LP762-L2 week 2

KarenS

LP762Notes2.pptx

Home >Psychology homework help >LP762-L2 week 2

WJC LP 762: The Psychology of Leadership and Followership Dr. Dan Jacobs William James College

Notes 2

Overview

Commonalities in leaders (Bennis)

Origins of leadership

Trait Theory/Common Traits Leaders

Characteristics of Managers versus Leaders

Collective Purpose, Exchange Theory & Leadership (Burns)

Leaders and Followers (Burns)

Complexity and Challenges of Leadership

Overview

Understanding the origins of leadership (and leadership theory)

Commonalities in leaders (Bennis)

Origins of leadership

Trait Theory/Common Traits Leaders

Characteristics of Managers versus Leaders

Collective Purpose, Exchange Theory & Leadership (Burns)

Leaders and Followers (Burns)

Complexity and Challenges of Leadership

Commonalities in Leadership

As we go through all of the different readings during the semester you will see that each researcher and each writer will talk about what commonalities (and what differences) are present in prominent or “successful leaders.”

Many comments are intuitive and some are counter-intuitive but either way take it all in with your perspective; there is no such thing as “THE LIST” to assess a “GOOD LEADER” that would work with every person in every situation.

A good leadership consultant is familiar with as many concepts as possible AND she is aware of the CONTEXT at all times (as we already talked about last week).

That being said, here is some interesting information about commonalities seen in leaders (from different sources):

Commonalities in Leaders (per Bennis, 2009)

1. Guiding Vision: “The leader has a clear idea of what he or she wants to do—professionally and personally—and the strength to persist in the face of setbacks, even failures. Unless you know where you’re going, and why, you cannot possibly get there.”

Commonalities in Leaders (per Bennis, 2009)

2. Passion: The leader has an “underlying passion for the promises of life, combined with a very particular passion for a vocation, a profession, a course of action. The leader loves what he or she does and loves doing it…The leader who communicates passion gives hope and inspiration to other people.”

Commonalities in Leaders (per Bennis, 2009)

3. Integrity: “I think there are three essential parts of integrity: self-knowledge, candor, and maturity…

Leaders never lie to themselves, especially about themselves, know their faults as well as their assets, and deal with them directly.

Candor is the key to self-knowledge. Candor is based on honesty of thought and action, a steadfast devotion to principle, and a fundamental soundness and wholeness.

Maturity is important to a leader because leading is not simply showing the way or issuing orders. Every leader needs to have experienced and grown through following—learning to be dedicated, observant, capable of working with and learning from others, never servile, always truthful.”

Commonalities in Leaders (per Bennis, 2009)

3a. Trust: “Integrity is the basis of trust, which is not as much an ingredient of leadership as it is a product. It is the one quality that cannot be acquired, but must be earned. It is given by co-workers and followers, and without it, the leader can’t function.”

Commonalities in Leaders (per Bennis, 2009)

4. Curiosity: “Leaders wonder about everything, want to learn as much as they can, are willing to take risks, experiment, try new things.”

5. Daring: Leaders “do not worry about failures, but embrace errors, knowing they will learn from them. Learning from adversity is another theme that comes up again and again…”

Origins of Leadership

“Even though I talk about basic ingredients, I’m not talking about traits that you’re born with and can’t change…True leaders are not born, but made, and usually self-made. Leaders invent themselves. They are not, by the way, made in a single weekend seminar…

“I would argue that more leaders have been made by accident, circumstance, sheer grit, or will than have been made by all the leadership courses put together.” -Bennis, 2009

Origins of Leadership

“Leadership courses can only teach skills. They can’t teach character or vision—and indeed they don’t even try. Developing character and vision is the way leaders invent themselves.”

“As John Gardner once said, talent is one thing, while its triumphant expression is another. Only when we are fully deployed are we capable of that triumphant expression. Full deployment, engagement, hone and sharpen all of one’s gifts, and ensure that one will be an original, not a copy.” -Bennis, 2009

Common Traits in Leaders

Trait theories of leadership were based on analysis of data connected to successful* and unsuccessful leaders and commonalities were identified and then applied to “new leaders” (from outside the original data set) to evaluate applicability of trait theory as a predictive model.

