Are we on the same page? Effects of self-awareness of
empowering and transformational leadership.
by Tekleab, Amanuel G.^Sims, Henry P., Jr.^Yun, Seokhwa^ Tesluk,
Paul E.^Cox, Jonathan
This study examines the effects of leaders' self-awareness of
their own leadership on followers' satisfaction, self-leadership,
and leader effectiveness. A leader's self-awareness was
conceptualized as the degree of similarity between the leader's
self-description and his or her followers' descriptions of leader
behaviors. Transformational and empowering leadership are measured from
48 leaders and 222 of their followers. Results from confirmatory factor
analyses provide support for two types of leadership: transformational
and empowering. Results from polynomial regression analyses indicate
that self-awareness of transformational leadership is related to leader
effectiveness and followers' supervisory satisfaction. In contrast,
self-awareness of empowering leadership is related to followers'
self-leadership. These effects of leadership self-awareness extend
beyond the direct effect of leadership on the outcome variables.
Keywords: leader effectiveness; transformational leadership;
empowering leadership; polynomial regression; self-awareness; follower
satisfaction; follower self-leadership; emotional intelligence
**********
It is wisdom to know others; It is enlightenment to know one's
self.
Lao-Tzu
How well do we know ourselves? Does it matter? Is self-awareness
somehow connected with our effectiveness as a leader? These are the
fundamental questions that inspired the research reported in this
article.
Self-awareness is related to the notion of self-evaluation. If we
know our self, then our self-evaluation is likely to be more accurate.
According to the literature on self-evaluation, individuals may either
overrate or underrate their own performance when compared with ratings
from other sources (Harris & Schaubroeck, 1988; Mabe & West,
1982). But in addition, another form of self-assessment is related to
the way we view ourselves as a leader. Are we accurate in describing our
own leadership? Is this accuracy related to our effectiveness as a
leader? Past research on leadership has investigated discrepancies
between self-descriptions of leadership and descriptions provided by
others (e.g., Atwater, Roush, & Fischthal, 1995; Atwater &
Yammarino, 1997; Felfe & Schyns, 2004; Thornton, 1980). These
discrepancies can be interpreted as a leader's lack of
self-awareness about his or her own leadership.
In the research reported here, we investigated the influence of
leader self-awareness on outcomes such as leader effectiveness, follower
satisfaction, and follower self-leadership. To some degree, we were
inspired by the notion of emotional intelligence, which suggests that
emotional self-awareness is an important part of one's life and
work effectiveness (Bar-On, 2000; Gross, 1998). According to this
viewpoint, if one is aware of one's own emotions, then life and
work experiences are likely to be more effective and satisfying (Cote
& Miners, 2006; Jordan & Ashkanasy, 2006; Sosik & Megerian,
1999). Extrapolating from this viewpoint, we suggest that self-awareness
about one's own leadership is likely to produce enhanced
effectiveness and satisfaction at work.
In general, research on leader self-awareness is relatively rare in
the leadership literature. Interesting exceptions are the works of
Atwater and Yammarino (1992); Atwater, Ostroff, Yammarino, and Fleenor
(1998); Bass and Yammarino (1991); Fleenor, McCauley, and Brutus (1996),
Felfe and Schyns (2004); Riggio and Cole (1992); and Sosik and Megerian
(1999). Overall, this previous research found that a leader's
agreement with followers (or self-awareness) about his or her own
transformational leadership was associated with leader effectiveness.
Yet self-awareness may be related to other outcomes, including follower
affective responses and self-leadership. Atwater et al. (1998) stated,
"self-other agreement is most relevant to outcomes that involve
human perceptions [emphasis added] and less relevant to more objective
measures such as sales volume or meeting productivity goals" (p.
595). Therefore, in this study, we extend the investigation of leader
self-awareness by exploring the effect of leader self-awareness on
affective and behavioral outcomes, such as satisfaction with supervisor
and self-leadership, in addition to the more usual outcome of leader
effectiveness.
