A systematic and critical review of research on respect in leadership

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101492Get rights and content

Abstract

Respect is an important psychological and interpersonal phenomenon that has been included in various theoretical and empirical approaches to leadership for nearly 70 years. In this systematic and critical review article, we provide a comprehensive summary and critique of theories, definitions, measures, and empirical studies of respect in leadership. We first provide an overview of the historical and theoretical background, including the most common theories, definitions, and measures that inform empirical studies of respect in leadership. Second, we present a systematic literature review of empirical studies on respect in leadership, including a critical evaluation of research designs and statistical analyses that support claims of the validity of various conceptualizations of respect that pertain to the study of leadership. Finally, we offer a new working definition of respect in leadership, and an accompanying conceptual framework which informs a number of recommendations for future theory development, empirical research, and leadership practice.

Section snippets

Historical and theoretical background of respect in leadership

Here we review the development of the concept of respect in leadership over time and also distinguish various dimensions of respect commonly investigated in work contexts (see Table 1). This review focuses broadly on the notion of interpersonal respect in leadership, and not only on constructs such as “respectful leadership,” because a wide variety of leadership theories and models include the notion of respect in some capacity. Arguably, one would be hard-pressed to find a description of

Inclusion/Exclusion criteria and literature search

Our systematic literature review focused on empirical leadership research that considers constructs labeled as “respect,” broadly defined. We adopted an iterative approach to literature searching (Siddaway, Wood, & Hedges, 2019). As a primary search strategy, we searched Google Scholar, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, using structured keywords (e.g., “respect” AND “leadership”, “respectful leadership”), resulting in over 10,000 records. After removing duplicates, 4200 records remained. We then

Definitions of respect in leadership

We first consider the definitions of respect in leadership used in the K = 51 studies considered here (see OA Table 1). Across the five broader conceptualizations found in the literature, there is a distinction—albeit a fuzzy one—between those that define respect in leadership in terms of either (a) various respectful behaviors that leaders engage in that engender feelings of respect from their followers, (b) the anticipated effects that such behaviors have for followers, especially followers'

The measurement of respect in leadership

Our review found 21 different measures of respect in leadership used across the k = 51 studies. There is a notable dearth of information about the development and psychometric qualities of these measures (see OA Table 3), as well as evidence for “phantom validation” (i.e., the propagation of unvalidated measures across multiple studies; Friedberg, 2019). Because the various measures of respect in leadership have generally failed to follow “best practices” for the development of psychometric

Research designs and statistical analyses in studies of respect in leadership

Our online appendix presents complete details of the K = 51 studies included in our literature review (see OA Table 2). Here, we focus on general themes observed in considering the research designs and statistical analyses used to study respect in leadership. In particular, we consider whether or not this research allows for unambiguous inferences (i.e., statistical conclusion validity; see Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002).

Discussion

The goal of this systematic and critical review was to comprehensively summarize and critique theories, definitions, measures, and empirical studies on respect in leadership. Here we broadly summarize our critiques of the theoretical basis for studying respect in leadership. With these critiques as a backdrop, we offer a number of recommendations for future theorizing, empirical research, and practice that considers the role of respect in leadership supported by a new working definition and

Conclusion

Our manuscript contributes to the accumulated knowledge base regarding leadership in at least three important ways: First, our review aids in coalescing existing theoretical, methodological, and empirical knowledge regarding the nature, operationalization, and nomological network of respect in leadership. We bring needed structure and clarity to this long investigated and popular topic. Second, various conceptualizations of respect in leadership have been offered and adopted rather uncritically

References1 (136)

  • D. Dunning et al.

    The psychology of respect: A case study of how behavioral norms regulate human action

    Advances in Motivation Science

    (2016)
  • A. *Friedman et al.

    When does respectful engagement with one’s supervisor foster help-seeking behaviors and performance?

    Journal of Vocational Behavior

    (2018)
  • T.R. Hinkin

    A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations

    Journal of Management

    (1995)
  • N. Lehmann-Willenbrock et al.

    How transformational leadership works during team interactions: A behavioral process analysis

    The Leadership Quarterly

    (2015)
  • R.C. Liden et al.

    Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: An empirical assessment through scale development

    Journal of Management

    (1998)
  • G. *Abid et al.

    Impact of perceived internal respect on flourishing: A sequential mediation of organizational identification and energy

    Cogent Business & Management

    (2018)
  • A.A. *Al-Atwi et al.

    Relationships between status judgments, identification, and counterproductive behavior

    Journal of Managerial Psychology

    (2014)
  • J. Antonakis et al.

    Causality and endogeneity: Problems and solu- tions

  • A.W. Astin

    The functional autonomy of psychotherapy

    American Psychologist

    (1961)
  • B.M. Bass

    Leadership and performance beyond expectations

    (1985)
  • B.M. Bass

    Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership

    (1990)
  • B.M. Bass et al.

    MLQ feedback report

    (1996)
  • B.M. Bass et al.

    Full range leadership development - manual for the multifactor leadership questionnaire

    (1997)
  • W. Bennis

    The four competencies of leadership

    Training and Development Journal

    (1984)
  • W. Bennis et al.

    Leaders: The strategies for taking charge

    (1985)
  • S.L. *Blader et al.

    Testing and extending the group engagement model: Linkages between social identity, procedural justice, economic outcomes, and extrarole behavior

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2009)
  • S.L. Blader et al.

    Are status and respect different or two sides of the same coin?

    Academy of Management Annals

    (2017)
  • E.J. *Boezeman et al.

    Volunteer leadership: The role of pride and respect in organizational identification and leadership satisfaction

    Leadership

    (2014)
  • K.C. Bormann et al.

    Construct proliferation in leadership style research: Reviewing pro and contra arguments

    Organizational Psychology Review

    (2018)
  • J.M. Burns

    Leadership

    (1978)
  • D.T. Campbell et al.

    A primer on regression artifacts

    (1999)
  • C. Caprino

    3 ways your leadership will improve when you demonstrate more respect

    Forbes

    (2019, November 9)
  • A. Carmeli et al.

    Linking respectful engagement, relational information processing, and creativity among employees and teams

    Human Relations

    (2015)
  • W. *Chen

    The differences in leadership and followership styles between China and the US: A cross cultural comparison

    (2013)
  • N. *Clarke et al.

    Mutual recognition respect between leaders and followers: Its relationship to follower job performance and well-being

    Journal of Business Ethics

    (2017)
  • J.G. Clawson

    Level three leadership: Getting below the surface

    (1999)
  • J.A. Conger et al.

    Charismatic leadership and follower effects

    Journal of Organizational Behavior

    (2000)
  • L.J. Cronbach et al.

    Construct validity in psychological tests

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1955)
  • D.V. Day et al.

    The future of leadership

  • C. *Decker et al.

    Getting respect from a boss you respect: How different types of respect interact to explain subordinates’ job satisfaction as mediated by self-determination

    Journal of Business Ethics

    (2015)
  • A.J. DeLellis

    Clarifying the concept of respect: Implications for leadership

    Journal of Leadership Studies

    (2000)
  • K. *Demmer

    Identity threat and perceived disrespect as causes of destructive leadership

    (2015)
  • D.S. DeRue et al.

    Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An integration and meta-analytic test of their relative validity

    Personnel Psychology

    (2011)
  • R.M. Dienesch et al.

    Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development

    Academy of Management Review

    (1986)
  • R.S. Dillon

    Respect: A philosophical perspective

    Gruppendynamik

    (2007)
  • G. *Dixon

    Can we lead and follow?

    Engineering Management Journal

    (2009)
  • T. *Eckloff et al.

    Entwicklung und Validierung einer Skala zu respektvoller Führung

  • T. *Eckloff et al.

    Respektvolle Führung und ihre Bedeutung für die Gestaltung von Veränderungen in Organisationen

  • R.M. Fernandez

    Structural bases of leadership in intraorganizational networks

    Social Psychology Quarterly

    (1991)
  • W.G. Findley

    A rationale for evaluation of item discrimination statistics

    Educational and Psychological Measurement

    (1956)
    • 1

    References marked with “*” indicate studies included in the systematic review.

    View full text
    © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.