*How “success” is defined is not always clear (as we talked about last week)

Trait Theories of Leadership

When talking about “traits” of leadership, the discussion can include:

Achievement drive

Charisma

Cognitive ability

Creativity

Emotional maturity

Flexibility

Leadership motivation

Honesty and integrity

Organizational knowledge

Self-confidence

Other: ________________________

Limitations with Trait Theories

For every tool based on trait theories and factors to evaluate “leadership potential” there are exceptions. There can be over 100 traits listed in more complex trait tools and there is a fair amount of subjectivity in evaluating “good” and “successful” leaders.

Howard Gardner’s theories about multiple intelligences are especially relevant here; it does not matter as much if a leader has X or Y trait, it matters is she has X or Y trait AND those traits are relevant to the tasks she faces in her organization or system.

The traits listed above can still be useful, if taken with a “grain of salt” (Burns throws a whole box of salt at them in the reading…)

People in Leadership Roles who Might Not Be Leaders

There are many people in positions of authority who have power over others but that does not necessarily make them leaders (even if they think they are or someone else thinks they are, they may still NOT be a leader).

The most common role we see that fits this description is the (non-leader) Manager.

Leaders versus Managers

“I tend to think of the differences between leaders and managers as the differences between those who master the context and those who surrender to it.”

Managers learn through training; Leaders learn from education. -Bennis, 2009

Leaders versus Managers (Differentiating Actions/Tendencies) (Bennis, 2009)

“The manager administers; the leader innovates.

The manager is a copy; the leader is an original.

The manager maintains; the leader develops.

The manager focuses on systems and structure; the leader focuses on people.

The manager relies on control; the leader inspires trust.

The manager has a short-range view; the leader has a long-range perspective.

Leaders versus Managers

“The manager asks how and when; the leader asks what and why.

The manager has his or her eye always on the bottom line; the leader’s eye is on the horizon.

The manager imitates; the leader originates.

The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.

The manager is the classic good soldier; the leader is his or her own person.

The manager does things right; the leader does the right thing.” -Bennis, 2009

Leaders versus Managers

Bennis’ list is very pithy and sounds great BUT what do WE think about it?

Cheap shots taken at managers or valid points?

What about his comments about the differences in “Education” versus “Training”?

What if WE believe something but our CLIENT does NOT buy in to the concept?

The Need for Self-Invention and Authenticity in Leadership (Bennis, 2009)

“I cannot stress too much the need for self-invention. To be authentic is literally to be your own author…to discover you own native energies and desires, and then to find your own way of acting on them. When you’ve done that, you are not existing simply in order to live up to an image posited by the culture or by some other authority or by a family tradition…

The Need for Self-Invention (cont.)

“When you write your own life, then no matter what happens, you have played the game that was natural for you to play…To become a leader, then, you must become yourself, become the maker of your own life.” -Bennis, 2009

Interesting quote. What does it really mean to us as individuals and to us as potential leadership consultants?

Going from Individual Traits to the Group and System Dynamics

The above slides addressed many of the traits and/or factors we would look for in a leader.

Much of that conversation was a bit isolated or in a vacuum (intentionally as we build our knowledge base) and NOW we need to consider again the CONTEXT and the GROUP needs (or Follower Needs) as they impact the Leader and his/her understanding of the Collective Purpose.

