Crystal Smith, Edgardo Cigaran - Student Research and Creativity Forum

CIPModel of Leadership: Exploring Sex-Based Differences & MethodologicalApproaches

Crystal Smith, Edgardo Cigaran, Terri Shapiro, Kevin Nolan

Prescriptive Mental Models

TheCharismatic,Ideological,andPragmatic(CIP)model,acognitiveleadershipapproach, focusesonindividualdifferencesinhowleadersconstructtheirunderstandingofacrisis throughsensemaking,usingthreedistinctleadershipstylesthatareequallycapableof achievingsuccess(Mumford,2006).

PurposeofStudy

TheCIPmodelhastraditionallyusedhistometicdata,thelackofopportunitiesforwomen toattainleadershippositionsinthepastleavesagapinliteratureregardingtheuniqueways inwhichfemaleleadersmayapproachdecision-making.Additionallytheassumptionofthe CIPpathwaysbeingstableovertimemaynotgeneralizetofemaleleadersbecausesocietal pressuresforhowleadersshouldbehavemaypreventthemfromusingastablesetof cognitiveprocesses(Griffith&Medeiros,2020).Thisstudyexploredthemostused pathwaybymaleandfemaleleadersandchangesinthepathwayusedbyeithersexinan evaluativecontextduetogenderexpectations.

Surveymethodshavethepotentialtobemoreinclusiveofadiversepopulationofleaders butareusedlessfrequentlyformeasuringCIPpathwaysandconsensusacrossexisting surveysislacking.Thisstudyexaminedtheconstructvalidityandalternative-forms reliabilityofrecentlydevelopedsurveymethods,specificallyaninventorysurvey measuringgeneraltendencyv.ascenariospecificsurvey.

ResearchQuestions

●RQ1: Can the resulting pathway determined by each survey instrument be interpreted meaningfully and in correspondence to the CIP model?

●RQ2: Does the CIP model restrict females to a singular pathway, if so which pathway?

●H1: The mutually exclusive nature of pathways will change under the evaluative condition for females more so than males, when compared to non-evaluative conditions.

METHODS

Sample

●Mturkparticipants(n=335)wereUSAresidentsover18yearsoldandinaleadership rolecompletedsecuritymeasurestoexcludeAIrespondentswereconducted.

●Participantsreceived$1.25andoptionalresultsoftheirsurvey.

●152participantswereremovedforfailingattentionchecksorinsufficienteffort,and3for identifyingasnon-binary.

●60%ofthefinalsampleidentifiedasmale,and70%werewhite.

Procedure

Uponqualifying,participantswererandomlyassignedtoanevaluativeornon-evaluative context,resultingina2(context:evaluative,non-evaluative)x2(participantsex:male, female)between-subjectsdesign.Participantscompletedtwosurveysinacounterbalanced order-oneonacrisiswithleaderresponsesandtheotheronleadershipbehaviors.Reading comprehensioncheckswereimplemented.Participantsalsoanswereddemographic questions.ResultsweresummarizedandoptionallysharedviaCloudResearch.

● Timeframeorientation

● Typeofexperiencesuse

● Natureofoutcomessought

● Numberofoutcomessought

● Focusonmodelconstruction

Scenario Survey

LeaderA’sResponse

Openingstatement:Greetingseveryone!Changeisonthehorizon.Ihavea visionforHumanistAssociation(HA)future,itisnotjustanorganization, it’safamily,afamilyunitedincarryingonthetorchofsuccesslitbythe founderssolongago

Message:Wewillfacethischallengetogether;thisisavisionthatis attainableifweuniteandworktogetherforabetterfutureforthe organizationanditsstaff.Iamwillingtotaketheserisksduetomyfaithin eachandeveryoneofyou!AsCEO,I’llexpecteachofyoutogiveityourall forthegreatergood. wantmyemployeestorealizetheirpotentialandhow muchtheyhavetooffer.EmployeesofHA,nowisthetimetostandtogether andunitearoundourcommongoal.

Outcomes:Wemustaddressmultiplegoalsincludingreshapingourimage usingnewadvertisingstrategiesandexploringmorecost-effectivewaysof recruitingvolunteers.Wemustconsidermultiplepossibilitiesandoutcomes, eachofwhichcouldsetusonabrighterpathawayfromhidingourmistakes, whichhaverecentlydefinedthestatusquoatHA.

Keyfactors:HumanistAssociation(HA) hasprosperedandpersevereddue totheblood,sweat,andhardworkofitsloyalemployees.Thispivotwill requiretakingrisks.Wemustshakethingsupthroughmutualsupport, participation,andcollaboration.

