Edwin P. Hollander (1927-2020).

Memorializes Edwin P. Hollander (1927-2020). Hollander was a major figure in the study of group and organizational leadership. He received his BS from Case Western Reserve University in 1948, his MS in psychometrics, working with Robert Thorndike in 1950, and his PhD in social psychology from Columbia University in 1952. After serving as a naval aviation psychologist during the Korean War, Ed began his academic career at Carnegie Mellon, initiating work on leadership that led to a 20-year research program at the State University of New York at Buffalo where he was also founding director of the doctoral program in social/organizational psychology and provost of social sciences. In 1989, he became the City University of New York Distinguished Professor of Psychology at Baruch College until his retirement in 1999. During his career, he had many visiting appointments, including the Tavistock Institute, Harvard, Oxford, the National Academy of Sciences, and Istanbul University. Hollander also served as president of the Eastern Psychological Association and American Psychological Association (APA) Division 1, APA's Board of Social and Ethical Responsibility for Psychology (BSERP), and on the Governing Council of the International Society of Political Psychology. He received a distinguished career award from the International Association of Applied Psychology, the International Leadership Association, the Network of Leadership Scholars, the New York Academy of Sciences, and the Center for Creative Leadership. His landmark books, including Leaders, Groups, and Influence (1964) and Leadership Dynamics (1978), positioned leadership as an influence process occurring at the nexus of leader, followers, and organizational context. Ed emphasized the importance of an engaged followership to the study of leadership, rather than focusing primarily on the leader. He is perhaps best known for the idiosyncrasy credit model, a framework that details how follower perceptions affect leader behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

See no evil: color blindness and perceptions of subtle racial discrimination in the workplace.

Workplace discrimination has grown more ambiguous, with interracial interactions often perceived differently by different people. The present study adds to the literature by examining a key individual difference variable in the perception of discrimination at work, namely individual color-blind attitudes. We examined relationships between 3 dimensions of color-blind attitudes (Racial Privilege, Institutional Discrimination, and Blatant Racial Issues) and perceptions of racial microaggressions in the workplace as enacted by a White supervisor toward a Black employee (i.e., discriminatory actions ranging from subtle to overt). Findings showed that observer views on institutional discrimination fully mediated, and blatant racial issues partially mediated, the relationships between racial group membership and the perception of workplace microaggressions. Non-Hispanic Whites endorsed color blindness as institutional discrimination and blatant racial issues significantly more than members of racioethnic minority groups, and higher levels of color-blind worldviews were associated with lower likelihoods of perceiving microaggressions. Views on racial privilege did not differ significantly between members of different racial groups or affect microaggression perceptions. Implications for organizations concerned about promoting more inclusive workplaces are discussed.

When leaders harass: the impact of target perceptions of organizational leadership and climate on harassment reporting and outcomes.

Using cases of harassment by leaders, the authors examined the effects of target perceptions of leader responses to sexual harassment and whether leader implementation of harassment policies made a difference beyond the impact of the policies themselves. Results showed that women who perceived that leaders made honest efforts to stop harassment felt significantly freer to report harassment, were more satisfied with the complaint process, and reported greater commitment than did those viewing leaders as more harassment tolerant. Different leadership levels had different effects, with hierarchically proximal leaders generally having the greatest impact. Leadership mediated the relationship between organizational policy and outcomes, supporting the view that a key role for leaders is establishing an ethical organizational climate that reinforces formal harassment policies through actions.

Supervisor Sex and Subordinate Influence Strategies.

This study explored the beliefs of men and women about what influence strategies they would consider using in a work-related disagreement with their supervisor as a function of their own sex and the sex of their supervisor. Subjects rated the likelihood of their taking each of 40 actions in order to get their own way. As expected, women considered using personal/dependent and negotiation strategies more than men; men considered using coercion/offering rewards for cooperation more than women. In addition, persons considering interaction with a female supervisor reported less likelihood of using reasoning and negotiation strategies and a greater likelihood of withdrawing from conflict than persons with a male supervisor.