foundations of leadership research paper

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Leadership: A Comprehensive Review of Literature, Research and Theoretical Framework

2020, Leadership: A Comprehensive Review of Literature, Research and Theoretical Framework. In: Journal of Economics and Business, Vol.3, No.1, 44-64.

This paper provides a comprehensive literature review on the research and theoretical framework of leadership. The author illuminates the historical foundation of leadership theories and then clarifies modern leadership approaches. After a brief introduction on leadership and its definition, the paper mentions the trait theories, summarizes the still predominant behavioral approaches, gives insights about the contingency theories and finally touches the latest contemporary leadership theories. The overall aim of the paper is to give a brief understanding of how effective leadership can be achieved throughout the organization by exploring many different theories of leadership, and to present leadership as a basic way of achieving individual and organizational goals. The paper is hoped to be an important resource for the academics and researchers who would like to study on the leadership field.

Related Papers

Sonali Sharma

Shanlax International Journal of Commerce

vivek deshwal

Journal of Leadership and Management; 2391-6087

Betina Wolfgang Rennison

The theoretical field of leadership is enormous-there is a need for an overview. This article maps out a selection of the more fundamental perspectives on leadership found in the management literature. It presents six perspectives: personal, functional, institutional, situational, relational and positional perspectives. By mapping out these perspectives and thus creating a theoretical cartography, the article sheds light on the complex contours of the leadership terrain. That is essential, not least because one of the most important leadership skills today is not merely to master a particular management theory or method but to be able to step in and out of various perspectives and competently juggle the many possible interpretations through which leadership is formed and transformed.

Fila Bertrand, Ph.D.

Leadership and the numerous concepts on leadership styles have been subjects of both study and debate for years. Every leader approaches challenges differently, and his or her personality traits and life experiences greatly influence his or her leadership style and the organizations they lead. Furthermore, leadership is a notion resulting from the interaction between a leader and followers, and not a position or title within the organization. This essay examines some of the contemporary theories of leadership, the leadership qualities and traits necessary to be successful in today's competitive environment, the impact of leadership to the organization, and the importance of moral leadership in today's world.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE

Vivian A . Ariguzo , Michael okoro

Diverse views have emerged on leadership definitions, theories, and classification in academic discourse. The debate and conscious efforts made to clarify leadership actively has generated socio-cultural and organizational research on its styles and behaviours. This study seeks to identify the theoretical views of various academic scholars on some of the main theories that emerged during the 20 th century include: the Thomas Carlyle's Great Man theory, Gordon Allport's Trait theory, Fred Fiedler's Contingency theory, Hersey and Blanchard Situational Theory, Max Weber's Transactional theory, MacGregor Burns' Transformational theory, Robert Houses' Path-goal theory, and Vroom and Yetton's Participative theory. Empirical discourse that revealed findings of academic scholars have enshrined the import of leadership in organizations. Various academic literature that already have been subject to validity and reliability tests were reviewed and used to arrive at the findings. The study postulated the Mystical-man theory after a rich discourse and recommended it as the ideal theory for all Christian leaders to adopt as it is assumed to provide above average performance at all times, irrespective of followership behaviour.

Neil D . Walshe

The three topics of this volume—leadership, change, and organization development (OD)—can be viewed as three separate and distinct organizational topics or they can be understood as three distinct lenses viewing a common psycho-organizational process. We begin the volume with a comprehensive treatment of leadership primarily because we view leadership as the fulcrum or crucible for any significant change in human behavior at the individual, team, or organizational level. Leaders must apply their understanding of how to effect change at behavioral, procedural, and structural levels in enacting leadership efforts. In many cases, these efforts are quite purposeful, planned, and conscious. In others, leadership behavior may stem from less-conscious understandings and forces. The chapters in Part I: Leadership provide a comprehensive view of what we know and what we don’t know about leadership. Alimo-Metcalfe (Chapter 2) provides a comprehensive view of theories and measures of leadershi...

Transylvanian review of administrative sciences

Cornelia Macarie

The paper endeavors to offer an overview of the major theories on leadership and the way in which it influences the management of contemporary organizations. Numerous scholars highlight that there are numerous overlaps between the concepts of management and leadership. This is the reason why the first section of the paper focuses on providing an extensive overview of the literature regarding the meaning of the two aforementioned concepts. The second section addresses more in depth the concept of leadership and managerial leadership and focuses on the ideal profile of the leader. The last section of the paper critically discusses various types of leadership and more specifically modern approaches to the concept and practices of leadership.

An organization constitute of a diverse group of individuals, working together towards a specified common goal. A robust organizational framework is based upon specified values, believes and positive culture accompanied by effective leaders and managers that are expected to understand their roles and responsibilities towards both the employees and the management of the organization. Culture is recognized as "the glue" that binds a group of people together (Martin and Meyerson, 1988). Therefore, organizational culture entails intelligent and great leaders who value and believe in nurturing employees and appreciate their active participation in the progression of the company (Balain & Sparrow 2009). With that said, management is also one of the crucial organisational activities that is necessary to ensure the coordination of individual efforts as well as the organization's resources and activities. Lastly, leadership in itself is a vital bond that connects effective management and splendid organizational culture. However, for a long time, there has been a disconnect and inconsistency on what entails leadership and management. We identify with scholars who questioned the overlying issues regarding the significant concepts of leadership and management (Schedlitzki & Edwards,2014). It is therefore paramount to understand how leadership and management play critical roles in shaping up contemporary organizations, fundamentally appreciating the applicability that arises with the various leadership styles and management theories while apprehending their link to organization culture.

International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development

Prof. Dr. Satya Subrahmanyam

This research article was motivated by the premise that no corporate grows further without effective corporate leaders. The purpose of this theoretical debate is to examine the wider context of corporate leadership theories and its effectiveness towards improving corporate leadership in the corporate world. Evolution of corporate leadership theories is a comprehensive study of leadership trends over the years and in various contexts and theoretical foundations. This research article presents the history of dominant corporate leadership theories and research, beginning with Great Man thesis and Trait theory to Decision process theory to various leadership characteristics. This article also offers a convenient way to utilize theoretical knowledge to the practical corporate situation.

Public Administration Review

Montgomery Van Wart

RELATED PAPERS

Journal of Biological Chemistry

Roberto Ciccoli

Astronomy & Astrophysics

Journal of neurophysiology

william Z rymer

Ted Balaker

Journal of Advances in Mathematics and Computer Science

Mejdin Saliji

Computational Intelligence

Christian Borgelt

Spencer Killen

EDUCA - Revista Multidisciplinar em Educação

Anelise Nascimento

Gaceta Sanitaria

MARIA FERNANDA CHINCHILLA LOPEZ

Marek Miśkowicz

ANAIS do XLIX Congresso Brasileiro de Educação em Engenharia

Fabiana Rodrigues Leta

Psychiatric Bulletin

Ahmed Gamal Ahmed

Jurnal Pemikiran Islam

Nur Alfianti

Journal of Molecular Biology

Francesc Xavier Aviles

Patrik Schmuki

Francisco José García Ariza

European Scientific Journal ESJ

Constantin Okou

Experimental Hematology

Jorge Sierra

eric padilla

Psycho Idea

Zaujatul Amna

Nucleic Acids Research

Natacha Kremer

Andreas Deutsch

Revista de Administração da Unimep

ADILSON RODRIGUES DA SILVA

Physical Review B

Jose Aldana

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Biblical Servant Leadership pp 1–12 Cite as

The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory

• Steven Crowther 6  
• First Online: 14 June 2018

2074 Accesses

Part of the book series: Christian Faith Perspectives in Leadership and Business ((CFPLB))

The ideas and concepts for servant leadership have been around for centuries in different forms. Nevertheless, in the 1970s, in the midst of a hotbed of leadership theory development, Robert Greenleaf proposed an idea at first about the servant being the leader. This idea grew into a concept of leadership in the writings of Greenleaf and others growing into a researched model for leadership. Then in the twenty-first century, there was an explosion of literature in many areas of leadership theory and thinking. Some of these areas included virtues and even spirituality as an important component of leadership and leadership development. In this context there emerged several new ideas concerning servant leadership. Some of the foundational ideas came from Winston and Patterson. Winston gave us some new terminology for this construct in using the word agapao for the leadership idea of love. Then Patterson developed a virtue-based model for servant leadership that built upon the ideas of Greenleaf but expanded it. In her model, the virtues of leadership are the central issue, however; it is done in such a way that it facilitates the ability to research this theory of leadership. It is this endeavor that is central here to research and expand this theory based upon a fuller examination of Scripture and its connection to leadership.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Anderson, J. (2008). The Writings of Robert K. Greenleaf: An Interpretive Analysis and the Future of Servant Leadership . Paper presented at the Servant Leadership Research Roundtable.

