Search

Two experiments tested hypotheses, derived from social identity and self-categorization theories, regarding the attribution of charisma to leaders. In Experiment 1 (N=203), in-group prototypical leaders were attributed greater levels of charisma and were perceived to be more persuasive than in-group non-prototypical leaders. In Experiment 2 (N=220), leaders described with in-group stereotypical characteristics were attributed relatively high levels of charisma regardless of their group-oriented versus exchange rhetoric. Leaders described with out-group stereotypical characteristics, however, had to employ group-oriented rhetoric to be attributed relatively high levels of charisma. We conclude that leadership emerges from being representative of 'us'; charisma may, indeed, be a special gift, but it is one bestowed on group members by group members for being representative of, rather than distinct from, the group itself. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An analysis of the social identity processes involved in organizational mergers suggests that organizational identification after a merger is contingent on a sense of continuity of identity. This sense of continuity, in turn, is argued to be contingent on the extent to which the individual's own pre-merger organization dominates, or is dominated by, the merger partner. In support of this analysis, results of two surveys of merged organizations showed that pre-merger and post-merger identification were more positively related for members of dominant as opposed to dominated organizations, whereas perceived differences between the merger partners were more negatively related to post-merger identification for members of the dominated compared with the dominant organization.