Christopher P. Neck and Jeffery D. Houghton
The purpose of this paper is to provide a thorough review of self‐leadership literature past and present, including a historical overview of how the concept was created and…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to provide a thorough review of self‐leadership literature past and present, including a historical overview of how the concept was created and expanded as well as a detailed look at more recent self‐leadership research trends and directions. The paper also presents a theoretical and conceptual explanation and differentiation of the self‐leadership concept relative to other related motivational, personality, and self‐influence constructs.
Design/methodology/approach
Self‐leadership research and related literatures of motivation, personality and self‐influence are discussed and described in order to present the current state of the self‐leadership body of knowledge and to suggest future directions to explore and study.
Findings
It is suggested that self‐leadership is a normative model of self‐influence that operates within the framework of more descriptive and deductive theories such as self‐regulation and social cognitive theory.
Research limitations/implications
While self‐leadership research composes an impressive body of knowledge, it is a domain of study that has been under‐investigated in some aspects, both empirically and conceptually.
Practical implications
This paper suggests several future directions that researchers can undertake to advance self‐leadership knowledge.
Originality/value
This paper fills a void in the organizational literature by reviewing the body of self‐leadership knowledge, by stating how self‐leadership is a distinctive theory in its own, and by presenting directions for future self‐leadership research.
Details
Keywords
Matteo Cristofaro, Christopher P. Neck, Pier Luigi Giardino and Christopher B. Neck
This study aims to investigate the relationship between shared leadership (SL) and decision quality, utilizing shared leadership theory (SLT) and behavioral decision theory (BDT)…
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to investigate the relationship between shared leadership (SL) and decision quality, utilizing shared leadership theory (SLT) and behavioral decision theory (BDT). The authors will explore the mediating role of “decision comprehensiveness” in the SL–decision quality linkage. Additionally, the authors will examine how individual “self-leadership” and “debate” among team members moderate the relationship between SL and decision comprehensiveness.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors tested the hypothesized moderated mediation model using a sample of 506 professionals employed in 112 research and development (R&D) teams, along with their direct managers from large Italian firms. To examine the relationships, the authors employed confirmatory factor analyses and path analyses. In order to address endogeneity concerns, the authors incorporated an instrumental variable, namely delegation, into the analysis.
Findings
SL positively influences decision quality, mediated by decision comprehensiveness, where teams include comprehensive information in decision-making. The level of debate among team members positively moderates the SL–decision comprehensiveness relationship. High levels of self-leadership can harm SL by reducing decision comprehensiveness, indicating a downside. However, low or moderate levels of self-leadership do not harm decision comprehensiveness and can even benefit SL.
Originality/value
This is the first work to investigate the relationship between SL and decision quality, shedding light on the mechanisms underlying this association. By integrating SLT and BDT, the authors provide insights into how managers can make higher-quality decisions within self-leading teams. Moreover, this research makes a distinct contribution to the field of self-leadership by delineating its boundaries and identifying a potentially negative aspect within the self-influence process.
Details
Keywords
Christopher B. Neck, Christopher P. Neck, Michael G. Goldsby and Elizabeth A. Goldsby
Despite turning a recent eye toward work teams, motivation research has largely treated the group as a contextual influence affecting an individual’s motivation, leaving…
Abstract
Purpose
Despite turning a recent eye toward work teams, motivation research has largely treated the group as a contextual influence affecting an individual’s motivation, leaving explanations of motivational forces within a group cached in theories of intrapersonal motivation. As a result, our understanding of the processes of motivation that operate beyond the individual remains lacking. Moving beyond this individual paradigm, the present paper seeks to clarify a process through which the motivational forces circulating within a team per se produce nascent member motivation through a motivational contagion. Specifically, we examine how motivational dynamics within a group serve as a unique motivational stimulus for its members and thereby operate as a process-altering collective effort as a consequence of its presence.
Design/methodology/approach
This paper is a conceptual analysis.
Findings
Either through an intrinsically driven adoption that promotes member persistence in effortful action or an extrinsic compelling that engenders intensity of effort, apparent motivation may spread through a connected social network.
Originality/value
Through providing a top-down explanation of how broader group-level motivation in and of itself may serve as an impetus for future motivation within the group, this paper takes an important first step to clarify how team-level motivation operates beyond a mere contextual influence on pre-existing individual motivation.
Details
Keywords
Jeffery D. Houghton, Christopher P. Neck and Charles C. Manz
In terms of the body of knowledge examining work teams, several books and articles have attempted to address the underlying causes of why work teams fail. However, a scarcity of…
Abstract
In terms of the body of knowledge examining work teams, several books and articles have attempted to address the underlying causes of why work teams fail. However, a scarcity of writings has focused on the issue of work team sustainability. The dictionary defines “sustain” as “to prevent from falling, collapsing, or giving way,” and “to endure.” This definition gives rise to the following question: “What are the factors that contribute to those work teams that ‘endure’ and that do not ‘fall, collapse, or give way’ during challenging organizational experiences?” In this paper, we will take an initial step toward answering this question by presenting a cognitive model of work team sustainability based upon established cognitive principles of individual‐level effort and performance sustainability. This model is designed to provide some practical insights into the long‐term team performance sustainability issue while also serving as a possible foundation for future research efforts.