Google Scholar  

Barbuto, J. E., Jr., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale Development and Construct Clarification of Servant Leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31 (3), 300–326.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bell, S. (Ed.). (2014). Servants and Friends: A Biblical Theology if Leadership . Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

Ciulla, J. B. (2014). Ethics: The Heart of Leadership . Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap—And Others Don’t . New York, NY: Harper Business.

Dennis, R. S., & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of the Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 25 (8), 600–615.

Dennis, R. S., Kinzler-Norheim, L., & Bocarnea, M. (2010). Servant Leadership Theory: Development of the Servant Leadership Assessment Instrument. In D. Van Dierendonck & K. A. Patterson (Eds.), Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 169–179). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Greenleaf, R. (2002). Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and Greatness . Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Guinness, O. (2003). The Call: Finding and Fulfilling the Central Purpose of Your Life . Nashville, TN: W Publishing.

Kaplan, S. (2000). New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Human Nature and Environmentally Responsible Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3), 491–508.

Klenke, K. (2007). Authentic Leadership: A Self, Leader, and Spiritual Identity Perspective. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 3 (1), 68–97.

Laub, J. (1999). Assessing the Servant Organization: Development of the Servant Organizational Leadership (SOLA) Instrument. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60 (2), 308 (UMI No. 9921922).

Morris, A. J., Brotheridge, C. M., & Urbanski, J. C. (2005). Bringing Humility to Leadership: Antecedents and Consequences of Leader Humility. Human Relations, 58 (10), 1323–1350.

Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and Practice . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Patterson, K. A. (2003). Servant Leadership: A Theoretical Model . Paper presented at the Servant Leadership Roundtable.

Patterson, K. A. (2010). Servant Leadership and Love. In D. Van Dierendonck & K. A. Patterson (Eds.), Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 67–76). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Polkinghorne, J. (2007). Quantum Physics and Theology: An Unexpected Kinship . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Russell, R. F. (2001). The Role of Values in Servant Leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22 , 76–84.

Sendjaya, S. (2010). Demystifying Servant Leadership. In D. Van Dierendonck & K. A. Patterson (Eds.), Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and Research (pp. 39–51). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Spears, L. C. (Ed.). (1998). Insights into Leadership: Service, Stewardship, and Servant Leadership . New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.

Van Dierendonck, D., & Nuijten, I. (2011). The Servant Leadership Survey: Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure. Journal of Business & Psychology, 26 (3), 249–267.

Van Dierendonck, D., & Patterson, K. A. (Eds.). (2010). Servant Leadership: Developments in Theory and Research . New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wilkes, C. G. (1998). Jesus on Leadership: Discovering the Secrets of Servant Leadership from the Life of Christ . London: Lifeway Press.

Winston, B. (2002). Be a Leader for God’s Sake . Virginia Beach, VA: Regent University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship.

Winston, B. E. (2003). Extending Patterson’s Servant Leadership Model: Coming Full Circle . Paper presented at Regent University’s Servant Leadership Research Roundtable, Virginia Beach, VA. Retrieved from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Wong, P. T. P., & Davey, D. (2007). Best Practices in Servant Leadership . Regent University Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings, 2007.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Grace College of Divinity, Fayetteville, NC, USA

Steven Crowther

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Crowther, S. (2018). The Foundation of Servant Leadership Theory. In: Biblical Servant Leadership. Christian Faith Perspectives in Leadership and Business. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89569-7_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89569-7_1

Published : 14 June 2018

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-89568-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-89569-7

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Ethical Leadership and Follower Moral Actions: Investigating an Emotional Linkage

Yajun zhang.

1 School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China

Fangfang Zhou

2 School of Business Administration, Guizhou University of Finance and Economics, Guiyang, China

Jianghua Mao

3 School of Business and Administration, Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, Wuhan, China

The effectiveness of ethical leadership has been extensively investigated. However, compared to the outcomes of ethical leadership, we still lack enough knowledge about the mechanisms underlying ethical leadership and its outcomes. Drawing from social information processing theory, this paper explores an emotional explanation for the effectiveness of ethical leadership. Adopting a time-lagged research design with responses from 64 leaders and 289 followers, the present research found that ethical leadership invokes followers’ other-praising emotions and eventually enhances their moral actions. Further, leader core self-evaluation contributes to the positive effects of ethical leadership on followers’ other-praising moral emotions and subsequent moral actions. Theoretical and practical implementations of these observations were discussed.

Introduction

As ethical scandals are cropping up more frequently in recent times and in view of its unique effectiveness in modeling behavioral ethicality, ethical leadership is receiving greater research attention ( Brown and Treviño, 2006 ; Demirtas and Akdogan, 2015 ). Characterized as a leadership demonstrating and promoting of “normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relations” ( Brown et al., 2005 , p. 120), ethical leadership has been reported to have positive effects on a range of follower outcomes including task performance ( Bouckenooghe et al., 2015 ), perceived leader effectiveness ( Brown et al., 2005 ), organizational citizenship behavior ( Piccolo et al., 2010 ), work place deviance ( Resick et al., 2013 ), ethical behaviors ( Mayer et al., 2009 ), and prosocial behaviors ( Kalshoven et al., 2013 ). However, in spite of such empirical support, several researchers ( Brown and Treviño, 2006 ; Bouckenooghe et al., 2015 ) have noted that our understanding of ethical leadership and its impacts on follower actions need to be improved due to the following reasons.

First, in comparison to the numerous outcomes of ethical leadership, little is known about the mechanisms through which ethical leaders trigger followers’ moral actions. Although the relationship between ethical leadership and follower ethical/unethical behaviors has been investigated ( Mayer et al., 2009 ), we still lack enough research regarding why followers can translate their leaders’ ethical behaviors into their own moral actions, which is an equally essential part to understand ethical leadership effectiveness ( van Knippenberg et al., 2004 ; Dinh et al., 2014 ). Thus,without investigating the mechanisms that drive the influence of ethical leadership on follower moral actions, we would not reach a comprehensive understanding about the effectiveness of ethical leadership.

Second, several scholars ( Brown and Treviño, 2006 ; Chen and Hou, 2016 ; Zhang and Tu, 2016 ) have stressed the need to explore the boundary conditions of ethical leadership effectiveness. However, with few exceptions that had focused on follower characteristics such as self-esteem ( Avey et al., 2011 ) or team climate ( Chen and Hou, 2016 ), what mitigates or strengthens ethical leadership’s influence has remained undiscovered. Especially, little is known about whether and how the effectiveness of ethical leadership varies across different leader characteristics. Since paucity of information on the boundary conditions will limit the theoretical development and practical implications of ethical leadership ( Brown and Treviño, 2006 ; Chen and Hou, 2016 ), it is necessary to examine such conditions to fully understand ethical leadership at the workplace.

The present research aims to address the gaps mentioned above. First, we rely on social information processing theory (SIP, Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ) to examine a moral emotional linkage between ethical leadership and follower moral actions. The emotional mechanism has been widely considered to be necessary to understand leader behaviors and to predict employee behaviors ( Dasborough and Ashkanasy, 2002 ; Sadri et al., 2011 ). As in the moral domain, emotions consciously and unconsciously affect employees’ ethical behavior and ethical decision making ( Greene and Haidt, 2002 ; Arsenio and Lemerise, 2004 ; Salvador and Folger, 2009 ; Harvey et al., 2016 ). However, research on ethical leadership has so far paid more attention to cognitive mechanisms such as (cognitive) trust ( Xu et al., 2016 ), perceived accountability ( Steinbauer et al., 2014 ) and perceived organizational politics ( Kacmar et al., 2013 ), while research on leadership and business ethics has not done so with regard to the role that emotions play in employees’ reactions to ethical leadership ( Brown and Mitchell, 2010 ). Although scholars have emphasized the vital role of moral emotions in translating moral standards into moral actions (see a review of Tangney et al., 2007 ; Lindebaum et al., 2017 ), few studies, as far as we know, have empirically examined this relationship.

Drawing from social information theory ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ), which posits that environmental information cues shape individual’s attitudes and behaviors by indicating what a person’s attitudes and opinions should be, we propose that ethical leadership would invoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions, which eventually triggers followers to report more ethical issues and engage in less unethical behavior. Second, we believe that an ethical leader is more likely to evoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions when the leader has high core self-evaluation. Salancik and Pfeffer (1978) have pointed out that, as information cues become more salient, individual’s attitudes and behaviors are more likely to change. Hence, we believe that when an ethical leader has high core self-evaluation, he/she would be more confident about his/her own ethical beliefs and actions, making the ethical cues more salient to invoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions.

