Adaptive leadership theory decouples leadership identities and behaviors from formal leadership roles, proposing that individuals negotiate who leads and who follows through reciprocated leader–follower actions. The present research tests the core tenets of this theory in the context of formal leader–follower dyads. We examine how formal leaders’ and followers’ claiming and granting behaviors are shaped by factors at the individual level (i.e., formal roles, leadership structure schemas (LSSs)), and relational level (i.e., convergence of LSSs, interaction history). We also assess whether reciprocated leadership claims enhance leader identity salience, independent of formal role. Applying a multi-method approach, combining survey-based measures and behavioral interaction coding data from 86 individuals in 43 dyads (4,262 behavioral units), we found that individuals in formal leader roles claimed leadership significantly more frequently than formal followers, yet LSS did not moderate these behaviors. Reciprocated claims and grants were not significantly linked to leader identity salience. However, early interaction patterns were linked to similar behavioral patterns later, underscoring the role of relational history in shaping leadership dynamics. These findings inform our understanding of leader identity construction in formal dyads, clarify the boundary conditions under which adaptive leadership theory applies, and offer practical guidance for fostering co-constructed leadership processes.
ActonB. P.FotiR. J.LordR. G.GladfelterJ. A. (2019). Putting emergence back in leadership emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 145–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.002
2.
AllenJ. A.BeckT.ScottC. W.RogelbergS. G. (2014). Understanding workplace meetings: A qualitative taxonomy of meeting purposes. Management Research Review, 37(9), 791–814. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-03-2013-0067
3.
AntonakisJ.BendahanS.JacquartP.LaliveR. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(6), 1086–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.10.010
4.
AshforthB. E.SchinoffB. S. (2016). Identity under construction: How individuals come to define themselves in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3(1), 111–137. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062322
5.
BaduraK. L.GalvinB. M.LeeM. Y. (2022). Leadership emergence: An integrative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 2069–2100. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000997
6.
BainK.KrepsT. A.MeikleN. L.TenneyE. R. (2021). Amplifying voice in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 64(4), 1288–1312. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.0621
7.
BakemanR.DecknerD. F.QueraV. (2005). Analysis of behavioral streams. In TetiD. M. (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in developmental psychology (pp. 394–429). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
8.
BakemanR.QueraV. (2011). Sequential analysis and observational methods for the behavioral sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139017343
BalesR. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis; a method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley.
11.
BanksG. C.WoznyjH. M.MansfieldC. A. (2023). Where is “behavior” in organizational behavior? A call for a revolution in leadership research and beyond. The Leadership Quarterly, 34(6), 101581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2021.101581
12.
BastardozN.AdriaensenS. (2023). What does it mean to follow? A critique of the followership literature and a conceptual model of the emergence of downward following. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1072800. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1072800
13.
BrownM. E.TreviñoL. K.HarrisonD. A. (2005). Ethical leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.002
14.
CarstenM. K.Uhl-BienM.WestB. J.PateraJ. L.McGregorR. (2010). Exploring social constructions of followership: A qualitative study. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 543–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.015
15.
CazaB. B.MossS.VoughH. (2018). From synchronizing to harmonizing: The process of authenticating multiple work identities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(4), 703–745. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839217733972
16.
ChiuC. Y. C.OwensB. P.TeslukP. E. (2016). Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in teams: The role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance capability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(12), 1705–1720. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000159
17.
CookA.ZillA.MeyerB. (2021). Perceiving leadership structures in teams: Effects of cognitive schemas and perceived communication. Small Group Research, 52(3), 251–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496420950480
DeRueD. S.AshfordS. J. (2010). Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4), 627–647. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.4.zok627
20.
DeRueD. S.NahrgangJ. D.AshfordS. J. (2015). Interpersonal perceptions and the emergence of leadership structures in groups: A network perspective. Organization Science, 26(4), 1192–1209. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0963
21.
EdenD. (2021). The science of leadership: A journey from survey research to field experimentation. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(3), 101472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101472
22.
EpitropakiO.KarkR.MainemelisC.LordR. G. (2017). Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 104–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.003
23.
EpitropakiO.MartinR. (2004). Implicit leadership theories in applied settings: Factor structure, generalizability, and stability over time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(2), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.293
24.
EvansK.SannerB.ChiuC.-Y. (2021). Shared leadership, unshared burdens: How shared leadership structure schema lowers individual enjoyment without increasing performance. Group & Organization Management, 46(6), 1027–1072. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601121997225
GüntnerA. V.MeineckeA. L.LüdersZ. E. K. (2023). Interaction coding in leadership research: A critical review and best-practice recommendations to measure behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 34(6), 101751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2023.101751
27.
