LP762-L2 WEEK 7
KarenS
LP762Notes7.pptxWJC LP 762: The Psychology of Leadership and Followership Dr. Dan Jacobs William James College
Notes 7
1
Leaders and Systems
Leadership in Context
Strengths and limitations
Opportunities
Gender and leadership
2
Communication and the System
As explored last week, issues of trust (cognitive and affective) are closely intertwined with issues of relationship dynamics between leaders and followers, as well as the different ways that trust is fostered in a system (the context).
Understanding how the leader communicates (the type or style) is very important in understanding a system as well.
Understanding how the follower communicates with the leader, and with other followers, is equally important.
3
Leadership in Context
“Clearly, to become a true leader, one must know the world as well as one knows one’s self. A variety of studies, as well as the lives of the leaders I talked with, demonstrates that certain kind of experiences are especially significant for learning. These experiences include broad and continuing education, idiosyncratic families, extensive travel and/or exile, a rich private life, and key associations with mentors and groups.” -Bennis (2009)
Effective leaders are not in a bubble or a vacuum, they are aware of and a part of their context.
4
Leadership in Context: Innovative Learning (Bennis, 2009)
Successful leaders are aware of the greater context and they are open to innovative learning which includes the following components:
1. “Anticipation: being active and imaginative rather than passive and habitual.”
2. “Learning by listening to others.”
3. “Participation: shaping events, rather than being shaped by them.”
5
Leadership in Context: Innovative Learning (Bennis, 2009)
“Obviously, then, innovative learning requires that you trust yourself, that you be self-directed rather than other-directed in both your life and your work. If you learn to anticipate the future and shape events rather than being shaped by them you will benefit in significant ways.”
Q: So what does this say about the leader in relation to his/her greater system in terms of being proactive or reactive?
6
Leadership Communication: Strengths and Weaknesses
Successful leaders are open to innovative learning as stated above; they also benefit from strong awareness of interpersonal communication styles, strengths and weaknesses.
“In interpersonal communication, the major emphasis is on transferring information from one person to another. Communication is looked on as a basic method of effecting behavioral change, and it incorporates the psychological processes (perception, learning, and motivation) on the one hand and language on the other. However, it must be noted that the explosion of advanced information technology is also having an impact on this human interaction process.” -Luthans (2010)
7
How do leaders communicate?
“In interpersonal communication, knowing how to talk to others can be very useful. One communication expert noted that when communicating with the boss, it is important to understand his or her preferred communication style. Here are some examples:
1. The Director: This person has a short attention span, processes information very quickly, and is interested only in the bottom line. So it is best to present this type of manager* with a bulleted list of conclusions and forget all of the background information.” -Luthans (2010)
*DBJ: While Luthans is using the word “Manager” here, I believe there is applicability to our studies of “Leaders” as well.
8
How do leaders communicate?
2. “The Free Spirit: This manager is a creative, big-picture type of person who likes to consider alternative approaches to doing things, but is not very good on follow-through. In communicating with this type of manager it is important to be patient and to be prepared for changes in direction. The manager often likes to assimilate what he or she is being told and to consider several alternatives before making a decision.”
9
How do leaders communicate?
3. “The Humanist: This manager likes everyone to be happy and is very concerned with the feelings of others. So any suggestions or recommendations that are given to him or her will be passed around the entire department for full consensus before any action is taken. In dealing with this type of manager, patience and tact are very important.” -Luthans (2010)
10
How do leaders communicate?
4. “The Historian: This manager likes to know the whole picture and thrives on details. This individual wants to be given a thorough analysis and background information, especially if it is presented in linear fashion. This type of manager does not jump from subject to subject, but instead remains focused on the topic under consideration until it has been exhaustively reviewed and a decision is made.” -Luthans (2010)
11
Communication and Leaders
Other factors that can influence the interpersonal aspects of communication for leaders and the leader-follower dynamic include:
Feedback
Trust
Expectations
Values
Status
Compatibility
Perceptions of the leader -Luthans (2010)
DBJ: What do we think about these examples/styles?
12
The Art of Communication
Communication and the System
As with other leadership factors there are the ongoing questions of:
What is inherent?
What is learned?
What is the leader’s communication style?
What are her other strengths and weaknesses?
What can be taught?*
(*Let’s see what Kellerman has to say on this one…)
14
Leading in Time (Kellerman, 2012)
“Can leadership—can learning how to lead—be taught?
“The truth is, we don’t know. We don’t know if learning how to lead wisely and well can be taught, for the objective evidence is scant…but regardless, the long tradition that Confucius began continues to this day—the tradition of teaching leading…”
15
Leading in Time: Leader as Role Model (Kellerman, 2012)
“Confucius assumed that a man or even a boy could be taught to lead, so long as his teacher was older and wiser, a sage or a master, and so long as he, the pupil was apt to profit from the instruction. Confucius was himself an inveterate teacher. When one of his students, a lord, asked, “What should I do in order to make the people respectful, loyal, and zealous?” Confucius replied, “Approach them with dignity and they will be respectful. Be yourself a good son and a kind father, and they will will be loyal. Raise the good and train the incompetent, and they will be zealous.”
16
Leading in Time: Time Frame for Training (Kellerman, 2012)
“Evident even from this small sample is that learning to lead has been historically thought to take years, not months, and certainly not days; that learning to lead has been historically thought to entail expanding the mind, not contracting it by concentrating on one area of study, or one organization or institution in particular; that learning to lead has been historically thought to apply to the few, not the many; and that learning to lead has, for millennia, been considered to be critically important.”
17
Leadership in the 21st Century
Leadership education in the 21st century “divides into two categories: leadership education for the purpose of learning how to lead, and leadership education for the purpose of learning about leadership.”
Learning how to lead is more common and more profitable and focuses more on practice rather than on theory. -Kellerman (2012)
18
What Should Be Learned When Learning to Lead? (Kellerman, 2012)
Skill Development: “Leaders should develop certain skills, such as communication skills, negotiating skills, and decision-making skills.”
