Introduction During the decades of the 1980s

During the decades of the 1980s and 1990s, the world of the Seventh-day

Adventist Church in the United States was greatly disturbed by the events surrounding

the bankruptcy cases of Dr. Donald Davenport and Harris Pine Mills (Wilson, 1983a,

1983c, 1983b, 1987). In the mid-1980s, the Davenport affair revived questions about

transparency, ethics, and integrity due to the perceived conflict of interest on the part of

some leaders who invested church and personal funds in Dr. Davenport’s real estate

ventures. In addition, the bankruptcy and closure of operations of Harris Pine Mills, a

wood furniture company which had been donated to the church, led to questioning the

leaders’ stewardship and financial management (Hackleman, 2008; Wilson, 1987).

A complete picture of the damage caused by these events was not limited to the

financial losses involved. It included a negative impact on the church constituency who

expected their leaders to be above reproach, efficient, and effective. The publicity these

events generated from the loss of leaders who were, despite the best of intentions, either

reprimanded or dismissed from employment for acting misguidedly presented a negative

image of the church to the community.

The public image of the church suffered when in March of 1999, Robert S.

Folkenberg, then President of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists brought

his presidency to an end by tendering his resignation due to personal financial concerns

(Medley, 1999; Thompson, 1999). Episodes like these contribute to the skepticism and

distrust of many toward church leadership. The erosion of trust in church leadership

touches particularly those who are responsible for fulfilling the church’s financial duties.

This perceived erosion of trust moved me to explore the leadership values of financial

officers of local Adventist conferences in the United States. This study is the second

dissertation study on record involving the local conference treasurers in the United States.

The first study was written by Theodore Brown (2005). As it is, local conference

treasurers in the United States guide in the financial affairs of thousands of congregations,

hundreds of schools, and multiple other church programs and projects. The knowledge

regarding the development of these leaders is limited, and yet they are responsible to

administer an approximate collective gross income above $1.5 billion per year. This study

contributes to the closure of the knowledge gap, and hopefully will contribute to planning

their development as financial leaders in the church.

As I endeavored to find an appropriate theoretical framework for this study, the

search guided me to consider positive forms of leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005;

Mazutis, 2007) as a desirable family of constructs, from where Authentic Leadership

seemed to be an appropriate fit given the current state of societal affairs.

The lack of trust experienced today by some church members is in harmony with

the American societal attitude developed over the last four decades as governmental and

corporate events have shaken trust and confidence, fomenting skepticism and distrust

(Halberstam, 1972; Reeves, 1982; Walsh, 1997). In the last decade alone we have

witnessed how financial scandals and business failures impacted investors, employees,

board members, corporate leaders and ultimately the general public. The stories of Enron,

WorldCom, Adelphia, Tyco, Arthur Andersen, HealthSouth, Sunbeam and others speak

eloquently about the values and attitudes that led to their malfunction. It is worth noting

that two non-profit organizations, the United Way and the Baptist Foundation of Arizona,

were also included perhaps to show that organizations established to benefit humanity

and to uphold high moral and religious values experience the same need for good

financial management, ethical and moral values, transparency, and guidance (Jennings,

2006).

As a result of the cases commented above there has been a reformulation of

leadership concepts to address more effectively moral and ethical issues faced today by

leaders and followers alike. This redefinition seems particularly apt at present, in our

post-Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 era; an era in which corporate transparency, ethical

responsibility and accountability are frequently invoked (AICPA, 2002).

The Seventh-day Adventist Church depends on quality managers and leaders. The

church is organized into numerous geographical entities, institutions, and agencies, which

are structural instruments to help accomplish its mission. In this context, reassuring the

members and the general public is important in helping it prosper and attract donor gifts.

Above all, the church is in need of leaders with sterling character values that will

not create embarrassing situations and financial losses that motivate some members to

question the values and decision-making processes of all church leaders (Hackleman,

2008, p. 367). Obviously the need is ever present for leaders who preserve integrity, work

harmoniously with their peers, and guide church entities into acting transparently,

ethically, and morally because the name of the church is associated with the name and

character of its leaders and followers (Turknett & Turknett, 2005, p. 191).

The dimensions proposed by authentic leadership theory are an appropriate match

to focus our concerns about church leadership. Authentic leadership is a theoretical

construct that focuses on self-awareness, relational transparency, ethical/moral behavior,

and the balanced processing of others’ opinions. These aspects overlap with the

dimensions of leadership called for by Adventist leaders. These constructs have not been

tested in the church arena, thus little is known if they fit the current search for a higher

level of leadership. This study focuses on the authentic leadership qualities of Seventhday

Adventist Chief Financial Officers in the US.

Paulsen’s Statements on Leadership

Dr. Jan Paulsen, President of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists

between 1999 and 2010, in his address to the plenary assembly of church delegates on

July 4, 2005, in St. Louis, Missouri, declared that leadership development is a church

priority. He explained that the expansion of Adventist membership around the world is

expected to reach 50 million by the year 2020, and the proliferation of local conferences,

missions, and institutions will require that a deliberate effort be placed on the definition

of the values to be instilled in church leaders (Paulsen, 2005, p. 33).

Paulsen asked, “What are the qualities which the community of faith can

reasonably be expected to look for in electing a leader?” He identified (a) transparency,

defined as the filter through which humility and integrity are seen; (b) self-awareness, or

relating to our past experiences in order to learn from them; (c) ethical/moral integrity, as

greed and self-seeking do not belong in any leadership assignment in our church; and (d)

the ability of a leader to seek unity; inclusiveness of culture, gender, and opinions; and

consideration to having the same manual, policies, statement of fundamental beliefs, and

integrated resource support system which in essence makes the church ‘one united global

family of faith.’ In his latest book Paulsen reiterated that “an Adventist leader is a person

of integrity” (Paulsen, 2011, p. 5). Paulsen (2005) further indicated that

what is critical is to have a clear identification of what constitutes the core

personality, the spiritual ‘DNA,’ of Seventh-day Adventism, which transcends

cultures and traditions and must be retained, treasured, nurtured, and passed on to

our children and the next generation of church members. And this is a leadership

issue. It is leadership’s responsibility, with discipline and love to look after the

heart and the mind of this church. (p. 33)

The denomination restated its need for quality leadership at the 2011 Spring

Council meeting of the Executive Committee with the approval of the document entitled

“Transparency and Accountability in Financial Reporting” (Lemon, Evans, Douglas, &

Kajiura, 2011). They asked church leaders to address administrative and leadership

matters from a well-defined ethical perspective.

Context of the Study

The Authentic Leadership Development construct defines authenticity in both

leaders and followers using four variables: Self-awareness, Relational Transparency,

Ethical/Moral Behavior, and Balanced Processing of other peoples’ opinions (Avolio &

Gardner, 2005; Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, & Walumbwa, 2005; Walumbwa, Avolio,

Gardner, Wernsing, & Peterson, 2008). This study evaluates these variables among

Adventist local conference treasurers and their associates. They correlate closely with the

values expressed by Paulsen.

Local conference treasurers in the Seventh-day Adventist Church are financial

managers/leaders (CFOs) in a geographic entity that includes local congregations,

schools, and community service agencies. Their functions include budgeting, finances,

administration, auditing, and personnel (T. Brown, 2005, pp. 37-44). Their leadership

development needs are important as the denomination rests heavily on them to lead out in

entities that are clearing points for funds and to provide input that ultimately becomes

financial policy and practice. Also critical to the life of the church is the fact that local

conference treasurers constitute a pool of candidates for more specialized assignments.

The official by-laws of the church indicate that these financial officers “shall be

responsible to provide financial leadership” (General Conference of SDA, 2014, p. 176).

The Seventh-day Adventist Church in the United States has 50 local entities

known as conferences functioning as centers of church governance, administration, and

leadership to local congregations, schools, and to a diversity of community-based

programs with approximately 1 million members, an estimated $1.5 billion in unrestricted

donations per year, and about 6,000 employees (General Conference of SDA, 2013).

Conferences offer an array of managerial services that include, but are not limited

to, (a) hiring and supervising ministers and teachers; (b) training officers of local

congregations and schools; (c) implementing of school curriculum; (d) providing

guidance to the institutions serving in the territory; and (e) providing financial, payroll,

human resource management, auditing, planned giving, trust management, and legal

services (T. Brown, 2005). It was to individuals such as these managers and leaders that

Calvin Rock, General Vice President 1985-2005, wrote an inspiring book encouraging

them to seek virtue, integrity and holiness, proposing a desired set of qualities that

included self-confidence, courage, trust, self-control, versatility, honesty, decisiveness,

loyalty and disinterested love (Rock, 1990). The central theme of his book was “the

correlation between personal integrity and institutional effectiveness” (p. 7).

Jan Paulsen, President of the General Conference 1999-2010, appealed to the

delegates assembled in the General Conference Session of 2005 for a change in Adventist

leadership practices (Paulsen, 2005). He identifies outstanding Adventist leaders as

having transparent motives, who show balance as they consider everyone’s opinion

before deciding, act selflessly, are guided by scriptural principles, and seek the guidance

of the Holy Spirit to know themselves better and to be able to sense the pulse of the

community they have been asked to lead, have the humility to be led, and are able to

handle change (pp. 30-35).

Cindy Tutsch, in her book Ellen White on Leadership: Guidance for Those Who

Influence Others, gives the reader a glimpse of the impact of Adventist religious values

following a process of spiritual awakening, similar to the self-awareness process that

brings self-knowledge, spiritual guidance, and character development to the leader

(Tutsch, 2008). In 2011, the Spring Council meeting of the Executive Committee of the

General Conference approved the document entitled “Transparency and Accountability in

Financial Reporting” (Lemon et al., 2011). The document issued a call to church leaders

to address administrative and leadership matters from a well-defined ethical perspective.

It raised questions that resonate with the corporate ethical failures of recent years and the

impact that such matters have on the denomination, and it also pointed to leadership

qualities that have been contained in authentic leadership.

How do leaders, and more specifically leaders entrusted with the financial

leadership of a denomination, develop the values that undergird their expertise as leaders?

At the moment little is known about this question in the context of the Seventhday

Adventist Church. This study is an answer to the need to understand these leadership

development aspects of local conference treasurers, with the goal of developing suitable

ideas to provide a better understanding for their continued growth as leaders.

Statement of the Problem

Treasurers are trusted by church members to manage the finances and provide

financial leadership according to the highest moral and ethical principles, and best

professional practices. They are at the center of trust, effectiveness, and efficiency of

denominational activities. How do these financial administrators develop the values that

guide them as leaders?

The Seventh-day Adventist Church as a denomination exercises care and due

diligence in selecting its financial officers from individuals who show experience,

maturity, and professional knowledge. However, to date there have been no studies

written of how their values compare with leadership values of ethics, morality, integrity,

and fairness that are prevalent in today’s positive and ethical leadership theories, and in

Authentic Leadership theory specifically. Conference treasurers are professionals who

combine business and accounting knowledge with leadership. These Chief Financial

Officers (CFOs) exert a significant influence in the administration the church; they are an

important voice among the executive officers, and provide input into the policies

governing church entities. In this study I was able to see their values through their eyes,

and through the eyes of their peers and subordinates.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of Adventist local

conference treasurers in the continental United States as authentic leaders and assess how

their perceptions either agree or disagree with the perceptions of their followers. This

study compares their self-assessment responses with the rating that their associates and

team members (followers) provide of their leadership. It will help us to know what their

leadership values are, as seen by the people that work the closest to them.

Research Questions

This study is guided by three research questions. They are:

Research Question 1

Are the self-perceptions of local conference treasurers (leaders) significantly

different from the perceptions of their followers in what refers to their authentic

leadership values (relational transparency, internalized moral and ethical values, balanced

processing of others’ opinions and self-awareness)?

Research Question 2

Are the personal characteristics of the local conference treasurers (their gender,

age, years of experience in administration, years of denominational service, and education

level) significantly related to their own self-perception as authentic leaders as expressed

in their relational transparency, internalized moral and ethical values, balanced processing

of others’ opinions, and self-awareness?

Research Question 3

Are the personal characteristics of the associates in treasury and academy

treasurers (their gender, age, years of experience in administration, years of

denominational service and education level) significantly related to the perceptions of the

local conference treasurers as authentic in their relational transparency, internalized moral

perspective, balanced processing of others’ opinions, and self-awareness?

Research Hypotheses

This research is based on the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1

The first research hypothesis (Ha1) of this study is the expectation that a local

conference treasurer’s self-perceptions of relational transparency, moral/ethical, balanced

processing, and self-awareness values are significantly different from the perceptions

followers expressed of their leaders in the same four ALD factors already indicated.

Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis (Ha2) states that the treasurer’s gender, age, years of

professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic

level are significantly related to their own self-perception of relational transparency,

moral/ethical values, balanced processing, and self-awareness.

Hypothesis 3

The third hypothesis (Ha3) states that the follower’s gender, age, years of professional

service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic level are

significantly related to their perception of relational transparency, moral/ethical,

balanced processing, and self-awareness of their leaders, the local conference treasurers.

Methodology

This study approached the population directly, instead of through a random

sampling or any other statistical technique. The participants responded to the Authentic

Leadership Questionnaire 1.0 (ALQ) obtained through Mind Garden, Inc. (Avolio,

Gardner, & Walumbwa, 2007). Given the nature of church work, the Authentic

Leadership construct provides a viable instrument from which a foundational and

comprehensive knowledge of their perception of leadership is possible through the

variables tested (Avolio & Luthans, 2006).

In the religious Protestant denomination of Seventh-day Adventists, treasurers are

Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) and they offer a business/financial voice to their entity,

and they also serve in an important subservient or secondary leadership role. Their

responses to the ALQ allowed me to understand how they see themselves. The responses

of their followers, the associates in treasury and the academy treasurers, provided a

window view into the values of the leaders as they either ratified or denied the CFO’s

responses.

The ALQ was developed by Bruce J. Avolio, William L. Gardner, and Fred O.

