Jona Krutaj – Leadership and the dynamics of social norms

This thesis examines how leaders drive normative change, foster cooperation in heterogeneous groups, and how shared characteristics influence leaders’ selection. Three experimental studies investigate how leaders influence coordination, cooperation, and adherence to social norms in dynamic vs. static settings. Chapter 1 explores whether leaders can facilitate the abandonment of detrimental norms in societies where members hold different normative preferences. Results indicate that in conservative societies, progressive minorities are unable to overturn established norms without external support. Conversely, while progressive societies are more likely to experience shifts in norms, these changes often come at a high social cost. By coordinating individuals’ expectations, leaders help both types of societies overcome detrimental norms, but the speed of normative change and the welfare outcomes depend on whether leaders align their recommendations with their preferences or those of the majority. Chapter 2 investigates the persistence of leaders’ influence in resolving normative conflicts that emerge in the production of public goods within heterogeneous groups, focusing on redistribution mechanisms. Findings show that most individuals favor a redistributive mechanism that, in exchange for maximum contributions from all group members, promotes reciprocity by redistributing resources from those who benefit most to those less advantaged. While this mechanism ensures both maximum efficiency and fairness in final gains, only a small minority of groups successfully coordinate on this principle without an external coordination device. Through communication, leaders play an important role in aligning beliefs, allowing a majority of groups to maximize efficiency and promote fairness. Chapter 3 examines how shared characteristics with potential candidates influence leaders’ selection, focusing on both competence and political identity. The findings reveal that voters tend to favor candidates who share their political identity, even at the expense of competence. This political identity bias overrides other affinities such as sport or art preferences, demonstrating the powerful influence of political identity on decision-making.