Acquisition of Awareness: “Leaders should acquire awareness, in particular self-awareness.”
Experience: “Leaders should have experience in…mobilizing and managing.”
Morals: “Leaders should learn the difference between right and wrong.”
19
Leadership in Context
“Given that leaders now are weaker than before, and given that followers now are stronger, does it still make sense to develop” leadership programs “as leader-centric?... Does it make sense to develop leaders primarily in ways that are situation-specific? Isn’t it obvious that twenty-first-century solutions to twenty-first-century problems mandate transcending the groups and organizations, the sectors and nations, of which most obviously we are members?” -Kellerman, 2012
Q: How important is context in this passage?
20
Leadership Pedagogies Review: Differences, Similarities & Contexts
Kellerman (2012) on the review of leadership pedagogies in The Handbook for Teaching Leadership, edited by Snook, et al. (2011):
“Most of the pedagogies are leader-centric. This seems a given—after all this is a handbook for teaching leadership. But as I have argued all along implicitly or explicitly, the model, the fundamental model based on the leader at the center, is wrong. Leader-centrism no longer explains, if it ever did, the way the world works.”
21
Leadership Pedagogies Review: Differences, Similarities & Contexts
“Most of the pedagogies are oblivious to the fact that followers matter. Why?
First, because most of the pedagogies were developed in schools of business, where followers matter even less than they do in schools of government;
second, because as indicated, there is a lot of money to be made in developing leaders, and not a lot of money to be made in developing followers; and
third, most important, because followers are still considered inconsequential. But as we know full well by now, followers, matter. They cannot then, must not then, be excluded from the learning process.”
-Kellerman (2012) on the review of leadership pedagogies in The Handbook for Teaching Leadership, edited by Snook, et al. (2011)
22
Leadership Pedagogies Review: Differences, Similarities & Contexts
“Most of the pedagogies are concerned only with maximizing good leadership, as opposed to minimizing bad leadership, an imbalance that can be explained only if you follow the money. Again, there is good money to be made teaching how to be a good leader; there is no money to be made teaching how to stop or slow a bad one. Still, a rough equivalent can be drawn to teaching medical students everything they should know about maintaining good health while teaching them nothing they should know about eliminating bad health—about how to remedy what ails us. The first is important but so, equally, is the second.” -Kellerman (2012) on the review of leadership pedagogies in The Handbook for Teaching Leadership, edited by Snook, et al. (2011)
23
Leadership Pedagogies Review: Differences, Similarities & Contexts
“Most of the pedagogies assume that good leadership can be taught, with little or no objective evidence to support the assumption. To be sure, the idea that leadership can be taught has been around since time immemorial. But one is struck by the fact that in the twenty-first century the leadership industry is still so bereft of empirical evidence to confirm or disconfirm whatever the pedagogical assumptions. This lack of hard evidence leaves unanswered the question of how exactly leader teachers should decide what exactly to teach leader learners.” -Kellerman (2012) on the review of leadership pedagogies in The Handbook for Teaching Leadership, edited by Snook, et al. (2011)
24
Leadership Pedagogies Review: Differences, Similarities & Contexts
“Most of the pedagogies have a constrained rather than expansive conception of context. To be sure, references to context are made in several place throughout The Handbook for Teaching Leadership. But in part because of the way leader learning is structured—invariably the instruction is relatively short in duration and usually the presumption is that one size fits all—context is usually treated hastily and superficially rather than over time and in depth.” -Kellerman (2012) on the review of leadership pedagogies in The Handbook for Teaching Leadership, edited by Snook, et al. (2011)
25
Three Different Leadership Training Programs: Context & Efficacy
Goldman Sachs: “Given its enormous investment in leadership development, how did Goldman get into so much trouble? (In 2011, its stock price declined precipitously). To which I would reply, how could it not? How, given its limited purpose, maximizing profit, can any in-house leadership program provide its participants with the broadly based, objectively grounded learning experience that is required for leadership writ large, as opposed to leadership writ small?” -Kellerman (2012)
26
Three Different Leadership Training Programs: Context & Efficacy
General Electric: “GE is often cited as having the best corporate leadership development program—best so far as its own corporate interests are concerned…Of course, just as Goldman’s leadership initiative is open to question—is good leadership tantamount only to good earnings and, if yes, should it be?—so is GE’s. On the one hand…GE develops more leaders than other companies and more, in fact, than GE itself can usefully absorb. On the other hand is GE’s performance, which was lambasted in recent years from being an “investor disaster” to favoring ventures in China to having a business model that is “broken” and a CEO…Jeffrey Immelt, who is unable to fix it.”
Q: Flaws in Kellerman’s criticisms? -Kellerman (2012)
27
Three Different Leadership Training Programs: Context & Efficacy
IBM: IBM “was in the business of leadership development before leadership development became the rage…the company was known for providing its people with experiences in lifelong learning, including, of course, learning how to lead.” One IBM project (The Global CEO Study, 2008) “addressed the question of how leaders can equip employees with the expertise and experience they need in today’s global environment. It concluded that twenty-first-century leaders require a new set of leadership competencies, which put a premium on communicating and mutual understating*.” -Kellerman (2012)
DBJ: *Typo? I am pretty sure “understating” should be “understanding.”
28
Three Different Leadership Training Programs: Context & Efficacy
“Obviously companies such as Goldman, GE, and IBM take leadership development seriously—very seriously. However, just as obviously they all fixate on leaders (and managers) to the effective exclusion of nearly everyone else, and they fixate on themselves, that is, on their companies, to the effective exclusion of near everything else…This leader-centrism combined with this situational specificity permeates the private sector particularly, and it permeates the leadership industry more generally, even in the twenty-first century.” -Kellerman (2012)
29
Questioning Leadership Industry Assumptions (Kellerman, 2012)
Kellerman (2012) believes the following Leadership Industry assumptions exacerbate “America’s leadership crisis”:
1. “That notwithstanding the ostensibly flattened hierarchy, leaders are where the action is.”