Walumbwa (2007) and is a theory-driven leadership-validated survey instrument designed

to measure the components or dimensions that together offer a measure of authentic

leadership. The ALQ is a validated research questionnaire that is reliable, has valid

construction, and has been used in a number of projects around the globe

(Walumbwa et al., 2008). It consists of 16 questions asked of the leader and 16 questions

asked of the follower. In the current study, the leader’s group consists of 50 leaders (Self)

currently working as local conference treasurers, and the 148 followers’ (raters) group is

composed of 120 serving as associates in treasury (undertreasurer, associate treasurer,

assistant treasurer, controller, and accountant), and 28 serving as academy treasurers for

selected secondary-level boarding institutions. These academies were identified by the

Office of Education of the North American Division of the Seventh-day Adventist

Church.

Conceptual Framework

This study was framed through the lens of Authentic Leadership Development

theory. The leadership theories that incorporate a moral/ethical component, Authentic

Leadership and its four distinctive constructs of self-awareness, ethical/moral values,

relational transparency, and balanced processing of others’ opinions, offer an approach to

measuring authentic leadership development. These variables are unique to the version of

the theory presented by the studies of Avolio, Gardner, Luthans and Walumbwa (Avolio

& Gardner, 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2008). Although many of the elements found in the

theory can also be found in other positive leadership theories, Authentic Leadership

claims to be a leadership development theory positioned “at the root of positive forms of

leadership” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 316).

Authenticity in leaders is grounded in values of morality and character. Gardner,

Avolio, Luthans, et al. (2005) define authentic leaders as “genuine leaders who lead by

example in fostering ethical climates characterized by transparency, trust, integrity, and

high moral standards, and these authentic leaders are both true to themselves and lead

others to achieve authenticity” (p. 344).

Significance of the Study

This study is relevant to the leaders and followers of the Seventh-day Adventist

Church in the United States of America, as it will provide information that was not

previously available, and better plans for leadership growth may be elaborated. Although

the study involves chief financial officers and their followers, the research design can be

applied to other leaders and followers as well. The Seventh-day Adventist Church around

the world will reap the benefit of this study as the research design can be replicated

elsewhere depending on the geographic, cultural, and social milieu. This study may prove

of interest to the financial sector of religious and secular non-profit entities, as there are

relatively few academic studies that provide information that is framed in Authentic

Leadership theory. And, it is ultimately important to me as a researcher, because this is a

subject of deep interest to me personally because of my study of positive forms of

leadership and authentic leadership in particular.

Assumptions

This study assumed that the local conference treasurers and other participant

groups were willing to share their responses by participating in the study. In May 2011 I

met with the Treasurer’s Council and presented the proposal, inviting them to participate

in the study. It was a time to answer their questions and reservations about the study.

They took an action at that meeting, affirming their participation. This action indicated

their willingness, and also their eagerness to participate because they realized this study

would provide light on their role as leaders. We met with the group again in August 2013,

receiving an affirming response. Therefore, this study rightfully assumes that respondents

took the time to answer questions in a sincere and honest way.

Limitations of the Study

The limitations of the study are (a) the participants’ potential willingness to

answer the questionnaire online, and (b) the ability to answer the questions asked by the

Authentic Leadership Questionnaire honestly and sincerely. The population under study is

composed of individuals who have multiple time-demands and some may have

considered this study unnecessary, or perhaps an unwelcome task.

Delimitations

This study is delimited to a population composed of Adventist local conference

treasurers in the United States and their treasury teams. The Seventh-day Adventist

Church (SDA) is a worldwide religious not-for-profit entity established originally in 1863

in the United States of America to carry on a dynamic work in religious, educational,

humanitarian, publishing, health-care, and food-production areas. Of the 58 official local

conferences in the territory of North America requiring the services of treasurers or

financial managers, seven of them operate in Canada, one in the Bermuda Islands, and 50

in the territory of the United States of America (General Conference of SDA, 2014, pp.

165-229). The administrative units located in Canada and the Bermuda Islands have not

been included in this study. Only the 50 entities serving in the United States are a part of

the population studied.

Definition of Terms

The terms defined below will be used repeatedly throughout the study:

Academy Treasurers (Followers): Financial officers of secondary schools. In this

study I included the academies operated by the local conferences in the United States, or

Local Conference-Operated Academies. They were selected by the Office of Education of

the North American Division located on 12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, MD

20904.

Adventist: Refers to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, its beliefs, mission,

structure, organization, and philosophical values.

Associates in Treasury (Followers): The treasury personnel who provide

professional support to the local conference treasurer; a participant group of local

conference employees working in the treasury departments composed of Undertreasurers,

Associate Treasurers, Assistant Treasurers and Accountants.

Authentic Leadership Values: Values advocated by Authentic Leadership

practitioners and believers as advocated by Avolio, Gardner, and Walumbwa.

Church: Term used mostly to identify Adventist local congregations. In this

dissertation the terms “churches” or “local churches” are used to identify local

congregations; the term “Church” (with capitalized “C”), depending on the context, is

used to identify the Seventh-day Adventist Church as a denomination or the Christian

Church in general.

Constituent Academies: Secondary schools operated by either a single local

congregation, or by a group of congregations that have agreed to operate it. Usually the

board elects the chair, and the local conference superintendent is an invitee serving in an

advisory role as the school is operated by the constituency of the local congregations,

rather than the conference office. Board membership includes a representative group of

pastors and members from the constituent congregations.

Denominational Culture: Adventist organizational way of thinking.

Followers: Participant group of associates in treasury and academy treasurers of

local conference-operated academies.

Inauthenticity: Considered the opposite of authenticity.

Leaders: Participant group of chief financial officers of the local conference, or

conference treasurer.

Local Conference Treasurer (Leader): The chief financial officer of the local

conference who is responsible to provide financial leadership, property ownership issues,

routing of funds, and other general financial and personnel matters.

Local Conference: An administrative unit composed of local congregations,

schools, and institutions. It is a center of church governance, the clearinghouse for the

routing of funds, holds title of church properties, and is the personnel employer.

Local Conference-Operated Academies: Secondary schools that have their direct

governance structure connected to the local conference office. Usually the local

conference president is the board chair, and the local conference treasurer is a member of

the board, and may chair the finance committee. The local conference superintendent is a

member of the board and is fully involved with personnel and classroom supervision.

Major decisions are made by the K-12 Board of Education, or the local conference

executive committee.

Working Policy: A compilation of mutual operational agreements guiding

organizational Adventist administrative practice for organizations and institutions, and

that establishes the norms of personnel behavior.

Mind Garden, Inc.: A company that administers the use of the Authentic

Leadership Questionnaire 1.0 (ALQ 1.0), and offers online data collection services at

www.mindgarden.com.

Overview of the Study

This study explores the authentic leadership values of the local conference

treasurers in the United States by observing whether their self-assessment responses agree

or disagree with the assessment their followers provide of them as authentic leaders. Both

groups, leaders and followers, responded to the same questionnaire (ALQ 1.0), but each

from a different perspective. In the following chapter I review the literature that provides

a theoretical framework to this study.

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

This review of the literature is focused on authentic leadership. The chapter is

organized into four sections: (a) brief historical overview of authentic leadership; (b) the

philosophical and theoretical foundations of authentic leadership; (c) ethical leadership

and positive forms of leadership, and (d) issues from the current research environment.

These four sections describe the authentic leader as a better kind of person, whose

character and behavior agree, who shows consistency in values and actions, in beliefs and

behavior, and one who is capable of inspiring others to follow, or lead.

Brief Historical Overview of Authentic Leadership

Authenticity, sincerity, and integrity are virtues that man has pursued for centuries.

Authenticity was understood by Chester Barnard in 1938 as the capacity of a leader to

balance responsibilities such as private freedom and public obligation, and this capacity is

“a litmus test of executive quality” (Novicevic, Harvey, Ronald, & BrownRadford, 2006,

p. 64).

Erickson (1995) notes that authenticity is “a centuries old problem that in its

modern conception emerged within the past eight decades” (p. 123). C. Taylor (1992)

notes that being authentic “is recovering our own ‘sentiment de l’existence,’ that perhaps

we can only achieve integrally if we recognize that this sentiment connects us to a wider

whole” (p. 91). Bill George (2003) defines authenticity as being yourself; being the

person you were created to be (George, 2003, p. 11). Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee

(2004) understand the modern concept of authenticity as a re-statement of a human

emotion in a new context, as “acting from one’s genuine feelings” (Goleman, Boyatzis, &

McKee, 2004, p. 51).

Walumbwa et al. (2008) indicate that authenticity is found “at the intersection of

the leadership, ethics, positive organizational behavior and scholarship literatures, and it

is achieved by owning one’s personal experiences be they thoughts, emotions, needs,

preferences, or beliefs, all processes captured by the injunction to know oneself.” He

further states that there is “growing evidence that an authentic approach to leading is

desirable and effective for advancing human enterprise, achieving positive outcomes, and

achieving enduring results” (Walumbwa et al., 2008, p. 92). Ideas on authentic leadership

espoused by other scholars are found in the literature (Cooper, Scandura, & Schriesheim,

2005; Gardner, Cogliser, Davis, & Dickens, 2011; Ilies, Morgeson, & Nahrgang, 2005;

Neider & Schriesheim, 2011; Shamir & Eilam, 2005).

The need for authenticity in leadership has been present in society from Bible

times, even prior to the Israelite exodus (Herskovitz & Klein, 1999, pp. 87-93). Socrates

is said to have advocated for an examined life, and more than 300 years ago Niccolo

Machiavelli was in search of a prudent man (Stackhouse, McCann, Roels, & Williams,

1995). During the last half of the 19th century and the first part of the 20th century, in

the days of Henry Fayol, Frederick Taylor, Max Weber, Elton Mayo, and Mary Parker

Follett, the economic emphasis shifted from an agrarian to an industrial society, and with

it came the need to reevaluate management and conform to new realities (Thompson,

Heames, & Harvey, 2006). Later into the 20th century Barnard looked at the personal

qualities of managers in his seminal work The Functions of the Executive and provided a

backdrop for the historic representation of the necessary qualities of successful managers

and leaders (Barnard, 1938). The evolution of management to conform to actual realities,

and the search for authenticity, integrity and transparency in leaders in general have

continued resonating in subsequent decades (Caro, 1982; Halberstam, 1972; Tuchman,

1984).

Until 2003 there were two practical approaches to authentic leadership. The

approach to authentic leadership developed by Robert W. Terry in 1993 with his

actioncentered Authentic Action Wheel comprised six elements. These elements are (a)

Mission, (b) Power, (c) Structure, (d) Resources, (e) Existence, and (f) Meaning, with the

center labeled Fulfillment. Terry helps distinguish between authentic and unauthentic

actions. As problems are diagnosed, the six elements of the wheel assist in finding a

solution.

The second practical approach was developed by Bill George in 2003 and

indicated that authentic leaders (a) have a genuine desire to serve others through their

leadership; (b) are interested in empowering the people they lead; (c) are guided by

qualities of the heart, by passion and compassion, as well as by qualities of the mind; (d)

lead with purpose, meaning, and values; (e) build enduring relationships with people; (f)

refuse to compromise their principles; and (g) are dedicated to developing themselves

because they know that becoming a leader takes a lifetime of personal growth (George,

2003; Northouse, 2013). The quest for integrity and ethical leadership values in

leadership was in part fueled by historical events.

After the conclusion of the Watergate Affair some theorists began writing about

adding an ethical and moral dimension to leadership (Burns, 2005), and others sought to

introduce a moral perspective to transformational leadership (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999;

Bass & Stogdill, 1990; Bennis, 2004, 2009). These different voices proclaimed the need

for the rise of integrity, sincerity, and transparency even when the term “authenticity”

may not have been used.

The Approach of This Study

The theoretical orientation used in this study owes its direction and focus to the

contributions of Bruce J. Avolio, William L. Gardner, Fred Luthans, and Fred O.

Walumbwa. They defined and operationalized Authentic Leadership theory (AL), and in

collaboration with other scholars reinterpreted authenticity, identified and tested its

variables nationally and internationally, and defined Authentic Leadership Development

(ALD) among positive leadership theories (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Walumbwa et al.,

2008).

The approach proposed by Avolio, Gardner, Luthans, and Walumbwa, even

though it is not the only interpretation of Authentic Leadership to be found in the

literature (Gardner et al., 2011; Neider & Schriesheim, 2011), provides four identifiable

constructs and a tested measurement instrument. The constructs are Self-Awareness,

Balanced Processing, Ethical/Moral, and Relational Transparency. The instrument called

the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ 1.0) was given in this study to the

Adventist chief financial officers in the United States, to their associates in treasury, and

to selected academy treasurers.

These four constructs or measurable variables, when measured together, define

authentic leadership. Thus authentic leadership is viewed as being composed of related

and substantive dimensions that are needed for individuals to be considered authentic

leaders (Walumbwa et al., 2008).

After the conclusion of the Watergate Affair some theorists began writing about

adding an ethical and moral dimension to leadership (Burns, 2005), and others sought to

introduce a moral perspective to transformational leadership (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999;

Bass & Stogdill, 1990; Bennis, 2004, 2009).

A New Awareness in Society

Although the need for authenticity in leadership has surfaced repeatedly, the

corporate failures of Enron, WorldCom, and other companies at the beginning of the new

millennium showcased the need to redefine leadership on an ethical and moral platform

(Jennings, 2006). As Sparrowe stated, “Authenticity—or, more precisely the lack thereof

—lies near the heart of the crisis of confidence in contemporary corporate leadership”

(Sparrowe, 2005, p. 419). A new awareness was created in society.

McCall and Hollenbeck (2002) identified the qualities needed by leaders in the

new environment as (a) being open-minded and flexible in thought and tactics, (b) having

value-added technical and business skills, (c) having cultural interest and sensitivity, (d)

being resilient, resourceful, optimistic, and energetic, (e) being able to deal with

complexity, (f) having a stable personal life, and (g) possessing and engendering honesty

and integrity (p. 35). Managers and leaders today, and financial managers in particular,

are aware of existing ethical rules as governmental regulations have given ethics and

morality more prominence in leadership development (Brown & Trevino, 2006;

Sarbanes, 2002). Novicevic et al. (2006) indicate that “the capacity of moral creativity is

a crucial quality of executives that have a genuine sense of self, are adaptive to situational

and organizational demands, but do not sacrifice their personal moral code” (p. 72). This

change represents a variation in professional outlook, as management transitioned from

an industrial-base profession to more individual oriented (Wren, 1972). It is observable

that this change in society has affected not only industrial but also corporate not-forprofit

and governmental organizations (Dresner, 2000, p. 33), integrating the perceptions of

both leader and follower (M. Taylor, 2009; Zhu, 2006) on a platform of ethics and

morality (M. E. Brown & Trevino, 2006).

