Toward a Theory of Individual Differences and Leadership: Understanding the Motivation to Lead

Abstract

A broad, multivariate and integrative theoretical framework for understanding the relationship between individual differences and various leader behaviors is presented; it proposes a new individual differences construct called the Motivation to Lead (MTL). A large-scale study employing three samples in different occupational and cultural contexts (i.e., 1594 Singapore military employing three samples in different occupational and cultural contexts (i.e., 1594 Singapore military recruits, 274 Singapore Junior College students, and 293 American College students) is conducted to develop measures of MTL, to model the antecedents to MTL, and to demonstrate the predictive validity of the MTL measures in relation to relevant leadership behaviors. The results show that MTL can be conceptualized and measured in terms of three correlated factors, namely, Affective/Identity MTL, Non-calculative MTL, and Social-normative MTL. Using a data-driven hierarchical regression modeling approach, consistencies in the patterns of antecedents to each of the three MTL factors are observed that are reasonable and theoretically justifiable. A revised, parsimonious model is developed from the findings of the regression analyses, and then tested in a cross-validation effort using confirmatory latent variable modeling. Confirmatory modeling shows that the revised model not only fits the data well, but is also parsimonious relative to a general model with all possible paths from distal antecedents to MTL. Leadership self-efficacy and past experience are also showed to mediate the relationship between various distal antecedents and the MTL factors. Cross-validation shows that the empirically derived model did not capitalize on chance. Finally, a predictive validity study shows that MTL is not only highly related to two different relevant leader behavioral criteria, it provides incremental validity over other predictors such as general cognitive ability, values, personality and attitudes. The findings are discussed with reference to the theoretical framework proposed for understanding the role of individual differences in leader behavior.