2. “That the wider world (larger context) matters only insofar as it pertains to the narrower one (smaller context).”
3. “That so far as the private sector is concerned one criterion is paramount—financial performance.”
4. “That leadership is a profession for which a professional education is optimal.”
30
Questioning Leadership Industry Assumptions (Kellerman, 2012)
5. “That leadership can be taught to virtually anyone and everyone and that leadership can be taught, simultaneously, to large numbers of different people in different situations.”
6. “That leadership can be learned quickly and easily, as opposed to slowly and carefully.”
7. “That leadership should be taught in silos—for example in different professional schools for different professional audiences.”
8. “That leadership can be codified and summarized and packaged.”
31
Questioning Leadership Industry Assumptions (Kellerman, 2012)
9. “That the only thing worth learning is that which obviously is applicable—because that which is not obviously applicable is not relevant.”
10. “That leadership is all-important and followership is unimportant.”
11. “That good leadership is all-important and bad leadership is unimportant.”
12. “That patterns of dominance and deference change only slightly over time and, at that, only over long periods of time.”
32
Questioning Kellerman’s Questions
Of the Leadership Industry questions that Kellerman raises (1-12 listed above), are there any that you disagree with as being problematic (do you have questions about her questions)?
What thoughts do you have about the fact that Kellerman is a highly paid leadership industry researcher and consultant who (in this book at least) is extremely critical of the leadership industry?
33
IBM Global CEO Study 2012
So Kellerman’s possible (“understating” instead of “understanding”) typo got me curious to go back to the source, the actual IBM study she was referencing, and I found the relatively more current “IBM Global CEO Study 2012” which had some interesting information relevant to our conversation.
Remember: If something gets your attention, follow it; paying attention to outliers and creative sparks or “odd ducks” can prove useful (in direct work, and in consulting).
34
“Empowering Employees Through Values”
“For CEOs, organizational openness offers tremendous upside potential— empowered employees, free-flowing ideas, more creativity and innovation, happier customers, better results. But openness also comes with more risk. As rigid controls loosen, organizations need a strong sense of purpose and shared beliefs to guide decision making. Teams will need processes and tools that inspire collaboration on a massive scale. Perhaps most important, organizations must help employees develop traits to excel in this type of environment.” -IBM Global CEO Study 2012
35
“Engaging Customers as Individuals”
“The pursuit of customer knowledge is as old as business itself, but where and how those insights are found and used are radically changing. To effectively engage an individual consumer, client or citizen, organizations must weave together insights about the whole person — from sources they likely haven’t consulted in the past. They will need stronger analytics capabilities to uncover patterns and answer questions they never thought to ask. Client-facing staff and channels must be equipped to act on those insights. And since customers are increasingly mobile, organizations must be active there too, ready to engage in the context of the moment.” -IBM Global CEO Study 2012
36
“Amplifying Innovation with Partnerships”
“Rising complexity and escalating competition have made partnering a core innovation strategy for many organizations. But to enable sustained, fruitful innovation partnerships, organizations will need deeper, more integrated relationships. Partnering organizations will have to share collaborative environments, share data — and share control. And even when the organization is performing well, CEOs must occasionally break from the status quo and introduce new external catalysts, unexpected partners and some intentionally disruptive thinking.” -IBM Global CEO Study 2012
37
“CEO Reality: No New Normal”
“Six years. That is the average time-in-role of the CEOs and public sector leaders we interviewed for this Global CEO Study. During that time, these leaders have experienced the full spectrum of economic volatility — booms, dips and financial disintegration.
Although battle-tested, these CEOs are still concerned about the economy. Shakeups like the European financial crises are felt worldwide. And mature markets are grappling as high-growth economies shift attention from manufacturing for export to capturing domestic markets. Contending with such a remarkable range of economic risks, CEOs are becoming increasingly accustomed to volatility. They simply expect unpredictability. For them, there is no “new normal.” As one U.S. government agency leader told us flatly, “There isn’t a single day I come into work when I know what will happen.” Unable to control or even anticipate economic outcomes, these CEOs have shifted their focus elsewhere.” -IBM Global CEO Study 2012
38
Top Three Factors Impacting Systems
In the IBM Global CEO Study (2012) the respondents rated their level of concern about all of the external factors that could impact their organizations/systems. The top 3 were:
1. Technology factors
2. People skills
3. Market factors
Since 2004, People Skills and Market Factors have been in the top 3 or 4 spots; Technology Factors was in the 6th spot in 2004 but has steadily been moving up and now occupies the top spot (of perceived concerns by CEO’s).
Q: How does this information help us in our work with leaders?
39
IBM Study and Context
The CEOs responded to the survey based on their own real-world experiences and they talked about the skills needed, and challenges faced, by leaders (in the global corporate world) in the 21st century.
The way that technology has increased as a concern (and not just for “technology companies”) shows that these leaders are very aware of their real-world context and know that to be an effective leader there must be both a focus on internal skills and strengths and on external and contextual factors.
40
IBM Study and Collaborative Leadership
Responses to the IBM study also showed that the “outperformers” (the most effective leaders) have also shifted to a more open and collaborative leadership style to help their employees (followers) engage more in the process to help their companies (systems).
“We are focused on empowering employees to be more creative and active in creating the company’s future. We need to mobilize our collective brain power for innovation.” -Dirk Van de Put, President and CEO, McCain Foods
-IBM Global CEO Study 2012
41
IBM Study and Values
Perception, and promotion, of values in the corporation are also seen as much more important than in the past and this influences CEOs (leaders) to care more about how their employees (followers) view this than in the past.