Novicevic et al. (2006) indicated that “the capacity of moral creativity is a crucial

quality of executives that have a genuine sense of self, are adaptive to situational and

organizational demands, but do not sacrifice their personal moral code” (p. 72).

T. Brown (2005), in his study of Adventist treasurers, observed that the research

participants of his study agreed that the treasurer’s roles and responsibilities were

changing from accounting to financial leadership, thus confirming that the trend

perceived in the financial world in general also affects Adventist financial managers. This

element has a potential effect on the leadership development as it is to be implemented

within the Adventist Church. Local conference treasurers are leaders who have a

subservient leadership function (Bonem & Patterson, 2005). While in past times the role

of the financial officer was seen mostly as accountant, in the 1980s the corporate role of

the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) became more prominent, outgrowing the traditional

accountant/bookkeeper concept, and rising to an executive status with leadership

influence (Vames, 1988). T. Brown (2005) described the functions of the financial

manager as servant, diplomat, accounting manager, and financial leader (T. Brown, 2005,

p. 91), pointing to the mixing of regular financial responsibilities with non-financial

duties, which makes the function fit the organizational climate the Church provides.

The Quest for Authenticity

The foundation of Authentic Leadership theory is grounded in the quest for

authenticity of society in general (Novicevic et al., 2006; Novicevic, Heames, Paolillo, &

Buckley, 2009). More recently the concept of authenticity—being true to oneself—

became a central focus of the post-Enron era, and the need for authenticity, executive

quality, or executive authenticity led to “reinventing theory, reinterpreting evidence, and

rediscovering voices and issues” attributing a new meaning to existing facts, as proposed

by Mark Bevir in his post-analytic philosophy approach (Novicevic et al., 2006, p. 64).

Considered an ethical theory, together with Ethical, Spiritual, and Servant

leadership (Yukl, 2010, p. 409). The Ethical, Servant, Spiritual and Authentic Leadership

category “reflects an eclectic mix of theories that emerged and/or rose in prominence

during the past decade and share a common focus on the moral component of leadership”

(Gardner, Lowe, Moss, Mahoney, & Cogliser, 2010, p. 937). A decade after its inception

we have a better view of Authentic Leadership’s theoretical foundations, its research

history, and its place in the field of leadership development (Gardner et al., 2011).

Shamir and Eilam (2005) note that the value of authenticity in leadership springs

from the fact that leaders exhibiting authenticity “lead from a conviction,” “do not fake

their leadership,” and “have a value-based cause or a mission they want to promote.”

They show they are eudaimonic—true to themselves—when people’s life activities are

congruent with the deeply held values, what they believe and what they do, work

harmoniously together. They want to reach their potential and make a difference—all for

a greater good. Shamir and Eilam elaborate that when people are eudaimonically

motivated, they are fully engaged in their own self-actualization, and make use of their

virtues, talents, and skills. They affirm that being authentic is being personal, original,

and unique although similar to others, but characterized by having a high level of

integrity and transparency. They write that “authenticity is personal, and develops from

personal reflections and personal learning,” and it takes place when talk and actions are

consistent with beliefs and values (Shamir & Eilam, 2005, pp. 3, 4). The need for these

values was made evident during the corporate malfeasance of the last decade documented

by Marianne Jennings (2006). As the concept of authenticity found its way to center

stage, the theory of Authentic Leadership appeared, and authentic leadership development

took its place among ethical and other positive forms of leadership.

The Positive Approach to Leadership

Positive psychology originated in the work of Martin Seligman. His philosophical

position is an objectivist view of life, explaining that there is no greater moral goal than

achieving happiness (Seligman, 2002). Positive psychology is in contrast with the views

presented in clinical psychology and places its emphasis on positive behavior, valuing the

strengths and virtues of people (Seligman, 2002; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000;

Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). Luthans (Avolio & Luthans, 2006) considered that

positive psychology offered a better theoretical platform for leadership development than

did traditional clinical psychology. His participation in a positive psychology summit

inspired him to apply its concepts to leadership development. His ideas connected well

with Avolio’s work on transformational leadership (Avolio, 2005; Avolio & Luthans,

2006, p. 147), and with these basic elements, authentic leadership became a full-fledged

theoretical approach to leadership.

The beginning of Authentic Leadership took place when Bruce Avolio and Fred

Luthans (2006) published an essay on Authentic Leadership Development in a book about

Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS), also known as Positive Organizational

Behavior (POB) (Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003, pp. 241-258). Avolio and Luthans

(2006) identified POS as foundational to positive psychological capital (PsyCap). The

component parts of PsyCap are hope, confidence, optimism, and resilience. In the very

first publications these PsyCap components were considered additional dimensions of the

Authentic Leadership theory, but now they are considered preliminary leadership

character qualities, foundational to positive forms of leadership (Avolio & Luthans, 2006,

p. 149). On this point Avolio and Luthans (2006) explain that traditionally

business schools and the implicit theories of business leaders have been almost

solely based on the perspective of the value of economic and financial capital:

how to invest it and gain a return from it. The vast majority of this education and

the resulting practice of capitalism is concerned with how to raise financial

capital, account for it, budget it, leverage it, and impact the ‘bottom line’;

however, such economic and financial capital is finally being recognized as not

entirely sufficient. Both business and authentic leaders recognize the value of

financial capital as a necessary foundation for today’s and for future

organizations, but they now also understand that financial and economic capital is

not the only consideration impacting sustained growth and competitive

advantage. (Avolio & Luthans, 2006, p. 143)

They further elaborate that the term capital “refers to the resources that are withdrawn

from consumption and invested for future anticipated returns” (p. 144). Table 1

consolidates Avolio and Luthans’ (2006) comprehensive view on the capital package of

leaders, which is a perspective of what a corporate leader provides. The items shown in

Table 1 are prioritized in order of importance from Economic/Financial to Psychological

(Avolio & Luthans, 2006).

Table 1

Comprehensive Capital Package

Capital Resources Definitions

4. Psychological (PsyCap) – Who you are

(the actual self) and what you intend to

become (your possible self) (p. 144).

Based on the positive psychology movement developed by

Martin Seligman that emphasizes what is right, and not what

is wrong with people (p.147).

3. Social – Who you know – Relationships Estimated based on years of education and experience, and

and the network of contacts and friends the expertise and qualifications people possess for completing

that can facilitate getting done what needs the mission and critical tasks. Calculated on network analysis

to be accomplished (p. 144). and the quality of the relationships that exist in the organization.

Associated with mutual trust, transparency, support, openness, etc. (p. 147).

2. Human – What you know – Employees

are the assets that walk home every night

(p. 144).

Made up of education, skills, experience, and tacit knowledge

that cannot be imitated or easily duplicated or purchased (p.

144).

1. Economic/Financial – What you have –

resources withdrawn from consumption

and invested for future anticipated returns

(p. 144).

Tangible assets such as plant, equipment, inventories,

technological processes, data of all kinds, and even

intellectual property like patents, copyrights, and trademarks

(p. 144).

Table 2 contains a summary explanation of the four components of Psychological

Capital (PsyCap)—Hope, Optimism, Confidence, and Resiliency—that Avolio and

Luthans (2006) consider embedded into the four variables of Authentic Leadership

Development: Relational Transparency, Self-Awareness, Balanced Processing of

Opinions and Ethical/Moral Values (Avolio & Luthans, 2006). The elements of PsyCap

shown in Table 2 are expected personal character qualities of an individual pursuing a

positive practice of leadership.

The contributions of Positive Psychology and Positive Psychological Capital (Psy

Cap), the new awareness in society about the need of integrity, honesty, and ethical

behavior, were incorporated into a new view of leadership that Avolio and Luthans (2006)

proposed with Authentic Leadership Theory.

Table 2

Elements of Psychological Capital (PsyCap)

Character Qualities Definitions

PsyCap – Hope

Defined by positive psychologist Rick Snyder as constituting the “will” and the “way.” The

Will represents a strong belief and sense of confidence that one will succeed, while the Way

represents what Snyder calls “pathway thinking.”

PsyCap – Optimism

Positive psychology treats optimism as expecting a positive outcome. Optimists do not take

failure personally, and view it as a temporary set-back that does not shatter their

selfawareness, while pessimists take failures personally. Provides a higher level for setting

your level of confidence, kicks into action your will power and ways to accomplish it.

PsyCap – Confidence

Confidence, or self-efficacy, refers to the probability that you will be successful in taking on

a particular task or challenge. ALD has a trickle-down or cascading effect through the

mechanism of self-efficacy (p. 71).

PsyCap – Resiliency

Exhibited by those who are hit hard by a particular problem or challenge but still find some

way to keep moving ahead. Resilient people bounce back and even beyond, never

bemoaning the past or the present.

Philosophical and Theoretical Foundations of Authentic

Leadership

A Post-Analytic View

During the first half of the 20th century, existential thinkers like Heidegger, Sartre,

Camus, Kierkegaard, and Maslow explored issues of inauthenticity, elevating honesty

and truthfulness in individuals above other existential values (Park, 1983; Seeman, 1966;

Trilling, 1972). Philosopher Mark Bevir (1999) participated in the philosophical

foundation by offering his voice to the theoretical framers of authentic leadership and

adopting “a (post) analytic view of philosophy drawing on the later work of

Wittgenstein” (p. 6). He writes, “I adopted a version of Wittgenstein’s view of analytic

philosophy as the grammar of our concepts, and then explored the forms of reasoning

appropriate to the history of ideas” (Bevir, 1999, p. 310). Providing a new philosophical

interpretation to already existing views, he treated “analytic philosophy, phenomenology,

and hermeneutics as compatible activities” (Bevir, 1999, p. 3), and argued that

while philosophers construct the logic of a discipline on the basis of the concepts

deployed within it, not the data uncovered by it, they do so to examine what

these concepts imply about the nature of the world, not to record how we use the

words that embody these concepts. (p. 13)

Novicevic et al. (2006) affirm that this new discipline studies cultural meanings

from a historical perspective. By seeking a normative reasoning and not pursuing the

uncovering of historical facts, the new discipline and the post-analytic view advocated by

Bevir provides us with a rationale to explain the uncovered meanings of past events

(Novicevic et al., 2006, p. 65). Grenz (1996) offers the perspective that

no experience occurs in the vacuum; no transformation comes to us apart from an

interpretation facilitated by the concepts—the ‘web of belief’—we bring to it.

To the contrary, experience and interpretive concepts are reciprocally related. Our

concepts facilitate our understanding of the experiences we have in life, and our

experience shapes the interpretive concepts we employ to speak about our lives.

(p. 170)

Novicevic et al. (2006) also observed that Bevir (1999) carved a middle-of-

theroad path to connect shared traditions in the process of discovering historical meanings

(Novicevic et al., 2006, p. 65). Bevir (1999) declared that “historians cannot have direct

access to the past, in the way we can to the present, simply because it has gone. . . .

Historians of ideas study relics from the past in order to recover historical meanings.

They seek to reconstruct ideas or meanings from the past” (p. 31). One would ask, What

does this philosophical intertwining have to do with authentic leadership? The answer is

simple, there is nothing new under the sun, and authenticity, authentic leadership,

authentic followership, and authentic leadership development are not an exception. The

terms may sound like new ideas, but their philosophical and historical origins declare

them to be a resurrection, a reincarnation, and a recasting of concepts that existed in a

different time and historical context. Bevir makes that point clear.

Other Contributions to Authentic Leadership

The perspective advanced by Avolio and Gardner (2005) and by Illies et al. (2005)

is firmly rooted in social psychology theory and research on authenticity; also the

perspective of Avolio and Gardner (2005) did not include either an inductive or a

philosophical approach (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Kernis, 2003). They were seeking a simpler

way to explain authentic leadership (Shamir & Eilam, 2005; Sparrowe, 2005). It is also

important to note the influence of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000, pp.

227268) on various facets of leader and follower self-awareness (such as values, identity,

emotions, goals, and motives), as well as the relationships between the follower outcomes

of trust, engagement, and well-being; and the attainment of a verifiable and sustainable

performance (Gardner, Avolio, & Walumbwa, et al., 2005).

Self-awareness is the capacity for self-reflection and introspection required for a

true understanding of the self or others. It is needed because an authentic leader needs to

know himself/herself, in order to be true to himself/herself. This process of

selfknowledge “frequently begins with some sort of a trigger moment, a moment that

activates an internal review of core ideas and values” (Avolio & Luthans, 2006, p. 228).

“Self-awareness is not a destination point, but rather an emerging process where one

continually comes to understand his or her unique talents, strengths, sense of purpose,

core values, beliefs and desires” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 324).

Self-awareness is defined as “an emerging process where one continually comes

to understand his or her unique talents, strengths, sense of purpose, core values, beliefs

and desires” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 324).

Other writers indicate that self-awareness, self-reflection, and storytelling develop

self-concept clarity, helping a leader to become mature and able to relate better to

complexity (Denning, 2007; Nehls, 2012; Shamir & Eilam, 2005; Simmons, 2007).

The process of self-awareness shows similarities with the experiential learning

and development model advocated by D. A. Kolb’s content and process reflection cycle,

that encompasses the stages of Concrete Experience (CE), Reflective Observation (RO),

Abstract Conceptualization (AC), Active Experimentation (AE), with the cycle repeating

itself (Kolb, 1984). The process of self-awareness is very much in line with the lifelong

process of self-development taught by several developmental psychologists and

leadership educators (Andenoro, Popa, Bletscher, & Albert, 2012; Clinton, 1988;

Levinson, 1978; Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007; Rothstein, 2010; Shamir &

Eilam, 2005; Sheehy, 1995).