Our research contributes to ethical leadership and moral emotions literature in the following ways. First, by linking ethical leadership with follower moral actions through moral emotions, our research provides a fundamentally emotional explanation of why ethical leadership promotes follower moral actions. Second, by focusing on other-praising moral emotions, our research discusses how emotions in specific-domain (i.e., moral domain) can help explain the effectiveness of ethical leadership, thus contributing new insights to emotion literature. Finally, by examining the moderating role of leader core self-evaluation, the present research clarifies the potential boundary condition of ethical leadership effectiveness. Our theoretical framework is shown in Figure ​ Figure1 1 .

Theoretical model.

Theory and Hypotheses

Individual’s job attitudes and behaviors are results of complex processes. Previous research has emphasized the vital role of need-satisfaction models in shaping employee’s job attitudes and behaviors. For example, Maslow (1943) proposed the hierarchy of needs model to explain how different needs guide individual’s specific behaviors. However, taking the social information processing perspective, Salancik and Pfeffer (1978) argue that the context and the consequences of past choices significantly influence individuals’ attitudes and behaviors, which go beyond the effects of individual predispositions and rational decision-making processes. Specifically, as social information processing theory posits, individual perceptions, attitudes and behaviors can be shaped by information cues, such as work requirements and expectations from the social environment ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ; Bhave et al., 2010 ). Specifically, Gundlach et al. (2003) indicated that individuals’ translating of information cues could trigger individuals’ emotional reacts. For example, employees may experience anger emotion if they translate others’ whistle-blowing behavior to responsibility avoidance behavior. Meanwhile, several scholars have emphasized the vital role of emotion in processing information cues and in translating those cues into moral judgment and actions (e.g., Arsenio and Lemerise, 2004 ; Dodge and Rabiner, 2004 ).

According to SIP theory, one of the important sources of information is individuals’ immediate social environment, which has two general effects on individuals’ attitudes and behaviors ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ). First, individuals’ social environment helps construct meaning directly through the guidance of socially acceptable beliefs, needs, attitudes, and reasons impinging on actions ( Bhave et al., 2010 ). For example, leaders’ continuous statements about ethical standards and principles underlying work conditions force employees to either reject such statements or include them during employees’ own evaluations. Second, social influence and context focus individuals’ attention on certain specific information, which makes the information more salient, raises expectations, and highlights the logical consequences of individual behaviors ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ). For example, coworkers may highlight the bad or unhealthy effects of their products to customers and state that their work was unethical when judged against the prevailing social norms.

According to social information processing theory, such environmental information cues help employees to construct and interpret events and shape their attitudes and behaviors by indicating what a person’s attitudes and opinions should be ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ). Previous research has validated the work-related outcomes explained by SIP theory, such as procedural justices ( Goldman, 2001 ), job satisfaction ( O’Reilly and Caldwell, 1985 ), work-family conflict ( Bhave et al., 2010 ), as well as leadership effectiveness ( Chiu et al., 2016 ).

Ethical Leadership and Other-Praising Moral Emotions

Ethical leadership is conceptualized as the “demonstration of normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships, and the promotion of such conduct to followers through two-way communication, reinforcement, and decision-making” ( Brown et al., 2005 , p. 120). First, ethical leaders get legitimized by modeling normatively appropriate behaviors such as honesty, fairness and care. Second, ethical leaders not only pay attention to ethics themselves, but they also take specific actions to make ethics salient in the social environment, say, by communicating with followers about ethics, allowing followers to speak up their ideas or opinions ( Bass and Steidlmeier, 1999 ), setting ethical standards and rewarding ethical conduct ( Treviño et al., 2003 ). Finally, ethical leaders embed ethicality into their decision-making process by considering the ethical consequences of their decisions and making fair choices as a model for others ( Bass and Avolio, 2000 ). Multiple studies have suggested that ethical leadership predicts followers’ work attitudes and behaviors, such as job satisfaction ( Brown et al., 2005 ), psychological well-being ( Avey et al., 2012 ), performance ( Bonner et al., 2016 ), employee voice ( Lee et al., 2017 ), OCB ( Bonner et al., 2016 ; Wang and Sung, 2016 ) and misconduct ( Mayer et al., 2010 ).

Moral emotions refer to the emotions that are linked to the “interests or welfare of society or at least of persons other than the judge or agent” ( Haidt, 2003 : 854), which typically include self-conscious emotions such as shame and guilt, other-condemning emotions such as anger and disgust, and other-praising emotions such as elevation and gratitude ( Brown and Mitchell, 2010 ). Moral emotions have been thought to play a vital role in linking moral standards and moral behaviors ( Tangney et al., 2007 ) because those emotions provide the motivational force (i.e., the power and the energy) for individual to do good and to avoid doing bad ( Kroll and Egan, 2004 ). However, with very few exceptions that focus on the trait qualities of moral emotions (e.g., Eisenbeiss and Knippenberg, 2015 ), researchers have not empirically examined how the state qualities of moral emotions can help to explain the linkage between moral standards and moral behaviors.

In present research, we focus on other-praising moral emotions to answer how followers translate ethical leadership into their own moral behaviors. Other-praising moral emotions refer to the emotions that are positive and other-targeted, such as elevation, gratitude, and awe ( Brown and Mitchell, 2010 ). We emphasize the mediating role of other-praising moral emotions for two reasons. First, ethical leaders stick to high ethical standards when making decisions ( Lee et al., 2017 ), which will be more likely to invoke followers’ positive rather than negative moral emotions. Second, through communicating with followers about ethical issues and responding to followers’ suggestions, ethical leaders will be more possible to evoke followers’ leader-targeted rather than self-targeted moral emotions, such as elevation and gratitude.

Drawing on social information processing theory, we believe employees’ moral emotions and moral behaviors can be shaped by the ethical information cues (e.g., values, standards and behaviors) exhibited by their direct leader ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ). Specifically, we propose that ethical leadership will evoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions due to the following reasons. First, we anticipate that ethical leadership can invoke follower moral emotions (e.g., elevation, inspiration) because ethical leaders express strong ethicality in their behaviors. Since the direct leader is one of the most important components of work environment for employees ( Bass and Stogdill, 1990 ), the beliefs and behaviors of the direct leader provide the salient information cues that are capable of progressively changing employee attitudes and behaviors. Since ethical leaders exhibit high ethical beliefs and behaviors, followers will translate leaders’ ethical values and behaviors into their own feelings, e.g., generating the other-praising emotions such as elevation and awe.

Second, ethical exemplars encourage followers to praise moral emotions (e.g., elevation, awe) by demonstrating the desire for being just and helping others. Having been characterized thus as moral persons, ethical leaders start being seen not only as fair and principled decision-makers in organizations but also moral examples who care about the broader society ( Brown and Treviño, 2006 ). By demonstrating self-sacrifice and self-transcendence ( Mayer et al., 2012a ), ethical leaders can easily invoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions. For example, when Martin Luther King was giving the famous speech “I Have a Dream”, the audience became charged with moral emotions such as elevation, inspiration, and awe. Third, ethical leaders elicit followers’ praising moral emotions (e.g., gratitude, inspiration) by taking care of followers’ needs and welfare. Haidt (2003) argued that, when an individual perceives that another person has done some good deeds for him/her, he/she will experience the emotion of gratitude. Thus, by continuously considering followers’ needs, ethical leaders will easily evoke praising moral emotions among their followers ( Cropanzano et al., 2017 ).

Although the association between ethical leadership and followers’ other-praising moral emotions have not been directly examined, several previous findings could be seen to be providing supportive evidence for our proposed relationship. For example, Vianello et al. (2010) found that leaders’ self-sacrificing and interpersonal fairness elicited followers’ elevation. Similarly, Haidt (2003) pointed out that kindness and self-sacrifice are powerful elicitors of awe and elevation emotion. Therefore, we propose that:

• simple  Hypothesis 1: Ethical leadership is positively related to other-praising moral emotions.

Other-Praising Moral Emotions and Moral Actions

The association between individual emotions and behavioral reactions has received much attention over the past few decades ( Cropanzano et al., 2017 ; Lebel, 2017 ). For example, as cognitive appraisal theory posits ( Lazarus, 1991 ), each discrete emotion predicts a specific action tendency ( O’Leary-Kelly et al., 2017 ), e.g., anger predicts attack, compassion predicts helping, and anxiety predicts avoidance. In the moral emotion domain, although the linkage between each moral emotion and the specific behavioral tendency has not been fully revealed, research has made much progress in predicting behaviors via moral emotions. For example, Cropanzano et al. (2017) proposed that other-condemning moral emotions (anger, disgust, and contempt) invoked by leader-member exchange (LMX) differentiation will harm the LMX relationship in the future.