“It is important for employees to see the company’s values as a reflection of their own. Values are at the core of the social contract between company and employee.”
-Wichian Mektrakarn, CEO, AIS
42
IBM Study and Follower Traits/Skills
Four traits stood out as most important for employees (followers) to be successful (and employees with these traits are viewed as most desirable for hiring and promotion):
1. Collaborative
2. Communicative
3. Creative
4. Flexible
43
Connections with the IBM study
What patterns can we see in the shifting perceptions of CEOs (leaders) from the IBM study and the other readings referenced above?
How can we make use of this information in the context of consulting with new systems?
How do the concepts raised in the study connect to the ”Hedgehog Concept” that Collins (2001) talks about?:
44
Hedgehogs and Organic Development
Jim Collins references the “Hedgehog Concept” in the chapter we read. It is built around a company’s development (a bit more than around the leader) but the concept is still useful for our conversation about trust, communication, authentic leadership, and organic development (that is, development that progresses in a natural development process rather than “being forced,” coming out of natural strengths and interests).
Hedgehogs
Hedgehogs “understand that the essence of profound insight is simplicity…they have a piercing insight that allows them to see through complexity and discern underlying patterns.
Hedgehogs see what is essential, and ignore the rest.” -Collins (2001)
The Hedgehog Concept
“The essential strategic difference between the good-to-great and comparison companies lay in two fundamental distinctions.
First, the good-to-great companies founded their strategies on deep understanding along three key dimensions—what we came to call the three circles.
Second, the good-to-great companies translated that understanding into a simple, crystalline concept that guided all of their efforts—hence the term Hedgehog Concept.” -Collins (2001)
Three Circles
The Hedgehog Concept: The Three Circles
1. “What you can be the best in the world at (and, equally important, what you cannot be the best at the world at). This discerning standard goes far beyond core competence. Just because you possess a core competence doesn’t necessarily mean you can be the best in the world at it. Conversely, what you can be the best at might not even be something in which you are currently engaged.” -Collins (2001)
Q: How does this translate to a leader knowing himself/herself?
The Hedgehog Concept: The Three Circles
2. “What drives your economic engine. All the good-to-great companies attained piercing insight into how to most effectively generate sustained and robust cash flow and profitability. In particular, they discovered the single denominator—profit per x—that had the greatest impact on their economics. (It would be cash flow per x in the social sector).” -Collins (2001)
Q: We could ask the leader how much his/her time is worth to explore this circle. (And how much is his/her followers’ time worth?)
The Hedgehog Concept: The Three Circles
3. “What you are deeply passionate about. The good-to-great companies focused on those activities that ignited their passion. The idea here is not to stimulate passion but to discover what makes you passionate.” –Collins (2001)
Q: How does this relate to the organic process that we talked about above?
The Hedgehog Concept: The Three Circles
Questions for Leaders we are consulting with:
Do you feel that you were born to do what you are doing?
Do you think you can be the best at what you are doing?
Do you feel well compensated for what you are doing?
How do measure “well compensated”? What matters to you? (e.g., money, flexibility, stature)
Are you passionate about what you do?
Do you believe in what you are doing?
Can you picture doing something else?
Do you picture yourself doing something else?
Self-Understanding
“A Hedgehog Concept is not a goal to be the best, a strategy to be the best, an intention to be the best, a plan to be the best. It is an understanding of what you can be the best at. The distinction is absolutely crucial.”
Q: Can we see the importance of self-understanding in this equation? It allows us to organically place ourselves (as leaders) in the right place, doing the right thing, hopefully at the right time, and allow us to fully succeed. It is about finding the “best fit.”
Q: How does this help us as leadership consultants?
Understanding Your Passion
“The good-to-great companies did not say, “Okay, folks, let’s get passionate about what we do.” Sensibly, they went the other way entirely: We should only do those things that we can get passionate about.” –Collins (2001)
Q: What assessment methods can we use to help “our” leaders learn what it is they are passionate about? How can they be authentic?
What Messages Have Hedgehogs Learned?
Gender and Leadership (and Systems)
If the “Hedgehog Concept” is all about helping a system understand what it is best at and what it can be the best at, where do issues of culture, communication, and gender fit in?
Very few of the “Great” companies that Collins looked at had female leaders (such as Ursula Burns) and we can consider the possible factors and reasons for this (and ways to address them) as we consider the next few articles:
Creativity and Charisma Among Female Leaders: The Role of Resources and Work Engagement (Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013)
“Organizations have become more and more interested in work engagement, since the research evidence shows that engaged workers perform better... However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no studies concerning the effect of engagement on creativity (i.e. a specific aspect of job performance) or leadership qualities (e.g. charisma).
In addition, few scholars have made an attempt to offer and empirically test a theoretical framework that investigates the predictors and outcomes of engagement simultaneously in one overall model. The present study among female school principals and their teachers was designed to fill this gap in the literature.”
Work Engagement
“A recent review of Macey and Schneider (2008) documented the proliferation of various definitions of engagement. In the present study, we use Schaufeli and Bakker’s (2004, 2010) widely used definition. Accordingly, work engagement is a positive, fulfilling, work-related experience that includes three complementary dimensions: an energetic (i.e. vigor), an affective (i.e. dedication) and a cognitive dimension (i.e. absorption). Vigor refers to high levels of energy while working. Dedication refers to being strongly involved in one’s work and experiencing a sense of significance, enthusiasm and challenge. Absorption is characterized by being fully concentrated and happily engrossed in one’s work. Thus, engaged workers are highly active, enthusiastic about their work and often fully immersed in their work so that time flies…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Work Engagement
“Research has confirmed that work engagement is a specific, distinct and properly operationalized psychological construct (Macey and Schneider 2008) that can be distinguished from other constructs including workaholism, organizational commitment and job involvement (Bakker et al. 2008).
