van Quaquebeke, N., Graf, M. M., & Brodbeck, F. C. (2007). What do leaders have to live up to? Contrasting the effects of typical versus ideal leader prototypes for the process of leader categorization. Paper presented at the 13th European Congress of Work and Organizational Psychology, Stockholm, SWE, May 9th – 12th.

The notion of leader categorization proposes that the more subordinates perceive a leader to match a cognitive leader prototype the more positive will they respond towards this leader. Yet, it is still unclear which kind of prototype subordinates exactly use in this benchmarking process. Do they match their leaders to a typical leader prototype, that is an image of leaders in general, or is it subordinates' image of an ideal leader that leaders have to live up to? Our study among employees (N = 266) contrasted the

relevance of both prototypes. Participants were given a list of 31 GLOBE leadership attributes and were to indicate in how far they would consider their image of ideal and of typical leaders to represent each attribute. Moreover, participants were to indicate in how far their current leaders represented each attribute. Analyses revealed that the relationship between the degree to which a leader showed leadership attributes and subordinates' responses towards these leaders (measured by respect for the leader and personal identification with the leader) was moderated by subordinates' ideal leader prototype. The higher an ideal image scored on the attributes the more predictive was the current leaders match on the same attributes for subordinates responses towards that leader. The typical leader prototype, on the other hand, did not show this moderating quality.

Consequences for leader categorization research and practical implications are discussed.