Since moral emotions are linked to the interests or welfare of society or of persons, moral actions will be more likely to become its behavior tendencies. As Kroll and Egan (2004) noted, moral emotions provide the motivational force—the power and energy—to do good and to avoid doing bad. In the present research, we propose that other-praising moral emotions positively affect followers’ moral actions to report unethical issues and to avoid doing unethical behaviors. First, other-praising moral emotions provide followers with more psychological power and energy to engage in moral actions ( Kroll and Egan, 2004 ). Haidt (2003) pointed out that other-praising moral emotions (e.g., elevation and awe) “create a more generalized desire to become a better person oneself” (p. 861). Similarly, Algoe and Haidt (2009) argue that employees who are high in other-praising moral emotions should motivate changes and behaviors that are beneficial in the long run. Thus, when employees are charged with other-praising moral emotions, they will be more likely to engage in moral actions themselves, such as reducing unethical behaviors and reporting unethical issues for sustainable development.

Second, other-praising moral emotions broaden followers’ awareness and encourage followers to display more novel, exploratory and ethical behaviors. Fredrickson (1998) “broaden and build model” suggests that positive emotions prompt individuals to pursue novel, varied, and creative paths of actions rather than discard trivial behavioral scripts. Other-praising moral emotions fit well with this “broaden and build model”. Thus, employees with high other-praising moral emotions will go beyond their own normal duties to display more ethical behaviors. Furthermore, previous researchers have pointed to the positive relationship between other-praising moral emotions (e.g., elevation, gratitude, and admiration) and prosocial or ethical behaviors, such as helping others ( Haidt, 2003 ; Algoe and Haidt, 2009 ). Therefore, we propose that:

• simple  Hypothesis 2: Other-praising moral emotions is positively related to followers’ moral actions, such as (a) reporting more ethical issues and (b) engaging in less unethical behavior.

Combining the above arguments—because ethical leadership acts as a critical antecedent of followers’ other-praising moral emotions (Hypothesis 1)—and because followers’ other-praising moral emotions could motivate them to do moral actions, we anticipate that other-praising moral emotions play a critical role in translating positive external influences (i.e., ethical leadership) to followers’ actual moral actions. Haidt (2003) also suggested that other-praising moral emotions encourage individuals to be a better person and to follow the moral example (i.e., the ethical leader) to demonstrate more ethical behaviors, creating “a virtuous ripple effect”. Hence, we argue that ethical leadership can invoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions, which in turn will lead to increased willingness to report unethical issues and decrease unethical behaviors at work.

• simple  Hypothesis 3: Ethical leadership will have positive effects on followers’ moral actions, such as (a) reporting more ethical issues and (b) engaging in less unethical behavior by invoking followers’ other-praising moral emotions.

Moderating Effect of Leader’s Core Self-Evaluation

Although we believe that ethical leadership can invoke followers’ other-praising moral emotions, whether the followers would indeed be moved and inspired depends on the extent to which the followers treat their ethical leader as an important source of information. According to social information processing theory ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ), an individual’s immediate social environment provides information cues to shape the individuals’ attitudes and behaviors. However, although the direct leader is one of the important environmental factors for employees, different leaders may influence their followers differently ( Rees and Segal, 1984 ). For example, if an ethical leader has no confidence about what he/she believes and what he/she has done, the followers may question their leaders’ ethical behavior, let alone generating moral emotions.

This paper focuses on leader core self-evaluation as the boundary factor for several reasons. First, core self-evaluation provides an integrative framework addressing the effects of employee dispositions on their job attitudes ( Bono and Judge, 2003 ). Judge et al. (2003) identified four components of core self-evaluation: generalized self-efficacy, self-esteem, emotional stability, and locus of control. Since these traits are fundamental and broaden self-perceptions, core self-evaluation is thought to have overarching influence on all other appraisals ( Johnson et al., 2008 ). Second, core self-evaluation reflects people’s beliefs about their own ability to interact with the environment by exhibiting their own behaviors ( Bono and Judge, 2003 ). By demonstrating efficacy beliefs while interacting with others, individuals with high core self-evaluation provide additional information cues for others to translate individuals’ behaviors. Third, previous leadership studies have called for investigating the role of core self-evaluation on leadership effectiveness ( Resick et al., 2009 ). Hence, it is important to explore how the leader’s core self-evaluation affects the effectiveness of ethical leadership.

We propose that when the leader has high core self-evaluation, the positive effect of ethical leadership on followers’ other-praising moral emotions get strengthened. According to social information processing theory, employees’ attitudes and behaviors can be shaped by environment information cues ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ). As a part of the followers’ immediate social environment, leader’s behaviors could exhibit both ethical and efficacy information. When an ethical leader has high core self-evaluation, he/she will be more confident about what he/she has done ( Bono and Judge, 2003 ), thus making the ethical information (e.g., values, standards and behaviors) more salient for employees. On one hand, ethical leaders with high core self-evaluation will carry out more ethical standards and practices, thus invoking followers’ other-praising moral emotions by strengthening the ethical values and behaviors. On the other hand, high core self-evaluation leaders have high self-regulatory capacities to control their own actions to cope with external constraints ( Johnson et al., 2008 ), which encourages followers to develop more positive feelings toward their leader. On the contrary, when an ethical leader has low core self-evaluation, he/she may have little confidence or ability to stick to ethical standards and behaviors himself/herself, thus conveying less ethical information cues to followers and invoking less moral emotions eventually. Therefore, we propose that:

• simple  Hypothesis 4: Leader core self-evaluation moderates the relationship between ethical leadership and other-praising moral emotions, such that the relationship between ethical leadership and other-praising moral emotions will be strengthened when leader has high core self-evaluation.

According to social information processing theory ( Salancik and Pfeffer, 1978 ), leader’s ethical and efficacy characters could jointly affect employees’ attitude and behaviors. Since ethical leadership and leader core self-evaluation interact to influence employees’ other-praising moral emotions (Hypothesis 4) and other-praising moral emotions elicit moral actions (Hypothesis 2), we propose a mediated moderation effect to theorize that followers’ other-praising moral emotions help translate leader’s ethical and efficacy characteristics into their own moral actions.

• simple  Hypothesis 5: Other-praising moral emotions mediate the effect of interaction between ethical leadership and leader core self-evaluation on followers’ (a) reporting ethical issues and (b) unethical behavior.

Participants and Procedures

Data was collected from several organizations located in Mainland China. Industry of these companies varies from manufacturing, real-estate and high-tech industry. A time-lagged data collection method was designed to reduce the potential common method bias. At Time 1, 72 teams were contacted in these companies, ranging from research (29%), production (43%), sales (18%), and other functional teams (11%). Each team has one leader and more than three employees (the average number of followers per team is 4.52). One of the authors went directly to the workplace to distribute the questionnaire. Each participant was offered with a questionnaire, a $2 gift, and an introductory letter to briefly introduce the research purpose and ensure participants’ confidentiality. 40 min later, we collected the questionnaire back. Finally, we received questionnaires from 72 leaders and 350 followers. About 7 weeks later, at Time 2, we distributed the questionnaire directly to the person who participated in the first survey and a total of 64 leaders (a response rate of 89%) and 295 followers (a response rate of 84%) responded. After excluding some uncompleted questionnaire, we finally identified 64 leaders and 289 followers. 48% of leaders were women and their average age was 39.0 years ( SD = 8.47), and they have worked in their company for an average of 9.9 years ( SD = 9.4). 58% of followers were women and their average age was 31.73 years ( SD = 8.41), and their average organizational tenure was 5.46 years ( SD = 7.01).

At Time 1, followers were asked to rate ethical leadership and their demographics background information and leaders were asked to report their own core self-evaluation and demographics information. At Time 2, followers completed measures of moral emotions and reporting unethical issues and leaders rated their followers’ unethical behaviors.

To ensure the internal validity of our translated scales, a back-translation process (c.f. Brislin, 1970 ) was conducted on all survey items.

Ethical Leadership

Ethical leadership was measured with a ten-item scale developed by Brown et al. (2005) . Sample items include “(my leader) sets an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics” and “(my leader) “conducts his or her personal life in an ethical manner” (α = 0.96). Items were rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).

Other-Praising Moral Emotions

We measured the five other-praising moral emotions proposed by Brown and Mitchell (2010) , by using the format for assessment from Brunstein (1993) . The five other-praising moral emotions are elevation, awe, inspiration, gratitude, and admiration. Followers were asked to report the extent they feel when interaction with their leader during the past months. Items were rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very frequently). The Cronbach’s α was 0.86.

Leader Core Self-Evaluation

We measured leader core self-evaluation with 12-item from Judge et al. (2003) . Sample items were “I am confident 1 get the success I deserve in life” and “I complete tasks successfully” (α = 0.94). Items were rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).

Reporting Unethical Issues

Reporting unethical issues was measured with the two items from Mayer et al. (2013) ’s reporting unethical conduct scale. The items are “If I personally observed conduct that violated our company’s standards of ethical business conduct I would report it” and “If I witnessed an employee violate our company’s code of conduct I would report it” (α = 0.90). Items were rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).

