People who view society as competitive are more likely to praise hostile leaders, new research finds. On the other hand, those who view society as a cooperative are more likely to call the same leader an invalidity.
Researchers looked at more than 2,000 participants for coercive behaviors, such as creating threats or denounceing other people’s issues, and observed that responses to these behaviors were not universal and instead relied on observer worldviews.
These results suggest that those who view the world as dog-eating dogs value leaders who behave hostilely as more capable and effective than those who believe that members of society are symbiotic and help each other.
You might like it
“Our work highlights the meaningful impact,” told Live Science in an email, Christine Nguyen, a doctoral student at Columbia Business School in New York. The results of this study were published in the APA’s Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on July 14th.
Worldview influences leadership perceptions
Nguyen, a social psychologist at the Columbia Business School, and co-author Daniel Ames, hypothesized that those who view society as competitive are more likely to value hostile leaders. To test the ideas, they surveyed 2,065 people in the US and asked them to participate in seven different assessments. In this study, antagonistic behavior was defined as including average, difficult and intimidating behavior, in contrast to friendly and pleasant behavior.
Related: AI is overconfident and as biased as humans, learning shows
Each survey included 10 questions, asking about the extent to which participants determined their worldview and agreed to various statements. One example is, “My knowledge and experience say that the world of society we live in is basically a competitive “jungle” where the fittest survives and succeeds, and that power, wealth and victory is everything and may be right. ” Participants responded on a 7-point scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.”
Another study evaluated participants as “significantly improving their ability to get things done” such as creating threats, criticizing others, and acting abrasively, to “significantly reduce their ability to get things done.” In another case, participants responded to hypothetical depictions of workplaces managed by people with a variety of horny behaviors.
Finally, one study had participants rate the behavior of well-known real-world business leaders, including CEOs such as Apple’s Tim Cook and Walt Disney’s Bob Iger. Participants assessed whether a particular CEO thought that antagonistic behaviors would help them “rise to the top.”
In all studies, those who viewed the world as competitive were more likely to make hostile leaders competent. In other words, those who believed more strongly in a society with an inherently corrupt nature were more likely to view hostile behavior as positively impacted or effective. When asked to evaluate CEOs, people with this worldview assumed that they used conflicting tactics that helped leaders succeed in their careers.
People with a competitive worldview were more likely to report working under the hostile managers themselves.
“Over time, through processes such as employees selectively participating and leaving, hostile leaders may find themselves surrounded by a subset of employees with stronger, competitive jungle beliefs.
“We see the world differently.”
Previous research has shown that people’s perceptions of behavior are partially dependent on factors such as their work and location. But “Our work is the first to apply this to leaders’ judgment through a competitive worldview,” Ames told Live Science in an email. He added that both employees and managers can learn from the research.
“Helping people thrive in their jobs and find satisfaction means that they need to understand not only how and why managers act, but how and why people perceive managers,” he said.
For example, leaders suggested that people should recognize that they “value them not only through the visible behavior of the leader, but also through the lens of the onlooker’s own belief system. Managers may believe that leadership styles are evaluated in workplace blanks, but this study influences a broader context, he suggested.
Nguyen flagged it because all survey respondents are based in the US and the results may not apply worldwide. That said, both Nguyen and Ames hope that the film will reflect on how people view the leaders around them, and encourage leaders to reflect on their perceived influences.
“I hope this research will help people understand that we see the world differently when someone disagrees about something competent or praiseworthy,” Nguyen said.
Source link