Through self-awareness, “followers develop greater clarity about their values,

identity, and emotions and, in turn move towards internalized regulatory processes,

balanced information processing, transparent relations with the leader and associates, and

authentic behavior” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 326). Other more recent contributors to

authentic leadership theory are discussed in the following segments of this review of the

literature (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Kernis, 2003; Mruk, 2006, 2008), and these

variables measure the degree of authenticity of leaders and followers (Ilies et al., 2005;

Walumbwa et al., 2008). Shamir and Eilam (2005) observed that in authentic leadership

“the role of leaders is central to their self-concept, they have achieved a high level of

selfresolution or self-concept clarity, their goals are self-concordant, and their behavior is

self-expressive” (Shamir & Eilam, 2005, p. 399).

Consistent with Kernis’s developmental model of “optimal” levels of self-esteem,

Walumbwa indicates that authentic leaders display high levels of self-esteem and

consistency between their values, beliefs, and actions (Walumbwa et al., 2008, p. 93). To

that effect Walumbwa et al. defined authentic leadership as

a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive

psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater

selfawareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of

information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with

followers, fostering positive self-development. (p. 94)

As the four dimensions of the developmental model authored by Kernis (2003)

became the four measurable components of authentic leadership, Walumbwa et al. (2008)

argued that the four areas proposed by Shamir and Eilam (2005) are integrated in the

selfbased model of authentic leaders and follower development of Gardner, Avolio, and

Luthans, et al. ( 2005).

According to Guasta (2012), the meaning of self-awareness is highly complex and

multifaceted, as expressed in Leading in Complex Worlds. “Self-awareness may be

considered to be personal and subjective, although equally connected to relationship and

community” (p. 11) and, as she suggests, “dialogue helps to develop self-awareness as

well as the relational connection that exists among all humans.” She identifies

“selfawareness as a fluid process” and as “a journey involving courage, vulnerability,

confusion, reflection, relation, discovery, and deepened awareness” (p. 12).

In Table 3 I present theorists, philosophers, researchers, and visionaries who have

contributed in varying measures to the origination and early understanding of Authentic

Leadership theory, as discussed in this review of the literature.

Table 3

Theorists, Philosophers, Researchers, and Visionaries

Philosophers Psychologists Theoreticians &

Researchers

Historians &

Visionaries

Bevir, Sartre,

Wittgenstein,

Heidegger

Seligman, Deci &

Ryan, Kernis,

Kolb

Avolio, Gardner, Luthans,

Kernis, Walumbwa, Ilies,

Cooper, Scandura,

Schriesheim, Shamir &

Eilam, Goleman

Novicevic, Barnard,

George, Terry

Existentialist,

Objectivist, Social

Constructionism,

Post-Analytic

Positive,

Social

Psychology

Psychological Capital,

Positive Leadership

theories, Emotional

Intelligence

Ethical Leadership, Positive Forms of Leadership, and

Authentic Leadership

Optimal Self-Esteem

In line with the interpretation of Authentic Leadership theory endorsed by Avolio,

Gardner and Luthans, the variables that define authentic leadership development are:

selfawareness, relational transparency, ethical/moral values, and balanced decision-

making involving others. These are adopted from the model of optimal self-esteem

offered by Kernis. The four dimensions of authentic leadership were originally introduced

by psychologist M. H. Kernis, as the component parts of what constitutes optimal

selfesteem (Kernis, 2003; Mruk, 2006, 2008), and he stated that optimal self-esteem “is

characterized by qualities associated with genuine, true, stable, and congruent high

selfesteem” (Kernis, 2003, p. 1). As Kernis establishes his rationale to achieve optimal

selfesteem, he expresses the reasons why he selected the four variables as follows:

I propose that authenticity as an individual difference construct may be

particularly important in delineating the adaptive features of optimal self-esteem.

Authenticity can be characterized as reflecting the unobstructed operation of

one’s true, or core, self in one’s daily enterprise. As I describe, authenticity has at

least four discriminable components: awareness, unbiased processing, action, and

relational orientation. (p. 13)

Kernis (2003) believed that “experiencing oneself as authentic provides the basis

for experiencing optimal self-esteem” (p. 16), and visualized authenticity as “useful in

advancing our understanding of optimal, or secure self-esteem” (p. 23). He identified

self-awareness as “having awareness of, and trust in, one’s motives, feelings, desires, and

self-relevant cognitions,” including, but not limited to, “being aware of one’s strengths

and weaknesses, trait characteristics and emotions” (p. 13) He further clarified that the

“awareness component of authenticity involves knowledge of one’s needs, values,

feelings, figure-ground personality aspects, and their roles in behavior” (p. 13).

Kernis’s (2003) second component “involves the unbiased processing of

selfrelevant information. In other words, it involves not denying, distorting, exaggerating,

or ignoring private knowledge, internal experiences, and externally based evaluative

information” (p. 14). Third is an ethical/moral element that involves behavior, and

“whether people act in accord with their true self . . . acting in accord with one’s values,

preferences, and needs as opposed to acting merely to please others or to attain rewards or

avoid punishments through acting ‘falsely’” (p. 14). In Kernis’s view transparency is

“relational in nature, inasmuch as it involves valuing and achieving openness and

truthfulness in one’s close relationships. Relational authenticity involves endorsing the

importance for close others to see the real you, good and bad” (p. 15). He attributes his

conception of authenticity to anthropologist Carlos Castaneda (Castaneda, 1971).

Kernis (2003) believed there is no single physical, social, or psychological reality,

but multiple realities coexist, and it is up to the individual to learn about and accept these

multiple realities. Kernis points out that Castaneda’s (1971) central argument is that

individuals are free to choose their own reality; they must trust in it and, at the same time,

recognize that it is not the only reality. He further argues that “this awareness provides a

sense of freedom and responsibility that promotes authenticity” (Kernis, 2003, p. 13).

Authentic Leadership Development

The most significant ideas of leadership development affecting authentic

leadership are found in the book The High Impact Leader (Avolio & Luthans, 2006). In

this work Avolio and Luthans brought authenticity to leadership development.

In an earlier work Avolio and Gardner (2005) identified the constructs guiding

how to do Authentic Leadership Development as (a) practicing transparency, (b) using a

balanced decision-making process, (c) growing moral/ethical perspectives, and (d)

developing self-awareness. These four constructs became the quantifiable variables of

authentic leadership, and they were placed at the foundation of authentic leadership, and

therefore are “at the root of positive forms of leadership” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, pp.

322-324).

Authentic Leadership follows a developmental process identified as self-based,

where the individual owns his or her experiences, whether they are values, thoughts,

emotions, and/or beliefs. Through a process of self-awareness these past experiences are

revisited, sometimes repeatedly, and lessons are extracted from them bringing “the actual

self” to become “the possible self,” helping connect the past, the present, and the future

(Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, et al., 2005, p. 344).

Social constructivism (Bruner, 1996; Dewey, 1916; Vygotsky & Cole, 1978)

offers Authentic Leadership and Authentic Leadership Development a philosophical

dwelling, as individuals learn as they work and understand their experiences, create

meaning, and learn from them. Figure 1 depicts the different theoretical influences I have

found in Authentic Leadership Development.

The PsyCap components—Confidence, Hope, Optimism and Resiliency—are

considered inherent to authentic leaders, and ultimately, the leadership development ideas

extracted from developmental psychology introduced by Bruce Avolio and Fred Luthans.

These different components serve as a framework that holds this theory together. Central

to Authentic Leadership are the measurable variables contributed by the Kernis studies on

Optimal Self-Esteem. Figure 1 depicts these influences.

Avolio and Gardner (2005) consider ALD to be “at the root of positive forms of

leadership” (pp. 322-324). Theories classified as positive forms of leadership include

Ethical, Transformational, Charismatic, Servant and Spiritual leadership (Avolio &

Gardner, 2005, p. 315; Walumbwa et al., 2008).

Yukl (2010) acknowledges the ambiguity that exists among theorists about

Transformational and Charismatic when he writes about “conceptual ambiguity and lack

of consistency in definitions,” indicating that “even among theorists who view the two

types of leadership as distinct processes, there remains disagreement about whether it is

possible to be both transformational and charismatic at the same time” (Yukl, 2010, p.

285). Yukl also classifies Authentic Leadership together with Ethical, Servant and

Spiritual leadership and considers these theories as “different conceptions of ethical

leadership” (p. 409). He treats Charismatic and Transformational leadership as two

separate theories, and compares Transformational with four charismatic leadership

constructs (Attributed Charisma, Self-Concept Theory, Psycho-Dynamic and Social

Contagion) (pp. 267-269).

Figure 1. Summary of philosophical, psychological, and theoretical influences on

authentic leadership development.

A comparison of the variables of Authentic, Transformational and Ethical

leadership theories by Walumbwa et al. (2008) shows that seven out of ten theoretical

components of transformational leadership are present in authentic leadership, most of

them treated as major focal components of the theory. Table 4 describes the components

of Authentic Leadership Development theory as compared with other positive forms of

Table 4

Components of Authentic Leadership Development Theory

TL SP

1. Positive psychological capital ○ ○ ○ - ○

2. Positive moral perspective ● ● ● ● ●

3. Leader self-awareness - - - - -

Values ● ● ● ● ●

Cognitions ● ● ● ● ●

Emotions ● ● ● ● ●

4. Leader self-regulation - - - - -

Internalized ● - ● - ● Balanced processing ● - - - -

Relational transparency ● - - - -

Authentic behavior ○ ○ ○ ● -

5. Leadership processes/behaviors - - - - -

Positive modeling ● ● ● ● ○

Personal and social identification ● ● ● ○ ○

Emotional Contagion - - - - -

Supporting self-determination ● ● ○ ● ● Positive social

exchanges ● ○ ○ ○ ○

6. Follower self-awareness - - - - -

Values ● - ● ● ●

Cognitions ● - ● - ●

Emotions ● - ● - ●

7. Follower self-regulation - - - - -

Internalized ● ● ● ○ ●

Balanced processing ● - - - -

Relational transparency ○ - ○ - - Authentic behavior

○ - ○ - ○

8. Follower development - - - ● ● 9. Organizational context - - - - -

CL (B) CL (SC) SVT

Uncertainty ● ● ● - - Inclusion ● - - - ●

Ethical ● - - - -

Positive, strengths-based - - - ○ -

Table 4—Continued.

TL CL (B) CL (SC) SVT SP

10. Performance - - - - -

- - - -

Sustained ● ● - - -

Beyond expectations ● ● - - ●

Total

○ ○ ○ ○ ○

25 14 18 13 18

Note. Focal component = ●; Discussed = ○; Not discussed = - .

TL=Transformational Leadership Theory; CL (B)=Behavioral Theory of Charismatic

Leadership; CL (SC)=Self-Concept Based Theory of Charismatic Leadership;

SVT=Servant Leadership Theory; SP=Spiritual Leadership Theory. From “Authentic

Leadership Development: Getting to the Root of Positive Forms of Leadership,” by B. J.

Avolio and W. L. Gardner, 2005, The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.

doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001

leadership. The comparison shown on Table 4 also shows that five of the main factors in

transformational leadership are found in ethical leadership theory (Walumbwa et al.,

2008).

Authentic Leadership Among Ethical and Positive Forms of

Leadership

Ethical leaders seek to do the right thing personally and professionally and have

the attributes of honesty, fairness, integrity, and openness. This dimension is the moral

person aspect of ethical leadership (M. E. Brown & Treviño, 2006, p. 597). In their

pursuit of clear standards, ethical leaders show self-discipline and consistency in their

pursuit of clear standards, and consider these standards to be not negotiable. This

dimension is what M. Brown, Treviño, and Harrison (2005) identify as the moral manager

aspect of ethical leadership. Walumbwa et al. (2008) comment that of the two constructs

(authentic leadership and ethical leadership), authentic leadership reflects more fully the

moral person aspect, and reflect only partially the moral manager aspect of ethical

leadership (p. 103).

Authentic Leadership likewise contains components that are not considered by

ethical leadership theory, such as the focus on self-awareness, relational transparency, and

balanced processing (Walumbwa et al., 2008, p. 103). Avolio and Gardner (2005) do not

include Ethical Leadership in their comparison with theories that bear similar components

of authentic leadership.

Transformational and Charismatic leadership theories have elements that are also

found in Authentic Leadership. According to the comparative analysis done by Avolio

and Gardner (2005), the foundational elements of transformational leadership theory can

be found in Authentic Leadership. The positive psychological capital, positive moral

perspective, leader self-awareness, leader self-regulation, leadership processes/behaviors,

follower self-awareness, follower self-regulation, follower development, organizational

context, and performance are identified in both theories. The emphasis, major or minor,

varies for both theories (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 323). Yukl (2010) identifies

charismatic leadership as having influenced processes, leader behaviors and facilitating

conditions, and according to his analysis, of the four modalities of charismatic leadership

(Attributed charisma, Self-Concept theory, Psycho-Dynamic, and Social Contagion), only

Self-Concept and Social Contagion were included in the comparison, indicating that these

two versions of charismatic leadership keep closer similarities with authentic leadership

(Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 323).

Avolio and Gardner (2005) point out that transformational and authentic

leadership theories remain the closest due to the number of similarities between them (see

Table 4 above). Avolio and Gardner also indicate that an authentic leader does not

necessarily mean the leader is transformational. They write, “We believe the key

distinction is that authentic leaders are anchored by their own deep sense of self; they

know where they stand on important issues, values and beliefs” (p. 329). Figure 2

describes the place of authentic leadership and its relationship among these closely

related theories, based on the assessment of Avolio and Gardner (2005).

Figure 2. Authentic leadership among ethical theories of leadership. Based on “Authentic

Leadership Development: Getting to the Root of Positive Forms of

Leadership,” by B. J. Avolio and W. L. Gardner, 2005, The Leadership Quarterly, 16,

315-338. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001

The fields of Ethical Leadership, Transformational Leadership, Leadership

Development, and other positive forms of leadership that preceded it, provided a rich

literature field in which Authentic Leadership and Authentic Leadership Development

started and grew. Just as the voices of practitioners claimed morality, ethics, integrity,

transparency, and self-based development to be central to leadership, likewise the field of

research in ethical theories has been actively contributing to leadership (Gardner et al.,

2011; Gardner et al., 2010).