Moreover, according to the JD-R model of engagement (Bakker 2011) engaged employees perform better. This is attributed to the fact that engaged employees’ enjoy better health, which means that they are able to perform better at high levels. In addition, engaged employees experience more frequently positive emotions that widen their thought and action horizons (cf. Bakker and Demerouti 2008).” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Job Resources and Work Engagement
“Research indicates that external job resources play a key role in facilitating engagement. According to the JD-R model…job resources are those characteristics of the job that have the potential to reduce job demands and the associated costs.
Moreover, physical, social or organizational aspects of the job can be qualified as job resources if they are functional in achieving work goals and/or stimulate personal growth, learning and development.
Hence, job resources (such as performance feedback, autonomy and learning opportunities) not only are necessary to deal with (high) job demands but also play a unique role in determining work engagement.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Job Resources and Work Engagement
“Job resources facilitate work engagement because they can act as intrinsic or extrinsic motivators (Bakker and Demerouti 2008). As intrinsic motivators, they fulfill basic human needs, such as the need for autonomy, relatedness and competence (Ryan and Frederick 1997).
As extrinsic motivators, job resources are instrumental in achieving work goals (Bakker and Demerouti 2008). In either case, employees become motivated, and engagement is likely to occur.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Four External Job Resources
“In the present study, we focus on four specific external job resources (i.e. autonomy, social support, performance feedback and opportunities for professional development).
We chose these specific job resources because they are able to satisfy people’s basic psychological needs for autonomy, relatedness and competence (Van den Broeck, Vansteenkiste, De Witte and Lens 2008), and thus foster personal growth, psychological adjustment and well-being…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Four External Job Resources
“Furthermore, in his meta-analysis of the work engagement literature, Halbesleben (2010) has shown that autonomy, social support and performance feedback are among the most important antecedents of work engagement.
In addition, opportunities for professional development have been found as an important antecedent of work engagement in several studies…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Personal Resources and Work Engagement
“Although job resources are crucial determinants of work engagement, a prerequisite for an individual to reach engagement is that the self is involved (Sonnentag, Dormann and Demerouti 2010). In order for employees to be vigorous, dedicated and absorbed in their work, it is important that they first feel that they possess the energetic, affective and cognitive potential required to deal with their work tasks.
Therefore, the beliefs that one is resilient and able to deal with the work tasks successfully seem the most proximal drivers of engagement that explain the job resources–engagement relationship.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Personal Resources and Work Engagement
“…personal resources are important in explaining the transition from job resources to work engagement. Personal resources refer to individuals’ sense of their ability to control and influence their environment …Xanthopoulou et al. used the conservation of resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll et al. 2003) to argue that autonomy, social support, supervisory coaching and opportunities for development influence work engagement through personal resources.
According to the COR theory, individuals strive not only to protect their resources but also to accumulate them. Resources tend to generate other resources, thus creating resource caravans, which may result in positive outcomes such as better coping and well-being (Hobfoll 2002).” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Personal Resources and Work Engagement
“Employees who work in a resourceful work environment are likely to have all the required means to perform their work tasks. Consequently, they are confident that they can manage these tasks. In turn, the more positive the employees’ self-regard, the more goal self-concordance is likely to be experienced…
Individuals with goal self-concordance are intrinsically motivated to pursue their goals, and as a result they are likely to be engaged in what they do…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Engagement & Charismatic Leadership
“Next to creativity, this study considers charismatic leadership as an outcome of work engagement. Charismatic leaders transform the needs and aspirations of followers from self- interests to collective interests, enhance their involvement and commitment to the goals of the organization and motivate them to perform above and beyond their own expectations and the call of duty…
Indeed, previous empirical studies showed that charismatic leaders have a positive effect on followers’ motivation, satisfaction, performance…and work engagement…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Engagement & Charismatic Leadership
“Next to Shamir et al.’s (1993) motivational theory of charismatic leadership, such leaders use role modeling to recruit and engage their followers. The leader becomes a symbol and shows to the followers what kinds of beliefs and behaviors are legitimate to develop, and as such constitutes a point of reference for vicarious learning.
On the basis of this, it may be suggested that leaders first need to be engaged themselves in the work goals to get their followers engaged in the goals of the organization.
Put differently, leaders who are vigorous, dedicated and absorbed are more likely to behave in a charismatic way that engages followers to the organizational goals…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Findings of the Study
“The present study among female school principals provides evidence for an overall model that examines simultaneously the main antecedents and outcomes of work engagement. Furthermore, this is one of the first studies that examined the role of engagement for creative task performance and charismatic leadership – important characteristics of successful leaders (Bass 1985; Oldham 2003).
Although the results are not informative about the direction of the effects, our findings are based on theoretical assumptions and do suggest that job resources facilitate employees’ sense of self-efficacy and resiliency, and consequently foster work engagement. In addition, the results clearly show that engaged school principals are considered by their subordinate teachers as charismatic and creative.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Findings of the Study
“These findings illustrate the importance of a resourceful work environment. Furthermore, our findings shed light on the process through which personal resources translate into enhanced performance.
Meta-analyses have shown that modifiable personal resources (including optimism, hope, self-efficacy and resiliency) are positively related to performance (Judge and Bono 2001; Luthans, Avolio, Avey and Norman 2007).
Our results illustrate that work engagement explains this effect. Individuals who are highly efficacious and resilient are more likely to become vigorous, dedicated and absorbed by their work – the motivational experience that brings out the best in people.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Findings of the Study
“A second contribution of this study is the evidence for a positive relationship between work engagement and other-ratings of creative task performance.
The engagement– creativity relationship may be ascribed to both the ability and motivation to excel. Considering that engagement is an affective–motivational experience, the positive relationship between work engagement and creativity is in line with Fredrickson’s (2001) broaden-and-build theory.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Findings of the Study
“Accordingly, positive affect broadens individuals’ thought– action repertoires, which is a prerequisite for creative performance (Isen 1999).
