their response to those attributes (see, for example, Lord and Maher
1990).

How the leader's self-presentation is perceived by followers has
broader ethical and performance consequences. These include obvious
instances of unfairness, self-seeking at others' expense, weakness, vac-
illation, and outright misconduct, all of which detract from the leader's
standing with followers. Emler and Hogan ( 1991) say, "There is no
inbuilt tendency to use power responsibly. You cannot randomly allo-
cate leadership responsibility and expect the interests of justice or
society to be well served. Those in charge have a responsibility to make
moral decisions greater than those they command . . . [and] those dif-
ferences become more consequential the further up the hierarchy one
goes" (p. 86).

Clearly there are ethical challenges in the use of authority and power.
Among these are the destructive effects on the social contract between
the leader and followers. Being a leader allows more influence and
power over others' outcomes and events more broadly. The leader also
has many benefits and privileges, including higher financial rewards
and the freedom to keep at a distance, if desired. But these benefits come
at the price of responsibility and accountability to followers (see Hollander
1978b). Where the leader is seen to be power-oriented, exploit-
ative, and self-serving, especially in the face of failures, the goal of
mutual identification is hardly attainable. Instead, followers may feel
alienated and ultimately take their allegiance elsewhere. That prospect
poses an essential challenge today.

Allport F. H. 1924. Social Psychology. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

Barnard C. I. 1938. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.

-58-