On the basis of the connectionist model of leadership, we examined perceptions of leadership as a function of the contextual factors of race (Asian American, Caucasian American) and occupation (engineering, sales) in 3 experiments (1 student sample and 2 industry samples). Race and occupation exhibited differential effects for within- and between-race comparisons. With regard to within-race comparisons, leadership perceptions of Asian Americans were higher when race-occupation was a good fit (engineer position) than when race-occupation was a poor fit (sales position) for the two industry samples. With regard to between-race comparisons, leadership perceptions of Asian Americans were low relative to those of Caucasian Americans. Additionally, when race-occupation was a good fit for Asian Americans, such individuals were evaluated higher on perceptions of technical competence than were Caucasian Americans, whereas they were evaluated lower when race-occupation was a poor fit. Furthermore, our results demonstrated that race affects leadership perceptions through the activation of prototypic leadership attributes (i.e., implicit leadership theories). Implications for the findings are discussed in terms of the connectionist model of leadership and leadership opportunities for Asian Americans.

No abstract

The construct validity of assessment center final dimension ratings was examined within a nomological network of cognitive and personality measures. Four hundred forty-one employees of a large mid-western petroleum company were assessed on 11 dimensions in two broad categories and completed four tests. Results showed that several cognitive ability measures related more strongly to performance-style dimension ratings than to interpersonal-style dimension ratings, providing evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Correlation analysis and factor analysis support the two a priori interpersonal-and performance-style categories. The results suggest that final dimension ratings possess construct validity and that assessors can differentiate between two broad categories of assessment dimensions.

No abstract

Limited research on ethics in family business leads to competing arguments regarding whether family firms are more, less or equally as ethical as non‐family controlled firms. Comparing structured interview data from 214 respondents in family firms with a proportionally matched sample of 230 respondents in non‐family‐owned firms, we found few–but important–differences in ethics‐related attitudes, behavior and experiences. Fewer family‐owned businesses had formal codes of ethics. They were more likely to employ informal methods to promote ethical behavior, with role modeling of expected behaviors regarded as more important than in non‐family firms.