Authentic leadership – for better and for worse? Leader well-being and inconsistency as moderating factors in the relation between daily authentic leadership and follower well-being

European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 1 - 11

Published: June 4, 2024

Despite comprehensive insights on favourable outcomes of authentic leadership for followers, there is a limited understanding about boundary conditions leadership. Leaders' decreased well-being (i.e. high trait emotional irritation and low work engagement) or inconsistency in may attenuate the relation between follower engagement). We tested these assumptions using daily diary study design over five consecutive working days with sample 64 leaders 162 followers. found partial support cross-level moderation across days, as was related to engagement (but not irritation) when low. Contrary our predictions, neither leader nor attenuated well-being. The results point out importance consistency behaviour. However, do need be overly concerned negative consequences followers they lead authentically while having reduced

Language: Английский

---

Getting to the root of authentic leadership: Where does the field go from here?

Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 45(1), P. 151 - 154

Published: May 16, 2023

The authors have no conflict of interest to report. There was data used for this research.

Language: Английский

---

“AI Can’t Steal My Soul”: In the Age of AI, the Human Touch is Paramount for the Craft of Managing Change

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Sept. 16, 2024

Artificial intelligence (AI) models are increasingly adopted as tools to enhance change management processes. Although many managers excited about AI's potential, others worry that their contributions may become obsolete. We explore the tension between job augmentation and automation how it affects professionals. argue need approach profession a context-sensitive craft. highlight elements likely central for managers’ success: (a) high-level skills—relational mastery systems thinking—and (b) continued development of specific attitudes—authentic dedication communal co-presence. In contrast, other tasks were previously engaged with (e.g., routine communication, reporting) will play smaller role in future. advocate approaching work an AI-augmented craft call critical reflection skills attitudes necessary effectively diagnose, envision, mobilize age AI.

Language: Английский

---

Is authenticity a “true self,” multiple selves, behavior, evaluation, or a hot mess? Response to Helmuth et al.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Oct. 16, 2023