In addition, happy people are in possession of past skills and other resources, which they have built over time during previous pleasant moods.
This engagement – creativity relationship offers support for Salanova et al.’s (2010) view that work engagement may broaden people’s thought–action repertoires by creating the urge to expand the self through learning and goal fulfillment…” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Findings of the Study
“Third, for the first time the present study examined charismatic leadership as a possible outcome of work engagement. The findings indicate that engaged leaders are considered by their subordinates to be charismatic leaders. Charismatic leaders develop a view of the future that will excite and convert potential followers.
This vision is constantly sold to followers – a process that takes energy and commitment, as few people will immediately get into a vision that is different from their own. Charismatic leaders take every opportunity to convince their employees to get involved with the goals of the organization (Bass 1985) -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Findings of the Study
“Therefore, it is more likely for leaders to engage their followers, when they are themselves highly engaged. Thus, our findings underscore important correlates of leader engagement. Previous studies have shown that employees with transformational leaders are more satisfied and more motivated, and they perform better (Judge and Piccolo 2007)...
Our findings suggest that leaders’ work engagement may influence followers’ engagement through charismatic leadership behaviors.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Additional Implications of Findings
“Schools in particular and organizations in general should be interested in work engagement, since engaged leaders are perceived by their followers to be creative performers. The present study offers a theoretical framework with which management can build engagement in their organizations.
The findings indicate that management may facilitate engagement by offering sufficient job resources (such as feedback and opportunities for development), since job resources foster self-efficacy and resiliency.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
Additional Implications of Findings
“Moreover, our findings clearly show that engaged leaders are not only creative but also perceived as charismatic.
This may suggest that the engagement of leaders may encourage the engagement and job performance of followers through vicarious learning and the communication of a clear vision.
In other words, engaged leaders themselves may represent a crucial resource for their followers.” -Bakker & Xanthopoulou, 2013
How is gender defined?
Gender and Leadership (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“There is now an abundant and rich literature on gender and leadership in the corporate context, where concepts of masculine and feminine leadership are widely debated. This article provides a bridge between this literature and the women and unions literature, where women’s leadership is under-researched but where feminist strategies are widely discussed.
The article uses the relatively novel lens of masculine, feminine and feminist leadership for interpreting the leadership talk of an ethnically diverse group of American and British union women…”
Gender and Leadership (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“We argue that when women lead in heavily masculinized settings, their leadership discourses and orientations are almost bound to reflect the dominant culture. The study reveals that while there is a discursive space within unions for alternative (feminine and feminist) visions of leadership, in practice women union leaders also engage in different combinations (often simultaneously) of (masculine) status quo and (feminine and feminist) transformative leadership talk.”
Q: Why is this article different from most gender and leadership articles?
Gender and Leadership in Unions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Unlike corporate organizations, unions are ostensibly democratic, yet union structures of power and leadership in both countries are historically white-male-dominated, although significant change started to occur in the early 1970s as unions began to be influenced by other social movements, including the women’s, civil rights and anti-racist movements (Cobble and Michal, 2002; Kirton, 2006)…”
Gender and Leadership in Unions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“In the UK among the ten larger dominant unions, there are now four women general secretaries (of feminized education unions); in three unions women are at least proportionally represented among paid national officials and only two unions have achieved proportionality on the national executive (Labour Research Department, 2012). There are few concrete data on BME* women, but all the available evidence indicates their under-representation in leadership (Bradley and Healy, 2008)…”
*BME=Black and Minority Ethnic
Gender and Leadership in Unions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
There has been an increase of women joining unions but “the feminization of union membership of the last decades has not translated into proportional feminization of leadership in either country. Generally, the literature finds that unions continue to be strongly white masculinized contexts often unwelcoming and unreceptive to women and BME people (Bradley and Healy, 2008; Fletcher and Hurd, 2000: 67)…”
Gender and Leadership in Unions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“A privileging and valorizing of masculine union identities (aggressive, domineering, tough, etc.) may sometimes include male BME workers, but exclude BME women (Moccio, 2009).
The AFL-CIO identifies among other barriers ‘push back’ from male leaders as inhibiting women from entering leadership, while the suggested solutions all point to the need for gendered cultural change (AFL-CIO, 2004)…”
Women and Leadership (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“How women lead, and to what ends, have become prominent questions in the literature where two dominant interconnected discourses have been extensively explored:
(i) two opposing models of feminine and masculine leadership; and
(ii) female leadership advantage…”
Women and Leadership (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Feminine leadership is defined as interpersonally oriented, democratic, collaborative and transformational, which contrasts with masculine leadership, defined as task-oriented, authoritarian, controlling and transactional.
Socially and culturally, feminine leadership is typically ascribed to women and masculine to men (Fletcher, 2004)…”
Women and Leadership (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Women are often seen to choose participative management styles and to be willing to share available resources owing to their lack of social power rather than owing to essential (biological or psychological) characteristics (Fairhurst, 1993). Traditionally, though, it is masculinity that provides the dominant interpretive frame for acceptable organizational behaviour, while femininity is frequently marginalized and associated with peripheral rather than core organizational functions (Mumby, 1998; Mumby and Putnam, 1992).
This is the case in unions where specifically white working class masculinity is often at play, particularly in male-dominated unions and unions representing blue-collar occupations (Williams, 2002)…”
“Feminine Leadership” (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Paradoxically, changes at organization level towards participatory work structures are said to call for feminine leadership, such that there is now allegedly a female leadership advantage (Eagly and Carli, 2003; Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Critical research in the communication field exposes flaws in the female leadership advantage thesis…”
“Feminine Leadership” (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Fairhurst (1993), for example, found that even though some female leaders might have high organization status, their social status as female (and perhaps black and/or young) created a gender hierarchy where white males of lower organization status made it difficult in everyday leader−follower interactions for women to exercise positional power.