HammondM. M.ThrasherG.LesterG. V. (2025). A systematic review of the leader identity research: A road map for the rigorous study and advancement of leader identity. Organizational Psychology Review, 15(3), 321–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866251351752
28.
HayesA. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from: http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
29.
Hemshorn de SanchezC. S.GerpottF. H.Lehmann-WillenbrockN. (2022). A review and future agenda for behavioral research on leader–follower interactions at different temporal scopes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(2), 342–368. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2583
30.
Hemshorn de SanchezC. S.MangelsJ.DegnerJ.Lehmann-WillenbrockN. (2025). Understanding emergent leader–follower patterns and the role of gender in teams: A micro-temporal account. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 46(2), 314–333. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-09-2023-0537
31.
HoffmanE. L.LordR. G. (2013). A taxonomy of event-level dimensions: Implications for understanding leadership processes, behavior, and performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(4), 558–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.03.009
32.
JohnsonH.WuW.ZhangY.LyuY. (2024). Ideas endorsed, credit claimed: Managerial credit claiming weakens the benefits of voice endorsement on future voice behavior through respect and work group identification. Human Relations, 77(5), 709–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267 231156791
33.
KatzD.KahnR. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
34.
KelemenT. K.MatthewsS. H.BreevaartK. (2020). Leading day-to-day: A review of the daily causes and consequences of leadership behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), 101344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101344
35.
KellyJ. R.DvirM.ParsonsD. M. (2018). TEMPO—A time-based system for analysis of group interaction process. In BraunerE.BoosM.KolbeM. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of group interaction analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286302
36.
KeytonJ. (2018). Interaction analysis: An introduction. In BraunerE.BoosM.KolbeM. (Eds.), The cambridge handbook of interaction analysis (pp. 3–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316286302
37.
KrasikovaD. V.LeBretonJ. M. (2019). Multilevel measurement: Agreement, reliability, and non-independence. In HumphreyS. E.LeBretonJ. M. (Eds.), The handbook of multilevel theory, measurement, and analysis (pp. 279–304). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000115-013
38.
LeBretonJ. M.SenterJ. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642
39.
Lehmann-WillenbrockN. (2025). Dynamic interpersonal processes at work: Taking social interactions seriously. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 12, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110622-035421
40.
Lehmann-WillenbrockN.AllenJ. A. (2018). Modeling temporal interaction dynamics in organizational settings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(3), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9506-9
41.
Lehmann-WillenbrockN.MeineckeA. L.RowoldJ.KauffeldS. (2015). How transformational leadership works during team interactions: A behavioral process analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 26(6), 1017–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.07.003
42.
LightR. J. (1971). Measures of response agreement for qualitative data: Some generalizations and alternatives. Psychological Bulletin, 76(5), 365–377. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031643
43.
LiuZ.VenkateshS.MurphyS. E.RiggioR. E. (2021). Leader development across the lifespan: A dynamic experiences-grounded approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(5), 101382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101382
44.
LloydB. P.YoderP. J.TappJ.StaubitzJ. L. (2016). The relative accuracy and interpretability of five sequential analysis methods: A simulation study. Behavior Research Methods, 48(4), 1482–1491. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0661-5
45.
LonatiS.QuirogaB. F.ZehnderC.AntonakisJ. (2018). On doing relevant and rigorous experiments. Review and Recommendations. Journal of Operations Management, 64(1), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2018.10.003
46.
LordR. G.BrownD. J. (2004). Leadership processes and follower self-identity. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
47.
LordR. G.EpitropakiO.FotiR. J.HansbroughT. K. (2020). Implicit leadership theories, implicit followership theories, and dynamic processing of leadership information. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 7, 49–74. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012119-045434
48.
LordR. G.GattiP.ChuiS. L. (2016). Social-cognitive, relational, and identity-based approaches to leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.03.001
49.
LordR. G.MaherK. J. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. London, England: Unwin Hyman.
50.
LührmannT.EberlP. (2007). Leadership and identity construction: Reframing the leader–follower interaction from an identity theory perspective. Leadership, 3(1), 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715007073070
MarchiondoL. A.MyersC. G.KopelmanS. (2015). The relational nature of leadership identity construction: How and when it influences perceived leadership and decisionmaking. Leadership Quarterly, 26(5), 892–908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.06.006
53.
McCauleyC. D.PalusC. J. (2020). Developing the theory and practice of leadership development: A relational view. The Leadership Quarterly, 32, 101456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101456
54.
McCleanS. T.BarnesC. M.CourtrightS. H.JohnsonR. E. (2019). Resetting the clock on dynamic leader behaviors: A conceptual integration and agenda for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 479–508. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0081
55.
MeadG. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
56.
MeindlJ. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as a follower-centric theory: A social constructionist approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(3), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90012-8
57.