We agree with Helmuth et al.'s (2023) assertion that authentic leadership (AL) has had a meteoric rise in attention and continues to appeal the hearts minds of many scientists practitioners. al. further noted AL is likely being applied policy-related decisions, as such, renewed scientific conversation on topic warranted. That is, given ubiquity its operationalization, Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ), it important we community consider what exactly (and not), how are measuring it, “good” might come it. There been no dearth critiques AL, concept quickly rivaling emotional intelligence (Antonakis al., 2009; Dasborough 2022; Murphy, 2014) Leader–Member Exchange (Gooty 2012; Gottfredson 2020; Schriesheim 2001) criticism) garnering. Despite noteworthy unique new insights from regarding separation action, suggest this clarification currently insufficient for building strong theoretical foundation domain. In our response focal article, first note some points agreement, followed by disagreement view future popular but troubled AL. As preview counterpoint, call deeper engagement assumptions underlying notion authenticity This includes addressing conflation concepts (e.g., behaviors, evaluations intentions behavior, behavior itself) recognizing AL's reliance existence knowability true self. Such an opens dialectical (Nguyen 2022). It remains be seen if such conceptualization authenticity, while intriguing, necessary science. If questions remain reconciled explored via dominant empirical approaches mainstream sciences built on. colleagues return foundations The roots existential humanist philosophy, despite argument (in Walumbwa 2008 elsewhere) lies social psychology or positive (Luthans & Avolio, 2003). These arguments somewhat misleading because development Kernis Goldman, 2006) explicitly drew philosophical roots. Thus, contention philosophy. draw those lay out distinction between actions they use data explore whether former value over latter both empirically conceptually. commend exploring question providing evidence their ideas. also hopeful will inspire work map nomological network For instance, research cognition leader (self-referential), actual perceived action judgment evaluation observers (relational action). With these agreement convergence, believe place, now turn where views diverge extend directions One point concern discussion matter (Fischer Sitkin, 2023). multiple ways could potentially conceptualized. First, degree which person lives up self individual difference. one's “true self,” (Helmuth 2023) construction “multiple selves” (see counterpoint 3 below) may exogenous process model. Across contexts, there invariance selves. perhaps genetic environmental components trait formed, similar personality extraversion. measured questionnaire, all normal psychometric standards around reliability validity convergent, discriminant, criterion) would apply. Second, comprise type knowledge, skill, ability (KSA) possesses. were case, training programs teach someone KSA's through education. An read about learn skills tested knowledge act alignment themselves. require conceptualizing set trainable skills. Third, conceptualized behavior. Behaviors can defined “the internally coordinated responses (actions inactions) whole living organisms (individuals groups) internal and/or external stimuli, excluding more easily understood developmental changes” (Levitis 2009: 103). regularly (Banks 2016) rarely meet behavioral press). Fourth, evaluation. Here, construct interest followers' assessment extent oneself acted authentically. To compare contrast behaviors evaluations, imagine expresses support project team smiling. Some members evaluate display (a behavior) highly authentic. Conversely, other exact same low authenticity. leader's smile different assessments followers Again, most commonly frequently (for meta-analytic review, see Banks 2016). creates theory-measurement misalignment. addressed issue self-referential relational actions. However, account does not take into consideration another conceptual confusion: Evaluations perception theoretically conflated styles reality, experience enacting number simultaneously (some positively valanced, negatively valanced). Followers ethical leadership, empowering leadership). questionable considered “style” separate leaders engage range behaviors. stands, made implicit assumption do yet unique; every style evaluating visionary behavior). Essentially, occur within (individual differences, KSAs, evaluations) well across “styles.” Given current state literature, unanswered. Another literature's Dominant conceptualizations reformulation rely exists knowable. When researchers conceptualize consistency person's “inner” values (convictions, personality, etc.) invoking idea (Lehman 2019). (2008: 92, emphasis added) did so formulation AL: “Authenticity ‘owning personal experiences, thoughts, emotions, needs, preferences, beliefs, processes captured injunction know oneself’ behaving accordance self” (S. Harter, 2002: 382). although philosophy often invoked (Avolio Gardner, 2005; 2008), relevant base not. due lack availability; philosophers variety related domains have offered relies one example, Bialystok (2014: 273) reviewed various