Research
Mohan G., Paunova M., Lee Y., (2024). From Heterogeneity to Inequality: The Impact of Nationality Diversity on Leadership in Multinational Teams, Journal of World Business, 59(3), pp. 1-12
​
Abstract
This study distinguishes heterogeneity and inequality by exploring how nationality diversity influences leadership perceptions in multinational teams. Using two studies that assessed 105 (Study 1) and 40 (Study 2) teams comprising 4,120 and 2,180 dyads respectively, we find that nationality-based status influences leadership perceptions directly and indirectly through competence perceptions of higher-status peers. Nationality-based identity had no direct effect, but some evidence suggests an indirect effect on leadership that was mediated by warmth perceptions of culturally similar peers. These findings highlight nationality as a source of inequality beyond heterogeneity, elucidating the social perceptual paths that shape leadership in multinational contexts.
Seijts, G. Mohan, G., Sosik, J., Pardo, A. C. R., Barath, I. (2024). The Effect of Character on Stress Coping Responses Through Motivation to Lead, Journal of Character and Leadership Development, 11 (2), 1-27
​
Abstract
There have been calls to elevate character alongside competencies and commitment in leadership research. Given the potential importance of character in leadership, it is surprising that the construct has not been more fully integrated into the nuanced nomological network of leadership processes. We built out the nomological network and, specifically, examined the relationship between character and stress coping responses in two field studies involving law enforcement officers. The results of our structural equation models revealed that character had both direct and indirect effects on coping responses through motivation to lead. Furthermore, our results indicated that character was discriminably different from related, empirically validated constructs of personality traits and psychological capital. The correlation between character and psychological capital was positive and significant, and they both predicted stress coping responses.​​
Maupin C., Mohan G., Jin F., Choudhary A., Deepak P., (2023). Network-based approaches to leadership: An organizing framework, review, and recommendations, Leadership Quarterly, 35(1), 101753.
​
Abstract
In this review, we aim to critically evaluate the state of the leadership and networks literature and provide a detailed overview of the various network-based approaches that can be leveraged in leadership research to accomplish three main objectives. First, we introduce an organizing framework that classifies the array of network-based approaches used in addressing leadership questions into two broad categories: descriptive versus predictive network-based approaches. Second, we critically review the leadership literature to assess the degree to which network-based approaches have been employed in leadership investigations, the major topic areas in leadership that have been investigated via a social network lens, and the extent to which network-based approaches have impacted researchers’ abilities to address major empirical challenges in leadership research—namely, the incorporation of multilevel, multisource, contextual, temporal, processual, and causal perspectives of leadership. Finally, we demonstrate the unique capabilities of the network-based approaches by showing how an exemplar topic in leadership investigations—leadership emergence—may be explored from multiple perspectives through the different categories of network-based models. By promoting a better understanding of network-based methodologies and their utilization in leadership research, we pave way for new ways of thinking about and framing leadership research questions.
Mohan, G., G. Seijts, and R. Miller (2022). Does Leader Character Have a Gender? Journal of Business Ethics. 188(1), 169-186.
​​
Abstract
Virtues and character strengths are often assumed to be universal, considered equally important to individuals across cultures, religions, racial-ethnic groups, and genders. The results of our surveys and laboratory studies, however, bring to light subtle yet consistent gender differences in the importance attributed to character in leadership: women considered character to be more important to successful leadership in business than did men, and women had higher expectations that individuals should demonstrate character in a new leadership role. Further, the gender of the research participant affected character ratings such that male respondents viewed a female leader who exhibited agentic behaviors in a professionally challenging situation less positively than a male leader who displayed the same agentic behaviors. The data also showed that male participants rated almost every dimension of character displayed by the female leader lower than did female participants. Our findings suggest that the question as to what extent gender differences may bias the assessment of virtues and character strengths is an important one, and one for which the practical implications for individuals in organizations need to be studied in more detail.