Behavioral Mechanisms of Leadership

只有有限的干净洞察力的领导工具的有效性，如以身作则或惩罚（Yaffe和Kark，2011）。这一缺陷实际上并不令人惊讶，因为领导者通常只使用他们最喜欢的工具。因此，我们不知道一个领导者的表现，如果她使用了另一种工具。这一缺陷限制了循证领导力培训的范围，因为我们无法评估特定工具的行为后果。为了解决识别问题，这个项目研究了领导工具的相对有效性（特别是通过榜样和惩罚的领导）与一系列的实验室实验，建立和加强领导行为经济学的最新发展。实验经济学家通常认为在社会困境中的先行者是领导者。这种以身作则的领导是协调小组和加强小组内合作的有效工具，至少在小组成员没有其他协调机制的情况下是这样。本项目将在简单的、不具约束力的建议促进协调的情况下检验这种领导的效力。此外，它还检验了以身作则相对于惩罚的有效性。这样的测试代表了变革型领导和交易型领导之间的简化比较（Judge and Robbins，2015）。该项目研究了不同环境背景下的领导影响（小与大群体，有/没有额外的自由形式的聊天交流，竞争与中立框架）。众所周知，这样的环境差异塑造了群体成员相互合作的倾向。这些差异也会影响领导工具的有效性。例如，惩罚的威胁在大群体中可能更有效，而竞争环境可能会增强以身作则的影响。最后，但并非最不重要的是，该项目研究领导者是否真的选择了更有效的工具。以身作则是一种相对危险的手段，因为领导者不确定其他团队成员是否真的会效仿。通过惩罚，领导者可以更好地控制自己的收益和团队内的收入差异。因此，领导者可能会选择更安全的而不是更有效的领导工具。

There is only limited clean insight into the effectiveness of leadership instruments like leading by example or punishment (Yaffe and Kark, 2011). This deficit is actually not that surprising because leaders typically only apply their most preferred instruments. Hence we do not know a leader's performance if she had used another instrument. This shortcoming limits the scope of evidence-based leadership training because we cannot assess the behavioral consequences of specific instruments. To address the identification problem, this project studies the relative effectiveness of leadership instruments (in particular leading by example and punishment) with a sequence of laboratory experiments, building upon and enhancing the recent developments in the behavioral economics of leadership. Experimental economists typically consider a first mover in a social dilemma as a leader. This leadership by example is an effective instrument to coordinate groups and enhance in-group cooperation, at least if group members have no alternative coordination mechanism at hand. This project will test the effectiveness of such leadership in a context where simple non-binding recommendations facilitate coordination. Moreover, it tests the effectiveness of leading-by-example relative to punishment. Such a test represents a streamlined comparison between transformational and transactional leadership (Judge and Robbins, 2015).The project studies this leadership impact in different environmental contexts (small vs. large groups, with/without additional free-form chat communication, competitive vs. neutral framings). It is well known that such environmental differences shape the inclination of group members to cooperate with each other. These differences can also influence the effectiveness of leadership instruments. For example, the threat of punishment can be more effective in large groups while competitive environments may enhance the impact of leading by example. Last, but not least, the project studies whether leaders actually choose the more effective instrument. Leading by example is a relative risky instrument because leaders are not sure whether the other group members will actually follow. With punishment, a leader has more control over her own payoff and the earning differences within the group. Hence, leaders might choose the safer rather than the more effective leadership instruments.