Thus, women can occupy leader roles simultaneously and still function within the constraints of their gender roles (Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001)…”
Gender Stereotyping (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“For feminist scholars, the idea that women make better leaders than men is as problematic as the conventional belief that men make better leaders than women. The notion of feminine leadership and its ascription to women reinforces the same essentializing gender stereotypes that help to create and sustain organizational gender inequalities (Billing and Alvesson, 2000; Briskin, 2006; Fournier and Kelemen, 2001).
Further, gender stereotypes create a double bind where ‘highly communal’ women leaders are vulnerable to criticism for not being authoritative enough, but ‘highly agentic’ women are criticized for lacking ‘communion’ (Carli and Eagly, 2011: 108)…”
Gender Stereotyping (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Agency is, of course, exercised in context against existing gendered organizational discourses and practices that, combined, produce gendered realities.
For example, women in male-typed leadership positions (‘gender-incongruent’ leaders) may be perceived by followers as well as by other leaders to lack leadership skills and authority, which may influence a ‘choice’ of more masculine leadership practices in an attempt to compensate and to display leadership competence…”
Gender Stereotyping and Incongruence (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“…gender incongruence produces a variety of responses among diverse women, not all reflecting feminist values. For some respondents, being an outsider had not been an entirely negative experience.
There were some accounts of progressive white male leaders (practising feminine and pro-feminist leadership) encouraging and mentoring others, including BME women, rather than simply working for their own or their identity group’s political ends as in white masculine leadership. At the same time, a reality experienced by senior women was male opposition to having ‘too many’ women…”
Gender Stereotyping and Incongruence (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“As gender-incongruent leaders, women often found themselves competing with other women for tokenistic space. Consequently, one woman’s rise could mean another’s suppression…”
Q: Implications for leadership consultants asked to help in effecting change?
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“To conclude, the study has shown that theoretically there is no necessary connection between feminine/ feminist leadership and women, or masculine leadership and men. It was clear from the interviews that leadership in the union movement is plural, not unitary, and there were many examples given to us of men who sought to lead in ways that resonate with feminine and feminist leadership.
However, from this study, whether or not women were more likely to practise what could be classified as feminine leadership and men masculine is a moot point…”
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Some women believed this to be the case, but at the same time they and others related experiences that pointed in the opposite direction.
Thus, respondents’ talk positioned feminine leadership as a normative construct and perhaps as an ideal, but only to some extent as an empirical phenomenon (see Billing and Alvesson, 2000)…”
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Our findings indicate that the contradictory talk has to be seen in the gendered union context, whereas its normative nature is also underpinned by women’s lack of social power (Fairhurst, 1993).
Moreover, it was evident that minority women’s discourse was also shaped by an intersectional sensibility that was resonant of the gendered and racialized union context of which they talked, but also of their different societal and domestic contexts and histories…”
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Thus women leaders in unions, where voice is built into structures, demonstrate the same forms of power deficits as are evident in more conventionally hierarchical organizations…”
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Second, against the incursion of women in union leadership, the discussion of gendered leadership discourses among union women serves to remind us that ‘organizing processes that create and re-create inequalities may have become more subtle, but in some cases, they have become more difficult to challenge’ (Acker, 2006b: 458), especially if it is women enacting marginalizing processes in environments where women have been let in…”
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“Although our discussion is situated in one specific white masculinized context – trade unionism – it has resonance with other work within the field of gender and leadership that sees masculinity and femininity as inherent features of leadership dynamics (e.g. Collinson, 2005; Fournier and Kelemen, 2001) and that sees race/ethnicity as woven into the collective work of leadership (Ospina and Su, 2009; Parker, 2005)…”
Findings and Conclusions (Kirton & Healy, 2012)
“It is clear that union women often engage in different combinations (often simultaneously) of (masculine) status quo and (feminine and feminist) transformative leadership practices. Women also draw on multiple marginalized identities to find strength to resist and challenge the status quo…”
Q: Implications for leadership consulting?
Assessment of Gender Differences?
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Impostor phenomenon” (also known as “impostor syndrome”) = when a person feels “inauthentic at work” and fears “being found out as fake or as someone who does not deserve their status or reputation” (or role or title)
“Impostors” strongly “doubt their ability to be successful, feel inauthentic and deceptive, and that they do not belong in the roles they hold…even when they experience success. As such, impostors have a difficult and complex relationship with their own performance.”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Despite gaining achievements and holding accomplished roles, impostors experience and display negative feelings and attitudes (low self-efficacy, low affective commitment, lack of perceived organization support, maladaptive perfectionism) and engage in counterproductive behaviors (low citizenship behaviors, biased managerial decision making, lack of career planning or striving) in the workplace that often stifle their progress…”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Clance and Imes (1978) coined the term “impostor phenomenon” to describe the tendency of some high achieving women to feel they are essentially phonies and faking their own success…
impostors experience an inconsistency between what they think about themselves and what they believe the external world thinks about them…”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
Impostors “believe they are not deserving of their success and constantly fear being evaluated negatively…or “found out” for their fraudulence…
“Beyond its general association with anxiety (e.g., negative affectivity, neuroticism)…avoidance…and poor self-views (e.g., low self-esteem, low self-perceived intelligence)…IP is inherently and specifically linked with the externalization or downplay of personal agency for one’s competence and performance.”
DBJ: Remember our discussions about “locus of control” and “perception versus reality”?
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
A common or normative reaction to receiving negative feedback could include “defensiveness, denial, or corrective behavior” likely “because feedback provides activation of competence-based components of the self-concept.”
IPs react to negative feedback with “guilt and humiliation” and “even internalize blame for the failure and interpret a single feedback instance as indicative of their entire sense of self” in part because these individuals “believe they are lacking such competency” (of the self).
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“To avoid risks associated with decreasing this type of perceived self-discrepancy, impostors tend to create an impediment to their success…such as not exerting enough effort, and then blame their eventual poor performance on that impediment.