These positive forms of leadership place moral values at the foundation,

emphasize “leader traits, skills, values, and behaviors; follower values, perceptions and

needs” and together with ethical leadership, are classified as the group of ethical theories

(Yukl, 2010, p. 431). Authentic Leadership came to light after these other theories existed,

and was conceived to integrate their common foundational elements. “A key

differentiation of Authentic Leadership Development from currently popular leadership

theories is that authentic leadership is more generic and represents what we would term ‘a

root construct’” (Avolio & Gardner, 2005, p. 328).

Algera and Lips-Wiersma (2012) indicate that Authentic Leadership and Authentic

Leadership Development, as they are currently theorized, contain paradoxes that

challenge the original objectives. They also indicate that the process of selfawareness,

self-development and self-regulation elevate Authentic Leadership theory above a mere

technique, as it brings the concept of existential authenticity to the heart of what is

human.

Table 5 is a summary of the measuring instruments and variables used to test

authentic, ethical, and positive forms of leadership theories. It also shows the comparison

of Authentic Leadership Development theory with transformational, charismatic, servant,

and spiritual leadership developed by Avolio and Gardner (2005, p. 323).

Table 5

Measuring Instruments for Authentic Leadership and Other

Theories of Leadership

Theory Authentic Transformational Charismatic Servant Spiritual Ethical

Measuring

Instruments

Authentic

Leadership

Questionnaire

ALQ (Walumbwa

& Avolio, 2008)

Authentic

Leadership

Inventory (ALI)

(Neider &

Schriesheim, 2011)

Multifactor

Leadership

Questionnaire

MLQ (Bass &

Avolio, 1996, 2003)

Transformational

Leadership Inventory

(TLI) (Podsaskoff,

1996)

Transformational Servant

Leadership Leadership

Questionnaire Questionnaire

TLQ-I (Conger, SLQ (Barbuto

1989) & Wheeler,

2006)

Spiritual Ethical

Leadership Leadership

On Line at Work,

Survey ELW

SLQ

Avolio and Gardner (2005) point to the fact that Authentic Leadership theory

shows more similarities with Transformational Leadership theory (see the 25 matching

concepts found in Table 4) than with any other positive form of leadership. Authentic

Leadership is growing into adulthood, and the academic community has responded in

diverse ways to it. The next section will provide a glimpse of the variety of issues and

questions still seeking answers.

Issues From the Current Research Environment

It has been 10 years since the first essays and journal articles on authenticity and

authentic leadership were published, and the new ideas began infiltrating the business

world. The young and untested construct journeyed into the spotlight, bringing a new

perspective and a new promise to be examined and tested because authentic leadership “is

about the authenticity of leaders and their leadership” (Northouse, 2013, p. 215). Avolio,

in the foreword he wrote to the book edited by Donna Ladkin and Chellie Spiller, has

referred to the response of the academic community as follows:

Simply put, I have truly marveled at how an idea in any field can become a study,

an article, a conference, the foundation for creating a network of scholars, a

collaborative relationship, a grant, a research contract, and indeed in some case

even institutionalized in the literature. . . . In sum, we started with a simple

definition offered initially by Avolio et al. (2004, p. 806), who stated that

authentic leaders ‘act in accordance with deep personal values and convictions,

to build credibility and win the respect and trust of followers by encouraging

diverse viewpoints and building networks of collaborative relationships with

followers, and thereby lead in a manner that followers recognize as authentic.’

(Avolio, 2013, p. xxvi)

A Complex Process

Despite the progress of the development of Authentic Leadership (AL) theory, a

number of issues need to be highlighted to show how AL theory relates to the continual

struggle to understand leadership. Northouse (2013) acknowledges that Authentic

Leadership “is a complex process that is difficult to characterize, and that can be seen

from an intrapersonal, developmental, and interpersonal perspective” (p. 215). Defined

from an intrapersonal viewpoint, it focuses on the leader and what goes on within the

leader, that is, the leader’s self-knowledge, self-regulation, and self-concept. From a

developmental perspective, Authentic Leadership is viewed as something that can be

nurtured in a leader over a lifetime, and can be triggered by life events. The interpersonal

perspective views Authentic Leadership as an interpersonal process, a relational process

created by leaders and followers (Northouse, 2013). These three aspects are seen in the

research material that has been produced in the last 10 years. This study in particular fits

into the interpersonal perspective, as authentic leadership is seen not only as the result of

the leader’s efforts but also from the response of followers. Authenticity emerges from the

interactions between leaders and their followers, with both groups affecting each other.

A Leader-Follower Process

Multiple statements from noted authors identify the leader-follower relationship as

the epicenter of Authentic Leadership (AL). In fact, the theory was conceived around the

concept that leadership is a relationship, and that it takes place as a result of the

interaction of the leader and the follower in the context of a mutual task. Küpers and

Weibler (2008) raised questions about the integral understanding of leadership as a series

of complex and interrelated processes, rather than isolated or mutually exclusive

paradigms lacking a more inclusive orientation and enfoldment of leadership (p. 444).

The role of followers has been researched and studied before AL appeared (Kelley, 1992),

and the understanding of the relationship leader-follower was established from the outset

by the framers of AL (Gardner, Avolio, & Walumbwa, et al., 2005; Walumbwa et al.,

2008; Walumbwa, Wang, Wang, Schaubroeck, & Avolio, 2010).

Until 2003 there were two practical approaches to Authentic Leadership. The first

was developed Robert W. Terry in 1993, and the second was developed by Bill George in

2003 (George, 2003; Northouse, 2013). Since 2003 the studies on AL have been mostly

theoretical (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, & May, 2004; Cooper et al., 2005;

Gardner, Avolio, & Walumbwa, et al., 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2008).

Authentic Leadership has been formulated as a practical and also as a theoretical

approach to a trustworthy, morally guided leadership. Northouse (2013) identified the

practical approach as evolving “from real life examples and training and development

literature,” and the theoretical approach as “based on findings from social science

research” (p. 208).

The practical approach found its voice with Bill George and Robert Terry

(George, 2003; George, Sims, McLean, & Mayer, 2007; Terry, 1998). The Authentic

Leadership Institute (ALI) and the Authentic Leadership Institute in Action (ALIA) are

pursuing the practical approach, providing mentoring to managers and leaders. ALI has

developed the Authentic Leadership Inventory, a research questionnaire that guides a

practical application of authenticity. Northouse notes that (a) AL is still in the formative

stages of development, and there are questions that still need to be addressed about the

theory; (b) the moral component of AL is not fully explained; (c) some researchers have

questioned whether positive psychological capacities (PsyCap) should be included as

components as they broadened the construct of AL too much and make measuring it

difficult; and (d) it is unclear how AL results in positive organizational outcomes

(Cameron et al., 2003; Cooper et al., 2005; Northouse, 2013).

Clashes, Convergences, and Coalescences

The issues and opinions on Authentic Leadership that have accumulated over a

period of 10 years have become a part of this new field of study, and research is discussed

in a useful summary of those who agree, disagree, or simply gravitate towards accepting

the current arguments in favor of AL published by Ladkin and Spiller (2013). At the

outset they dismissed the idea that authentic leadership is a repackaging of

transformational leadership, and proceeded to frame the book with a summary of the

clashes or inharmonious areas existing among scholars, presented the concepts in which

the scholars converge, and the areas of clear agreement or coalescence that form a body

of agreements uniting the participating authentic leadership scholars. Ladkin and Spiller

presented two overarching premises in their introduction. They are (a) leadership is a

relational phenomenon, and (b) the nature of the “self” is formed in relationships and is

considered a work in process (p. 1). The summary of their concepts is presented in Table

Table 6

Summary of Ladkin and Spiller (2013)

Clashes Convergences Coalescences

The nature of the self marginalizes

relationships and contexts. The

notion that the ‘true self’ operates

at its best when unencumbered by

the world of others denies the

forces that interplay to forge a

person.

Letting go – leaders need the

capacity to act selflessly in order

to provide leadership. There is

potential for reciprocity between

leaders and followers. The

orchestra conductor needs to let

the musicians play.

Authenticity in the context of

institutions – fitting in to the

dominant discourse, rather than

being “true” can be a key to

career advancement. Followers

need a leader who is prototypical

of them.

Performing authentically and the

requirements of leading as leaders

can hide behind abusive and

dysfunctional behavior by

claiming to be authentic.

Power and status – being fully in

each moment produces a genuine,

live and unplanned response to

what happens on stage. Followers

may lower their status in order to

experience the safety of having a

higher status leader around.

Relational nature of authenticity –

who is authenticity for? A sense of

acting with one’s own values and

beliefs is key to an individual’s

experience of operating with a

healthy sense of well-being.

Authenticity is a social, rather

than personal virtue.

Too good to be true, as leaders are

idealized and portrayed as more

god-like despite the realities of

being human.

Working it – the idea that

authenticity is a process to be

“worked” rather than a quality of

self to be dipped to. It is not

enough being yourself, if you are

not at your best.

The value of authenticity –

shareholders observe leader’s

commitment to a longer term and

broader interests. Direct

experience, reflection and

discovery forge authentic

responses in the face of the

unknown.

Leadership as “a relational phenomenon is not something that can be distilled

down to one leader, whether authentic or not” (Ladkin & Spiller, 2013, p. 1). Instead, they

observed that “it involves taking up the leader role—a part required by a particular socio-

historic moment—rather than being something that a person is” (p. 1). This position

seems to be partial to the interpersonal and apparent denial of the intrapersonal and

developmental perspectives of authentic leadership (Northouse, 2013).

Ladkin and Spiller (2013) believe that much of authentic leadership focuses on the

individual leader, although, they admit, the self is formed in relationships. Even when the

notion that the “true self” operates at its best when unencumbered by others, that in itself

is a denial of forces that interplay to forge a person, and many authors speak of the

benefits and the drawbacks in understanding the self primarily through self-reflection.

Ladkin and Spiller (2013) also questioned how authentic leadership, with its focus on the

self, can produce the selfless and enlightened leaders that it claims. Furthermore, with

some scholars questioning self-other rating comparison for measuring self-awareness, the

question becomes open as to the measuring statistical technique that could be applied to

the groups studied (S. N. Taylor, Wang, & Yujie, 2012). As scholarly research in the area

of authentic leadership proliferated during the last decade, its impact on our

understanding of leadership development has also grown (Gardner et al., 2011).

Inauthentic Leaders

Leaders are not perfect, and most of them present a measure of inauthentic beliefs

and behavior. They may be found less than open, reliable, and accountable; not following

principles, and less than upright and honest. They could be openly biased, partial, unfair,

and unable to understand the world and the meaning of its realities, simply being

inauthentic (Algera & Lips-Wiersma, 2012; Dasborough & Ashkanasy, 2005; Seeman,

1966). Even the most classic examples of leaders with widely recognized integrity and

authenticity, like Mohandas Gandhi in India, Nelson Mandela in South Africa, or Aung

San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, are found to be inauthentic in some aspect of their leadership.

Leaders are complex and may show less than their authentic self. Ciulla (2013)

sees that a construct of authenticity that centers on self-knowledge is too simplistic to

explain leaders like Mandela. Ciulla describes him as less than authentic when his public

behavior was at odds with his true personal emotions. Mandela, she concludes,

gives up some of his freedom and autonomy to become a part of the project of

the anti-apartheid movement. Mandela is attentive to what he is in the context of

others, but whether he acts as he really is or fakes it is irrelevant to what he

actually does. The assumption that morality is a quality of an authentic leader and

the result of being an authentic leader is circular and too simplistic to stand up to

real examples in history. Mandela is not a moral leader because he is authentic,

nor is he an authentic leader because he is moral. (p. 37)

She concluded, “Mandela the man got lost in Mandela the movement” (Ciulla, 2013, p.

37).

Issues of inauthenticity have been implied also in research done on toxic,

despotic, destructive, tyrannical or simply systemic anomalies that have crept into the

system and make leaders fail (Einarsen, Aasland, & Skogstad, 2007; Krasikova, Green, &

LeBreton, 2013; Padilla, Hogan, & Kaiser, 2007; Popper, 2011; Schyns & Schilling,

2013; Thoroughgood, Padilla, Hunter, & Tate, 2012).

A View of Adventist Leaders

Before concluding this chapter, it is of critical importance to emphasize the need

of authenticity among Adventist leaders, and to revisit Jan Paulsen’s remarks in 2005

already commented on previously. A harmony exists between his description of the

leadership dimensions needed by church leaders and the constructs of Authentic

Leadership theory. During his public address Paulsen asked, “What are the qualities

which the community of faith can reasonably be expected to look for in electing a

leader?” (p. 37). He identified (a) transparency, defined as the filter through which

humility and integrity are seen; (b) self-awareness, or relating to our past experiences in

order to learn from them; (c) ethical/moral integrity, as greed and self-seeking do not

belong in any leadership assignment in our church; and (d) the ability of a leader to seek

unity, inclusiveness of culture, gender and opinions, and consideration to having the same

manual, policies, statement of fundamental beliefs and integrated resource support system

which in essence makes the church ‘one united global family of faith.’ Paulsen (2005)

further indicated,

what is critical is to have a clear identification of what constitutes the core

personality, the spiritual ‘DNA,’ of Seventh-day Adventism, which transcends

cultures and traditions and must be retained, treasured, nurtured, and passed on to

our children and the next generation of church members. And this is a leadership

issue. It is leadership’s responsibility, with discipline and love to look after the

heart and the mind of this church. (p. 33)

The Authentic Leadership construct defines authenticity in both leaders and

followers in four variables that impact their development: Self-Awareness, Relational

Transparency, Ethical/Moral Behavior, and Balanced Processing of other peoples’

opinions (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, et al., 2005; Walumbwa et

al., 2008). They correlate closely with the values expressed by Paulsen (2005). As I

evaluate these variables among Adventist local conference treasurers and their associates

in this study, I believe that I am also addressing needs the church has already articulated.

In his latest book (2011), Paulsen reiterated that “an Adventist leader is a person

of integrity” (p. 29), and identified outstanding Adventist leaders as (a) having transparent

motives, (b) showing balance as they consider everyone’s opinion before deciding and

acting selflessly, (c) should be guided by scriptural principles, (d) seek the guidance of

the Holy Spirit to know themselves better, (e) to be able to sense the pulse of the

community they have been asked to lead, (f) having the humility to be led, and (g) being

able to handle change (pp. 30-35).

