The influence of leader humor on relationships between leader behavior and follower outcomes

Journal of Managerial Issues, Summer, 2009 by Robert P. Vecchio, Joseph E. Justin, Craig L. Pearce

The present lack of evidence of an association between follower reports of leader use of humor and follower gender (or of leader gender and the use of humor) is interesting, especially in light of Decker and Rotondo's (2001) earlier study of workplace humor and other prior reports of possible gender differences in the reported appropriateness of the use of humor (cf., Decker, 1986; Martin et al., 2003). However, the pattern of the observed means (Table 5) suggests that the gender similarity-difference of the source of the humor may play a role in reports of a leader's use of humor. (2) Therefore, future research on the topic of workplace humor should be mindful of the possibility that reports of humor may be associated, in a complex manner, with the gender of the leader and follower. Nonetheless, the present finding of only directional support for Hypothesis 4 (predicting that same-gender leader-follower pairs would reveal higher reports of a leader's use of humor) tends to underscore the "gender-similarities perspective" recently offered by Hyde (2005). That is to say, the available empirical evidence does not support the view that the genders are greatly different on most psychological variables (i.e., a "gender-differences" hypothesis) so much as it supports a "gender-similarities" view (where claims of differences are presumed to be suspect unless substantial effect sizes can be demonstrated). Still, the pattern of means in Table 5 is suggestive that humor may be a domain where leaders display different faces to different subordinates (in accordance with the assumption of the leader-member exchange perspective that leaders do not exhibit an "average" or common set of leadership behaviors to all subordinates (see Dansereau et al., 1975; Graen and Uhl-Bien, 1995). Humor may also be a domain where gender differences are somewhat more plausible as evidence of gender differences in aggression are fairly reliable (cf. Hyde, 2005) and humor may, arguably, sometimes be a manifestation of a subtle type of aggression (Martin et al., 2003; Rodrigues and Collinson, 1995).

Managerial Implications

Avolio et al. (1999) proposed that leaders should consider the practical application of humor. Specifically, Avolio and colleagues suggested that an organization's culture may promote the use of humor, or it may consider humor to be inappropriate. In those cultures that are not open to humor or in situations where dramatic changes in the organization or the industry are occurring, high levels of humor may be counter-productive. This may be especially true if humor is tied to contingent rewards. As a proactive measure, organizations may consider encouraging leaders in the use of contingent rewards, honesty/ integrity, and humor, and in identifying the situations and types of employees that may be most open to the use of humor. Demographics and work history may also be factors to consider (e.g., organizational downsizing experiences or personal work situations). When justified, the training of leaders (by instructing them on the value inherent in the use of contingent reward, the importance of integrity, and the use of humor) may offer a further means of opening communication between leaders and followers and thereby enhancing performance.