1 / 45

FOLLOWING IN THEIR FOOTSTEPS Self-Leader Similarity Perceptions and Motivation

FOLLOWING IN THEIR FOOTSTEPS Self-Leader Similarity Perceptions and Motivation Kim Peters & Michelle Ryan. MOTIVATION. Internal and external factors that impel action (its direction, intensity and duration). (Locke & Latham, 2004)

dionne
Download Presentation

FOLLOWING IN THEIR FOOTSTEPS Self-Leader Similarity Perceptions and Motivation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FOLLOWING IN THEIR FOOTSTEPS Self-Leader Similarity Perceptions and Motivation Kim Peters & Michelle Ryan

  2. MOTIVATION • Internal and external factors that impel action (its direction, intensity and duration). (Locke & Latham, 2004) • The process whereby one or more members of a group influence other group members in a way that contributes to the definition and achievement of group goals. (Haslam & Reicher, 2002) LEADERSHIP

  3. MOTIVATING FOLLOWERS Haslam & Peters (2010)

  4. MOTIVATING FOLLOWERS 1. Be sensitive 57% 2. Be positive 53% 3. Be respectful 48% 4. Work hard 41% 5 Meet expectations 40% 6. Support followers 38% 7. Don’t be arrogant 36% Haslam & Peters (2010)

  5. SELF-LEADER SIMILARITY • “Men [sic] nearly always follow the tracks • made by others and proceed in their • affairs by imitation”. • Machiavelli (1513/1961)

  6. SELF-LEADER SIMILARITY • Individuals who perceive themselves • to be similar to leaders should be • more motivated by the aspirations • that the leader embodies and • promotes.

  7. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY • 422 RN personnel on 4 ships; 11% officers; M=29 years (7 years service); 86% in engineering, warfare and logistics branches. Peters, Ryan & Moon (2012)

  8. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY • SELF-OTHER SIMILARITY • I have a lot in common with leading RN personnel • I have a lot in common with my peers in the RN • RN IDENTIFICATION • I identify with the RN • CAREER MOTIVATION • My career in one of the most important things in my life • I consider myself ambitious in my career • EXIT DESIRE • I often think about leaving the RN Peters, Ryan & Moon (2012)

  9. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY Self-Leader Similarity .28 RN Identity .36 Self-Peer Similarity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.26, F(2,463)=81.69, p<.001

  10. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY .28 Self-Leader Similarity RN Career Motivation .28 .32 RN Identity .36 Self-Peer Similarity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.22, F(3,461)=45.60, p<.001

  11. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY -.15 .28 Self-Leader Similarity RN Career Motivation .28 -.33 .32 -.30 RN Identity RN Exit Desire .36 Self-Peer Similarity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.38, F(3,460)=70.43, p<.001

  12. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY • 220 Royal Marine Commando recruits from 4 troops; M=20 years. Peters & Haslam (2012b)

  13. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY • Day 1 Day 15 Day 25 • SELF & LEADER PERCEPTIONS • 5-factor adjective checklist (Rawlings, 2001) + stereotype • SELF-LEADER SIMILARITY • I have a lot in common with leading marine commandos • CAREER MOTIVATION • My career in one of the most important things in my life • I consider myself ambitious in my career Peters & Haslam (2012b)

  14. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY • Day 1 Day 15 Day 25 • SELF & LEADER PERCEPTIONS • 1. Commando Spirit • 2. Neuroticism • 3. Extraversion • 4. Disagreeableness determined, efficient, brave, competitive, energetic, loyal, decisive, team player. Peters & Haslam (2012b)

  15. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 1 Ss Com Spirit .54 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .17 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.27

  16. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 1 .39 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation .28 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.16

  17. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 1 .17 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation .54 .16 .41 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .17 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.27

  18. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 15 Ss Com Spirit .61 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .22 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.30

  19. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 15 .41 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation .19 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.17

  20. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 15 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation .61 .57 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .22 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.40

  21. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 25 Ss Com Spirit .51 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .30 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.20

  22. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 25 .37 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation .26 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.17

  23. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 25 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation .51 .66 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .30 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.52

  24. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 1 .17 .24 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation RM Training Exit Week .54 .16 .41 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .17 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.06

  25. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 15 .19 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation RM Training Exit Week .61 .57 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .22 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.09

  26. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY DAY 25 .30 Ss Com Spirit RM Career Motivation RM Training Exit Week .51 .66 Similarity Perceptions Self-Lead Similarity .30 Leader Com Spirit + ve effect − ve effect R2=.08

  27. PROTOTYPE SIMILARITY • Perceptions of similarity to leading (prototypical) members of an occupation increases career motivation. • How do these dynamics play out among underrepresented groups?

  28. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES

  29. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES

  30. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES • 216 Surgical Trainees; 129 males, 87 females; M=32.5 years. Peters, Ryan, Haslam & Fernandes (2012)

  31. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES F(1,63)=7.78, p=.007, p2=.11

  32. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES Ss Masculinity Similarity Perceptions Gender Self-Lead Similarity -.20 Leader Masculinity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.04

  33. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES Ss Masculinity .24 .20 Similarity Perceptions Gender Self-Lead Similarity -.26 Leader Masculinity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.17

  34. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES Ss Masculinity .24 .20 .55 Similarity Perceptions Gender Self-Lead Similarity Surg. Career Identification -.26 Leader Masculinity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.32

  35. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES • 234 Surgical Trainees; 141 males, 93 females; M=30.0 years.

  36. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES Ss Masculinity .24 .22 .52 Similarity Perceptions Gender Self-Lead Similarity Surg. Career Ambition Leader Masculinity + ve effect − ve effect R2=.31

  37. MASCULINE PROTOTYPES • Knowing this, what can be done?

  38. MANIPULATING SIMILARITY • 250 policewomen; 120 senior level; 164 officers; M=41.5 years. Peters, Ryan & Haslam (2012)

  39. MANIPULATING SIMILARITY Peters, Ryan & Haslam (2012)

  40. MANIPULATING SIMILARITY Peters, Ryan & Haslam (2012)

  41. MANIPULATING SIMILARITY The Leadership Style of Police Force Leaders Previous research (Kettering & Savage, 2007) has shown that the vast majority of the top leaders in the UK police force have a transactional leadership style. Please tick the appropriate box in the figure below to indicate whether your leadership style is the same as, or differs from, the majority of those who have risen to the top of the police force. Peters, Ryan & Haslam (2012)

  42. MANIPULATING SIMILARITY F(1,179)=14.13, p<.001, p2=.07

  43. SELF-LEADER SIMILARITY

  44. SELF-LEADER SIMILARITY

  45. SELF-LEADER SIMILARITY • Leaders need to think not only about • what they do, but also about who • followers think that they are.

More Related