SAGE Journal Articles
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
Journal Article 1: Ogunfowora, B. (2014). Its all a matter of consensus: Leader role modeling strength as a moderator of the links between ethical leadership and employee outcomes. Human Relations, 67, 1467–1490.
Abstract: The present research examines the relationships between ethical leadership and unit-level organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB) and individual-level job satisfaction. In addition, this study tests the proposition that the impact of ethical leadership on these outcomes is moderated by leader role modeling strength, a unit-level construct that captures within-group consensus regarding the extent to which unit members perceived the leader as a role model of ethical behaviors at work. To these ends, the article draws on social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) and social identity theory (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). The results provide support for the proposed theoretical model in a sample of 297 employees nested in 58 work units. Specifically, ethical leadership was more strongly and positively associated with unit-level OCB and individual-level job satisfaction in work units reporting higher (versus lower) leader role modeling strength. This research highlights the importance of studying leader role modeling perceptions in order to better understand the boundary conditions of the impact of ethical leadership on employee attitudes and behaviors.
Journal Article 2: Liu, L., Friedman, R., Barry, B., Gelfand, M., & Zhang, Z. (2012). The dynamics of consensus building in intracultural and intercultural negotiations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 57, 269–304.
Abstract: This research examines the dynamics of consensus building in intracultural and intercultural negotiations achieved through the convergence of mental models between negotiators. Working from a dynamic constructivist view, according to which the effects of culture are socially and contextually contingent, we theorize and show in two studies of U.S. and Chinese negotiators that while consensus might be generally easier to achieve in intracultural negotiation settings than intercultural settings, the effects of culture depend on the epistemic and social motives of the parties. As hypothesized, we find that movement toward consensus (in the form of mental model convergence) is more likely among intracultural than intercultural negotiating dyads and that negotiators’ epistemic and social motives moderated these effects: need for closure inhibited consensus more for intercultural than intracultural dyads, while concern for face fostered consensus more for intercultural than intracultural dyads. Our theory and findings suggest that consensus building is not necessarily more challenging in cross-cultural negotiations but depends on the epistemic and social motivations of the individuals negotiating.