Furthermore, we extend previous work by investigating
self-awareness of empowering leadership in addition to transformational
leadership. In recent decades, we have certainly seen an increasing
interest among organizations to promote autonomy, especially with
self-managing teams. Parallel to this interest has been the emergence of
empowering leadership as a new focus of leadership. This form of
leadership concentrates on the notion of a leader who enhances follower
serf-leadership (e.g., Arnold, Arad, Rhoades, & Drasgow, 2000;
Cohen, Chang, & Ledford, 1997; Manz & Sims, 1987; Salam, Cox,
& Sims, 1997; Stewart & Manz, 1995). Several recent studies
(Ahearne, Mathieu, & Rapp, 2005; Cohen et al., 1997; Ensley,
Hmieleski, & Pearce, 2006; Houghton & Yoho, 2005; Manz &
Sims, 1987; Pearce & Sims, 2002; Pearce, Yoo, & Alavi, 2004;
Yun, Cox, & Sims, 2006; Yun, Faraj, & Sims, 2005) have
recognized empowering leadership as distinct from transformational
leadership.
Although empowering leadership behavior has received relatively
less attention in the leadership literature when compared to
transformational leadership, results have consistently found linkages to
follower self-leadership and team performance. Therefore, an important
part of this research is our extension of prior studies by examining
leaders' self-awareness of their own empowering leadership. Our
research not only compared the results of self-awareness of
transformational leadership with past studies but also investigated
whether the findings are similar for empowering leadership. In summary,
the main contribution of this study is to extend prior research about
self-awareness of one's own leadership by investigating (a) both
empowering leadership and transformational leadership and (b) additional
outcomes such as follower satisfaction and self-leadership.
Hypotheses
Leadership
Over the years, the literature has developed many perspectives and
viewpoints of leadership. For an extensive review, we refer the reader
to the encyclopedic work of Bass (1990) and the ongoing review and
synthesis of the leadership literature presented by Yukl (2002, 2006).
Here, we briefly review perspectives represented by the labels of
transformational and empowering leadership.
Transformational leadership is defined as the process of
cultivating followers' commitment to organizational objectives and
shaping the culture in ways consistent with the organizational strategy
(Yukl, 2002). Transformational leadership is directed toward inspiring
followers to share and pursue the leader's vision (Yammarino &
Bass, 1990) and motivating followers to go beyond acting in their own
self-interest of exchanging effort and compliance for rewards (Hater
& Bass, 1988) and to work for the good of the group (Yammarino &
Bass, 1990). Transformational leadership, then, helps concentrate
followers' efforts on long-term goals (Howell & Avolio, 1993).
To meet these goals, transformational leaders focus on developing vision
and inspiring followers' pursuit of the vision. Furthermore, they
stimulate changes or alignment of systems in service of a new vision
rather than working within existing systems to sustain the status quo
(Howell & Avolio, 1993).
In comparison, empowering leadership involves a different set of
leader behaviors that are directed more toward developing the
self-influence capabilities, including: self-control, self-regulation,
self-management, and self-leadership of followers (see Manz & Sims,
1987, for the first appearance of empowering leader behaviors). To
achieve this goal, empowering leaders delegate extensive responsibility
to followers and create an environment that enables followers to satisfy
needs for growth and autonomy by exercising effective self-control and
self-direction toward organizational objectives (Cohen et al., 1997;
Manz & Sims, 1987, 1991, 1995; Sims & Manz, 1996; Yun et al.,
2006; Yun et al., 2005). That is, they provide opportunities for their
followers to make decisions and carry them out.
Empowering leadership is different from transformational
leadership. In general, transformational leadership is centered largely
on the vision of the leader. In contrast, empowering leadership is
targeted at developing the self-leadership capabilities among followers.
Indeed, Pearce et al. (2003) have empirically supported the distinction
between empowering and transformational leadership behaviors.
Furthermore, Arnold et al. (2000), Cohen et al. (1997), and Pearce and
Sims (2002) provided support for empowering leadership as encompassing a
different set of leader behaviors from those of transformational
leadership. Recently, Houghton and Yoho (2005) also recognized
empowering leadership as a separate type of leadership and included it
in their contingency model of leadership and psychological empowerment.
Following these endeavors, we conceptualize and operationalize
empowering leadership as distinct from transformational leadership.
Because there has been relatively little research that has directly
compared empowering and transformation leadership, as a preliminary
analysis, we will first empirically examine this distinction; thus, we
hypothesize the following:
Hypothesis 1a: Transformational and empowering leadership are two
separate constructs.
COPYRIGHT 2008 Baker College System - Center for
Graduate Studies Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further reproduction or distribution is prohibited without permission.
Copyright 2008, Gale Group. All rights
reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.
NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.