. In a second field study of 245 bank branch offices, we find that the offices of more unpredictable leaders have higher internal power struggles, and thereby lower office financial performance, especially when team task interdependence is low.