Before I conclude this literature review it is fair to mention a less intentional, and

yet generalized problem existing in the administration of the structures of the Adventist

denomination. The systemic, perhaps an imperceptible hint at inequity in the distribution

leadership tasks among administrative officers that renders my target group, the local

conference treasurers, unable to function as the leaders they are (Patterson, 2012). The

reader of this study should be made aware of the fact that when leaders are unable to

exercise leadership effectively in their assigned areas, they forfeit the possibility of

becoming authentic leaders.

Summary

This review of the literature was divided into four major sections: (a) a historical

overview of Authentic Leadership (AL); (b) the philosophical and theoretical foundations

of AL; (c) ethical, positive forms of leadership and AL/Authentic Leadership

Development (ALD), and (d) issues and questions from the current research environment.

These four sections describe the origin and development of AL as a leadership theory, its

different philosophical and theoretical influences, and the most recent trends of the theory

given its relatively short life. Authentic leadership was eclectically conceived to be at the

root of positive forms of leadership with the purpose of developing a leader who is a

better kind of person, whose character and behavior agree, who shows consistency in

values and actions, in beliefs and behavior, and who is capable of inspiring others to

follow, or lead. The local conference treasurers, or chief financial officers, function in a

church environment and culture. T. Brown (2005) indicates that the perception of the

treasurer has moved from accounting to financial leadership. The review of the literature

framing this study provides a platform to help understand their perceptions and that of

their followers within the context of authentic leadership, which converges with the stated

desires expressed by the church. In the following chapter I address the research design,

the methodology, and the limitations of the study.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN, METHODOLOGY, AND

LIMITATIONS

Introduction

The purpose of the study is to explore the perceptions of Adventist local

conference treasurers in the continental United States as Authentic Leaders and assess

how their perceptions either agree or disagree with the perceptions of their followers. I

will accomplish this by relating the answers of the local conference treasurers with the

answers of their subordinates or followers to the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire

(ALQ 1.0) (Avolio et al., 2007).

The chapter includes (a) a description of the sample/population under study; (b)

the survey procedure; (c) a description of the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ);

(d) the methodology used for data collection and analysis; and (e) notes the limitations of

the research design and methodology of this study. I seek to explore how the treasurers

relate to the values proposed by “a root construct at the base of transformational

leadership” (Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, et al., 2005, p. 350), and if their perception is

either confirmed or denied by the responses of their followers.

This is a quantitative correlational, comparative, cross-sectional survey. It seeks to

explore and measure the relationship between leaders and followers (Creswell, 2008, pp.

133-135). The study seeks to explain the relationship of two sets of measurable variables

(relational transparency, balanced processing of opinions, ethical/moral values and self-

awareness), and it has a cross-sectional survey design (pp. 389-391).

Population and Sample

The populations studied compose the conference-level financial personnel of the

Seventh-day Adventist Church in the United States. In this study the Authentic

Leadership values, in four measurable dimensions, are tested for the local conference

treasurers or financial managers/leaders, as the “leaders,” and their responses will be

measured and compared with the responses of their “followers,” their associates in

financial management (local conference undertreasurers, associate treasurers, assistant

treasurers, accountants, and association or corporation treasurers working under their

immediate and direct supervision). These are identified in Table 7 as Follower 1. The

treasurers of secondary boarding school institutions operating under the direct local

conference financial supervision are identified under Follower 2. The table groups them

by Union Conferences, which are geographic areas where the conferences operate.

Based on the information shown in Table 7, the number of participants from the

Leader group was 50, from Follower 1 group were 120, and from Follower 2 group were

28, for a total number of 198 possible participants. This study is considered to be a census

study, as it studies the data directly from the population; therefore, a random sample was

not taken, and hypothesis probability testing procedures were not required (Creswell,

2008, p. 394).

Hypotheses

For this quantitative inferential study the first research hypothesis (Ha1) is the

expectation that the local conference treasurers’ self-perceptions of transparency, Table 7

Leaders and Followers Participants

Union

Conference

Local Conference Leader Follower 1 Follower 2 Total

Atlantic

(North East, New

York)

Greater New York

New York

Northeastern

Northern New England

Southern New England

2 2

2 3

- -

5 13 1 19

Columbia

(Middle Atlantic)

Allegheny East

Allegheny West

Chesapeake

Mountain View

New Jersey

Ohio

Pennsylvania

Potomac

3 3

2 5

- 1

8 21 5 34

Lake

(Great Lakes)

Illinois

Indiana

Lake Region

Michigan

Wisconsin

3 1

3 3

- 1

5 12 3 20

Mid-America

(US center region)

Central States

Dakota

Iowa-Missouri

Kansas-Nebraska

Minnesota

Rocky Mountain

1 1

2 2

- 1

6 10 4 20

North Pacific

(Pacific North

West)

Alaska

Idaho

Montana

Oregon

Upper Columbia

Washington

1 1

1 4

- 1

6 9 5 20

Pacific

(Arizona,

California,

Hawaii, Nevada

and Utah)

Arizona

Central California

Hawaii

Nevada-Utah

Northern California

Southeastern California

Southern California

1 5

3 4

1 1

- 1

7 20 4 31 Table 7—Continued.

Union Conference Local Conference Leader Follower 1 Follower 2 Total

Southern

(South East and

South Central

States)

Carolina

Florida

Georgia-Cumberland

Gulf States

Kentucky-Tennessee

South Atlantic

South Central

Southeastern

1 1

4 4

3 2

1 1

8 24 5 37

Southwestern

(South West)

Arkansas-Louisiana

Oklahoma

Southwest Region

Texas

Texico

1 1

1 3

4 1

5 11 1 17

Total 50 120 28 198

moral/ethical values, balanced processing, and self-awareness are significantly different

from followers’ perceptions of their leaders in the same four factors already indicated.

This expectation stands in contrast with the null hypothesis (Ha1) that the treasurer’s self-

perceptions of relational transparency, moral/ethical values, balanced processing, and

self-awareness are not significantly different from followers’ perceptions of their leaders

in the same four constructs.

The second hypothesis (Ha2) states that the treasurers’ gender, age, years of

professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic

level are significantly related to their own self-perception of relational transparency,

moral/ethical values, balanced processing, and self-awareness. This expectation stands in

contrast with the null hypothesis (Ha2) that the treasurers’ gender, age, years of

professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and the

academic level are not significantly related to their own self-perceptions of relational

transparency, moral/ethical, balanced processing, and self-awareness.

The third hypothesis (Ha3) states that the followers’ gender, age, years of

professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic

level are significantly related to their perception of relational transparency, moral/ethical,

balanced processing, and self-awareness of their leaders, the local conference treasurers.

This expectation stands in contrast with the null hypothesis (Ha3) that the treasurers’

gender, age, years of professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist

Church, and academic level are not significantly related to the followers’ perception of

relational transparency, moral/ethical, balanced processing, and self-awareness of their

leaders.

Definition of Variables

This section includes the conceptual, instrumental, and operational definitions of

the variables included in this study, namely (a) relational transparency; (b) balanced

processing of opinions; (c) ethical/moral values, and (d) self-awareness. These variables

are defined and described below. The reader also finds definitions for these variables in

the Table of Variable Definitions in Appendix A.

Relational Transparency

In this study, following Avolio and Gardner (2005) and Walumbwa et al. (2008),

the Leader (Self) concept of relational transparency is expressed as the leaders present

authentic self to others, promoting trust through disclosures, openly sharing information,

and expressing true thoughts and feelings while trying to minimize displays of

inappropriate emotions. This concept will be operationalized via the Authentic

Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ 1.0) constituted by five items like leaders “Encourage

everyone to speak their mind,” and “Admit their mistakes when they are made.” A

fivescore Likert scale type (from “Not at all” to “Frequently if not always”) is used to

answer the items. An addition of the scores from items 1 to 5 divided by 5 will be a 0 to 4

value of the exact interval. The same measure will apply to followers with similar

instrumental and operational definition.

Ethical/Moral Values

The Leader concept of moral/ethical values is expressed as the leaders have an

internalized and integrated form of self-regulation guided by internal moral standards and

values versus group organizational and societal pressures that result in expressed decision

making and behavior consistent with the internalized values. This concept will be

operationalized via the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ 1.0) constituted by

four items such as leaders “Demonstrate beliefs that are consistent with actions,” and

“Make difficult decisions based on high standards of ethical conduct.” A five-score

Likert scale type (“Not at all,” to “Frequently if not always”) is used to answer the items.

An addition of the scores from items 6 to 9 divided by 4 will be a 0 to 4 value of the exact

interval scale. A similar measure will apply to followers with a similar instrumental and

operational definition.

Balanced Processing

The Leader concept of balanced processing of the opinions of others is expressed

as they objectively analyze all relevant data before coming to a decision, and solicit views

that challenge their deeply held positions. This concept will be operationalized via the

Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ 1.0) constituted by three items such as leaders

“Solicit views that challenge my deeply held positions,” and “Listen carefully to different

points of view before coming to conclusions.” A five-score Likert scale type (from “Not

at all” to “Frequently if not always”) is used to answer the items. An addition of the

scores from items 10 to 12 divided by 3 will be a 0 to 4 value of the exact interval scale.

A similar measure will apply to followers with similar instrumental and operational

definition.

Self-Awareness

The Leader concept of self-awareness is expressed as the leaders demonstrate an

understanding of how one derives and makes meaning of the world and how that

meaning-making process impacts the way one views himself or herself over time. It also

refers to showing an understanding of one’s strengths and weaknesses and the

multifaceted nature of the self, which includes gaining insight into the self through

exposure to others. This concept will be operationalized via the Authentic Leadership

Questionnaire (ALQ 1.0) constituted by four items such as leaders “Seek feedback to

improve interactions with others,” “Accurately describe how others view my

capabilities,” “Know when it is time to reevaluate my position on important issues,” and

“Shows he or she understands how specific actions impact others.” A five-score Likert

scale type (“Not at all,” to “Frequently if not always”) is used to answer the items. An

addition of the scores from items 13 to 16 divided by 4 will be a 0 to 4 value of the exact

interval scale. A similar measure will apply to followers with similar instrumental and

operational definition.

Demographic Variables

In addition to the variables defined above, I collected other pertinent information

to describe the population under study. These variables include age, defined as the time

from birth to the present. The age of the respondent was determined by asking the year

when he/she was born, and subtracting the year reported from 2011. Gender is defined as

the respondent’s sexual biological condition. The responses seek to identify whether the

respondent is a male or a female with a 1 for male, and 0 for a female, which is to be

treated as a dummy variable. Educational level is defined as the highest academic degree

obtained. It provides an operational definition of 1 for High School, 2 for Associate

College Degree, 3 for Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Science, 4 for Master of Arts, Master

of Science or Master of Business Administration, and 5 for PhD or equivalent.

Professional affiliations involve collecting information of professional certifications such

as Certified Public Accountant (CPA), Certified Management Accountant (CMA),

Certified Internal Auditor (CIA), or any other equivalent professional certification. The

operational definitions are 1 for CPA, 2 for CMA, 3 for CIA, and 4 for other.

I also sought information about the total number of years of professional work of

the respondent in either a financial and/or administrative area such as managerial,

investments, treasury, accounting, etc. These will be operationalized based on actual

number reported. The years reported in this section should be the total number of years of

work regardless of whether they worked for Adventist denomination or not. The Years of

Denominational Service variable seeks to obtain the information of the years of service

the individual served for the Seventh-day Adventist denomination in treasury or

treasuryrelated work. This could include any time served in financial management,

investment, management, treasury, and accounting as an employee of a Seventh-day

Adventist entity.

The information is defined as the total number of years of service for the SDA Church,

and is operationalized as the actual number reported by the respondent.

Instrumentation

The instrument chosen for this study is the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire

(ALQ) version 1.0, developed by the theorists who originated Authentic Leadership

Development (Avolio et al., 2007). It is available through www.mindgarden.com, with the

following physical address: Mind Garden, Inc., 855 Oak Grove Ave., Suite 215,

Menlo Park, CA 94025 ([email protected]). The questionnaire was introduced by

Walumbwa et al. (2008) and “has undergone significant validation efforts to demonstrate

that it is both reliable and construct valid that gave Authentic Leadership Development a

quantitative foundation” (Avolio et al., 2007, p. 1). It was tested with samples in The

Republic of China, Kenya, and the United States (p. 92). The ALQ consists of 16

questions to the leaders (self), and 16 questions to the followers, (rater). Each statement

was judged using the following scale: 0 = Not at all; 1 = Once in a while; 2 = Sometimes;

3 = Fairly often; 4 = Frequently, if not always. The constructs are measured with the

following questions: Transparency (1, 2, 3, 4, 5); Moral/Ethical (6, 7, 8, 9); Balanced

Processing (10, 11, 12); and Self-Awareness (13, 14, 15, 16) for both leaders and

followers.

Validity and reliability of the instrument ALQ 1.0 are established as

confirmatory factor analyses [that] supported a higher order, multidimensional model

of the construct comprising leader self-awareness, relational transparency,

internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing. Structural equation

modeling (SEM) demonstrated the predictive validity for the ALQ measure for

important work-related attitudes and behaviors, beyond what ethical and

transformational leadership offered. (Walumbwa et al., 2008, pp. 97)

Finally, the instrument provided to the participants included three open-ended

questions addressed to the local conference treasurers. These answers were used as the

foundation of a separate qualitative study not related to this dissertation.

Data Collection

On April 13, 2011, a presentation of the research project was made to the leaders,

the group of local conference treasurers. They collectively and voluntarily agreed to

participate in the study. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved the application

under AU Protocol Number 11-142, and upon receiving the approval I contacted the

participants by email to reestablish contact with the leader group, and to establish contact

with the follower groups. I contacted Mind Garden, Inc., and received their permission

for the use of the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire, ALQ 1.0, for data collection. Their

message contained a web line that required the Informed Consent Form to be answered

first by the participant, and only after they extended their consent did the web page allow

them to have access to the ALQ for them to respond to the survey questions. Each

participant was given electronic access to the portion of the ALQ that applied to them.

Their responses were received by Mind Garden, Inc., through an encrypted line, thus

protecting the anonymity of the respondents and the confidentiality of the data.