Unethical Behavior

Leaders were asked to rate followers’ unethical behavior with a seven-item scale from Moore et al. (2012) . Sample items include “falsifies a receipt to get reimbursed for more money than he/she spent on business expenses” and “takes property from work without permission” (α = 0.76). Items were rated on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (daily).

Control Variables

Since we based on social information processing perspective to examine how ethical leadership affects follower moral emotions, we controlled follower age, gender, and the interaction frequency between leader and follower ( Lopes et al., 2005 ) to exclude potential confounded effects. Frequency of interaction with leader was measured with a 3-point item adapted from McAllister (1995) ranging from 1 (many times daily), to 3 (once or twice in the past 1 month). The item was “How frequently do you interact with your supervisor at work?” Follower gender was measured as a dummy variable, with “0” refers men and “1” refers to women.

Analytical Strategy

Within-group interrater agreement (rwg, James et al., 1993 ) and ICC values were computed to examine whether employee-rating ethical leadership could be aggregated to team level. Ethical leadership had an average r wg value of 0.94 with ICC(1) and ICC(2) of 0.46 and 0.80. Thus, according to these results, we aggregated ethical leadership to team level.

Follow the recommendation of Raudenbush et al. (2011) , we used hierarchical linear modeling to test our hypotheses. As our hypothesis 2 and hypothesis 3 indicated cross-level indirect effect, we used Montel Carlo method to test those hypotheses ( Preacher et al., 2010 ).

Preliminary Analyses

Table ​ Table1 1 provides the means, standard deviations, reliability, and correlations among all variables. Ethical leadership was positively related to moral emotions ( r = 0.33, p < 0.001). Moral emotions was positively related to reporting unethical issues ( r = 0.43, p < 0.001) and was negatively related to unethical behavior ( r = −0.25, p < 0.001).

Means, standard deviations, and correlations for all variables.

We adopted the confirmatory factor analysis to verify discriminant validity of all the constructs. The measurement model was composed of four latent variables (ethical leadership, moral emotions, reporting unethical issues, and unethical behavior) with 24 indicators (10 items for ethical leadership, 5 items for moral emotions, 2 items for reporting unethical issues, and 7 items for unethical behavior). Results (see Table ​ Table2 2 ) showed that the four-factor model had the best fi to the data (χ 2 = 1487.84, df = 485, χ 2 / df = 3.07, CFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.89, RMSEA = 0.08), indicating that the constructs used in our model had good discriminant validity.

Confirmatory factor analyses.

Hypotheses Testing

We used hierarchical linear modeling to test our hypotheses. As shown in Table ​ Table3 3 , after controlling follower age, gender and interaction frequency with their leader, ethical leadership was positively related to other-praising moral emotions (γ = 0.61, SE = 0.12, p < 0.001; Model 1b), supporting hypothesis 1. Meanwhile, the interaction between ethical leadership and leader core self-evaluation was positively related to other-praising moral emotions (γ = 0.18, SE = 0.07, p < 0.05; Model 1c), supporting hypothesis 4. Results from Model 2b showed that other-praising moral emotions had a positive effect on reporting unethical issues (γ = 0.41, SE = 0.10, p < 0.001), supporting hypothesis 2a. Similarly, results from Model 3b showed that other-praising moral emotions had a negative effect on unethical behavior (γ = −0.02, SE = 0.01, p < 0.05), supporting hypothesis 2b.

Hierarchical linear modeling results.

We further plotted the interactive effects and performed the simple slop tests. As shown in Figure ​ Figure2 2 , when leader has high core self-evaluation, ethical leadership was significantly positively related to moral emotions ( t = 4.17, p < 0.001). However, when leader core self-evaluation is low, the relationship between ethical leadership and moral emotions was not significant ( t = 1.74, p = 0.08), supporting our hypothesis 4.

Interaction effect between ethical leadership and leader core self-evaluation on other-praising moral emotions.

We followed Preacher et al. (2010) ’s recommendation to use Montel Carlo method to test cross-level indirect effect (i.e., Hypothesis 2a, 2b, 5a, and 5b). Results with 20000 times bootstrapping showed that the indirect effect between ethical leadership and reporting unethical issues via other-praising moral emotions was 0.29, with 95% confidence interval between 0.17 and 0.42 (not including 0), supporting hypothesis 2a. Similarly, the indirect effect between ethical leadership and reporting unethical issues via other-praising moral emotions was −0.02, with 95% confidence interval between −0.024 and −0.011 (not including 0), supporting hypothesis 2b. Moreover, the mediated moderation effect of moral emotions in relationship between hypothesized interaction (i.e., the interaction between ethical leadership and leader core self-evaluation) and reporting unethical issues was 0.08, with 95% confidence interval between 0.06 and 0.10 (not including 0), supporting hypothesis 5a. The mediated moderation effect of moral emotions in relationship between hypothesized interaction and unethical behavior was −0.005, with 95% confidence interval between −0.006 and −0.004 (not including 0), supporting hypothesis 5b.

The present study has investigated how ethical leadership improves followers’ moral actions through generating followers’ moral emotions. We have found that ethical leadership invokes followers’ other-praising moral emotions and eventually promotes moral actions among the followers, such as reporting more ethical conduct and engaging in less unethical behaviors. Furthermore, when ethical leaders have high core self-evaluation, followers’ other-praising moral emotions as well as their subsequent moral actions will be more likely evoked. On the other hand, when the leader has lower core self-evaluation, the positive effect of ethical leadership on follower other-praising moral emotions becomes neutralized.

Theoretical Contributions

Our research contributes to literature in multiple ways. By introducing the affective perspective, it has offered an emotional explanation about why ethical leadership matters. Previous scholars had consistently suggested that while considering the vital effects of moral emotions on moral actions ( Harvey et al., 2016 ), it is essential for future leadership research to understand the role of moral emotions ( Brown and Mitchell, 2010 ; Lindebaum et al., 2017 ). For example, followers’ hostile affective states can help explain how followers translate their leader’s mistreatment into their own deviant behaviors ( Mayer et al., 2012b ). However, although researchers have demonstrated that ethical leadership can benefit followers and teams in multiple ways ( Brown et al., 2005 ; Avey et al., 2012 ), the question of what role emotions play in employees’ reactions to ethical leadership has not been answered clearly. This answer is important because it helps us understand the causal relationship between ethical leadership and follower moral actions ( Brown and Mitchell, 2010 ) and distinguish ethical leadership from other positive leadership approaches in influencing followers. Drawing on social information processing theory, we have found that ethical leadership evokes followers’ other-praising moral emotions and enhances their moral actions. Specifically, by displaying high moral standards and behaving ethically, ethical leaders invoke follower’s other-praising moral emotions such as elevation, awe, and inspiration, which eventually motivates followers to report more unethical issues and engage in less unethical behavior. Thus, our research has provided an emotional linkage between ethical leadership and follower moral actions, contributing to literature on ethical leadership.

Our research also contributes to emotion literature by focusing on other-praising moral emotions and offering new insights on the association between emotions and behaviors in the moral domain. It is well-documented that emotions have significant effects on individual’s attitudes and behaviors ( Cropanzano et al., 2017 ; Lebel, 2017 ). However, previous studies have paid more attention on more generalized emotions such as positive emotions and negative emotions ( Matta et al., 2014 ). Although those efforts increased our understanding about how emotions shape individual behaviors, several theorists have argued for more specific-domain research on the differentiated influences of specific emotions on behaviors ( Tangney et al., 2007 ; Brown and Mitchell, 2010 ; Horberg et al., 2011 ). For example, several scholars have called for future research to pay attention to moral emotions by revealing its unique role in linking organizational moral standards and employee moral actions ( Tangney et al., 2007 ; Lindebaum et al., 2017 ). In response to such calls, our research examined the positive association between ethical leadership, follower moral emotions, and moral behaviors. Specifically, our results showed that followers are more likely to generate other-praising moral emotions toward their ethical leaders and then conduct more moral actions, such as reporting more unethical issues. Thus, our research contributes to emotion literature by extending our knowledge about the influence of emotions on behaviors in the moral domain.

Finally, our research has contributed to ethical leadership literature by exploring the boundary conditions under which ethical leaders could be more influential in invoking follower moral emotions. Although the positive impacts of ethical leadership have been examined in previous studies (e.g., Brown et al., 2005 ; Avey et al., 2012 ), our knowledge about the conditions under which ethical leadership will be more effective is still far from being satisfactory. Several scholars have noted that without revealing the boundary conditions of effectiveness of ethical leadership, we would not be able reach a comprehensive understanding of ethical leadership ( Brown and Treviño, 2006 ). In response, our results showed that ethical leadership will be more effective when the leader has high core self-evaluation. By contrast, when an ethical leader has low core self-evaluation, followers will not generate other-praising moral emotions toward their leader. Our research thus contributes to ethical leadership literature by investigating how leader characteristics influence the impact of ethical leadership on followers.

