“Authentic leadership focuses on whether the leader is genuine or “real” (Northouse, 2019, pg. 197). This is why authentic leadership is a highly complex process. In order to understand how authentic leadership is effective it is important that the leader goes through the individualistic process of understanding themselves and their beliefs and values. Since every new leader begins at various stages of self-awareness, it is paramount to have an understanding of this process in order for the leader to come off as intentional and not reactive. Therefore, achieving trust and a deeper level of commitment amongst followers.

In order to have a better understanding of this process, there has been a course developed to understand authentic leadership in a graduate school MBA program. This course encourages students to go above and beyond understanding authentic leadership theoretical concepts and putting the theory to practical use. The purpose of the course is to understand practical reflexivity, self-awareness, and self-authorship through a series of exercises. In order to discern how this practice is applied to authentic leadership it is important to clarify each of the terms. Practical reflexivity is questioning of one’s self, this can be instantaneous or after the fact. It allows us “to understand ourselves, our ways of relating to others, and how to participate in our social world” (Cunliffe & Easterby-Smith, 2004, pp. 35-36). In other words, it is questioning relationships and the leader’s ability to be critical of them. Self-awareness deals with the knowledge of oneself. It is the process of personal inventory that characterizes the leader’s ability to own their strengths and weaknesses. And finally, self-authorship deals with reflection, or the ability “to develop self-understanding based on internally constructed values and beliefs, rather than based on external influences” (Baxter Magolda, 1999, 2001; Baxter Magolda & King, 2004; Kegan, 1994).

The assignment first asks students to consider their own beliefs and values that come from interactions with others, experience, and life events. Then students consider whether or not their actions are consistent with the values stated. Connecting both values and actions is important to honoring the effectiveness of an authentic leader. Lastly, students express how they would articulate these beliefs and discuss how it informs how they lead (Eriksen, 2009). By coming up with the answers to these questions students set up criteria for how to evaluate effectiveness. Through the process of defining what makes them genuine, how their actions translate this perspective, and finally how this impacts the type of leader they are, students can attempt to grasp some of the concepts of authentic leadership through a subjective lens.

While this exercise can sound like a daunting task it does bring to light many of the aspects of authentic leadership. For one, authentic leadership is developed and will begin to emerge through experiences, redefining values, continuing knowledge of self-awareness and personal insight, and a willingness to nurture the process as the leader grows. Rather than defaulting to skills and prescribed leadership abilities, the authentic leader owns actions based on a set of core values and the belief that their influence will guide others in this direction.

To break this down through my own personal narrative, when I first took on my first leadership position 6 years ago my first instinct was to emulate the behaviors, strategies, and styles of others in order to be effective. Through time, experience, and developing relationships with employees, I slowly learned how to guide my influence in a way that felt more genuine and in return, accentuated my own personal strengths and gave me the confidence to own my weaknesses and delegate. Adopting behaviors to better understand my role worked for a period of time, but once I had more secure footing, I was able to apply my own personal values and have a clearer sense of my own contributions. This is an important process for any new leader to undergo and can be helpful when seeking out new opportunities. Knowing it was important to me to be perceived as trustworthy, I had to seek out my own ways of achieving this goal.

We might ask why authentic leadership development is important? For one, when followers have clarity on what you stand for, they can more confidently make their own decisions on what leaders to endorse, and this certainty will guide trust and commitment. “When leaders know themselves and have a clear sense of who they are an what they stand for, they have a strong anchor for their decisions and actions” (Northouse, 2019, pg. 203). Having a true sense of the leader has had a positive effect on employee creativity, performance, engagement, and long-term commitment (Northouse, 2019).

As a result, the development of authentic leadership is deeply rooted in the leader’s personal development, self-awareness, and their ability to translate goals and values in order to be an effective influencer. This process is on-going and continuous and when it is nurtured can continue to enhance the leader as they grow to better understand themselves, their leadership values and actions, and the affect this has on followers.