Data Analysis

The data were processed without names to protect the anonymity of the

participants, and in line with the methodology I used the SPSS statistical package. This is

a census study and descriptive statistics was applied to the data collected. The population

was studied in its entirety due to its size and identity, and as such it permits conclusions to

be drawn about the entire population (Creswell, 2008, p. 394). The application of

MANOVA in order to test Hypothesis 1 (Ha1), and Canonical Regression (Rc) to

Hypotheses 2 and 3 (Ha2, Ha3) afforded a valuable opportunity to understand the

responses of the groups appropriately.

Summary

This chapter has presented a complete description of the methodology, including

the type of research, population and sample, hypotheses, definition of variables,

instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis.

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to explore the Authentic Leadership values of

Adventist local conference treasurers or Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) in the

continental United States by comparing their self-evaluating input with the input their

followers provide of them. This study used the Authentic Leadership Development

Questionnaire 1.0 (ALQ 1.0) as the measuring instrument (Avolio et al., 2007). This

chapter presents how the leaders and the followers relate to the four variables defining

Authentic Leadership Development (ALD), which are relational transparency,

selfawareness, ethical/moral values, and balanced processing of other people’s opinions.

ALD is considered “a root construct at the base of transformational leadership” (Gardner,

Avolio, Luthans, et al., 2005, p. 350).

The data describe the demographic characteristics of the population and were

tested using multivariate statistical analyses. Because of this, it should be clarified that

the statistical mean (ẋ) is to be considered the population mean (µ). The data are a

description of the population studied, and are not a sample (Heiman, 2004; Hinkle,

Wiersma, & Jurs, 1998). The individuals studied are the population of local conference

treasurers (the leaders), and the associates in treasurers and academy treasurers (the

followers). The first research hypothesis in this study was tested with MANOVA, and the

second and third hypotheses were tested by means of canonical correlation, using the

statistical software SPSS, version 22.

Description of the Population

The group studied consisted of 50 Adventist local conference treasurers, who are

also referred to in this study as leaders, CFOs, and self who are serving in the United

States. A total of 45 individuals answered the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire 1.0

(ALQ 1.0) anonymously via web, using the services of Mind Garden, Inc. for data

collection, and four (4) decided not to participate in the study. In order to protect their

anonymity, as well as the identities of the group of respondents who evaluated the 45

participating local conference treasurers, Mind Garden, Inc., made the data available to

my advisor, who made them available to me without individual names, but only with

code numbers. The second group is a total of 102 respondents composed of 84 Associates

in Treasury in Adventist local conferences, and 18 Academy Treasurers directly

administered by local conferences, as provided by the Education Department of the

Seventh-day Adventist Church in North America. It should be noted that one participant

leader (CFO, Local Conference Treasurer) chose to answer only part of the questions and

because of this the number of respondents varies from 45 to 46. This fluctuation is noted

in Table 8. This study is a census of the population.

The first group, Self, is a group of financial leaders consisting of 35 males and 10

females who self-evaluated, with ages ranging from their 30s to their 70s, with 71% of

them in age groups ranging from 50 to 69 years of age, and with an educational level of

BA, BS, MA, or MBA totaling 95.6% of the participant leaders. The second group

(Raters) represents a total of 102 participants composed of two kinds of followers. The

Associates in Treasury work group (R1) consists of 84 participants, and the Academy

Treasurers group (R2) consists of 18 participants. The number of raters who decided not to

participate was 45, of which 35 are Associates in Treasury and 10 are Academy

Treasurers. The groups together included 37% females and 63% males, with ages ranging

between 25 and 74 years of age. This population group of employees responded to the

same ALQ 1.0 questions to which the first group responded. The results are detailed in

Table 8.

Description of the Variables

The four dependent variables tested as the core of Authentic Leadership

Development (ALD) are the leader’s (a) Relational Transparency in dealing with others,

(b) adherence to Moral/Ethical standards and values, (c) understanding of his/her own

self through Self-Awareness, and (d) Balanced Processing weighing the opinions of

others in making decisions.

These four dependent variables taken together provide a measure of the leader’s

view of his/her own authentic values. The measurement of authenticity is completed

when their followers add their own views about their leader’s self-rating. Both sets of

responses taken in combination provide the view of authentic leadership of this study.

The three independent or demographic metric variables are (a) Years of Work for

the Denomination, (b) Years in Administration, and (c) Age of the participants. The

summary of results of the Mean and Standard Deviation for all groups (Self, R1, and R2) is

presented in Table 9. The total number of independent variables increases to five (5) with

the addition of two categorical variables, Educational Level and Gender.

Table 8

1–9

10–19

20–29

30–39

40–50

13.3

15.5

33.4

26.7

11.1

25.0

24.0

31.0

15.0

5.0

33.0

11.0

17.0

6.0

22.0

29.0

19.0

7.0

Years in Denominational Work

1–9

10–19

20–29

30–39

40–50

8.9

15.5

35.5

33.4

6.7

35.0

36.0

23.0

6.0

1.0

44.0

39.0

11.0

6.0

28.0

30.0

25.0

14.0

3.0

Variables Local Conference Treasurers N=45 Associates in Treasury N=84 Academy Treasurers N=18 Total

N=147

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage

Demographic Information of Participants

Gender

Male

Female 35

77.8

22.2

58.3

41.7

9 9 50.0

50.0

63.0

37.0

Age

25–29

30–39

40–49

50–59

60–69

70–74

0 6

12 2

13.0

11.0

44.0

27.0

5.0

2.0

24.0

20.0

36.0

18.0

2 4

2 1

11.0

22.0

28.0

11.0

6.0

29 3

3.0

20.0

18.0

37.0

20.0

2.0

Educational Level

High School

Associate

Degree BA or BS

MA or MBA

2.2

48.9

46.7

10.0

6.0

50.0

34.0

12 5

6.0

66.0

28.0

6 76

6.0

4.0

52.0

37.0

CPA

OTHER

None

26.7

8.9

64.4

- 5

6.0

- -

8.0

7.0

85.0

Years in Administration

PhD or Equivalent 1 2.2 -

- - - 1 1

Professional Affiliation

Table 9

Summary of Means and Standard Deviations

Years of DEN

Years of ADM 24.30 19.85 17.94 11.42 11.01 11.87

Age 54.60 48.60 46.39 9.67 11.19 12.37

Transparency 3.07 2.86 3.43 0.49 0.91 0.57

Self-Awareness 2.99 2.64 3.26 0.54 1.04 0.80

Ethical Moral 3.56 3.21 3.61 0.43 0.94 0.64

Balanced Processing 3.24 2.82 3.26 0.50 0.99 0.85

Note. DEN = Denomination Service; ADM = Administrative Experience.

The five independent and the four dependent variates were used to test the

hypotheses described in the following paragraphs. The results are detailed in the

following tables and paragraphs.

Testing

This section describes the tests applied to each of the research hypotheses and the

results of the tests. It includes descriptive statistical tables and comments on the results.

Hypothesis 1

The first research hypothesis (Ha1) of this study is the expectation that a local

conference treasurer’s self-perceptions of relational transparency, moral/ethical, balanced

processing, and self-awareness values are significantly different from the perceptions

Variables

Mean SD

Self R1 R2 Self R1 R2

(N=45) (N=84) (N=18) (N=45) (N=84) (N=18)

25.62 14.93 11.78 10.03 9.46 9.59

followers expressed of their leaders in the same four ALD factors already indicated. This

expectation stands in contrast with the null hypothesis (Ho1) that the treasurer’s

selfperceptions of relational transparency, moral/ethical, balanced processing, and

selfawareness are not significantly different from those of followers on the same four

constructs.

A three group one-way between-subjects multivariate analysis of variance was

performed on the four authentic leadership dependent variables indicated above. The

independent variable was the role of the participant, namely the local conference

treasurer, the associates in treasury, and the academy treasurer. A total of 148 participants

were distributed in 46 Treasurers, 84 Associates in Treasury, and 18 Academy Treasurers

(see Table 8). A statistically significant Box’s M test (p<.001) indicated unequal variance-

covariance matrices of the dependent variables across levels of participant role, and thus

necessitated the use of Pillai’s trace in assessing the multivariate effect.

By using Pillai’s trace as the criterion, the dependent variate mean was

significantly different by participant’s role. Pillai’s trace is equal to .126, F (8,286) = 2.40,

p=.016, 1 minus the Wilks’s Lambda value = .122. Univariate ANOVAs were conducted

in each dependent variable separately to determine the locus of the statistically significant

multivariate difference. Against this alpha level, the participant’s role was statistically

significantly different for transparency F (2,145) = 4.97, sig. = .013; SelfAwareness F (2,

145) = 4.720, sig. = .010; Ethical/Moral F (2, 145) = 3.935, sig. = .022; and Balanced

Processing F (2, 145) = 4.671, sig. = .011.

The Tamhane test suggested that the Academy raters (R2, Followers) value

transparency slightly higher than do the Associates in Treasury (R1, Followers), with sig. =

.004, but remain closer to the treasurer’s self-evaluation (see Table 9). The SelfAwareness

mean is significantly lower for Associates in Treasury than the Academy Treasurers and

Treasurers, with sig. = .027 for Academy Treasurers, and sig. = .040 for Treasurers (see

Table 9).

Ethical/Moral mean of Associates in Treasury is significantly lower in comparison

with the Treasurers mean, sig. = .013, than with the mean of Academy Treasurers, and the

difference is not significant. Balanced Processing mean of Associates in Treasury is

significantly lower in comparison with the Treasurer’s mean, sig. = .004, than with the

mean of Academy Treasurers, and the difference is not significant. The Treasurers and the

Academy Treasurers show no significant difference among themselves.

Hypothesis 2

The hypothesis that was examined stated that the treasurer’s personal

characteristics of gender, age, years of professional service, years of service to the

Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic level are significantly related to his or her

own self-perception of authentic leadership as expressed in transparency, moral/ethical

values, balanced processing, and self-awareness. This expectations stand in contrast with

null hypothesis 2 (Ho2) that the treasurer’s personal characteristics of gender, age, years

of professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and

academic level are not significantly related to his or her own self-perception of authentic

leadership as expressed in transparency, moral/ethical values, balanced processing, and

self-awareness. Table 10 describes the zero/order correlation coefficient of dependent and

independent variables for Treasurers.

Table 10

Zero/Order Correlation Coefficient of Dependent and

Independent Variables for Treasurers*

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Years DEN

Years ADM

.519

Educational Level -.280 -.312

Gender .228 .082 -.194

Age .651 .631 -.324 -.089

Transparency .192 .121 .121 -.303 .155

Self-Awareness -.329 -.079 .372 -.253 -.129 .480

Ethical/Moral -.079 .081 .138 -.142 .255 .455 .436

Balanced Process -.387 -.243 .209 .064 -.247 .374 .731 .356

Note. DEN = Denominational Service; ADM = Administrative Experience. *Self-Rated,

Leaders, Local Conference Treasurers, CFOs.

A canonical correlational analysis was conducted to test the multivariate

relationship between the variables of the dependent variate authentic leadership (relational

transparency, moral/ethical values, balanced processing, and self-awareness) and the

variables of the independent variate personal characteristics (gender, age, years of

professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic

level). The relationship between authentic leadership and personal characteristics was

statistically significant using the Wilks’s λ =.446 criterion (F [20,120] =1.65), p =.051, Rc

= .581, Rc2 = .338, and RI =.175. The significance of this relationship, canonical

correlation, canonical correlation squared (shared variance), and redundancy index

provided the basis for the rejection of the null hypothesis.

Canonical loadings were examined to measure the correlation between the

variables with the respective canonical variables (authentic leadership and personal

characteristics). Table 11 presents the canonical loadings as a measure of the correlation

and shared variance between each variate with the respective canonical variables.

Table 11

Canonical Correlation Analysis Between Treasurers’ Personal

Characteristics and Authentic Leadership Self-evaluation (N=45)

Variables Ba rb r2c

Correlations between dependent variable AL and

its canonical variables

Transparency .514 .776 .602

Self-Awareness .728 .641 .411

Ethical/Moral .374 .679 .461

Balanced Processing

-.678

.179

.032

Rc .581 .338

Correlations between independent variable PC

and its canonical variables

Variables Ba rb r2c

Years DEN -.653 -.180 .032

Years ADM .410 .343 .118

Education .551 .424 .180

Gender -.311 -.600 .360

Age

.745

.428

.183

Note. AL = authentic leadership and PC = personal characteristics; DEN = Denominational Service; ADM =

Administrative Experience.

aStandardized function coefficients. bCanonical correlation coefficients/Canonical loadings. cSquared

canonical coefficients/Canonical loadings.

The correlation between each variable and the respective canonical variate is

organized in a range from highest to lowest. The following relationships between the

variables in the canonical variate authentic leadership were observed: transparency (.776),

ethical moral (.679), self-awareness (.641), and balance processing (.179). The correlation

between the variables and the canonical variate personal characteristics was observed:

gender (-.600), age (.428), education (.424), years administration (.343), years

denominational (-.180).

In Table 12 the Beta (β) coefficients of Treasurers, their personal characteristics,

serve as predictors of the AL variables (Relational Transparency, Self-Awareness,

Ethical/Moral behavior, and Balanced Processing of others’ opinions). The highest

coefficients for Relational Transparency are predicted by the Years of Denominational

Service (-.45) and Age (.36). The highest coefficients for Self-Awareness are predicted by

the Years of Denominational Service (-.36) and Education (.34). The highest ones for

Ethical/Moral Behavior are predicted by Years of Denominational Service (-.42) and by

Age (.62), and the highest coefficients for Balanced Processing are predicted by Years of

Denominational Service (-.40), with the other levels showing no significance. The (R)

correlation levels show low β coefficients ranging from .17 to .25, with the highest one for

Self-Awareness.