concluded “demand identify self, combined impossibility conclusively doing so, spells trouble accounts authenticity.” Or Foucault's (1983) scathing characterization Carl Rogers his counterparts Californian cult (cited Strohminger 2017: 552). Of note, Rogers' ideas influenced (2003: 15) who credited (2008) generating highlight any domain aware subsequently provide justification them. literature adopted bold largely unverifiable taken few steps explain justify assumption. Even adopt self-assumption, problem remains. only must exists; people (2023: 6) proposed reformulation, needs when “falling” pressure acting line requirement similarly hard justify. Consider own discipline conducted like ideology (Seeck 2020) culture (Barker, 1993). People always ideas, values, on, from. innately ours, be? All born society during particular historical period. context fundamentally shapes language access to, consider, “pool possible available us (Markus Nurius, 1986: 954). person, let alone majority people, thus questionable. rests selves exist knowable population. target individual's While defense domain, science Alvesson Einola, 2019; Bialystok, 2014). absence better argumentation evidence, align (2017) conclusion unknowable concept. argued above problematic. section, attempt resolve putting forth inauthenticity Nguyen philosophers, humans extension, leaders) constructed selves? Whether unnecessary view: Leading others having influence. clarity stand (values), (identity), correspondingly enact situation (context). think able “off” ideals, identities, emotions make humans. say, anyone occupies role, automatically leave identities parent, activist, student) Cha 2019), ideals benevolence, honesty), pride, grief) behind. Further, occasionally conflict. Leaders routinely forced prioritize at times paradoxical balancing safety versus keeping business open Covid) optimism vaccines grief loss) (Bedeian Day, 2004; Collings 2021; Giustiniano 2020). aligned inauthentic Other overly simplistic complexity human experience. do, however, empathize position, aligns tendency “resolve” paradoxes present unitary way moving forward. propose fruitful path forward embrace reality complexity. inauthentic; 2023: cases. good generative moves away earlier works inauthenticity. seem assume lines (phantasmal) inherently (Strohminger 2017); conversely, want bad. places rather disproportionate weight rejecting common, collective “other”. Three pathways arise multifaceted reject bad undesirable. label growth development, outside comfort zone, things necessarily (Ibarra, 2015). Perhaps key goal get comfortable demands impose. move unrealistic (or impossible) expectation A relaxation then humanizes role makes viable everyone. begin introduce uncommon messiness strength weakness (Zhang prefer straight thinking should reduced undesirable feature – not? What survival strategy nonprototypical first-time leaders? represents evolution capacities obsession “self”? Being psychological well-being, effectiveness? Research supposes effect effectiveness (as evident indicators subordinates' job attitudes, performance). argued, ALQ measure itself. Moreover, observers' perceptions equated action. relating effectiveness. Instead, venture raise here clear answer base. trivial merely griping measurement issues; fundamental conceptual. intuitive generally perceive “a fake.” equal, than inauthentic. flawed logic, conclude influence leader. received subordinates. means engaging abusive supervision, (Tepper, 2007; Zander, 2013). appears excludes authentically displaying justified. explains part why, per analysis, was replaced internalized morality theory measurement. effect, replaces claims desirable qualification contingent fact, accurate nature drives enhance (i.e., moderate) expected leadership. notions two ways: evaluated shifting presumed se moderating raises negative effects supervision stronger (Zander, diversity relation Acting challenging deviate traditional prototypes tend favor men stereotypically masculine traits well-documented informed beliefs even capturing effective (Epitropaki shows White men; United States, feminine compared Black Asian American (Eagly Karau, 2002; Rosette findings recent replications white male standard show prototype still Petsko Rosette, 2023), leaders' already “natural” fits positions, positions judged “natural.” go hand creation inclusive environments. condition cannot realized, risk calls privilege demographic group others. (2023), four counterpoints. Based counterpoints, outline three specific plausible said, skeptical metaphysical Indeed, took position approach harmful conform prototypes. hold promise muddled authors declare conflicts interest. Janaki Gooty professor Department Management Belk College Business, Organizational Science, interdisciplinary PhD program UNC Charlotte. Her focuses designs, values/ethics, levels analyses. George C. University North Carolina, His ethics, strategic resource management, methods statistics. Andrew McBride candidate Science Carolina identity, Daan van Knippenberg Houston Endowment Professor Jones Graduate School Rice University. areas expertise include inclusion, performance, creativity innovation. Data sharing applicable article datasets generated analyzed study.