MeineckeA. L.KauffeldS. (2019). Engaging the hearts and minds of followers: Leader empathy and language style matching during appraisal interviews. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34(4), 485–501https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9554-9
58.
MeineckeA. L.Lehmann-WillenbrockN.KauffeldS. (2017). What happens during annual appraisal interviews? How leader–follower interactions unfold and impact interview outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1054–1074. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000219
59.
MeyerR. D.DalalR. S.HermidaR. (2010). A review and synthesis of situational strength in the organizational sciences. Journal of Management, 36(1), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309349309
60.
NieberleK. W.ActonB. P.BraunS.LordR. G.FuY. (2024). Leader identity on the fly: Intra-personal leader identity dynamics in response to strong events. Journal of Business and Psychology, 39(3), 755–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-023-09906-7
61.
NieberleK. W.FladererM. P. (2025). Voice echoes: A critical review and future research agenda on the consequences of employee voice for voicers, their co-workers, and managers. Organizational Psychology Review, 15(2), 209–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866251317929
62.
NieberleK. W.SchynsB.KuonathA.FreyD. (2024). When identification with your group matters: Leader consultation in response to constructive follower voice. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 33(6), 759–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2024.2392901
63.
OcB.ChintakanandaK.BashshurM. R.DayD. V. (2023). The study of followers in leadership research: A systematic and critical review. The Leadership Quarterly, 34(1), 101674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2022.101674
64.
PalanskiM. E.ThomasJ. S.HammondM. M.LesterG. V.Clapp-SmithR. (2021). Being a leader and doing leadership: The cross-domain impact of family and friends on leader identity and leader behaviors at work. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 28(3), 273–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518211005452
65.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.MoormanR. H.FetterR. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7
66.
PodsakoffP. M.PodsakoffN. P. (2019). Experimental designs in management and leadership research: Strengths, limitations, and recommendations for improving publishability. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.11.002
67.
PrattM. G.RockmannK. W.KaufmanJ. B. (2006). Constructing professional identity: The role of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity among medical residents. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 235–262. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20786060
68.
RalonA.RothenbergJ.OdehG.TurneyM.WuY. (2021). How followers contribute to team success, leadership transformation and organizational excellence. Journal of International Business and Management, 4(12), 01–07. https://doi.org/10.37227/JIBM-2021-11-1476
SiewekeJ.SantoniS. (2020). Natural experiments in leadership research: An introduction, review, and guidelines. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), 101338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101338
71.
SimsR.WeinbergF. J. (2024). More than follow the leader: Expectations, behaviors, stability, and change in a co-created leadership process. Group & Organization Management, 49(2), 332–364. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011221093456
72.
StrykerS.BurkeP. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63(4), 284–297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2695840
TepperB. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812
75.
ThrasherG. R.HammondM. M.Biermeier-HansonB. (2025). (In)Congruence in claims and grants and multi-domain leader identity: A response surface modeling test of multi-domain leader identity construction theory. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 32(3), 270–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518251332976
76.
Uhl-BienM.CarstenM. K.NewsteadT. (2025). Toward construct clarity in followership research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 13(1), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-110622-040329
77.
Uhl-BienM.RiggioR. E.LoweK. B.CarstenM. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.007
78.
Van DyneL.AngS.BoteroI. C. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00384
79.
WallaceD. M.TorresE. M.ZaccaroS. J. (2021). Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader and leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(5), 101494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101494
80.
WeickK. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
81.
WellmanN.AshfordS. J.Sanchez-BurksJ.DeRueD. S. (2022). Leading when the boss is present: How leadership structure schemas affect leadership behavior. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 29(3), 249–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518221076767
82.
WellmanN.MayerD. M.OngM.DeRueD. S. (2016). When are do-gooders treated badly? Legitimate power, role expectations, and reactions to moral objection in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(6), 793–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000094
83.
WilsonE.DeaneyR. (2010). Changing career and changing identity: How do teacher career changers exercise agency in identity construction?Social Psychology of Education, 13(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-010-9119-x
84.
XuA. J.LoiR.CaiZ. (2023). Not threats, but resources: An investigation of how leaders react to employee constructive voice. British Journal of Management, 34(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12581
85.
XuA. J.LoiR.CaiZ.LidenR. C. (2019). Reversing the lens: How followers influence leader–member exchange quality. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(3), 475–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12268
86.
YuklG. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(4), 66–85. 10.5465/amp.2012.0088
87.
YuklG.GordonA.TaberT. (2002). A hierarchical taxonomy of leadership behavior: Integrating a half century of behavior research. Journal of leadership & organizational studies, 9(1), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/10717919020090010
88.
ZhangZ.WaldmanD. A.WangZ. (2012). A multilevel investigation of leader-member exchange, informal leader emergence, and individual and team performance. Personnel Psychology, 65(1), 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01238.x
