In: European journal of work and organizational psychology: the official journal of The European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology, Band 24, Heft 3, S. 444-461
In: European journal of work and organizational psychology: the official journal of The European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology, Band 25, Heft 6, S. 790-803
Stress and the associated correlates, such as depression, alcohol abuse, and suicidal ideation, are a global issue among college and university students. We assert that character is a personal resource that students have at their disposal to address personal, social, and environmental challenges they may encounter in their personal and academic lives. The results of a field study involving undergraduate business students show that character, operationalized as a higher order construct consisting of 11 interrelated dimensions, has a direct effect on the subjective well-being of students and an indirect effect through the perceived stressfulness of life events. Our results imply that it is essential for faculty and students at management education institutions to fully appreciate the importance of character for effective functioning and to develop the various character dimensions to address adverse personal, social, and environmental situations in a positive fashion.
This research was supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation awarded to RvD, NMJ and JAH (DI 848/15-1 and HA 6455/4-1). ; Objectives : To investigate whether citizens' adherence to health-protective non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) during the COVID-19 pandemic is predicted by identity leadership, wherein leaders are perceived to create a sense of shared national identity. Design : Observational two-wave study. Hypotheses testing was conducted with structural equation modelling. Setting : Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic in China, Germany, Israel and the USA in April/May 2020 and four weeks later. Participants : Adults in China (n=548, 66.6% women), Germany (n=182, 78% women), Israel (n=198, 51.0% women) and the USA (n=108, 58.3% women). Measures : Identity leadership (assessed by the four-item Identity Leadership Inventory Short-Form) at Time 1, perceived shared national identification (PSNI; assessed with four items) and adherence to health-protective NPIs (assessed with 10 items that describe different health-protective interventions; for example, wearing face masks) at Time 2. Results : Identity leadership was positively associated with PSNI (95% CI 0.11 to 0.30, p<0.001) in all countries. This, in turn, was related to more adherence to health-protective NPIs in all countries (95% CI 0.03 to 0.36, 0.001≤p≤0.017) except Israel (95% CI −0.03 to 0.27, p=0.119). In Germany, the more people saw Chancellor Merkel as engaging in identity leadership, the more they adhered to health-protective NPIs (95% CI 0.04 to 0.18, p=0.002). In the USA, in contrast, the more people perceived President Trump as engaging in identity leadership, the less they adhered to health-protective NPIs (95% CI −0.17 to −0.04, p=0.002). Conclusions : National leaders can make a difference by promoting a sense of shared identity among their citizens because people are more inclined to follow health-protective NPIs to the extent that they feel part of a united 'us'. However, the content of identity leadership ...
Recent theorizing applying the social identity approach to leadership proposes a four‐dimensional model of identity leadership that centres on leaders' management of a shared sense of 'we' and 'us'. This research validates a scale assessing this model – the Identity Leadership Inventory (ILI). We present results from an international project with data from all six continents and from more than 20 countries/regions with 5,290 participants. TheILIwas translated (using back‐translation methods) into 13 different languages (available in the Appendix S1) and used along with measures of other leadership constructs (i.e., leader–member exchange [LMX], transformational leadership, and authentic leadership) as well as employee attitudes and (self‐reported) behaviours – namely identification, trust in the leader, job satisfaction, innovative work behaviour, organizational citizenship behaviour, and burnout. Results provide consistent support for the construct, discriminant, and criterion validity of theILIacross countries. We show that the four dimensions of identity leadership are distinguishable and that they relate to important work‐related attitudes and behaviours above and beyond other leadership constructs. Finally, we also validate a short form of theILI, noting that is likely to have particular utility in applied contexts.Practitioner pointsThe Identity Leadership Inventory (ILI) has a consistent factor structure and high predictive value across 20 countries and can thus be used to assess a leader's ability to manage (team and organizational) identities in a range of national and cultural contexts.Identity leadership as perceived by employees is uniquely related to important indicators of leadership effectiveness including employees' relationship to their team (identification and perceived team support), well‐being (job satisfaction and reduced burnout), and performance (citizenship and innovative behaviour at work).TheILIcan be used in practical settings to assess and develop leadership, for instance, in 360‐degree feedback systems.The short form of theILIis also a valid assessment of identity leadership, and this is likely to be useful in a range of applied contexts (e.g., those where there is a premium on cost and time or when comparing multiple leaders or multiple time points).
AbstractIdentity leadership captures leaders efforts to create and promote a sense of shared group membership (i.e., a sense of "we" and of "us") among followers. The present research report tests this claim by drawing on data from 26 countries that are part of the Global Identity Leadership Development (GILD) project to examine the relationship between political leaders' identity leadership and civic citizenship behavior (N = 6787). It also examines the contributions of trust and economic inequality to this relationship. Political leaders' identity leadership (PLIL) was positively associated with respondents' people‐oriented civic citizenship behaviors (CCB‐P) in 20 of 26 countries and civic citizenship behaviors aimed at one's country (CCB‐C) in 23 of 26 countries. Mediational analyses also confirmed the indirect effects of PLIL via trust in fellow citizens on both CCB‐P (in 25 out of 26 countries) and CCB‐C (in all 26 countries). Economic inequality moderated these effects such that the main and indirect effects of trust in one's fellow citizens on CCB‐C were stronger in countries with higher economic inequality. This interaction effect was not observed for CCB‐P. The study highlights the importance of identity leadership and trust in fellow citizens in promoting civic citizenship behavior, especially in the context of economic inequality.
Employee silence, the withholding of work‐related ideas, questions, or concerns from someone who could effect change, has been proposed to hamper individual and collective learning as well as the detection of errors and unethical behaviors in many areas of the world. To facilitate cross‐cultural research, we validated an instrument measuring four employee silence motives (i.e., silence based on fear, resignation, prosocial, and selfish motives) in 21 languages. Across 33 countries (N = 8,222) representing diverse cultural clusters, the instrument shows good psychometric properties (i.e., internal reliabilities, factor structure, and measurement invariance). Results further revealed similarities and differences in the prevalence of silence motives between countries, but did not necessarily support cultural stereotypes. To explore the role of culture for silence, we examined relationships of silence motives with the societal practices cultural dimensions from the GLOBE Program. We found relationships between silence motives and power distance, institutional collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance. Overall, the findings suggest that relationships between silence and cultural dimensions are more complex than commonly assumed. We discuss the explanatory power of nations as (cultural) units of analysis, our social scientific approach, the predictive value of cultural dimensions, and opportunities to extend silence research geographically, methodologically, and conceptually.