Practical Implications

Our results verify the effectiveness of ethical leadership on follower moral actions, suggesting that ethical leadership is effective to promote employees to behave more ethically. Moreover, our findings show that ethical leaders trigger followers to foster other-praising moral emotions. Organizations should actively hire or cultivate more ethical leaders, since those leaders could benefit followers and, at the same time, the organization. Meanwhile, following our finding that ethical leadership elicits followers’ moral actions, leaders should themselves be more willing to behave ethically. Furthermore, our findings show that when an ethical leader has high core self-evaluation, followers’ moral emotions will be more likely invoked. This result suggests that ethical leaders should be self-motivated and express strong self-confidence in front of their followers. Our result also indicates that when the leader has low core self-evaluation, the positive effects of ethical leadership on followers’ moral emotions will be neutralized. This finding could act as a reminder that ethical leadership may not always be useful.

Limitations and Future Research

Our study comes with several limitations that should be noted. First, since this study was conducted in China, it is not very clear to what extent can our results be generalized to other contexts. Previous research has indicated that several cultural factors, such as power distance, impact the interactions between leaders and followers ( Kirkman et al., 2009 ). For example, Kirkman et al. (2009) found that the effect of transformational leadership on procedural justice is more positive when followers have low power distance orientation. Similarly, power distance orientation may also affect the relationship between ethical leadership and followers’ moral emotions since followers with different level of power distance orientation may translate their leader’s ethical behavior differently. Thus, we recommend future research examining whether cultural factors make a difference in our proposed model.

Moreover, although our research has revealed the vital role of other-praising moral emotions in linking ethical leadership and follower moral behaviors, we did not exclude the possibility that other kinds of moral emotions may make a difference. For example, as Brown and Mitchell (2010) noted, other-condemning emotions such as disgust and self-focused emotions such as shame may also explain the effect of ethical/unethical leadership on follower behaviors. Meanwhile, in our research, we intended to provide a comprehensive emotional explanation for the influence of ethical leadership on follower moral actions, thus we did not examine whether specific other-praising emotions (e.g., elevation, inspiration, and gratitude) will have distinct effects. Since the behavioral tendency varies across different emotions ( Lazarus, 1991 ), we encourage future research to dig into the emotional link between ethical leadership and follower moral actions.

The effectiveness of ethical leadership has been well-documented in a growing number of studies. Therefore, it is surprising that we still lack enough knowledge about the emotional linkage between ethical leadership and follower moral actions. The present research proposed and found that ethical leadership prompts followers to engage in more moral actions by invoking followers’ other-praising moral emotions. Moreover, when the ethical leader has high core self-evaluation, the positive effects of ethical leadership on follower moral emotions and moral actions is strengthened. We hope our work will enhance our current knowledge on ethical leadership and provide new insights.

Ethics Statement

An ethics approval was not required as per our institution’s guidelines and national regulations. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in our study.

Author Contributions

YZ and JM designed and adopted the study, wrote the paper. FZ wrote the paper.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding. This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71802193) and Humanities and Social Sciences grant of the Chinese Ministry of Education (No. 18YJA630149).