Evaluative Condition

● Locusofcausation

● Controllabilityofcausation

● Useofemotions

● Targetsofinfluence

Inventory Survey

Towhatextentdoyouengagein….

● Useafuture-orientedtime-frame?

● Useapresent-orientedtime-frame?

● Useapast-orientedtime-frame?

● Discusspositivepriorexperienceswhen interactingwith(e.g.,motivating) subordinates?

● Discussnegativepriorexperienceswhen interactingwith(e.g.,motivating) subordinates?

● Blendbothpositiveandnegativeprior experienceswheninteractingwith(e.g., motivating)subordinates?

Non-Evaluative Condition

RESULTS

● RQ1weconductedaconfirmatoryfactoranalysisoneachmeasuretoevaluatethe underlyingCIPpathwaystheinventoryshowedpoorfactorstructure(X2(1,N=152) = 946,p<.001;TLI=.44,CFI=.49,RMSEA=.11)andthescenariomeasurehad acceptablemodelfitindices(X2(1,N=152)=264,p<.001;TLI=.96,CFI=.96, RMSEA=.08).Thissuggeststhatthescenariomeasureismorereliableinmeasuring theunderlyingpathways.Cronbach'salphaforeachpathwayinthescenariomeasure wasCharismatic=.96,Ideological=.97,Pragmatic=.97

● ForRQ2andH1,thestudyuseda2(gender)x2(condition)x3(pathway)complex designtoexamineleadershippathways.Resultsshowednomainorinteractiveeffects betweensubjects.Therewasathree-wayinteractionbetweencondition,sex,leader pathway,F(2,7.00)=3.09,p<.05,accountingfor1%ofthewithin-subjectvariance. Simpleeffectsanalysisindicatedthatundernon-evaluativeconditions,females(M= 3.92,SD=1.01)identifiedwithpragmaticleadershipmorethanwithideological leadership(M=2.79,SD=1.17).Additionallyourresultssuggestthatfemalesusea Pragmaticpathwaytoalargerextentthanideologicalpathwayinanon-evaluative condition.

DISCUSSION: ORGANIZATIONALCONSIDERATIONS

● ContextualscenariosshouldbeusedtomeasureCIPpathwaysratherthanself-reports ofleadershipbehaviorsbasedonitspsychometricproperties

● FemalesaremostsimilartothePragmaticpathwayandleastsimilartotheIdeological pathway,accordingtothescenariosurveymethodofmeasurement.Thisfinding supportstheassertionthatstereotypesplayagainstcognitiveprocessesconsistentwith theideologicalpathway.Whenfemaleswereevaluated,thepathwaychosenwasfairly distributed.

● Evaluationdidnotinfluenceparticipantresponsestowhichpathwaytheywoulduseor aremostsimilarto.

Limitations

● Self-reportwasusedtomeasureallconstructswhichthreatensinternalvalidity

● PossiblesamplingerrorusingMTurkworkers

● AppliedexistingCIPmethodstorealworldleadersusingaconveniencesample, assumingthatourparticipantsalluseanunderlyingCIPleadershippathway

FutureDirections

● Understandtheprescriptivementalmodelsusedbyexceptionalfemaleleaders.By learningwhichCIPpathwayssuccessfulfemalesuse,strategiestoadjusttheirstyle basedonperformanceexpectationscanbeidentified.

● UselongitudinalmethodstotrackCIPpathwaysacrosscareersandconfirmwhether CIPpathwaysarestableacrosstimeorchange.

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook

Crystal Smith, Edgardo Cigaran - Student Research and Creativity Forum

Published on May 10, 2023

Hofstra University

Oftentimes leadership is referred to as a black box that produces results without rhyme or reason, leaving researchers tracing an idealized set of traits and behaviors. Moving away from traditional traits and situational approaches to leadership, the study of cognitive processes used by leaders to make decisions is a new approach to understanding organizational leadership. The Charismatic, Ideological, and Pragmatic (CIP) model, a cognitive leadership approach, focuses on individual differences in how leaders construct their understanding of a crisis through sensemaking, using three distinct leadership styles that are equally capable of achieving success. Researchers have been able to capture these thought patterns in the purview of a crisis because it presents an opportunity for a leader to apply their experience in problem-solving. Cognition is a vital component of problem-solving, and the change and disruption of a crisis plays an important role in the emergence of outstanding leadership...