Details
Keywords
Matteo Cristofaro, Frank Butler, Christopher Neck, Satyanarayana Parayitam and Chanchai Tangpong
Christopher P. Neck and Todd M. Edwards
The organisational literature suggests a plethora of techniques available to managers to enhance their managerial effectiveness (e.g., planning tools, decision‐making guidelines…
Abstract
The organisational literature suggests a plethora of techniques available to managers to enhance their managerial effectiveness (e.g., planning tools, decision‐making guidelines, etc.). However, an often‐overlooked skill that could assist managers in overcoming obstacles in their daily jobs involves the self‐management of their cognitive processes. In fact, a leading psychologist has written, “One of the most significant findings in psychology in the last twenty years is that individuals can choose the way they think,” (Seligman, 1991, p.8). It has been suggested that managers can better lead themselves and work more effectively with others by applying strategies that help them to manage or control their thoughts. More productive thinking and improved performance are the payoffs. This theory, labelled Thought Self‐Leadership (TSL), centres on employees' establishing and maintaining constructive desirable thought patterns (Neck & Manz, 1992; Manz & Neck, 1991; Neck & Milliman, 1994). This perspective suggests that just as we tend to develop behavioural habits that are both functional and dysfunctional, we also develop habits (or patterns) in our thinking that influence our perceptions, the way we process information, and the choices we make in an almost automatic way.
One major stream of organizational change research focuses on the relationship between senior level employees' cognitions and organizations' responses to change. It is argued here…
Abstract
One major stream of organizational change research focuses on the relationship between senior level employees' cognitions and organizations' responses to change. It is argued here that the cognitive component is important towards how all members (not only top executives) of organizations react and respond to change. In this article, I examine the application of a cognitive process recently introduced into the organizational behavior literature, thought self‐leadership, to the organizational change process. Particularly, this application will focus on how thought self‐leadership can enhance employees' perceptions of specific organizational change. Additionally, a training‐based field experiment is discussed to illustrate and provide support for the arguments proposed.
Mitchell J. Neubert and Ju‐Chien Cindy Wu
Seeks to examine the psychometric properties and construct validity of the Houghton and Neck Revised Self‐Leadership Questionnaire (RSLQ) in a Chinese context.
Abstract
Purpose
Seeks to examine the psychometric properties and construct validity of the Houghton and Neck Revised Self‐Leadership Questionnaire (RSLQ) in a Chinese context.
Design/methodology/approach
The RSLQ was administered to 559 Chinese employees of a large petroleum transportation company. Analyses included reliability assessments, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and tests of association with creativity and performance.
Findings
The RSLQ did not uniformly generalize to a Chinese context. The best fitting model included the self‐leadership dimensions of goal‐setting, visualizing successful performance, self‐talk, self‐reward, and self‐punishment. The modified RSLQ was positively associated with creativity and in‐role performance.
Research limitations/implications
Although this study supports some components of self‐leadership generalizing to a Chinese context, the results suggest that further validation work is required on the RSLQ.
Practical implications
Managers will be well served to understand which dimensions of self‐leadership are generalizable across cultures, and how to measure the existence and development of such practices.
Originality/value
This research makes a significant contribution to research on self‐leadership by investigating the generalizability of the RSLQ to working adults in a non‐Western culture.
Details
Keywords
This article has been withdrawn as it was published elsewhere and accidentally duplicated. The original article can be seen here: 10.1108/02683949510075155. When citing the…
Abstract
This article has been withdrawn as it was published elsewhere and accidentally duplicated. The original article can be seen here: 10.1108/02683949510075155. When citing the article, please cite: Charles C. Manz, Christopher P. Neck, (1995), “Teamthink: beyond the groupthink syndrome in self-managing work teams”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10 Iss: 1, pp. 7 - 15.
Christopher P. Neck, Heidi M. Neck, Charles C. Manz and Jeffrey Godwin
The concept of “Thought Self‐Leadership” involves individual self‐influence through cognitive strategies that focus on self‐dialogue, mental imagery, beliefs and assumptions, and…
Abstract
The concept of “Thought Self‐Leadership” involves individual self‐influence through cognitive strategies that focus on self‐dialogue, mental imagery, beliefs and assumptions, and thought patterns. A plethora of studies from various fields including management, counseling psychology, sports psychology, education, and communication, address the effect of these Thought Self‐Leadership cognitive strategies on cognitions and behaviors. This research provides consistent support for the relationship between constructive self‐leadership of these cognitive processes and enhanced performance. The application of these cognitive strategies to the entrepreneurship domain, however, is sparse. We propose that the application of these principles to the entrepreneurial process offers the potential to enhance individual performance and mental states for both practicing and aspiring entrepreneurs. Propositions derived from the proposed framework are developed to serve as catalysts for empirically testing the applicability of Thought Self‐Leadership to the entrepreneurship context.