Economic Costs of Workplace Exclusion: Implicit Leadership Anti-Prototype Traits in IT Teams

  • Authors

    • Sudarshan S Research Scholar, Faculty of Management, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, India
    • Priya Xavier Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, India
    https://doi.org/10.14419/mq3me038

    Received date: September 19, 2025

    Accepted date: October 6, 2025

    Published date: October 19, 2025

  • Workplace; Leadership; Team performance; Anti-prototype; IT Industry

  • Abstract

    Workplace exclusion remains a pervasive yet underexplored challenge in the information technology (IT) sector, where technically skilled employees are central to digital transformation and organizational competitiveness. While prior studies have primarily examined exclusion as a social or psychological phenomenon, this research investigates how implicit leadership anti-prototypical traits, such as quietness, sensitivity, and low dominance, contribute to exclusion and its consequences for team performance. Drawing on a cross-sectional survey of IT professionals, structural equation modeling was employed to test the mediating roles of psychological safety and team identification and the moderating influence of project complexity. Findings reveal that exclusion significantly reduces team performance by undermining psychological safety and team identification, with effects amplified under high project complexity. Importantly, the study extends current literature by connecting exclusion not only to behavioral outcomes but also to economic costs, including productivity losses, turnover, and inefficiencies, as well as governance challenges related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting. Theoretical contributions lie in bridging psychological and economic perspectives on exclusion, while practical implications highlight the need for IT organizations to develop inclusive leadership practices, systematically monitor exclusion risks, and align human capital strategies with performance and governance objectives.

  • References

    1. Aguinis, H. (2019). Performance management for dummies. John Wiley & Sons.
    2. Bersin, J. (2022). Cost of turnover and ways to retain employees. Insight Executive Search. https://www.insightexecutivesearch.com/cost-of-turnover-and-ways-to-retain-employees/
    3. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
    4. Curtis, R. J. (2013). A study of implicit leadership theories among business and management undergraduates. [PDF]. University of Gloucestershire.
    5. De Smet, A., Rubenstein, K., Schrah, G., Vierow, M., & Edmondson, A. (2021). Psychological safety and the critical role of leadership develop-ment. McKinsey and Company, February, 11.
    6. De Veer, R. (2012). Exploring the moderating effect of task interdependence on the relationship between team autonomy and team effectiveness (Doctoral dissertation, Master Thesis. Tilburg University).
    7. EasyLlama. (2024). How to prevent discrimination in the workplace: The best tips for employers. https://www.easyllama.com/blog/prevent-discrimination-in-the-workplace
    8. Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
    9. Epitropaki, O., & Martin, R. (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
    10. Exude, Inc. (2025). Exclusion in the workplace: Signs, examples & more.
    11. Ferris, D. L., Brown, D. J., Berry, J. W., & Lian, H. (2008). The development and validation of the Workplace Ostracism Scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1348–1366. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012743
    12. Gallup. (2017). This fixable problem costs U.S. businesses $1 trillion. Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/247391/fixable-problem-costs-businesses-trillion.aspx
    13. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
    14. Hesmert, K. S., van Gils, S., & Epitropaki, O. (2023). Espoused implicit leadership and followership theories and leader-follower relationships. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 10206136.
    15. Kim, M. (2020). How psychological safety affects team performance: Mediating role of behavioral integration. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1581. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01581
    16. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., Schaufeli, W. B., de Vet, H. C. W., & van der Beek, A. J. (2013). Development of an indi-vidual work performance questionnaire. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 62(1), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410401311285273
    17. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
    18. Liang, J., Greguras, G. J., McAllister, D. J., & To, M. L. (2022). Leader’s implicit followership and employees’ innovative behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 9161151. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.9161151
    19. Lisak, A., Harush, R., Icekson, T., & Harel, S. (2022). Team interdependence as a substitute for empowering leadership contribution to team mean-ingfulness and performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 637822.
    20. Luo, J. (2023). A meta-analysis of workplace exclusion on employee work outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1280074. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1280074
    21. Mael, F. A., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Jour-nal of Organizational Behavior, 13(2), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202
    22. Michael Page. (2024). How to handle exclusion in the workplace. https://www.michaelpage.com.au/advice/management-advice/how-handle-exclusion-workplace
    23. Review.jobs. (2024). Strategies to prevent workplace exclusion. https://review.jobs/blog/exclusion-at-work-signs-and-strategies-to-combat-it/
    24. Santana, B., Monte, L., de Araújo Silva, B. S., Carneiro, G., Freire, S., Santos, J. A. M., & Mendonça, M. (2025). Psychological safety in software workplaces: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 107838.
    25. Shahid, S., Sajjad, M., & Ahmed, W. (2024). Task interdependence, team identity, and team performance. SAGE Open, 14(1), 21582440241237874.
    26. Society for Human Resource Management. (2017). Human capital benchmarking report. SHRM. https://www.payscale.com/compensation-trends/cost-losing-employees
    27. Sy, T. (2010). What do you think of followers? Examining the content, structure, and consequences of implicit followership theories. Organization-al Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 113(2), 73–84.
    28. Sy, T., & van Knippenberg, D. (2020). Leadership and diversity: Leading diverse teams and organizations. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(3), 101364.
    29. Sy, T., Cote, S., & Saavedra, R. (2005). The contagious leader: Impact of the leader's mood on the mood of group members, group affective tone, and group processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 295–305.
    30. Vilnius Tech. (2023). A meta-analytic review of project complexity and team performance. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 29(5), 587–604.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    S, S., & Xavier , P. . (2025). Economic Costs of Workplace Exclusion: Implicit Leadership Anti-Prototype Traits in IT Teams. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(6), 745-751. https://doi.org/10.14419/mq3me038