Hypothesis 3

The hypothesis that was examined stated that the followers’ (raters) personal

characteristics of gender, age, years of professional service, years of service to the

Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic level are significantly related to their

perception of authentic leadership as expressed in transparency, moral/ethical values,

Table 12

β Coefficients of Treasurers’ Personal Characteristics Variables as

Predictors of Authentic Leadership Variables (N=46)

Variables Transparency Self-Awareness Ethical/Moral Balanced

Processing

Years DEN -.45 -.36 -.42 -.40

Years ADM .18 .15 -.03 -.06

Education .14 .34 .22 .12

Gender -.16 -.11 .05 .06

Age .36 .11 .62 .10

R .23 .25 .21 .17

Note. DEN = Denominational Service; ADM = Administrative Experience.

balanced processing, and self-awareness of their leaders, the local treasurers. This

expectation stands in contrast with null hypothesis 2 (Ho2) that the followers’ (raters)

personal characteristics of gender, age, years of professional service, years of service to

the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic level are not significantly related to

their perception of authentic leadership as expressed in transparency, moral/ethical values,

balanced processing, and self-awareness of their leaders, the local treasurers.

Table 13 describes the zero/order correlation coefficient for raters.

A canonical correlational analysis was conducted to test the multivariate

relationship between the variables of the dependent variate authentic leadership

(transparency, moral/ethical values, balanced processing and self-awareness) and the

variables of the independent variate personal characteristics (gender, age, years of

professional service, years of service to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and academic

level). The relationship between authentic leadership and personal characteristics was

statistically significant using the Wilks’s λ =.694 criterion (F [20,309] =1.79), p =.020, Rc

Table 13

Zero/Order Correlation Coefficients of Raters

Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Years DEN

Years ADM

.586

Education -.179 -.285

Gender .064 -.017 .332

Age .571 .763 -.418 .191

Transparency -.111 .005 -.102 .162 -.053

Self-

Awareness .021 .085 -.087 .076 -.045 .787

Ethical/Moral -.067 -.053 -.146 .069 -.035 .822 .743

Balanced

Processing

-.021 -.008 -.016 .095 -.020 .774 .855 .774

Note. DEN = Denominational Service; ADM = Administrative Experience.

= .408, Rc2 = .167, and RI =.078. The significance of this relationship, canonical

correlation, canonical correlation squared (shared variance), and redundancy index helped

in making the decision to reject the null hypothesis.

Canonical loadings were examined to measure the correlation between the

variables with the respective canonical variables (authentic leadership and personal

characteristics). Table 14 presents the canonical loadings as a measure of the correlation

and shared variance between each variate with the respective canonical variables.

The correlation between each variable and the respective canonical variate is

organized in a range from highest to lowest. The following relationships between the

variables in the canonical variate authentic leadership were observed: self-awareness

(-.470), transparency (-.048), ethical moral (.048), and balance processing (.022). The

correlation between the variables and the canonical variate personal characteristics was

observed: years in administration (-.496), years denominational (-.304), education (.195),

age (.098), and gender (.088).

Table 14

Correlation Analysis Between Raters’ Personal Characteristics and

Authentic Leadership Perception (N=102)

Variables Ba rb r2c

Correlations between dependent variable AL and

its canonical variables

Transparency .292 -.048 .002

Self-Awareness 2.056 -.470 .229

Ethical/Moral .334 .048 .002

Balanced Processing

1.295

.022

.000

Rc .408 .167

Correlations between independent variable PC

and its canonical variables

Variables Ba rb r2c

Years DEN -.330 -.304 .092

Years ADM -1.356 -.496 .246

Education .281 .195 .038

Gender .278 .088 .007

Age

1.492

.098

.009

Note. AL = authentic leadership perception and PC = personal characteristics; DEN = Denominational

Service; ADM = Administrative Experience.

aStandardized function coefficients. bCanonical correlation coefficients/Canonical loadings. cSquared

canonical coefficients/Canonical loadings.

In Table 15 the Beta (β) coefficients shown are the results of the personal

characteristics variables of the raters (Associates in Treasury and Academy Treasurers)

predicting the ALD variables (Relational Transparency, Self-Awareness, Ethical/Moral

behavior, and Balanced Processing) of the leaders, the local conference treasurers. The

strongest predictors for Relational Transparency are Education (-.21) and Gender (.23).

Table 15

β Coefficients of Raters’ Personal Characteristics Variables as

Predictors of Authentic Leadership Variables (N=102)

Variables Transparency Self-Awareness Ethical/Moral

Balanced

Processing

Years DEN -.18 .00 -.07 -.04

Years ADM .10 .27 -.06 .00

Education -.21 -.16 -.23 -.06

Gender .23 .07 .15 .11

Age -.07 -.31 -.01 .00

.08 .06 .05 .01

Note. DEN = Denominational Service; ADM = Administrative Experience.

The predictors of Self-Awareness are indicated by the scores in Years of

Administrative Experience (.27) and Age (-.31). The Ethical/Moral variable is predicted

by Education (-.45), and the Balanced Processing scores are not significant to indicate an

impact on the variable. The correlation (R) levels show very low beta (β) coefficients

ranging from .08 to .01, with the highest level indicated for Relational Transparency.

Summary

In this study I measured the authentic leadership values of local conference

treasurers as tested by their followers, their associates in treasury and academy treasurers.

Three hypotheses were tested using MANOVA (on Ha1) and Canonical correlation (on

Ha2 and Ha3) on the dependent variables (Self-Awareness, Relational Transparency,

Ethical/Moral behavior, and Balanced Processing of others’ opinions) that taken together

provide the view of authentic leadership. In the case of hypothesis 1 (Ha1) the null

hypothesis was rejected. The demographic data of the participants indicate a frequency of

male ages ranging from 50 to 59, an educational level of BA or BS, with a significant

number of years of experience in administration, and years in denominational service.

The summary of means and standard deviations (Table 9) points to a higher mean

and a lower standard deviation for age among leaders (Self) than for followers (R1, R2),

which indicate a stronger concurrence of opinion and a lower data variability. Among the

dependent variables, the leaders also indicated a higher mean (3.56) and a lower standard

deviation (0.43), pointing to higher agreement and low data variability in their responses

on Ethical/Moral behavior. Testing hypothesis 1 (Ha1) with Pillai’s trace, and with

Tamhane’s and Levene’s tests, provides a higher alpha, with a .01 level used for

transparency.

In the case of the second and third hypotheses (Ha2, Ha3) the null hypotheses

(Ho2, Ho3) were rejected. The canonical correlation analysis for Ha2 indicates that the

stronger predictors among personal characteristics were Gender (-.600), and (equally

significant) Age and Education (.428, .424, respectively). And the highest correlations

were found with variables Relational Transparency (.776) and Ethical/Moral (.679). The

canonical correlation analysis for Ha3 (in which the personal characteristics of the

followers predict the authentic leadership variables of the leaders) points to the Years of

Experience in Administration (-.496) and the Years of Denominational Service (-.304) as

significant predictors of Self-Awareness (-.470). The scores of other dependent variables

do not show significance. These factors are analyzed in the next and final chapter of this

study.

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

This chapter provides a summary of the study, a brief review of the methodology

and the research design, a discussion of the study’s key findings, the conclusions, and

recommendations. The findings are interpreted in the light of the literature and my

personal experience.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to explore the authentic leadership values of

Adventist local conference treasurers in the United States. I accomplished this task by

observing whether the self-assessment responses agree or disagree with the assessment

their followers provided of them as authentic leaders. The followers are the associates in

treasury and academy treasurers. This study is categorized as a self-rater, correlational,

cross-sectional exploration survey of a population of business leaders working in a

religious organizational structure. Through the application of the Authentic Leadership

Questionnaire 1.0 I sought answers to the following questions:

1. Are local conference treasurers’ self-perceptions as authentic leaders

significantly different from the perceptions of their followers in their relational

transparency, their internalized moral and ethical values, their balanced processing of

followers’ opinions, and their self-awareness?

2. Are personal characteristics of the local conference treasurers significantly

related to their own self-perception as authentic leaders in their relational transparency,

their internalized moral and ethical values, their balanced processing of followers’

opinions and their self-awareness?

3. Are personal characteristics of the followers (gender, age, years of

professional work, years of service to the church and education) significantly related to

the perceptions of the local conference treasurers as authentic leaders in their relational

transparency, internalized moral and ethical values, balanced processing of followers’

opinions, and their self-awareness?

Authentic Leadership is an intrapersonal, developmental, and interpersonal

process, depending on whether the focus is (a) on what goes on within the leader, (b) on

the nurturing of the leader, or (c) on the relational part of leadership (Northouse, 2013). In

this research study, the responses of the participants touch on all three aspects, but they

especially connect with authentic leadership as an interpersonal or relational process. For

the purposes of answering Research Question 1, I tested a group of leaders and two

groups of followers, totaling 148 participants. I used a one-way MANOVA to compare

their responses to the four dimensions of authentic leadership, relational transparency,

self-awareness, internalized moral and ethical values, and balanced processing of their

followers’ opinions. Figure 3 shows a graphic description of Research Question 1, testing

Hypothesis 1 with MANOVA.

Answering Research Question 2 involved exploring the group of local conference

treasurers’ personal characteristics (years of denominational service, years of

administrative experience, educational level, gender and age) through canonical

Figure 3. Graphic description of the study—Hypothesis 1 (Ha1).

regression (Rc) as predictors of their responses to the four dimensions of authentic

leadership (relational transparency, self-awareness, internalized moral and ethical values,

and balanced processing of their followers’ opinions). Answering Research Question 3

involved applying canonical regression to identify how the followers’ personal

characteristics (years of denominational service, years of experience in administration,

educational level, gender and age) are related to their understanding of the local

conference treasurers’ view of the four dimensions of (relational transparency,

selfawareness, internalized moral and ethical values, and the balanced processing of their

followers’ opinions) authentic leadership. Figure 4 shows a graphic description of

Research Questions 2 and 3 testing Hypotheses 2 and 3 with canonical regressions (Rc).

Figure 4. Graphic description of the study—Hypothesis 2 (Ha2) and Hypothesis 3 (Ha3).

Findings

Findings From MANOVA Test

The results of the MANOVA test and the Canonical Regressions are presented and

discussed in the following paragraphs. There are three results of the MANOVA test that

point to the main findings of this study. These are:

1. The self-perceptions of the leaders are significantly higher than the

perception expressed by the followers. This result helped set aside null hypothesis Ho1.

2. The group of associates in treasury consistently gave lower means (µ) than

did the academy treasurers.

3. The role played by the participants (local conference treasurers, associates

in treasury, and academy treasurers) was significantly related to the responses they

provided.

The first finding addressed whether the perceptions of local conference treasurers

agreed with the perceptions of their followers. The simplest answer is that they do not

agree. Local conference treasurers rate themselves higher than the rating they received

from their followers. A degree of discomfort, possibly distrust, skepticism or

dissatisfaction can be inferred by the lower statistical means of the raters (followers). The

local conference treasurers are not viewed as the open, reliable, principle-guided,

unbiased, even-handed, self-aware and understanding leaders they believe themselves to

be. This answer also means that local conference treasurers tend to view themselves as

accountants, not as CFOs, thus leaving their leadership role unfulfilled. They do not

inspire confidence when they are challenged; generate hope when facing obstacles;

inspire optimism when they interact with their associates; or show resilience when facing

discouragement.

Because the demographic information shows that the majority of local conference

treasurer’ ages fall between 50 and 69, it leads one to conjecture whether they received

their graduate education without a proper emphasis in business leadership, or whether the

age factor is proving to be a sign of vulnerability. One could also conjecture about the fact

that local conference treasuries in the Adventist structure are elective positions, and the

treasurers may be showing themselves sensitive to the effect of a combination of these

previously mentioned factors in the way they lead. One thing seems clear: The difference

in the means of the participating groups shows that conference treasurers are leaving their

leadership chair vacant. This conclusion is on the opposite side of Brown (2005) who saw

them functioning more as Chief Financial Officers. The other side of the issue is the

systemic conundrum that the Seventh-day Adventist Church structure with regard to

administration may have become more presidential than perhaps it was intended to be,

and that power has gravitated towards the position of the president, as happens often in

corporate business structures (Patterson, 2012).

The second finding indicates that of the two groups of followers, the group of the

associates in treasury consistently provided lower means (µ) than did the academy

treasurers. This finding gives us an opportunity to question the reasons why the closest

group of collaborators consistently gives low ratings to the conference treasurers as

leaders. This finding compounds the first issue I already discussed because it suggests that

the reality that is lived in the treasury may be a silent crisis, showing a destructive and

insidious toxicity that has become the normal way of operating. It seems to be that local

conference treasurers are rated lower by their closest associates, and a bit higher by their

more distant ones. This scenario is unacceptable, and points to an erosion of influence,

power, and authority, which leaves the treasurers open to the question, What is it that their

people in the office headquarters seem to object about their leading? What do these

followers see that the academy treasurers don’t? These and other questions are addressed

in the following sections.

The third finding points to the fact that the positions held by each group tested and

the role they play were significantly related to the responses they shared. Local

conference treasurers rated themselves higher, as compared to the rating they received

from their associates in treasury. Perhaps local conference treasurers were generous in

their own self-rating because they need to have a clearer view of what leaders are about.

Under normal circumstances people protect themselves, particularly if their identity is

involved. It seems that in this study the closest associates to the treasurers expressed

themselves freely regardless of any potential risk to their jobs. This is also evidence that

the protocol that was arranged to protect their identity was considered to be effective and

trustworthy.

Associates in treasury constitute a tier of followers who work directly under the

guidance of the leaders, and these leaders set the tone for their organizations. The

relationship of these followers and their leaders is expected to be close, their

communication flow is intense, and they depend much on each other. From that

perspective, is it that academy treasurers have a totally different point of view from where

they evaluate their leaders? Or is it simply that academy treasurers do not see enough of

their leaders to perceive them as less than open, reliable, accountable, principle-guided,

upright, honest, unbiased, impartial, even-handed, and understanding? Even though this

study was not designed to focus on the difference in perception between the two groups of

followers, the difference in the statistical means of their responses indicates a need for

further study of the factors that motivate both groups to answer as they did. The

importance of this finding is simple: Leaders cannot afford to have their closest group of

followers doubt their leadership values.

The understanding of the leader-follower relationship as it was understood by the

framers of authentic leadership advises this research study about the importance of the

interpersonal or relational process. In the next findings we look into additional discoveries

that build on the idea of leader-follower interpersonal process.

Students also viewed