• Algoe S. B., Haidt J. (2009). Witnessing excellence in action: the ‘other-praising’ emotions of elevation, gratitude, and admiration. J. Posit. Psychol. 4 105–127. 10.1080/17439760802650519 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arsenio W. F., Lemerise E. A. (2004). Aggression and moral development: integrating social information processing and moral domain models. Child Dev. 75 987–1002. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00720.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avey J. B., Palanski M. E., Walumbwa F. O. (2011). When leadership goes unnoticed: the moderating role of follower self-esteem on the relationship between ethical leadership and follower behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 98 573–582. 10.1007/s10551-010-0610-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avey J. B., Wernsing T. S., Palanski M. E. (2012). Exploring the process of ethical leadership: the mediating role of employee voice and psychological ownership. J. Bus. Ethics 107 21–34. 10.1007/s10551-012-1298-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bass B. M., Avolio B. J. (2000). MLQ: Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire . Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bass B. M., Steidlmeier P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadersh. Q. 10 181–217. 10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00016-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bass B. M., Stogdill R. M. (1990). Handbook of Leadership Vol. 11 New York, NY: Free Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhave D. P., Kramer A., Glomb T. M. (2010). Work–family conflict in work groups: social information processing, support, and demographic dissimilarity. J. Appl. Psychol. 95 145–158. 10.1037/a0017885 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bonner J. M., Greenbaum R. L., Mayer D. M. (2016). My boss is morally disengaged: the role of ethical leadership in explaining the interactive effect of supervisor and employee moral disengagement on employee behaviors. J. Bus. Ethics 137 731–742. 10.1007/s10551-014-2366-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bono J. E., Judge T. A. (2003). Core self-evaluations: a review of the trait and its role in job satisfaction and job performance. Eur. J. Pers. 17 S5–S18. 10.1002/per.481 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bouckenooghe D., Zafar A., Raja U. (2015). How ethical leadership shapes employees’ job performance: the mediating roles of goal congruence and psychological capital. J. Bus. Ethics 129 251–264. 10.1007/s10551-014-2162-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brislin R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 1 185–216. 10.1177/135910457000100301 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown M. E., Mitchell M. S. (2010). Ethical and unethical leadership: exploring new avenues for future research. Bus. Ethics Q. 20 583–616. 10.5840/beq201020439 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown M. E., Treviño L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: a review and future directions. Leadersh. Q. 17 595–616. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown M. E., Treviño L. K., Harrison D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: a social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 97 117–134. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brunstein J. C. (1993). Personal goals and subjective well-being: a longitudinal study. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 65 1061–1070. 10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.1061 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen A. S. Y., Hou Y. H. (2016). The effects of ethical leadership, voice behavior and climates for innovation on creativity: a moderated mediation examination. Leadersh. Q. 27 1–13. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.10.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiu C. C., Owens B. P., Tesluk P. E. (2016). Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: the role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability. J. Appl. Psychol. 101 1705–1720. 10.1037/apl0000159 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cropanzano R., Dasborough M. T., Weiss H. M. (2017). Affective events and the development of leader-member exchange. Acad. Manag. Rev. 42 233–258. 10.5465/amr.2014.0384 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dasborough M. T., Ashkanasy N. M. (2002). Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships. Leadersh. Q. 13 615–634. 10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00147-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Demirtas O., Akdogan A. A. (2015). The effect of ethical leadership behavior on ethical climate, turnover intention, and affective commitment. J. Bus. Ethics 130 59–67. 10.1007/s10551-014-2196-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dinh J. E., Lord R. G., Gardner W. L., Meuser J. D., Liden R. C., Hu J. (2014). Leadership theory and research in the new millennium: current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. Leadersh. Q. 25 36–62. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dodge K. A., Rabiner D. L. (2004). Returning to roots: on social information processing and moral development. Child Dev. 75 1003–1008. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00721.x [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eisenbeiss S. A., Knippenberg D. (2015). On ethical leadership impact: the role of follower mindfulness and moral emotions. J. Organ. Behav. 36 182–195. 10.1002/job.1968 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fredrickson B. L. (1998). What good are positive emotions? Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2 300–319. 10.1037/1089-2680.2.3.300 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldman B. M. (2001). Toward an understanding of employment discrimination claiming: an integration of organizational justice and social information processing theories. Pers. Psychol. 54 361–386. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00096.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greene J., Haidt J. (2002). How (and where) does moral judgment work? Trends Cogn. Sci. 6 517–523. 10.1016/S1364-6613(02)02011-9 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gundlach M. J., Douglas S. C., Martinko M. J. (2003). The decision to blow the whistle: a social information processing framework. Acad. Manag. Rev. 28 107–123. 10.5465/amr.2003.8925239 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haidt J. (2003). “The moral emotions,” in Handbook of Affective Sciences , eds Davidson R. J., Scherer K. R., Goldsmith H. H. (Oxford: Oxford University Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Harvey P., Martinko M. J., Borkowski N. (2016). Justifying deviant behavior: the role of attributions and moral emotions. J. Bus. Ethics 141 1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofmann D. A. (1997). An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. J. Manag. 23 723–744. 10.1016/S0149-2063(97)90026-X [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horberg E. J., Oveis C., Keltner D. (2011). Emotions as moral amplifiers: an appraisal tendency approach to the influences of distinct emotions upon moral judgment. Emot. Rev. 3 237–244. 10.1177/1754073911402384 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• James L. R., Demaree R. G., Wolf G. (1993). rwg: an assessment of within-group interrater agreement. J. Appl. Psychol. 78 306–309. 10.1037/0021-9010.78.2.306 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson R. E., Rosen C. C., Levy P. E. (2008). Getting to the core of core self-evaluation: a review and recommendations. J. Organ. Behav. 29 391–413. 10.1002/job.514 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Judge T. A., Erez A., Bono J. E., Thoresen C. J. (2003). The core self-evaluations scale: development of a measure. Pers. Psychol. 56 303–331. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00152.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kacmar K. M., Andrews M. C., Harris K. J., Tepper B. J. (2013). Ethical leadership and subordinate outcomes: the mediating role of organizational politics and the moderating role of political skill. J. Bus. Ethics 115 33–44. 10.1007/s10551-012-1373-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalshoven K., Den Hartog D. N., de Hoogh A. H. (2013). Ethical leadership and followers’ helping and initiative: the role of demonstrated responsibility and job autonomy. Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 22 165–181. 10.1080/1359432X.2011.640773 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kirkman B. L., Chen G., Farh J. L., Chen Z. X., Lowe K. B. (2009). Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders: a cross-level, cross-cultural examination. Acad. Manag. J. 52 744–764. 10.5465/AMJ.2009.43669971 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kroll J., Egan E. (2004). Psychiatry, moral worry, and the moral emotions. J. Psychiatr. Pract. 10 352–360. 10.1097/00131746-200411000-00003 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarus R. S. (1991). Cognition and motivation in emotion. Am. Psychol. 46 352–367. 10.1037/0003-066X.46.4.352 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lebel R. D. (2017). Moving beyond fight and flight: a contingent model of how the emotional regulation of anger and fear sparks proactivity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 42 190–206. 10.5465/amr.2014.0368 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee D., Choi Y., Youn S., Chun J. U. (2017). Ethical leadership and employee moral voice: the mediating role of moral efficacy and the moderating role of leader–follower value congruence. J. Bus. Ethics 141 47–57. 10.1007/s10551-015-2689-y [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lindebaum D., Geddes D., Gabriel Y. (2017). Moral emotions and ethics in organisations: introduction to the special issue. J. Bus. Ethics 141 645–656. 10.1007/s10551-016-3201-z [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopes P. N., Salovey P., Côté S., Beers M., Petty R. E. (2005). Emotion regulation abilities and the quality of social interaction. Emotion 5 113–118. 10.1037/1528-3542.5.1.113 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maslow A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychol. Rev. 50 370–396. 10.1037/h0054346 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matta F. K., Erol-Korkmaz H. T., Johnson R. E., Biçaksiz P. (2014). Significant work events and counterproductive work behavior: the role of fairness, emotions, and emotion regulation. J. Organ. Behav. 35 920–944. 10.1002/job.1934 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayer D. M., Aquino K., Greenbaum R. L., Kuenzi M. (2012a). Who displays ethical leadership, and why does it matter? An examination of antecedents and consequences of ethical leadership. Acad. Manag. J. 55 151–171. 10.5465/amj.2008.0276 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayer D. M., Thau S., Workman K. M., Van Dijke M., De Cremer D. (2012b). Leader mistreatment, employee hostility, and deviant behaviors: integrating self-uncertainty and thwarted needs perspectives on deviance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 117 24–40. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.07.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayer D. M., Kuenzi M., Greenbaum R., Bardes M., Salvador R. B. (2009). How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 108 1–13. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.04.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayer D. M., Kuenzi M., Greenbaum R. L. (2010). Examining the link between ethical leadership and employee misconduct: the mediating role of ethical climate. J. Bus. Ethics 95 7–16. 10.1007/s10551-011-0794-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayer D. M., Nurmohamed S., Treviño L. K., Shapiro D. L., Schminke M. (2013). Encouraging employees to report unethical conduct internally: it takes a village. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 121 89–103. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.01.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McAllister D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Acad. Manag. J. 38 24–59. 10.2307/256727 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore C., Detert J. R., Klebe Treviño L., Baker V. L., Mayer D. M. (2012). Why employees do bad things: moral disengagement and unethical organizational behavior. Pers. Psychol. 65 1–48. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01237.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Leary-Kelly A., Rosen C. C., Hochwarter W. A. (2017). Who is deserving and who decides: entitlement as a work-situated phenomenon. Acad. Manag. Rev. 42 417–436. 10.5465/amr.2014.0128 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Reilly C. A., Caldwell D. F. (1985). The impact of normative social influence and cohesiveness on task perceptions and attitudes: a social information processing approach. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 58 193–206. 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1985.tb00195.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piccolo R. F., Greenbaum R., Hartog D. N. D., Folger R. (2010). The relationship between ethical leadership and core job characteristics. J. Organ. Behav. 31 259–278. 10.1002/job.627 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Preacher K. J., Zyphur M. J., Zhang Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychol. Methods 15 209–233. 10.1037/a0020141 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raudenbush S. W., Bryk A. S., Cheong Y. F., Congdon R., Du Toit M. (2011). Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling (HLM7) . Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rees C. R., Segal M. W. (1984). Role differentiation in groups: the relationship between instrumental and expressive leadership. Small Group Behav. 15 109–123. 10.1177/104649648401500106 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Resick C. J., Hargis M. B., Shao P., Dust S. B. (2013). Ethical leadership, moral equity judgments, and discretionary workplace behavior. Hum. Relat. 66 951–972. 10.1177/0018726713481633 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Resick C. J., Whitman D. S., Weingarden S. M., Hiller N. J. (2009). The bright-side and the dark-side of CEO personality: examining core self-evaluations, narcissism, transformational leadership, and strategic influence. J. Appl. Psychol. 94 1365–1381. 10.1037/a0016238 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sadri G., Weber T. J., Gentry W. A. (2011). Empathic emotion and leadership performance: an empirical analysis across 38 countries. Leadersh. Q. 22 818–830. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salancik G. R., Pfeffer J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Adm. Sci. Q. 239 224–253. 10.2307/2392563 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salvador R., Folger R. G. (2009). Business Ethics and the Brain: Rommel Salvador and Robert G. Folger. Bus. Ethics Q. 19 1–31. 10.5840/beq20091911 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steinbauer R., Renn R. W., Taylor R. R., Njoroge P. K. (2014). Ethical leadership and followers’ moral judgment: the role of followers’ perceived accountability and self-leadership. J. Bus. Ethics 120 381–392. 10.1007/s10551-013-1662-x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tangney J. P., Stuewig J., Mashek D. J. (2007). Moral emotions and moral behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 58 345–372. 10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070145 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Treviño L. K., Brown M., Hartman L. P. (2003). A qualitative investigation of perceived executive ethical leadership: perceptions from inside and outside the executive suite. Hum. Relat. 56 5–37. 10.1177/0018726703056001448 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Knippenberg D., Van Knippenberg B., De Cremer D., Hogg M. A. (2004). Leadership, self, and identity: a review and research agenda. Leadersh. Q. 15 825–856. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vianello M., Galliani E. M., Haidt J. (2010). Elevation at work: the effects of leaders’ moral excellence. J. Posit. Psychol. 5 390–411. 10.1080/17439760.2010.516764 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang Y. D., Sung W. C. (2016). Predictors of organizational citizenship behavior: ethical leadership and workplace jealousy. J. Bus. Ethics 135 117–128. 10.1007/s10551-014-2480-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu A. J., Loi R., Ngo H. Y. (2016). Ethical leadership behavior and employee justice perceptions: the mediating role of trust in organization. J. Bus. Ethics 134 493–504. 10.1007/s10551-014-2457-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang S., Tu Y. (2016). Cross-Domain effects of ethical leadership on employee family and life satisfaction: the moderating role of family-supportive supervisor behaviors. J. Bus. Ethics 152 1–13. 10.1007/s10551-016-3306-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Advertisement

Project 2025 tells us what a second Trump term could mean for climate policy. It isn’t pretty

• Frederick Hewett

Simply saying there is a lot at stake for the climate in the 2024 election understates the outcome’s potential for profound global impact . The chasm between the parties on climate issues is broad, deep and dangerous. Unfortunately, many people aren’t paying attention.

When pollsters ask voters what their top issues are, climate comes in fifth , at best. But more often, it's far down the list or at the bottom . In a poll conducted last summer , only 27% percent of voters were acquainted with the Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden administration's marquee climate legislation. And a recent article in the New York Times points out that many voters are unaware of the implications of the sharp divide between the parties on this critical question.

Our democratic processes and political dynamics have left climate policy largely on the sidelines of electoral discourse despite the yawning ideological gap between the parties. On the right, the Heritage Foundation, a prominent conservative think tank with deep ties to the MAGA movement, has set the climate agenda. Last year, the foundation's Project 2025 released a 920-page document titled " Mandate for Leadership ," which outlines a comprehensive plan for a potential Republican administration to implement the organization's vision of limited government and free-market economics.

The plan’s proposals include eviscerating existing climate programs and increasing reliance on fossil fuels. It emphatically repudiates efforts to decarbonize the economy and is a wholesale reversal of the progress made on climate policy over recent years.