 

References:

Eriksen, M. (2009). Authentic leadership: Practical reflexivity, self-awareness, and self-authorship. Journal of Management Education, 33(6), 747-771.

https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1177%2F1052562909339307

Northouse, P.G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Servant leadership became a topic of discussion when Robert K. Greenleaf coined the term in 1970 (Northouse, 2019). Since the beginning of recognizing this leadership philosophy as one that focuses on a leader being of service to followers, servant leadership has more recently grown into a leadership theory that has gained momentum. It is now seen as a theoretical concept with practical elements that offer insight into organizational development and follower commitment. It is of particular interest to organizations that are focused on trust and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leaders who practice servant leadership behaviors teach followers to engage in behaviors that “transcend job performance and is directed to the overall welfare of the organization”, known as citizenship behaviors (Muchinsky & Howes, 2018). Research suggests that this phenomenon, brought on by servant leadership behaviors, often times translates into higher employee performance, engagement, commitment, and trust.

Servant leaders recognize the individual goals of employees and seek out ways to nurture development and pave the way for employees to continue on this path. This involves listening, understanding employee points of view, decreasing task obstacles, and helping employees recognize potential. Servant leaders understand the needs of employees, hold themselves accountable for mistakes, and are dedicated to taking a proactive role in the continuing growth of followers. Once leaders are able to set a precedent that they are dedicated to follower growth and well-being, employees will match this behavior with a higher level of commitment, and consider themselves valued members of the group. Theoretically this has been modeled into three main components: antecedent conditions, servant leadership behaviors, and leadership outcomes (Northouse, 2019). In order for servant leadership and its positive outcomes to be effective, organizations must meet the conditions and behaviors emphasized to reach these goals.

The antecedent conditions set the stage for servant leadership behaviors to be effective within an organization. The overall context and culture must be conducive for leaders to be of service to employees. This involves the values of the organization, and the time dedicated to leaders to facilitate opportunities to create trusting relationships. Oftentimes in environments that are competitive or fast-paced this can be overlooked when organizations are met with challenges that require emphasis on budgets, sales goals, profits, or production without focusing on the employee experience and roadblocks that might be contributing to the situation. “Servant leadership does not occur in a vacuum but occurs within a given organizational context and a particular culture” (Northouse, 2019). The model points out that these conditions must be consistent even when situational challenges occur. Leaders who have particular attributes towards helping others, motivating employees, and who seek out leadership opportunities to provide mentorship, build lasting relationships, and are dedicated to providing a fulfilling and supportive workplace environment are also contributing factors to the right conditions. Finally, follower receptivity focuses on matching this type of leadership philosophy with follower needs. If followers are not receptive to this type of guidance, involvement, and nurturing they may be frustrated by this level of interaction, ultimately effecting outcomes. However, “empirical studies have shown that when servant leadership was matched with followers who desired it, this type of leadership had a positive impact on performance and organizational citizenship behavior (Meuser, Liden, Wayne, & Henderson, 2011; Otero-Neira, Varela-Neira, & Bande, 2016; Ozyilmaz & Cicek, 2015).

The servant leadership behaviors are the foundation of the process.  Each behavior plays a central role to the contribution and outcome of servant leadership. Liden et al (2018) put together a list of core behaviors to help ground and further define servant leadership theory. These include: conceptualizing, emotional healing, putting followers first, helping followers grow and succeed, behaving ethically, empowering, and creating value for the Community (Northouse, 2019). Each one of these leader motives and behaviors implies the servant leader is aware, intelligent, motivational, and dedicated to followers. This involves the leader having a clear motive to inspire others, and the ability to integrate these behaviors into the overall context and culture. These behaviors help create a power distance that enables trust and organizational citizenship behaviors. Once these behaviors are legitimized by followers they will reciprocate with a feeling of safety and belonging, engaged and committed, under leadership that focuses on the employee experience and creating a collaborative environment. Reinforcing the fact that the organization is people-focused and determined to cultivate and quality and meaningful experience for followers.