Language: Английский

---

Authentic action: A recipe for success or a minefield?

Journal of Organizational Behavior, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 45(1), P. 136 - 141

Published: Nov. 1, 2023

Our academic field of leadership studies is plagued by an unscholarly obsession with fashions and clientelism. We have a pronounced penchant to tell our audiences what they like hear makes us popular rather than need know. Moreover, much work suffers from chronic illusion that the study pertains natural sciences governed at least appear be highly elusive laws causality. These two afflictions together skew fuzzy social phenomenon we come know as leadership, towards understandings world many find intellectually unappealing, ideologically loaded, practically misleading. Despite skepticism authentic theory (see Alvesson & Einola, 2019, 2022; Einola Alvesson, 2021), do think authenticity should topic inquiry within organization studies. want encourage colleagues Enlightenment scholar poet, Schiller, referred philosophical minds (Alvesson et al., 2022a) use imaginative novel approaches conduct research in this area. In article, seek both address some broader questions suggest about—or could about, engage directly Helmuth, Cole Vendette's article on action (Helmuth 2023). are certain most students who believe power positive psychology inform indisputably relational probably mean well. However, good intentions, optimistic personal worldviews, wishful thinking not help when looking glass reflects back image confused human being, search of—or trying get away from—their true, self adjust working new boss radically different values, blow whistle engaging insider trading, or define grand purpose for fast-fashion company. Genuinely facing one's self, fact, can difficult, scary, intimidating us—hence common inclination type reflexivity, Heidegger's influential shows us. read write about other similar journals fortunate live abundance possibilities but also society where polarization, destruction, conflict all possible shades black paving way looming apocalypse, Doomsday Clock symbolically indicates. clearly capable guidance, leader-ship. hyphen partly separate word, consider one make analytical distinction between its parts. The etymology tells "leader" originates word implies guide suffix "ship" extends meaning person's capacity lead others. If rise courageous leaders Ulysses their True North institutions out perilous waters thanks exceptional navigation skills unwavering faith, then onto something meaningful. Alas, educators advisors these leader-candidates so impatiently (still) waits feel confident pedagogical match pastoral task hand. It will take epic persuasion powers charisma individually collectively may simply lack, convert same senior managers heirs whose actions gotten today into morally strong humble self-sacrificing guides, uniting troops under flag, generating promised land, despite odds. Helmuth al. (2023) ask: did go wrong? answer derailed it was turned Authentic Leadership Theory (ALT) captured construct. As point out, community inwards, stopped questioning validity, key premises, which construct operationalized almost immediately after inception start massive empirical effort showing "good"—indeed source anything good. For us, idea objective unconcerned complexity life unaffected subjectivities, discourses, very constantly alter, mess-up, (mis)interpret phenomena such leader-follower relations interesting thought experiment. remain dismayed how swiftly discourse transformed sticky ALT has been critique theory, well theories, transformational 2019; 2021; Ford Harding, 2011; Gardiner, 2016; Gardner Iszatt-White, Carroll, Stead, Elliott, Spoelstra Tourish, 2019). appears immune critical reflection. There even scholars openly confess never (Tourish, Yet no serious scientific endeavor—different ideology—can sustained without skepticism, doubt, engagement well-founded critique. note argue combination qualitative quantitative work—but only aim latter. realize understanding calls else getting questionnaires filled, single-minded training, myopic publication norms, stiff career regimes prevent people conducting studies, ethnographies, forms slow research. Qualitative often fraught problems. One-time interviews X number shallow questionnaire-filling research, well-carried exploring issues in-depth perhaps employing mixed methods designs better chance bit deeper subject matter. here messy field, objectivity ideal. more insightful pluralism, methodological, needed. Studies interested vague, complex, elusive, subjective area genuinely (intuitive, interpretative, tentative, uncertainty-acknowledging, situationally sensitive, explorative) seriously. Cole, Vendette capture "the basic elements" interest regard sparked Suddaby's (2010) realization researchers "cannot agree communicate elements phenomenon, accumulation knowledge cannot occur … organizational becomes increasingly fragmented" (pp. 352–353). Are there leadership? And claimed necessarily phenomenon? tribe assumes element "leadership," "root" sibling constructs built on. One say (whatever reader) mainly subordinates relation happens result. Here, implicitly claim about. They themselves experts because published papers topic, diligently citing each other. But since deductive capabilities experience automatically best, options considered. Researchers longer periods time, once context enough ask meaningful competent interpretations, approach roles them important leader–follower done optimal way. Any qualities emerging listed, technical competence, empathy, group identification, skills, cognitive sharpness, political astuteness, courage, fairness, availability, autonomy, support, having "right" being tactful along people, speaking up, loyal upwards, downwards, sidewards, profession doing resistance, hands-on, avoiding indicates micro-management. obvious "authenticity" would score high list (unless participants recently attended course inserting heads). More substantive, "basic constitute researcher fantasy, pretense scholarly knowledge, quite reductionistic researcher-egocentric view problems ideal linear systematic project. successful, larger needs strongly agreeing project thing—same definitions, measures, studying people. limited success (other comes successful business own right) look areas scoring knowledge-ideal, track record disappointing (Fischer, 2018; van Knippenberg Sitkin, 2013). All applied received devastating suggesting things wrong including arbitrary lumping impossible-to-study "elements." Is lack really problem? Probably yes, if function physical world, fairly uniform following mechanical laws, certainty conviction position best. not, fragmentation instead considered welcome diversity thought, manifestation creativity, reflect deep dimensions facets cultivated, reduced finding universally relevant, replicable, important. strive consensus ideas, insights, valuable emerging. An question colleagues' likely reduce confusion, achieve