Social Identity Theory at the Charlotte Observer’s Magazine Department

As I mentioned in my last Theories in Action post, Caroline (my boss) is a pro-social leader (other-regarding) rather than a pro-self leader (self-regarding), in the sense that she is a team player rather than a dominant figure. She doesn’t want there to be any major distinction between her position and others’, thus diminishing any room for hierarchy. The social identity theory of leadership states that group membership affects how we perceive ourselves and our role within a group. Caroline is viewed as a “peacemaker” around the office, as she really is so kind and doesn’t assert her dominance when there is conflict within the group. Therefore, this self-realization of her impression among other people in the office might have something to do with why there is no apparent hierarchy present. Perhaps she compares herself and her personality to those of her followers, the other members of the office. Some of my coworkers definitely have a more aggressive personality, like the senior graphic designer who abused the “freedom” Caroline gave her by making executive decisions for a magazine’s layout. I think that Caroline acknowledges that there are more dominant personalities in the workplace, and maybe that’s why she doesn’t necessarily assert herself as a leader, but rather as just another member of the group, because she believes her followers have more stereotypical “leader” traits than she does. And perhaps that is why she assigns more power or freedom to her employees’ positions, because she feels that they “deserve” more power since their personalities are typically associated with that of dominant leaders, unlike her personality.