How Implicit Theories Shape Follower Perceptions of Ethical Leadership

The studies reported in Chapters 3, 4, and 6 highlight how individuals across different contexts differ in their implicit assumptions, beliefs, and expectations about what ethical leadership should entail. As argued in Chapter 2, such differences in implicit theories of ethical leadership (IELT) may lead to variability in how these individuals perceive and understand the characteristics and behaviors exhibited by their leader. However, while there is an increasing number of studies delineating individuals’ implicit theories of ethicalleadership (e.g., Keating et al., 2007; Martin et al., 2009; Resick et al., 2006; Resick et al., 2011; Resick et al., 2009), no empirical research exists on the extent to which such implicit theories affect subsequent observations of ethical leadership. In fact, when assessing ethical leadership and its effects, the variability in follower perceptions and its underlying causes are largely neglected (e.g., Brown et al., 2005; Kalshoven et al., 2011; Yukl et al., 2013). Yet research on the relation between follower IELT and perceptions of ethical leadership may provide critical information about how reputations for ethical leadership are formed, why variability in follower perceptions of ethical leadership occurs, and, as a result, why the effects of ethical leadership vary across contexts and among the followers of one and the same leader (see Brown & Mitchell, 2010; Hannah & Jennings, 2013; Lord & Emrich, 2000).