further results "be transferred practitioners." feelings suggestion. Problems concern assess "authentic actions" assumed close link person leader (authentic) action. While product painting (and fake), difficult activity way, decoupled act. positively, cultivating consequences insights contemporary life. could, example, investigate does acting authentically not—and why. Shifting focus small step right direction. Leadership, few disagree, behaviors—and reactions. intentions accommodate dictates preferred method. Authenticity emanates mind authenticity-dilemmas intimately reflection mind. My painful process decision-making follow convictions denounce my wrong-doer thus risking inevitably before act denouncing them. company mailbox filling anonymous denouncements proof action, just objectively verifiable observation. upshot readily counted, appropriate taken fix problem. fixer authentic, inauthentic, someone job care truthfulness self. outcome matters, practical purposes. problem malpractices, scholars, unattended members, leaders, prefer willful ignorance 2022b) avoid around (in-) upfront. A statement seems "A acts resist external pressure Other choose according desires" (p. 6). Resistance norms theme here. resistance laudable principle, practice, any manager going against culture, team expectations, superiors risk negatively evaluated punished groups against. This typically articulated behavior ways: spirit, violating refusing job. Own desires necessary seen matter integrity, stubbornness mental rigidity, socially insensitive, self-righteous, disloyal, (Jackall, 1988). Organizations professions intolerant focusing others moral commitments breaking norms. particular self-other established, instance, sometimes middle level seniors juniors time (Gjerde 2020; Sims, 2003). additional specific person. classical trick credit outcomes attribute responsibility less decisions, acts, others: circumstances, management, complexity. Few leader's free agency, unless talk absolute Mark Zuckerberg Elon Musk. Outcomes subjected constraints others—seniors, suppliers, customers, subordinates, professional legislation, policy, splendid isolation contingent ways, tracing difficult. multitude demands frontstage behavior—acting differently front audience unconstrained—may put leader. Some see occasionally, planned interactions, formal meetings appraisal talks, closely variety situations. Actions assessed terms show considerable differences based leader/follower is. (2023, p. 13) tab. 4 offer directions future box authors method philosophy Maybe taking inspiration fields historically concerned psychology, philosophy, literature, sociology, richness concept better? broadly varied ways aspects (in-)authenticity problem, forces making rewarding authentic. concludes suggestions "paths" leadership. second path proposing complete rebuild leadership's theoretical, conceptual, measurement deficiencies. According requires developing lends measurement. clear theoretically sound definition establishing nomological network articulating antecedents, correlates, newly developed training imagination robust leadership—including self-awareness, others, actions, related "outcomes" built. apparent: shaky respondent questionnaire authenticity, little bearing complex (sense-making, relations) outside form-filling (Alvesson, 1996, 2020). through storytelling persuasive (backbone leadership!) journaling moments struggled choices selves, situations became salient forcing confront it, happened consequence. employees demonstrating behaviors attitudes sincere, empathetic, fair, listener, reversing bad decisions lived experiences perceptions authenticity—and notion diverse packaged theory? conceptualize either extension leadership) concepts phenomena. Hence, constructive, mix existential authenticity. essence phenomenological introspection—a journey Self Being. What me? How I it? existence? space ponderations highlight individual freedom (typically managers) essential part means human. attempted convey that, slippery combined implying aspect attributed contestable promising inductively members struggling encountering true selves test otherwise become lives paths. age fake commercialized occurs virtual media. involve know, meet person, let alone inauthentic thoughts, these. So case interact work—customers, managers, colleagues, Most effective smooth role-playing adaptation rules, corporate correctness, navigating sectional interests, value identities workplaces. Sometimes, noise signals full fake, hypocrisy, imitations, talk, add commodified selling persuade consumers buy package. Ideological escape attempts tempting oneself—the first aspiring reasons skeptical—and scrutiny. organizations issue authenticity-promoting seriously, perilous, depending context. call compliance, relations, saying thing, line policies cultural top exercise follow, humans clones discouraged. ethical desirable. "truly true" cultures welcoming created step. Individuals jobs changes, sanctions unpopularity, voice whistle-blowers. foster workplace people's flourish. stopper, while appearing complying promoted made "leadership material." view, ongoing discussions understood theory. amount facelifts, tummy tucks botox (re)fills restore reach beauty elegance relativity. bending fit cater customer likings? Or everyone invested money, substantial egos happy psychologically safe? playing semantics save shipwrecked sinking? refute studies? trapped socio-cultural differences, difficulty establish ground—and so, hope hopeless tyrannical drama modern politics. loud ruling coalition great supporters, prevails. On scene, chorus clones, "perfect" followers willingly given up burden (authentically) themselves, sings tune cacophonic melody is, muffling dissident voices, inside themselves. Even though board twist moving existentialist philosophers standardized yet another intermediary variable "construct," enjoyed reading piece (2023). Some, although modest rocking boat, vital skeptical outsiders ourselves broad mainstream. Intellectual humility debate bring forth attitude nurturing. wish thank editor reviewer comments helped paper. Journal Organizational Behavior, representatives, Mats professor University Bath, UK, affiliated Lund University, Sweden, Stockholm School Economics City, London. His recent books include Re-imagining Research Process (Sage 2021, w Jörgen Sandberg), Return Meaning. Social Science Something Say (Oxford Press 2017, Yiannis Gabriel Roland Paulsen), Reflexive Martin Blom Stefan Sveningsson), Stupidity Paradox (Profile 2016, André Spicer). He fellow British Academy 2023 recipient Herbert Simon Award Rajk College Advanced Studies. 2023–26 Hans Fischer Institute Technical Munich. Katja assistant (Sweden). Her leading international themes teams, artificial intelligence organizations. She fluent six languages 20 years various large multinational firms spanning three continents. data support findings available corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Language: Английский

---

The person behind the mask: supervisor-subordinate relationships and well-being at work

Management Research The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Oct. 9, 2024

Purpose Taking the subordinates’ perspective, this paper aims to explore supervisor-subordinate relationships and how daily interactions, personal ties connections with supervisors contribute more significantly, positively or negatively, well-being. Design/methodology/approach This exploratory study is based on thematic analysis of data collected from two rounds in-depth semi-structured interviews 21 participants in a Portuguese utility company. Findings The perceptions nature quality their were found have considerable effects Positive identified when subordinates feel emotionally supported believe that truly care about them are genuinely willing listen concerns, but most significant well-being produced perceived authenticity supervisor allows relationship evolve into state relational closeness, connect person-as-real, human being behind mask who playing supervisory role. These findings reflect features cultural setting where was conducted. Originality/value provides evidence support argument better understanding requires an integrated approach considers valuable contributions different literatures theoretical frameworks multiple dimensions relationship, including non-work dimensions. particularly relevant contexts these might play critical role work relations.

Language: Английский

---

‘Let’s get real’ … when we lead: A systematic review, critical assessment, and agenda for authentic leadership theory and research

Journal of Management & Organization, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 1 - 27

Published: Nov. 22, 2024

Abstract Scholarly and practitioner interest in authentic leadership has grown at an accelerating rate over the last decade, resulting a proliferation of publications across diverse social science disciplines. Accompanying this been criticism theory methods used to explore it. We conducted systematic review 303 scholarly articles published from 2010 2023 critically assess conceptual empirical strengths limitations literature map nomological network construct. Results indicate that much extant research does not follow best practices terms design analysis. Based on findings obtained, agenda for advancing embraces signaling perspective is proposed.

Language: Английский

---

Rethinking authentic leadership: An alternative approach based on dynamic processes of active identity, self-regulation, and ironic processes of mental control

Journal of Management & Organization, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: unknown, P. 1 - 30

Published: Nov. 26, 2024

Abstract Despite its popularity, authentic leadership remains enigmatic, with both advantages and disadvantages. The connection between authenticity (an internal process) external influence is complex. We introduce a theory that connects these processes through self-regulation, suggesting results from managing multiple identities regulated by factors such as active self-identity. Using ironic theory, we propose model encourages leaders to focus on their self rather than suppressing misaligned aspects. present dynamic process, adaptable across individual, relational, collective levels, self-identity shifting contextually. This perspective offers insights into developing leader authenticity, addresses the limitations of approach, provides roadmap for future research.

Language: Английский

---

Factores de riesgo psicosocial que afectan el desempeño laboral de los trabajadores en una empresa petrolera

Religación, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 9(43), P. e2401340 - e2401340

Published: Dec. 10, 2024

Esta investigación tiene como objetivo principal identificar los factores de riesgo psicosocial que influyen en el desempeño laboral empleados una empresa petrolera ubicada Ecuador. Para llevar a cabo estudio, se utilizó un enfoque descriptivo dentro diseño cuantitativo. Este caracterizó por ser experimental y corte transversal, permitiendo evaluación detallada puntual las variables cuestión. riesgos psicosociales empleó cuestionario estandarizado publicado Ministerio Trabajo Ecuador para WPQ Koopmans. La población inicial del estudio estaba compuesta 126 trabajadores, pero después aplicar proceso selección muestra, la muestra final quedó conformada 96 empleados. Los resultados generales revelan 100% trabajadores evaluados enfrentan alto nivel psicosocial. Esto indica prevalencia significativa condiciones laborales afectan negativamente bienestar rendimiento petrolera. Respecto determinó no existen correlaciones significativas dado significancia su mayoría supera 0,05 requerido.

---

Deconstructing Dimensions of Authentic Strategic Leadership of State-Owned Enterprises in Malawi: A Literature Analysis

Foundations of Management, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 16(1), P. 325 - 344

Published: Jan. 1, 2024

Abstract There is a paucity of research on authentic leadership (AL) top-level executives, especially in state-owned enterprises (SOEs). The objective this conceptual paper to review the extant models AL and propose new comprehensive framework dimensions strategic (ASL) leading SOEs Malawi. A background literature authenticity was conducted several peer-reviewed journals identify foundation nature authenticity, AL, dimensions, revealing different interrelated aspects existing models. Six key ASL Malawi are connecting self organization direction; building organizational, resilience, iterative influence internal external stakeholders, collaborative transparent drive positive; change producing direction, alignment, commitment (DAC). proposed diverse stakeholders achieve DAC SOE Researchers implored test validate enhance its explanatory power.

Language: Английский

---