In order to come up with a fully realized theoretical review of servant leadership Dirk van Dierendonck put together a synthesis of both servant leadership key points starting with Greenleaf and analyzing more recent literature, explaining why this is important especially today. “At present, innovation and employee well-being are given high priority and so leadership that is rooted in ethical and caring behavior becomes of great importance” (van Dierendonck, 2011). Even more true ten years later, organizations that focus on servant leadership behaviors and do so authentically will set themselves apart as being people-focused and since this is societally the change employees are looking for, these organizations become more desirable. They have a reputation for creating opportunity for employees and realizing potential. Employees will seek out these organizations, which will increase follower receptivity and increase organizational goals, improving employee engagement, commitment, and organizational citizenship behaviors. This relationship is built upon trust and fairness, and provides opportunity for employees to collaborate, grow, and find value in the organization they represent.

In my experience it is true that servant leadership behaviors do impact a deeper level of commitment and engagement. Employees that feel secure and listened to will legitimize leaders and want to impact organizations in positive ways. One downfall of servant leadership behavior I have witnessed, and now recognize in hindsight is due to the fact that antecedent conditions were not met in order to optimize servant leadership behaviors. I’m sure many have had experience with a manager that was more present, active, and there for employees especially during challenging times. These leaders had a sense of serving for others, and became an ambassador for employee growth and potential. They create trust by listening to others, and fixing issues so that the team can succeed. When this is not part of the overall context and culture of the organization, it can become overwhelming for the manager that everyone seeks out to discuss development, conflict, or day-to-day operational obstacles. Without a cultural foundation in place that emphasizes servant leadership behavior within the organization the demands of lifting up employees and serving others on just one individual or small group of individuals can be cumbersome especially in organizations where managers oversee a large group of employees.

As depicted in the model the final phase is outcomes. These outcomes highlight the impact when conditions and behaviors are legitimized. Follower performance and growth, organizational performance, and societal impact examines how servant leadership can impact individuals, organizations, and communities going above and beyond transactional organizational goals but understanding the impact of servant leadership both within the organization, reputationally, and the ways it enhances the surrounding community. Several studies have examined constructive servant leadership with positive organizational citizenship behaviors. This can lead to higher performance levels, increased job satisfaction, and long-term commitment. Followers learn to be servant leaders themselves and have a deeper understanding of the effects of servant leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors to take with them throughout their careers, enhancing the value, meaning, and practice of servant leadership within organizations.

References:

Muchinsky, P. M., & Howes, S. S. (2019). Psychology applied to work: an introduction to industrial and organizational psychology. Hypergraphic Press, Inc.

Northouse, P.G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant Leadership: A Review and Synthesis. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1228–1261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310380462

Traditional hierarchical leadership structures within organizations have been a well-established standard amongst organizational infrastructure. Members of the workforce are familiar with this top-down leadership approach which emphasizes sources of legitimate power, or formal authority. As employee needs are shifting to highlight personal development, empowerment, and more horizontal leadership structures, organizational environments also need to adapt in order to promote the benefits of shared leadership and team effectiveness. The rapid increase in globalization and technology advances have caused organizations to seek out competitive advantages through team leadership models. As work teams are becoming more widespread in today’s industries in order to achieve organizational outcomes, an emphasis on creating a supportive environment that recognizes the resources needed to facilitate this organizational development will directly impact how effective work teams perform.

This requires not only honoring the skill set needed to facilitate shared leadership by followers, but also the skill set needed for traditional leaders used to power and influence to restructure the way they approach a shared leadership environment. Team leadership is contingent upon the ability to work together, and trust and rely on each other to reach common goals. Each member is interdependent on the other, with the idea that no one individual is accountable for team performance, but that everyone has a motive collectively to reach common goals. If comparing this to the traditional structure, formal authority figures exercise less control and more collaboration, while subordinates exercise more power and influence, team effectiveness is determined by the ability to recognize when one’s own needs match or differ from the group needs in order to reach common outcomes. In this way traditional leaders may need to adjust their leadership style to match the needs of the group, and in turn encourage emergent leaders within the group to exercise autonomy to make decisions and seek out solutions.