The authors of the mandate don't deny the reality of climate change or that humans cause it; their central premise is that the risks of climate change are overstated . They maintain the world’s best course of action is to abandon the idea of a green energy transition, continue the unabated exploitation of fossil fuels, and deal with the ensuing consequences, which they say will be " mild and manageable ." Without this dubious tenet, their program is incoherent.

Project 2025 advocates disbanding various bureaucratic offices related to renewable energy and climate science, among them the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Loan Program Office, the Clean Energy Corps, the Grid Deployment Office and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Project 2025 document says, “Government … should not be picking winners and losers in dealing with energy resources or commercial technology,” using one of the right’s favorite tropes about incubating nascent technology.

It doesn't stop there. “The new energy crisis is caused not by lack of resources, but by extreme ‘green’ policies,” the report chides. It calls for loosening existing fuel economy standards, weakening the Endangered Species Act, expanding oil and gas drilling in the Arctic, eliminating appliance efficiency standards and fast-tracking environmental approvals for natural gas infrastructure.

Project 2025 also calls for the repeal of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, which creates powerful incentives to develop clean energy. And it would gut the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which includes provisions for decarbonizing our transportation systems.

Much of the voting public is disturbingly unaware of both Biden’s climate record and the assault that Project 2025 would marshal against it. 

But there's more. Not only does the plan espouse exiting the 2015 Paris Agreement, it suggests quitting altogether the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. That would be a radical rejection of the international community's collective efforts to address the climate crisis. Withdrawal from the Framework Convention would diminish global capacity for funding climate adaptation while marginalizing the United States in climate negotiations.

Finally, the plan includes a recommendation "to update the 2009 endangerment finding," referring to the Environmental Protection Agency’s ruling that followed from the landmark Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. EPA . The endangerment finding allows the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant and undergirds much of what the agency can do about greenhouse gas emissions. The suggestion that this pillar of the regulatory framework would be weakened or removed is ominous.

The contrast between Project 2025’s climate prescriptions and the policies of the Democratic Party is striking. Despite some notable exceptions , the Biden administration has taken a comprehensive approach to promoting renewable energy and combating climate change. The US rejoined the Paris Agreement. The Inflation Reduction Act passed under Biden aims to reduce carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030. The administration has placed limits on oil and gas leases on federal land. Recently, the White House announced a pause in approving new permits for export of liquefied natural gas, a move that drew the ire of the fossil fuel power establishment.

Much of the voting public is disturbingly unaware of both Biden’s climate record and the assault that Project 2025 would marshal against it.

When a substantial number of voters fail to weigh the ramifications of profound policy differences between two political parties on a crucial issue, it exposes troubling weaknesses in our democratic process.

This election will determine whether the energy and environmental justice policies Biden has advanced will be fully implemented or recklessly rolled back. It will also determine the role of the U.S. in the international community's effort to act on climate mitigation and adaptation. It will either keep the nation on track toward its mid-century targets for a carbon-free energy economy or introduce delays in the transition the world cannot afford.

Understandably, voters tend to prioritize immediate economic concerns like inflation and healthcare costs when casting their ballots. Controversial topics like immigration, guns, crime and abortion reliably crowd out environmental concerns. And most voters have already made up their minds about November’s election based on party identity.

Climate policy has never been a deciding factor in presidential elections. It wasn't in 2016 , when hours of televised debates yielded a single question on it, and it had only a limited impact in 2020. Our political process doesn't excel at amplifying causes that serve the common good in the long term rather than the individual in the short term. It discounts the value of confronting disruptive change when faced with a systemic crisis.

But as Thomas Jefferson said, "A well-informed citizenry is the best defense against tyranny." It may also be our best defense against climate chaos. In a close election that may hinge on a few votes in a few states, every undecided voter in a swing state needs to know about the dangerous agenda of Project 2025.

Follow Cognoscenti on Facebook and Instagram .

• On Point: Trump’s 2025 authoritarian playbook and what it means for democracy
• Barbara Moran: Many scientists don’t want to tell the truth about climate change. Here’s why
• Also by Frederick Hewett: Electric vehicles are caught up in the culture wars, but the climate doesn’t care how you vote

Frederick Hewett Cognoscenti contributor Frederick Hewett is a freelance writer living in Cambridge. He writes about climate and energy.

More from WBUR

• Search for: Toggle Search

‘You Transformed the World,’ NVIDIA CEO Tells Researchers Behind Landmark AI Paper

Of GTC ’s 900+ sessions, the most wildly popular was a conversation hosted by NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang with seven of the authors of the legendary research paper that introduced the aptly named transformer — a neural network architecture that went on to change the deep learning landscape and enable today’s era of generative AI.

“Everything that we’re enjoying today can be traced back to that moment,” Huang said to a packed room with hundreds of attendees, who heard him speak with the authors of “ Attention Is All You Need .”

Sharing the stage for the first time, the research luminaries reflected on the factors that led to their original paper, which has been cited more than 100,000 times since it was first published and presented at the NeurIPS AI conference. They also discussed their latest projects and offered insights into future directions for the field of generative AI.

While they started as Google researchers, the collaborators are now spread across the industry, most as founders of their own AI companies.

“We have a whole industry that is grateful for the work that you guys did,” Huang said.

Origins of the Transformer Model

The research team initially sought to overcome the limitations of recurrent neural networks , or RNNs, which were then the state of the art for processing language data.

Noam Shazeer, cofounder and CEO of Character.AI, compared RNNs to the steam engine and transformers to the improved efficiency of internal combustion.

“We could have done the industrial revolution on the steam engine, but it would just have been a pain,” he said. “Things went way, way better with internal combustion.”

“Now we’re just waiting for the fusion,” quipped Illia Polosukhin, cofounder of blockchain company NEAR Protocol.

The paper’s title came from a realization that attention mechanisms — an element of neural networks that enable them to determine the relationship between different parts of input data — were the most critical component of their model’s performance.

“We had very recently started throwing bits of the model away, just to see how much worse it would get. And to our surprise it started getting better,” said Llion Jones, cofounder and chief technology officer at Sakana AI.

Having a name as general as “transformers” spoke to the team’s ambitions to build AI models that could process and transform every data type — including text, images, audio, tensors and biological data.

“That North Star, it was there on day zero, and so it’s been really exciting and gratifying to watch that come to fruition,” said Aidan Gomez, cofounder and CEO of Cohere. “We’re actually seeing it happen now.”

Envisioning the Road Ahead 

Adaptive computation, where a model adjusts how much computing power is used based on the complexity of a given problem, is a key factor the researchers see improving in future AI models.

“It’s really about spending the right amount of effort and ultimately energy on a given problem,” said Jakob Uszkoreit, cofounder and CEO of biological software company Inceptive. “You don’t want to spend too much on a problem that’s easy or too little on a problem that’s hard.”

A math problem like two plus two, for example, shouldn’t be run through a trillion-parameter transformer model — it should run on a basic calculator, the group agreed.

They’re also looking forward to the next generation of AI models.

“I think the world needs something better than the transformer,” said Gomez. “I think all of us here hope it gets succeeded by something that will carry us to a new plateau of performance.”

“You don’t want to miss these next 10 years,” Huang said. “Unbelievable new capabilities will be invented.”

The conversation concluded with Huang presenting each researcher with a framed cover plate of the NVIDIA DGX-1 AI supercomputer, signed with the message, “You transformed the world.”

There’s still time to catch the session replay by registering for a virtual GTC pass — it’s free.

To discover the latest in generative AI, watch Huang’s GTC keynote address:

NVIDIA websites use cookies to deliver and improve the website experience. See our cookie policy for further details on how we use cookies and how to change your cookie settings.

Share on Mastodon

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Title: mm1: methods, analysis & insights from multimodal llm pre-training.

Abstract: In this work, we discuss building performant Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). In particular, we study the importance of various architecture components and data choices. Through careful and comprehensive ablations of the image encoder, the vision language connector, and various pre-training data choices, we identified several crucial design lessons. For example, we demonstrate that for large-scale multimodal pre-training using a careful mix of image-caption, interleaved image-text, and text-only data is crucial for achieving state-of-the-art (SOTA) few-shot results across multiple benchmarks, compared to other published pre-training results. Further, we show that the image encoder together with image resolution and the image token count has substantial impact, while the vision-language connector design is of comparatively negligible importance. By scaling up the presented recipe, we build MM1, a family of multimodal models up to 30B parameters, including both dense models and mixture-of-experts (MoE) variants, that are SOTA in pre-training metrics and achieve competitive performance after supervised fine-tuning on a range of established multimodal benchmarks. Thanks to large-scale pre-training, MM1 enjoys appealing properties such as enhanced in-context learning, and multi-image reasoning, enabling few-shot chain-of-thought prompting.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• Download PDF
• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .