Our worldviews shape how we judge antagonistic leaders

What is it about?

Every individual has an idiosyncratic understanding of how the world “works,” and these beliefs serve as lenses that shape how they perceive and evaluate antagonistic leaders. In particular, people who believe the world is competitive evaluate someone who behaves antagonistically as more competent and more effective as a leader, compared to people who believe the world is cooperative. These judgments are driven by people’s beliefs about the impact of antagonistic behavior. For example, if someone believes being tough gets results, they’re more likely to view a tough leader as smart or effective. Similar effects also play out in reverse: when people evaluate successful CEOs like Apple’s Tim Cook or GM’s Mary Barra, those who think the world is a competitive jungle assume that those leaders must have used confrontational tactics more frequently on their rise to the top, and believe those tactics helped them succeed. People who see the world as competitive are more tolerant of even their own antagonistic bosses. While no one loves having a boss who was a jerk, those who see the world as competitive are more motivated and satisfied with their job under such managers, more likely to choose and stay with such managers, and less likely to leave such managers, compared to those who see the world as cooperative.

Featured Image

Photo by Chris Sabor on Unsplash

Photo by Chris Sabor on Unsplash

Why is it important?

We believe this research has implications not only for interpersonal relationships but also for workplace environments and management. These findings shed light on how and why some antagonistic leaders succeed, despite creating tension or seeming off-putting. The patterns we found help explain how and why these leaders might be endured, excused, or even celebrated by those who work with or under them, allowing them to attain and remain in positions of influence. People’s beliefs about “what works” in the world can influence who gets hired or promoted, who stays in or leaves a job, and what kinds of behavior and leadership styles become retained, normalized, reinforced, and rewarded in a workplace. Stepping back, our research is also about the basic psychological processes of how humans judge one another. Our work shows that onlookers don’t simply leap from seeing someone’s behavior to forming an impression of them. Instead, each onlooker has their own particular model in their mind of how the social world works, and should work, and they grade others’ behavior through that lens.