For this discussion we turn to our friend J.M. Burns:

Burns on Leadership and Collective Purpose

Burns (1978) said: “Leadership is the reciprocal process of mobilizing, by persons with certain motives and values, various economic, political, and other resources, in a context of competition and conflict, in order to realize goals independently or mutually held by both leaders and followers. The nature of these goals is crucial…

Leadership and Collective Purpose (Transactional Leadership)

“The nature of these goals is crucial. They could be separate but related; that is, two persons may exchange goods or services or other things in order to realize independent objectives…This is transactional leadership. The object in these cases is not a joint effort for persons with common aims acting for the collective interests of followers but a bargain to aid the individual interests of persons or groups going their separate ways.” –Burns (1978)

Leadership and Collective Purpose (Transformative Leadership)

“Leaders can also shape and alter and elevate the motives and values and goals of followers through the vital teaching role of leadership. This is transforming leadership. The premise of leadership is that, whatever the separate interests persons might hold, they are presently or potentially united in the pursuit of “higher” goals, the realization of which is tested by the achievement of significant change that represents the collective or pooled interests of leaders and followers.” –Burns (1978)

Leadership and Collective Purpose (Transactional and Transformative)

“Both forms of leadership can contribute to human purpose. If the transactions between leaders and followers result in realizing the individual goals of each, followers may satisfy certain wants, such as food or drink, in order to realize goals higher in the hierarchy of values, such as aesthetic needs.” -Burns (1978)

Leadership and Collective Purpose (Transactional and Transformative)

“The chief monitors of transactional leadership are modal values, that is, values of means—honesty, responsibility, fairness, the honoring of commitments—without which transactional leadership could not work.

Transformational leadership is more concerned with end-values, such as liberty, justice, equality. Transforming leaders “raise” their followers up through levels of morality, though insufficient attention to means can corrupt the ends.”-Burns (1978)

Leaders and Followers

“Because our emphasis is on collective purpose and change we stress the factors that unite leaders and followers as well as those that differentiate them.

This distinction may be elusive to an observer who sees leaders leading followers but does not understand that leaders may modify their leadership in recognition of followers’ preferences, or in order to anticipate followers’ responses, or in order to harmonize the actions of both leader and follower with their common motives, values, and goals…

Leaders and Followers

“Leaders and followers are engaged in a common enterprise; they are dependent on each other, their fortunes rise and fall together, they share the results of planned change together.” -Burns (1978)

Leadership Has Many Forms

“Even if we exclude acts of nonleadership from our analysis, we must include an enormous variety and range of actions that in themselves constitute complete leadership acts—that is, the process and achievement of intended change—or that consciously make up significant links in the total process of achieving intended change…

Leadership begins earlier, operates more widely, takes more forms, pervades more sectors of society, and lasts longer in the lives of most persons than has been generally recognized.” –Burns (1978)

Complexity of Leadership

“We have seen that leadership, as we have defined it, is a function of complex biological, social, cognitive, and affective processes, that it is closely influenced by the structures of opportunity and closure around it, that it may emerge at different stages in different peoples’ lives, that it manifests itself in a variety of processes and arenas—in short, we have seen that the usual generalizations are without foundation (or at best only apply to highly specific subcultures).” -Burns (1978)

Q: What?!—Did Burns just say that generalized statements about leadership have limited merit?...

Complexity of Leadership

A: Yep. He did.

Good.

Leadership is a complex topic.

Answers to complex problems or questions will not be simple.

Not every client you work with will like hearing this. Tell them anyway. In the right way. AND still try to help them.

Speed bumps (challenges)

“Leaders constantly come up against the intense, highly structured “situationist ethics” of particular groups and localities. What may seem to some principled leaders to be parochialism, inertia, perversity, or apathy may be, in fact, highly charged leader-follower relationships with their own tradition, structure, logic, and morality.” -Burns (1978)

DBJ: If you are the external consultant trying to help this leader it is crucial that you understand these dynamics.

Speed bumps (Change Opportunities)

“Only with time, determination, conviction, and skill—and with the indispensable element of conflict—can followers be drawn out of these narrower collectivities and into “higher” purpose and principle validated by the most enduring criteria of justice and humanity and forged in an open and continuing conflict of values.” -Burns (1978)

Q: Did Burns just say that conflict is what helps a leader get more in sync with her followers and help her get those followers focused on a higher purpose?

Leaders and Change Opportunities

A: Yep, he did.

Drawing from behaviorism, from systems theory, and from leadership theory (to name just a few), people and systems have a tendency to avoid change.

Even when those involved do not like the current circumstance, they often STILL avoid change.

Leaders and Change Opportunities

Conflict (and this can obviously be defined in many ways) can lead to a “jolt to the system” and a leader who is tuned in to what is going on with followers on an emotional, psychological, and behavioral level can utilize or work with the circumstances of the conflict to bring about (desired and goal-consistent) change. (Other leaders may just promote fear or anger in a similar circumstance).

Risk for Leaders with Simplistic Messages

“Leaders who appeal to followers with simplistic slogans such as Equality, Progress, Liberty, Justice, Order are neither offering a guide to followers on where leaders really stand nor mobilizing followers to seek explicit objectives; they are seeking the widest possible consensus on the basis of the thinnest—or least thoughtful—consensus. They are not acting as leaders as we have defined leadership.

Leaders who act under conditions of conflict within hierarchies of needs and values, however, must act under the necessity of choosing between certain kinds of liberties, equalities, and other end-values. They both exploit purpose and are guided by it.” -Burns (1978)

Other Factors Influencing Leadership

Traits, psychological factors, context, situational stressors, conflict—all important issues that impact how a person becomes a leader and then how she acts once she is in that leadership role.

As we continue to move forward we will continue to explore additional factors that influence this leadership process. We do so next by examining what Dansereau, et al. (2013) have to tell us about the leader-follower dynamic:

Other Factors Influencing Leadership (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“Leadership is generally described as an interpersonal process in which a leader influences followers. For instance, Yukl (2006) defined leadership as “a process whereby intentional influence is exerted by one person over other people to guide, structure, and facilitate activities and relationships in a group or organization” (p. 8).

In most definitions, the basic elements of leadership usually include a leader, a follower, and their relational interactions. While traditional leadership studies mainly focused on why leaders are influential…more recent research has expanded the original theories by placing greater emphasis on how and why followers are willing to be influenced by their leaders…”

Other Factors Influencing Leadership (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“The growing interest in the notion of followership has shed light on the importance of followers within the leader– follower model (Carsten, Uhl-Bien, West, Patera, & McGregor, 2010). In considering the importance of followers to the concept of leadership, we ask which process might be common to followers when they are receptive to a leader, regardless of the traditional leadership theory applicable to the leader's behavior…”

Q: In addition to context how does process relate to leadership?

Trust and Leadership (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“One factor that seems to influence the leader–follower relationship and is relatively universal to leadership theories is trust (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002). Development and maintenance of trust seems to be a key process that underlies many traditional leadership approaches.

Trust is defined as “a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behaviors of others” (Rousseau et al., 1998, p. 395), and it motivates followers to comply with and exhibit commitment to their leaders (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002)…”

Trust and Leadership (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“Trust has been proposed as a critical factor in making leaders respectable and believable, which is likely why transformational leadership works through followers' trust to produce positive outcomes (Podsakoff et al., 1990).

Trust is also one of the defining elements of a high-quality leader–member exchange (Brower, Schoorman, & Tan, 2000). In addition, charismatic leadership often involves trusting a leader from a distance (Shamir, 1995)…”

Psychological Contract & Self-Conception (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“Building on the construct of trust, Rousseau (1995) introduced the concept of psychological contract (PC), which she believes to be a critical factor in the leadership process. PC refers to an unspoken relational contract that involves mutual obligations perceived by both leaders and followers, and is expected to facilitate trust and satisfaction within the relationship (Pillai, Schriesheim, & Williams, 1999).

In addition, Van Knippenberg and associates (2004) proposed that followers are motivated by the fulfillment of self-conception. When leadership is able to promote their self-construal, self-efficacy, and self-esteem, followers are more willing to comply with their leaders…”

Psychological & Relational Distance (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“The trust, PC, and the self-conception perspectives all converge in a research trend that involves scholars exploring characteristics of the leader–follower relationship to explain why followers are committed to their leaders.

From intensely emotional bonds (trust), to mutual obligations (PC), to self-fulfillment, the implication is that leadership emerges when the psychological and relational distance within a leader–follower dyad becomes shorter and the parties draw closer. In addition to the distance within a leader–follower dyad, trust plays a major role in the emergence of leadership and committed followers…”

Q: How could knowing this help us in consulting?

Boundary Conditions & Self-Expansion (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“Previous studies have summarized several boundary conditions for the impact of shared leadership, including the distribution of task competence and the team life cycle (Carson et al., 2007; Pearce & Conger, 2003).

All of these conditions relate, to some extent, to how team members expand their self-identities and rely on others for sharing leadership responsibilities…”

Boundary Conditions & Self-Expansion (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“For instance, shared leadership may be more beneficial to team effectiveness when the team members possess a high level of different task competence (Carson et al., 2007), as the self-expansion processes among the group members may assist them to better utilize the team's internal resources (i.e., a variety of individual expertise).

If the team members have similar expertise, they may be less likely to realize the benefits from self-expansion due to the redundancy of resources, which may decrease the influence of shared leadership…”

Teamwork Capacities & Task Abilities (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“In addition, shared leadership may be more effective when the team life cycle promotes the development of shared leadership (Carson et al., 2007). In the team development model proposed by Kozlowski and associates (2008), for team members to improve their teamwork capacities (i.e., task–role interactions, mutual trust, and cooperation), they must develop task abilities (i.e., individual task mastery and role acceptance).”

Teamwork Capacities & Task Abilities (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“The effectiveness of shared leadership could be mitigated if the team remains at the stage of building task capacities, because at this stage the members still have to develop individual skills and identify their own roles in the team, which provides them no incentive to process self-expansion.

Likewise, a lack of the necessity for task interdependence may result in shared leadership being perceived as a burden rather than as an opportunity for self-expansion.”

Q: Relational model (context) impacting leadership?

Concepts/Models to Know (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

Psychological Contract (PC)

Self-Expansion

Vertical Dyad Linkage (VDL)

The VDL model “describes the process by which a leader and a member develop various behavioral interdependencies between their respective roles”

Leader-Member Exchange (LMX)

“One particular way that LMX is distinct from VDL is in its incorporation of many levels of analysis, whereas VDL remains explicitly at the dyadic within-group level of analysis” and “high-quality LMX tends to relate to positive outcomes, including affective commitment, satisfaction, perceived organizational support, and supervisor effectiveness.”

Overview of Leadership Approaches (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

Group Oriented Leadership

Development Based Leadership

Individual Based Leadership

Vision Based Leadership

Outcome Based Leadership

Organizational Leadership

Non-Leadership

Implications of Leadership Review (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“Assuming empirical support is found for the ideas outlined in this article, a key professional practice implication of these ideas is that no single approach to leadership may work in all managerial situations…

All of the boundary conditions presented here raise serious questions about the universality of all current leadership theories. In turn, training individuals to use a particular approach to leadership in some situations may not result in positive results. Thus, from an applied perspective, the question becomes, which combination might work, and when, to produce self-expansion?...”

Implications of Leadership Review (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“The multiplicity of possible relationships would suggest an eclectic approach be taken in regard to leadership training. For example, instead of viewing transformational leadership as the only way to train individuals to assume leadership roles, the situation of the trainee and characteristics of the trainees themselves would need to be taken into account.

Likewise, although one might like to obtain the theoretical benefits of transformational leadership, one might need to consider which other leadership theories might support a movement in that direction. For example, would a combination of visionary, individualized leadership, and group leadership enhance the effectiveness of training or an intervention?...”

Conclusions & Suggestions (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“The literature on leadership has produced a great deal of information on the effectiveness of leader behaviors, the characteristics of followers, and the elements of the leader–follower relationship.

However, distinct leadership theories remain just that—distinct. Few attempts have been made to unify traditional and contemporary leadership theories to date, although all of the various theories purport to fall under the umbrella of leadership…”

Conclusions & Suggestions (Dansereau, et al., 2013)

“Leadership as a broad term has its own set of definitions, but the process by which leadership emerges and is effective has received little attention beyond the development of new leadership paradigms.

The main contribution of the current work is the introduction of self-expansion as a connection or integrative construct involving traditional and contemporary leadership theories.”

Transformational Leadership: Some Thoughts from Caldwell, et al.

“Transformative leadership is an ethically based leadership model that integrates a commitment to values and outcomes by optimizing the long-term interests of stakeholders and society and honoring the moral duties owed by organizations to their stakeholders…” -Caldwell, et al. (2012)

Transformational Leadership: Some Thoughts from Caldwell, et al.

“Transformative leadership demands a virtuousness that requires both a personal transformation of self…and the ability to reframe how one views the world…” -Caldwell, et al. (2012)

Transformational Leadership: Some Thoughts from Caldwell, et al.

“Transformative leadership rises to the level of ethical stewardship when leaders create integrated organizational systems that add value, enhance lives, benefit society, and honor duties owed to stakeholders by optimizing long-term wealth creation…

When leaders act as ethical stewards they earn the followership that truly effective leadership requires…” -Caldwell, et al. (2012)

Theme of Transformational Leadership

“The theme or major message of transformational leadership is ‘‘In a world that is constantly changing, pursue both the synergistic interests of individual employees and the organization itself.’’

-Caldwell, et al. (2012)

Potential Impact of Transformative Leadership

“Although transformative leadership may be difficult to attain, the ethical standards and commitment to virtuousness of transformative leadership are worthy ideals that can have a profound impact on people and society and produce outstanding results…

As Quinn has observed, today’s organizations need moral leaders with vision, who take risks when taking risks are the right thing to do, and who care passionately about their organizations. ‘‘Most organizations,’’ Quinn concluded, ‘‘have few such people’’ (Quinn 1996).” -Caldwell, et al. (2012)

Theme of Transformational Leadership

“Balancing the interests of the organization and its stakeholders requires focusing on long-term wealth creation and leading in a manner that maximizes employee commitment and trust…” -Caldwell, et al. (2012)

Q: How could awareness of these themes/comments help us in our consulting work?

Q: How does it connect to concepts of authentic leadership (talked about briefly earlier)? Let’s go see what Rego, et al. (2012) have to say:

Feedback Needs to Be Useful

Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity (Rego, et al., 2012)

What is “authentic leadership”?:

“Authentic leadership (AL) is “as a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, and internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development”” (Walumbwa, et al., 2008) and

“AL promotes positive employees’ attitudes and behaviors and contributes to organizational performance.”

The Authentic Leadership Construct

The AL construct is comprised of four dimensions:

(1) Self-awareness

(2) Balanced processing

(3) Internalized moral perspective

(4) Relational transparency -Rego, et al. (2012)

The Authentic Leadership Construct

“ (1) Self-awareness is the degree to which the leader demonstrates an understanding of how (s)he derives and makes sense of the world and is aware of his or her strengths, limitations, how others see him or her, and how (s)he impacts others…” -Rego, et al. (2012)

The Authentic Leadership Construct

“(2) Balanced processing is the degree to which the leader shows that (s)he objectively analyzes the relevant data before coming to a decision and solicits views that challenge deeply held positions…” -Rego, et al. (2012)

The Authentic Leadership Construct

“(3) Internalized moral perspective refers to the degree to which the leader sets a high standard for moral and ethical conduct, guides actions by internal moral standards and values (versus group, organizational, and societal pressures), and expresses decision making and behaviors that are consistent with such internalized values…” -Rego, et al. (2012)

The Authentic Leadership Construct

“(4) Relational transparency is the degree to which the leader presents his/her authentic self (as opposed to a false or distorted self) to others, openly shares information, and expresses his/her true thoughts and feelings, reinforcing a level of openness with others that provides them with an opportunity to be forthcoming with their ideas, challenges, and opinions.” -Rego, et al. (2012)

So What is Authentic Leadership (AL)?

1. Self-awareness

2. Balanced processing

3. Internalized moral perspective

4. Relational transparency

Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity (Rego, et al., 2012)

What is “psychological capital” (AKA PsyCap)?:

“AL predicts employees’ creativity both directly and indirectly through the mediating role of PsyCap…PsyCap is an individual’s positive psychological state of development characterized by:

“(1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks;

(2) making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future…

Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity (Rego, et al., 2012)

What is PsyCap (continued)?

“(3) persevering toward goals, and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) in order to succeed; and

(4) when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back and even beyond (resilience) to attain success” (Luthan, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007)”

So What is Psychological Capital (PsyCap)? (Rego, et al., 2012)

1. Self-efficacy

2. Optimism

3. Hope

4. Resilience

Connections Between PsyCap and Growth?

While “character strengths and virtues are “trait-like” (relatively stable and difficult to change), the PsyCap is “state-like,” and thus relatively malleable and open to development…prior research on hope, resilience, optimism, and efficacy indicate that such personal strength are amenable to development…

PsyCap represents “one’s positive appraisal of circumstances and probability for success based on motivated effort and perseverance”…and predicts “variables such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and work performance.” -Rego, et al. (2012)

Importance of Creativity in the Workplace

“…to survive and prosper, organizations need to take full advantage of their employees’ creative potential, so that innovation, change, learning, performance, and competitiveness can be sustained.

Creativity in the workplace represents the production of novel and useful ideas or solutions concerning products, services, processes, and procedures…

The goal of creative performance is to solve problems, to roll out new products and services, to take advantage of business opportunities, and to improve organizational effectiveness.” -Rego, et al. (2012)

Leadership and Creativity

“Individual creativity is a function of individual and social/contextual factors…

One of the most relevant contextual factors is leadership. Several researchers focus on identifying the role of specific leadership behaviors and leaders' characteristics in supporting, suppressing, facilitating, or inhibiting creativity…” -Rego, et al. (2012)

Leadership and Creativity

“These behaviors include

transformational leadership,

emotional intelligence,

close monitoring,

developmental feedback,

supportive supervision,

controlling supervision,

benevolent leadership,

leader encouragement of creativity,

leader inspirational motivation, and

empowering leadership.” -Rego, et al. (2012)

Characteristics, Attitudes and Creativity

“Studies also focus on employees' characteristics and attitudes that make them more creative. For example, Amabile (1983) suggests domain-relevant skills (knowledge and expertise), creativity-relevant processes (including cognitive styles, cognitive strategies, and personality variables), and task motivation (attitudes and motivation, such as intrinsic motivation) as predictors of creativity. Woodman, Sawyer, and Griffin (1993) model includes personality variables, cognitive factors, intrinsic motivation, and knowledge…” -Rego, et al. (2012)

Characteristics, Attitudes and Creativity

“Ford (1996) includes sense making, motivation, knowledge and ability. According to Egan (2005), the studies identify a consistent number of individual factors associated with individual creativity, including

esthetic sensitivity,

attraction to complexity,

broad interests,

intuition, and

tolerance of ambiguity.” -Rego, et al. (2012)

Findings of “Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity” (Rego, et al., 2012)

This study looked at how “two hundred and one employees report their psychological capital, as well as their supervisors' authentic leadership. Supervisors describe the employees' creativity.

The main findings show that authentic leadership predicts employees' creativity, both directly and through the mediating role of employees' psychological capital.”

Findings of “Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity” (Rego, et al., 2012)

“The study empirically validates theoretical arguments that suggest integrating authentic leadership and psychological capital in research, and indicates that both may foster employees' creativity, a crucial resource for helping organizations to face competitive challenges, take advantage of business opportunities, and improve organizational effectiveness.”

Findings of “Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity” (Rego, et al., 2012)

“Authentic leaders promote employee’s creativity because employees develop higher PsyCap, thus being more creative.”

“The findings also show direct relationship between AL and employees’ creativity, suggesting that other variables/mechanism than PsyCap operate in the process that makes the employees led by authentic leaders more creative.”

Findings of “Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity” (Rego, et al., 2012)

Other possible influence on creativity may come from different variables, including:

Identification with the supervisor

Psychological empowerment

Work engagement

Sense of trust

Feelings of meaningful work

Intrinsic motivation

Positive emotions

Leader-member exchange

Followers’ authenticity