Organizational support focuses on the information, skills, technology, and rewards needed to accomplish a group task (Northouse, 2019). Organizations must understand the amount of time and knowledge needed to facilitate team outcomes, and offer an appropriate amount of time for task completion. This might involve adjusting the day-to-day responsibilities of members in order to get the job done, and groups need to know that the organization will offer the security to meet team goals. In the Characteristics of Team Effectiveness, Larson & LaFasto (1989) offer key points in order to meet team full potential (Northouse, 2019). Unified commitment focuses on the abilities of all team members “to develop a sense of unity or identification” (Northouse, 2019, pg. 377). Team members must be encouraged to speak freely, with a sense of autonomy that is supported by the organization. Organizations must encourage this by keeping each team member equally accountable for team successes and roadblocks, offering feedback and support throughout the process. Larson & LaFasto (1989) also point out the need for a collaborative climate (Northouse, 2019). This points to the demand for all members to trust and rely on each other in a mutually influencing environment that focuses on integration, respect, and equal control. Lastly, Larson & LaFasto (1989) highlight the important of external support and recognition (Northouse, 2019). Without the support of organizations teams can feel overwhelmed, stressed, and unmotivated to accomplish group tasks, or continue to commit to group engagement. Team efforts and shared leadership skills need to be rewarded and encouraged throughout the process, and organizations are responsible for guiding this behavior by rewarding team engagement, collaboration, decision making, and problem solving.

In a 2019 study, Trafvelin, Hasson & Holmstrom, take this idea one step further by positing that organizations would benefit from leadership training not only for formal leaders, but also others, especially those who work in teams. “By tradition, most organizations send only formal leaders to training, thus putting a heavy burden on their shoulders to take on the sole leadership responsibility for their teams. Building on shared leadership theory and the results from our study, we encourage organizations to reconsider this narrow, hierarchical view of leadership and instead expand their view to see the full leadership potential in their organizations by allowing leadership responsibilities to be shared among group members” (Trafvelin et al, 2013). In this way, the organization takes a stance on promoting leadership capabilities and potential by sending a message that all members are encouraged to be leaders. The article concludes with an understanding of the potential for organizations to recognize leadership as a process that everyone contributes to.

In my own professional experience, I have witnessed the ways organizational support plays in the success and failure of work teams. I have encountered organizations that claim to be collaborative and team driven but only honor the decision making from a select few, resulting in distrust and a lack of engagement by others. In most cases, despite the goals of the organization to promote shared leadership and member collaboration, the climate is set up to default to traditional structures due to the demands of day-to-day task completion because organizations have not adjusted systematically to support team leadership. Without a commitment to foster and nurture team leadership from an organizational climate perspective, which encourages emergent leaders, restructures the power and influence of formal leaders, and provides the knowledge needed to effectively integrate and work together, organizations will fail to recognize the potential impact of empowering all team members to help reach organizational goals.

 

Resources:

Northouse, P.G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Tafvelin, S., Hasson, H., Holmström, S., & von Thiele Schwarz, U. (2019). Are Formal Leaders the Only Ones Benefitting From Leadership Training? A Shared Leadership Perspective. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 26(1), 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051818774552

Recent studies have focused on the important role of humility in leadership. Humility encourages growth and learning, and will help provide the self-awareness needed to determine strengths and weaknesses, modify behaviors, and promote effective decision-making. In focusing on leadership as a complex process emphasizing the relationship between leader and follower, realistic self-awareness is one of the first steps to building this foundation. Humility encourages a desire for personal improvement, with an understanding that learning from mistakes and failures are part of the process. When leaders are open to acknowledging mistakes, they take a stance on also being accepting of change, adaptation, and flexibility. Humility also plays an important role in defining character, and understanding values and personality traits necessary to fulfilling a leadership role. 