Because impostors believe they cannot improve their performance (and thus cannot demonstrate their competence through these means), they are more likely to utilize alternate explanations for poor performance to preserve others’ view of their competence than non-impostors.”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“In terms of the self in the workplace, accountability heightens the salience of an individual’s competence-based self-concept, and the importance of acting in line with others’ view of their competence.
Whereas accountability may motivate non-impostors to enhance their effort in anticipation of such expectations…it should have the opposite effect on impostors…”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Impostors under conditions of high accountability should expect to perform poorly because of their self-perceived lack of competence, which should trigger anxiety and negative emotions, and motivate them to reduce their initial effort as a means of preserving how others view their competency.”
DBJ: They are stuck in a negative (self) feedback loop (they have “rigged the game” against themselves)
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
The Role of Gender with IP Issues:
“Because much of the concern impostors experience stems from violating expectations, gender is likely to play a unique role in the relationship between IP and performance-relevant outcomes.
As social role theory explains, we expect communal (e.g., warm, nurturing, domestic) behaviors from females and agentic (e.g., self-interested, assertive, independent) behaviors from males. Through interactions with others, these behavioral norms are communicated and reinforced, ultimately becoming a part of an individual’s identity…”
DBJ: Obviously, this varies depending on the person’s cultural, family, and personal journey…
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“One aspect of gender role prescriptions that tends to differ between males and females is individual competence, which has been considered a reason why females develop impostor feelings (i.e., young boys are socialized to be competent while young girls are socialized to be warm)…Fittingly, IP was originally studied to explain feelings of undeserved recognition and achievement in professional women…”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
There have been conflicting findings in different studies that show that IP is NOT just a female issue.
At least one study (Gravois, 2007) “estimated that at least 70% of individuals of both genders will experience IP feelings.”
Badawy, et al. DID however think that “male and female impostors will react differently depending on feedback and accountability.”
Gender differences with impostor phenomenon (IP) (Badawy, et al, 2018)
The researchers conducted two different (online) studies to examine whether males with IP ”react more negatively” than females with IP to similar performance demands.
As part of the studies, they took into account different conditions of feedback and accountability, with a particular focus on “the interactive effect of gender and IP on state anxiety, effort, and performance.”
Results and Implications (Badawy, et al, 2018)
Results from the two studies showed/suggested:
“…that male IPs fair worse when confronted with performance cues than do female impostors.
Male IPs experienced greater anxiety after receiving negative feedback and under conditions of high accountability than did female IPs, and
(males) exhibited less effort and poorer performance on a task when held accountable to a higher authority…”
Results and Implications (Badawy, et al, 2018)
Results from the two studies showed/suggested:
“Comparatively, females with higher levels of IP exhibited more effort and performed marginally better than their male IP counterparts after receiving negative feedback…
In light of gender role theory, the greater negative reaction of male imposters could potentially be linked to the expectations for agentic and competent behavior from males…
Finally, this last finding stands in contrast to previous work and may offer insight into the dynamics between impostor self-concept and gender role expectations…”
Results and Implications (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Contrary to the assumption that females are impacted more by IP…our studies find that though IP was reported to a higher degree by females, male impostors exhibited signs of distress and reducing their effort in situations that trigger concern about maintaining the positivity of their competence-based self-views, whereas females were unaltered and appeared resilient in such situations…”
Results and Implications (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Assuming that traditional gender role norms hold, male IPs may have exhibited stronger negative reactions because they believe that society at large values males who demonstrate high competence, and, at the same time, do not believe that they can fulfill this standard.
Being less constrained by gender norm violations and backlash (i.e., they were already expected to perform poorly on competence-based tasks like exam questions), female IPs may have felt freer to attempt to improve their performance (and risk failure) rather than excusing it with lack of time or effort invested; this could have happened because competence-based self-discrepancies were not strongly felt, or were simply not activated.
The reaction was opposite for the males, whose behavior and stress reactions indicate helplessness to change, and greater concern over being “found out”…agency perceptions may differentially affect the means by which male and female IPs react to self-discrepancies…”
Results and Implications (Badawy, et al, 2018)
“Beyond gender, our study also adds clarity to the question of whether or not impostors are able to maintain high performance despite their self-doubt.
Our findings suggest that impostors experience greater state anxiety when given negative feedback, but not under conditions of positive feedback.
Further, impostors seem to experience higher state anxiety while performing tasks under high accountability, and react with decreased effort and lower performance under this same condition…”
Discussion of the Findings of the IP Study
While the Badawy, et al. (2018) study was limited in scope, there certainly appear to be some very interesting ideas here.
How can this information be relevant to our work in the field with female and male leaders?
How does it fit in with the earlier studies that have addressed other aspects of gender differences in leadership?
Potential for specialization and/or doctoral project ideas?...
How are issues communicated?
Next Steps
Come on over to the discussion board and continue the consideration of application of these concepts into practical scenarios.
Thank you!
120
References
Badawy, R., Gazdag, B., Bentley, J. & Brouer, R. (2018). Are all impostors created equal? Exploring gender differences in the impostor phenomenon-performance link. Personality and Individual Differences, 131, 156-163.
Bakker, A. & Xanthopoulou, D. (2013). Creativity and charisma among female leaders: The role of resources and work engagement. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(14), 2760-2779.
Bennis, W. (2009). On becoming a leader. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap…and others don’t. New York, NY: HarperBusiness.
121
References
Kellerman, B. (2012). The end of leadership. New York, NY: HarperBusiness.
Kirton, G. & Healy, G. (2012). ‘Lift as you rise’: Union women’s leadership talk. Human Relations, 65(8), 979-999.
Luthans, F. (2010). Organizational behavior (12th edition). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Snook, S., Nohria, N. & Khurana, R. (Eds.). (2011). The handbook for teaching leadership: Knowing, doing, and being. New York, NY: Sage Publications.
122
