道德领导行为和5大人格特质因素外文翻译可编辑.docx

1、道德领导行为和5大人格特质因素外文翻译可编辑道德领导行为和5大人格特质因素外文翻译 外文翻译Ethical Leader Behavior and Big Five Factors of Personality Material Source: Journal of Business Ethics Author:Karianne Kalshoven Deanne N. Den Hartog Annebel H. B. De Hoogh Research shows that personal characteristics affect leaders influence Anderson e

2、t al., 2008.However,we do not yet suf?ciently understand why some people in a leadership situation choose to influence others through ethical behaviors manner while others choose less ethical behaviors. Traits are likely to play a role in this. So far, however, research has mainly focused on consequ

3、ences rather than the antecedents of ethical leader behavior, though theory does predict individual differences will play a role in ethical leadership Brown and Trevino,2006.Expanding our knowledge of the antecedents of ethical leadership is crucial, because only when such antecedents are known, org

4、anizations can purposefully in?uence the selection, training, and development of such leaders and in turn bene?t from the positive outcomes of ethical leadership. For example, if ethical behavior is associated to stable traits,organizations may wish to more speci?cally aim to select leaders who are

5、high on these traits to stimulate ethical behavior on the work place Previous literature has proposed that various individual differences are likely to be associated with ethical leadership, including level of cognitive moral development, concern for people, reliability, and responsibility cf. Bass

6、and Steidlmeier, 1999; Brown et al., 2005; Brown and Trevino, 2006;De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2008; Turner et al., 2002.For example, De Hoogh and Den Hartog 2008 found that highly socially responsible leaders are perceived as more ethical. Also, Mayer et al. 2008 found that leader moral identity is re

7、lated to ethical leadership. In this study, we will focus on theBig Fivepersonality traits. TheBig Fiveare believed to be basic underlying trait dimensions of personality e.g., Goldberg, 1990 and have been recognized as genetically based, relatively stable, and cross-culture generalizable e.g., McCr

8、ae and Costa, 1997. Another argument to focus on the Big Five is that integrity tests are not clearly distinguishable from the Big Five dimensions measures Becker, 1998; Sacket and Wanek, 1996. Integrity was found to correlate consistently with conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stabili

9、tycf. Marcus et al., 2006; Ones et al., 2005. These three traits are also suggested to be important for leaders to be perceived as ethical Brown and Trevino, 2006Although three of theBig Fivetraits conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability are thus mentioned as potentially important

10、antecedents of ethical leadership e.g., Brown andTrevino, 2006; De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2009,to our knowledge there is only one published article that has actually tested these relationships. Walumbwa and Schaubroeck 2009 found positive relationships of conscientiousness and agreeableness with ethi

11、cal leadership. However, they did not ?nd the proposed relationship with emotional stability and did not control for the other two Big Five traitsopenness to experience and extraversion.As their findings are not completely in line with the propositions in the literature, additional research seems wa

12、rranted. In addition, controlling for the influence of openness and extraversion is needed and replicating findings in another country and context will help determine whether ?ndings are stable and generalizable. Finally, where Walumbwa and Schaubroeck take a uni-dimensional view of ethical leadersh

13、ip, weinclude multiple behavioral dimensions of ethical leadership and control for the quality of the relationship between leader and follower The Five Factor model and ethical leadership The Five Factor view of personality describes an emerging consensus on the structure of personality in five main

14、 factors, often labeled Extraversion,Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness to Experience e.g.,Costa and McCrae,1992; Digman, 1990; Goldberg,1990. The Big Five traits are found consistently using different research methods and have been recognized as genetically based, s

15、table, and cross-culture generalizable e.g., Costa and McCrae,1988; Digman and Shmelyov, 1996; McCrae and Costa, 1997. The Five Factor model provides a comprehensive theoretical framework for comparing empirical ?ndings among researchers. Here we aim to test how the Big Five relate to ethical leader

16、ship So far research on the Big Five personality traits and ethical leadership has been very limited. As mentioned, Walumbwa and Schaubroeck tested the relationships of three of the ?ve traits with overall ethical leadership and found positive correlations for agreeableness and conscientiousness but

17、 not for emotional stability. For example, Sacket and Wanek 1996 report that integrity tests correlate with conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability. Also, Mayer et al. 2007 found that agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism were the three most important leader traits for