Leaders are faced with a variety of challenges: different types of followers, situational challenges, strategizing effective behavioral styles, how to motivate employees, and ultimately, how to self-manage and move towards common goals. Each set of circumstances requires a leader’s response, and that response will determine how competent the leader is at adapting and overcoming obstacles. In a study conducted by Rosa Hendijani and Babak Sohrabi on humility and social and emotional competencies, they conclude that “high levels of humility can have a significant effect on judgement and decision-making” (Hendijani et al., 2019, pg. 5). Northouse (2019) posits the leadership process highlights the interaction between leaders and followers, and therefore leadership can be observed, evaluated, and learned (Northouse, 2019). The leader will get the most out of this learning process, whether through experience, college-level classes, or leadership training, by having a solid grasp on their own competencies, or set of knowledge, skills, and abilities (Hendijani et al., 2019). 

Humility can be a valuable tool especially for new leaders. My experience as a food and beverage manager has helped me clarify goals and values, understand leader follower relationships, and learn personal strengths and weaknesses. The latter being significant in knowing when to jump into complex situations, or when to delegate or ask for support. Although this wasn’t the case at first, and the learning process is continually ongoing even now with years of experience. Leadership roles are accompanied by new responsibilities, an assigned position of power, and usually a formal title. In the hospitality industry this often led to new leaders stepping into roles with overconfidence and little leadership experience or training. This was described by myself and a co-manager as “coming in hot” something we had both witnessed, and experienced ourselves. It comes from a desire to prove you are worthy of the position, set official boundaries, and rise to the occasion. This leadership style is highly directive and achievement oriented. However, when applied to this situation it is not sustainable, not favorable to employees, and ineffective due to the fact that it is largely self-focused and not group-focused. One of the principles of humility in leadership is that it “is other-enhancing rather than self-enhancing” (Hendijani et al., 2019, pg.3). This lesson was just one of many that emphasizes the value of humility, especially in terms of relationship management and reaching common goals.

There are many examples of the role humility plays in leadership theory. Most theories provide some form of self-assessment in order to better understand it’s practical uses on a personal level. Since high levels of humility can have an impact on judgement when evaluating successes and failures, students with this level of self-awareness will get the most out of the exercise when applying it to real world situations. 

Path-goal theory provides some insight into why this directive and achievement oriented leadership behavior was ineffective. Path-goal theory highlights the leadership styles that work best in order to motivate employees and work together towards goal-accomplishment (PSU WC, 2021, L. 6). Tasks at the restaurant were highly structured, most of the employees were quite experienced, and the work was frequently fast-paced and stressful. According to path-goal theory a supportive style is more effective in this situation and supports trust. As stated, “directive leadership becomes redundant and perhaps excessively controlling when followers feel competent to complete their own work” (Northouse, 2019, p. 122). Employees responded favorably to removing some of the obstacles that caused stress, and having the confidence they can achieve tasks without being micromanaged. As discussed in follower characteristics it is important for the leader to assess how they are perceived. This awareness initiated flexibility in choosing different management styles, with the realization that the need to control the environment and obstacles rather than a need to control tasks, was more effective and motivational for staff. In this sense path-goal theory is two fold, determining what leadership style is motivational, and then implementing the style that best fits subordinate goals.

Humility can be learned and developed through goal-setting, intentional practice, and self-reflection (Hendijani et al., 2019). This dedication to personal improvement can impact both personal development and organizational performance. Through the process of trial and error through experience, or dedicated classes and research on leadership, changing behaviors, attempting new strategies, and understanding situations will be a continuous process when attempting to lead effectively. Circumstances, follower needs, and organizational goals will most likely adjust during the process. The need to assess strengths and weaknesses, understand the circumstances that led to success, and own failures are important tools when navigating leadership success.

 

Resources:

Rosa Hendijani & Babak Sohrabi (2019) The effect of humility on emotional and social competencies: The mediating role of judgment, Cogent Business & Management, 6:1, 1641257, DOI: 10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257

Northouse, P.G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2021). PSYCH 485 Lesson 6: Contingency and Path-Goal Theories. Retrieved from: https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2132629/modules/items/32790574

As scholars move towards examining the relationship between leaders and followers, there is a new emphasis on the impact each role plays on the other in organizational development and change. Northouse (2019) points out “the process of leading requires the process of following. Leaders and followers together create the leadership relationship, and without an understanding of the process of following, our understanding of leadership is incomplete” (Shamir, 2007; Uhl-Bien, Riggio, Lowe, & Carsten, 2014). Together this relationship will dictate how leadership is perceived, and in turn the level of commitment by followers. This shared process will determine how effective leadership is, by highlighting the role followers play and the ability to work together to achieve common goals.

