Research has shown that men tend to emerge as leaders more frequently than women. However, societal role expectations for both women and leaders have changed in the decades since the last empirical review of the gender gap in leader emergence (Eagly & Karau, 1991). We leverage meta‐analytic evidence to demonstrate that the gender gap has decreased over time, but a contemporary gap remains. To understand why this gap in leader emergence occurs, we draw on social role theory to develop a Gender‐Agency/Communion‐Participation (GAP) Model—an integrative theoretical model that includes both trait and behavioral mechanisms. Specifically, we examine a sequence of effects: from gender to agentic and communal personality traits, from these traits to behavioral participation in group activities, and ultimately from participation to leader emergence. The model is tested using original meta‐analyses of the personality and behavioral mechanisms (coding 1,632 effect sizes total). Gender differences in leadership emergence are predominately explained by agentic traits (positive) and communal traits (negative), both directly and through the mechanism of participation in group discussions. In addition, several paths in the theoretical model are moderated by situational contingencies. Our study enhances knowledge of the mechanisms and boundary conditions underlying the gender gap in leader emergence.

To understand how motivation to lead (MTL) fits into the broader leadership literature, we present a meta-analytic review of MTL and test a Distal-Proximal Model of Motivation and Leadership. Using a database of 1,154 effect sizes from 100 primary studies, we found that the 3 types of MTL (affectiveidentity, social-normative, and noncalculative) had a unique pattern of antecedents and were only modestly correlated, indicating that MTL may be best operationalized as three separate motivational constructs instead of as one overarching construct. Further, the 3 MTL types were generally associated with individuals emerging as leaders, engaging in beneficial leadership behaviors (i.e., more transformational and transactional leadership, as well as less laissez faire leadership), and performing more effectively in leadership roles. Finally, meta-analytic path analysis demonstrated that the three MTL types partially explained the relationship between more distal predictors (i.e., gender, cognitive ability, the Big Five, past leader experience, and leader self-efficacy) and leadership emergence/effectiveness. Interestingly, we found that traits often viewed as beneficial for leadership (extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness) may have a darker side that is transmitted through MTL. Taken together, this study advances theory by clarifying the distinctiveness of the three MTL types, establishing MTL's relationship with leadership outcomes, and identifying MTL's role within the broader leadership domain.

No abstract

Despite significant scholarly attention and practical importance regarding who emerges as informal and formal leaders in organizations, an integrative framework of the leadership emergence literature remains elusive. The presence of such a framework proves integral for the advancement of work in this area due to the complexity of the field, coupled with its sprawling nature across multiple disciplines (e.g., management, communication, education, economics). Accordingly, in this review, we utilize a database of 270 primary studies to put forth a distal–proximal framework of leadership emergence. In particular, we systematically review past research to answer four questions: (1) what do we know about the phenomenon of leadership emergence itself, (2) what are the antecedents of leadership emergence, (3) what outcomes are associated with leader emergence, and (4) what are the boundary conditions of leadership emergence? By introducing a conceptual framework for informal and formal emergent leadership, we highlight areas of research maturity and nascency and offer several recommendations for future work in this domain. Altogether, we highlight broad theoretical implications for the leadership, teams, and individual differences literature—and elaborate upon several benefits that an integrated framework of emergent leadership provides for organizations.

No abstract