18、creating a justice climate. Below, we focus on the three traits for which strong theoretical linkages with ethical leader behaviors exist conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability and in the two studies we also include and control for the two remaining Big Five traits extraversion an

19、d openness Conscientiousness The trait conscientiousness consists of two main facets, namely, dependability re?ecting being thorough, dutiful, responsible, and organized, and achievement representing the capacity to work hard and meet challenges Digman, 1990; McCrae and Costa, 1987; Mount and Barric

20、k, 1995. Highly conscientious individuals tend to think carefully before acting and adhere closely to their moral obligations and perceived responsibilities Costa and McCrae, 1992. This is relevant for leaders to be perceived as ethical. Ethical leaders behave consistently, set clear guidelines for

21、appropriate behavior and clarify what is expected of employees and thus conscientiousness is expected to be positively related to ethical leadership Brown et al., 2005; De Hoogh and Den Hartog, 2008.By acting dutifully themselves leaders high on conscientiousness are likely to be seen as role models

22、 of appropriate behavior. This is in line with the social learning framework Brownet al. 2005 applied to ethical leadership Also, conscientiousness re?ects the tendency to adhere to codes of conduct and follow protocols and policies Costa et al., 1991. In doing so, leaders high on conscientiousness

23、are likely to follow the rules and work transparently. In addition, highly conscientious individuals prefer personal responsibility Witt et al., 2002. This combination of modeling responsibility and being transparent is likely to translate in leaders careful attention to clarifying responsibilities

24、and demands so that employees understand what goes on and know what is expected of them. Conscientiousness individuals see sharing relevant information with others as part of their duty Mayer et al., 2007. In line with this, Sheppard and Lewicki 1987 found that leaders high on conscientiousness are

25、more expected to communicate important information to their employees. Thus, conscientiousness is likely to be positively related to the dimension role clari?cation Agreeableness Agreeableness reflects the tendencies to be kind, gentle, trusting, honest, altruistic, and warm Goldberg, 1990; McCrae a

26、nd Costa, 1987.Leaders high on agreeableness deal with maintenance of social relations Jensen-Campbell and Graziano, 2001.Also, they are sensitive to the needs of subordinates.Ethical leaders are described as caring, altruistic, and concerned about the welfare of employees, and therefore, agreeablen

27、ess is expected to relate positively to ethical leadership Kanungo, 2001; Trevino et al., 2003Agreeable individuals are described as caring and emphatic to others. This suggests leaders high on agreeableness are likely to treat employees in a fair and respectful manner and to attempt to not offend t

28、hem. Additional support for the link between agreeableness and fairness relates to the straightforwardness element of agreeableness McCrae andCosta, 1987. Straightforwardness re?ects being honest, sincere, and truthful in dealing with othersCosta et al., 1991, which implies behaving fairly.Also, bei

29、ng straightforward and trusting as a leader makes it easier to delegate and share sensitive information, which means that agreeable individuals as leaders may be more likely to share their power. Also, leaders high on agreeableness are expected to provide justi?cations to subordinates about decision

30、 making, because of their sympathetic and sensitive characteristics Mayer et al., 2007. This again suggests a link with power sharing Emotional stability Emotional stability forms the opposite of Neuroticism, which is being anxious, unstable, stressed, and impulsive. In general, neurotic people are

31、less likely to be perceived as leaders Hogan et al., 1994. In their meta-analysis, Judge et al. 2002a found neuroticism to be negatively related to leadership emergence. Leaders high on neuroticism are anxious, depressed, stressed, and moody McCrae and Costa, 1987, and thus such leaders are less lik

32、ely to be seen as role models Bono and Judge, 2004. In addition, Judge et al. 2002b found that neuroticism is related to lower self-esteem and self-ef?cacy. Social learning theory cf. Bandura, 1986 suggests that individuals with low self-esteem and self-efficacy have low con?dence in their own abili

33、ties and, therefore, are less likely to be perceived as role models and less able to guide others. As role modeling of appropriate behaviors is an important element of ethical leadership e.g. Brown et al., 2005; Trevino et al., 2003, a negative relationship with neuroticism is expected Low self-ef?cacy is also related to the use of coercive power Goodstadt and Kipn