This nurturing process can be implemented in several ways: by providing followers the ability to evaluate leadership behaviors and performance, structuring the organization so that leaders and employees interact and collaborate with each other regularly, and by creating a culture that supports and encourages employee voice, often times referred to as an open-door policy. I will emphasize employee voice as it also pertains and overlaps with the other two.

James R. Detert and Ethan R. Burris describe voice “as the discretionary provision of information intended to improve organizational functioning to someone inside an organization with the perceived authority to act, even though such information may challenge or upset the status quo of the organization or power holders, but is critical to organizational well-being” (Detert et al., 2007). Using this definition, the organizational culture will dictate whether or not these challenges are met openly with the intent to take action, something Detert and Burris refer to as improvement-oriented voice, or whether or not followers are discouraged to speak up either due to fear, job security, or because the organization has a history of not taking action. In other words, followers are more likely to speak up when the potential benefits outweigh the costs (Detert et al., 2007).

One of the underlying factors that play into the follower’s willingness to engage in improvement-oriented voice will be how the organization handles conflict or situational challenges. Organizations that adopt collaborating conflict styles emphasize that “all parties have a vested interest in the outcome, and they have the potential to resolve conflict in a way that satisfies all major interests” (Folger, Poole, and Stutman, 2018). This involves an emphasis on constructive results and actions, mutual benefits, and the ability to empower followers in this integrative process. Collaborating promotes a sense of equality and trust, and the flexibility of both parties to reach common goals. This idea is further posited by Kelley, “in his efforts to give followership equal billing to leadership, Kelley examined those aspects of followers that account for exemplary followership” (Northouse, 2019). Kelley stresses the important role that followers play and the influence they have on organizational outcomes, by posing exemplary followers as engaged, positive, and offering constructive feedback (Northouse, 2019).

While organizations may claim to have open-door policies, its effectiveness is decided when both parties validate and legitimize each other’s role within the organization. According to Northouse (2019) “being engaged, active, and challenging are identifying characteristics of effective followers. But followers who challenge the leader can also help to make an organization run more effectively and successfully.” Since followers are the ones doing the work, leaders who pay attention to issues they might not be aware of, had not considered, or challenge organizational status quo will gain credibility amongst followers which will alter motivation, behavior, and perceived validity of leaders.

At the hotel I worked for, voicing concerns was often times difficult due to the fast-paced environment, and the continuous hours the operation ran. In an attempt to bridge the gap between follower and leader the organization decided that each team would elect a representative to be added to the agenda of weekly meetings with upper management. Although not everyone was on board with this process, the majority of staff was encouraged by this new strategy. Over time, the exercise proved to be influential in promoting conversations around resources needed, wages, tip-out procedures in the bar and restaurant, staffing and shift times, training effectiveness, and manager support. The exercise also led to anonymous leadership assessment, which had never been done before.

While adopting open-door policies between leaders and followers may sound good in theory, implementing this strategy in a way that encourages employee feedback requires the willingness for both parties to engage in constructive conflict resolution, the ability to take action, and the continuous process of redefining mutual goals. Giving equal weight to both followers and leaders in their ability to effect change and promote organizational development will impact numerous factors that impact the bottom line, such as employee satisfaction and retention, performance, engagement, and commitment to organizational goals.

 

References:

Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869-884. https://www-proquest-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/psycinfo/docview/621935958/37E11CE2462F44C4PQ/16?accountid=13158

Folger, Joseph P., Marshall Scott Poole, & Randall K. Stutman. (2018) Working Through Conflict: Strategies for Relationships, Groups, and Organizations. 8th Edition. New York: Routledge.

Northouse, P.G. (2019).  Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th Edition. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.