Authentic leadership is most recently defined as "concordant, values-based leader signalling of self-awareness, internalised moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency". The idea has also been embraced by leaders and leadership coaches, who view it as an alternative to leaders who emphasize profit and share price over people and ethics. There appears to be some consensus in the literature about the qualities an authentic leader must have. These include self-awareness, the ability to trust one's thoughts, feelings, motives and values, self reflection, responsiveness to feedback, and the ability to resolve conflict in honest and non-manipulative ways. An authentic leader is supposedly able to further the success of an organization within the confines of social and ethical values, even when that seems impossible. Authentic leadership is claimed to be a superior model due to the greater trust and motivation it invokes in subordinates. Much of the evidentiary basis for authentic leadership has been called into question and papers have been retracted.
Historical background The concept of "authenticity" can trace its history back to ancient Greece. Ancient Greek philosophers stressed authenticity as an important state through an emphasis on being in control of one's own life and the ubiquitous admonition: "Know thyself".Parke, H., & Wormell, D. (1956). The Delphic Oracle. Oxford: Blackwell.Kernis, M. H., & Goldman, B. M. (2006). A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity: Theory and research. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 38, pp. 283–357). San Diego: Academic Press. Authentic leadership as we know it today evolved from the history of these terms. It originated in the 1960s as a means to describe how an organization reflects itself authentically through leadership.Gardner, W.L., Cogliser, C.C., Davis, K.M., & Dickens, M.P. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1120-1145. Some believed that an entire organization could act authentically like a single person through responsibility, reactions to uncertainty, and creativity.Rome, B. K., & Rome, S. C. (1967). Humanistic research on large social organizations. In J. F. T. Bugental (Ed.), Challenges of humanistic psychology (pp. 181 193). New York: McGraw-Hill Others believed that authentic leadership was more about how the leaders defined their own role within an organization.Seeman, M. (1966). Status and identity: The problem of inauthenticity. The Pacific Sociological Review, 9 (2), 67–73.
Recently, authentic leadership has garnered more attention among scholars and practitioners because of publications from Harvard professor and former Medtronic CEO Bill GeorgeGeorge, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.George, B., & Sims, P. (2007). True north: Discover your authentic leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. and other calls for research.Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership development. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 241–261). San Francisco: Barrett-Koehler. The past decade has seen a surge in publications about authentic leadership, producing new models, definitions, and theories. The emphasis on conceptual development suggests that the concept is still in the initial stages of construct evolution, though as the scholarly research on the topic progresses, the types of publications produced appear to be shifting from mostly conceptual pieces to more and more empirically based articles. This shift may be indicative of a nascent emergence of the construct from an introduction and elaboration evolutionary stage to one marked by evaluation and augmentation.
Definitions Because the concept itself is not yet fully mature in a theoretical sense, there are many different definitions of authentic leadership, each with its own nuances. However, consensus appears to be growing that authentic leadership includes these distinct qualities: An authentic leader is always self-aware (Duignan, 2014). They trust their thoughts, feelings, motives, and values (Kernis, 2003). Yet, at the same time, they believe in self-inquiry and self-realization (Gardner et al., 2011). An authentic leader reflects on their decisions, asks for feedback and opinions (both supporting and opposing), and believes to resolve the conflicts in a non-manipulative (Henderson & Hoy, 1982, as cited in Gardner et al., 2011 ) and balanced (Kernis and Goldman, 2006) way; through unbiased, honest and ethically and morally uplifting practices (Duignan & Bhindi, 2009). Moreover, the primary focus of an authentic leader is the success of the organization within the construct of social values; even if they have to struggle with challenging situations (Whitehead, 2009). There is empirical research that supports a superordinate construct of authentic leadership that includes these four components.Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34, 89–126. This evidence has been called into question as a result of reporting statistically impossible results. Other papers by the same authors have been retracted for similar problems and the inability of the authors to produce evidence of their claims.
Authenticity and ethics The defining characteristics of Authentic Leadership have been displayed as an inverse of those defining Traditional Leadership. In contrast to leading with goals, Authentic Leadership claims to lead with purpose, revolving its coaching methods around the core value of preceding with self-discipline. This varies from the traditional leadership approach by keeping morals in view at all times, lacking toleration for shortcuts and keeping personal values as a close crucial element. These distinct habits have been described as "leading with the heart" and generally keeps a softer approach with the main basis being goal making, relationship building, self discipline etc. If leaders utilise staying true to themselves and their core values, this can act as a basis for them leading ethically for the benefit of others, creating coherence between leadership, business ethics and a companies mission. By leading from core values, authentic leadership should result in a leader being morally responsible and if shown not to be, it indicates their leadership style was lacking authenticity. This leadership style is often seen as useful in times of shocks or crises that put leadership in jeopardy.
Patterns of behavior Authentic leadership should be understood as a pattern of behaviors through which leaders exhibit the components of authentic leadership. Thus, it is insufficient for the leader to be self-aware, etc. without also conducting themself in such a way that others, particularly subordinates, view the leader as authentic.
Empirical model of authentic leadership Although the concept of authentic leadership as an actionable model is relatively new to leadership theory and practice, there has been some initial research regarding the overall effectiveness of the model as well as the inner workings of the model within teams and organizations. This research has been used to explain what precedes the appearance of authentic leadership behaviors, what makes authentic leadership effective, and the consequences of adopting an authentic leadership style. These factors contribute to why authentic leadership works within teams and organizations.
Antecedents Several leader characteristics may be important to the appearance of authentic leadership behaviors by leaders. For instance, both leader self-knowledge and self-consistency have been shown to act as antecedents for authentic leadership (the former being a static process of understanding one's own strengths and weaknesses and the latter consistency between their values, beliefs, and actions). This relates to the key components of authentic leadership: leaders first have to be clear about their values and convictions to be perceived as authentic by their followers and they have to demonstrate consistency between their values, beliefs, and actions.Peus, C., Weschem J.S., Streicher, B., Braun, S., & Frey, D. (2012). Authentic leadership: An empirical test of its antecedents, consequences, and mediating mechanisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 331-348.
Additional research suggests that leaders who act in accordance to the three components of positive psychological capital (PsyCap) (hope, optimism, and resiliency) are more likely to become authentic leaders.Jensen, S. M., & Luthans, F. (2006). Relationship between entrepreneurs' psychological capital and their authentic leadership. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18, 254–273. This is true for several reasons. First, leaders who can set and explain goals effectively create a more hopeful environment for their followers. Second, optimistic leaders have a greater ability to motivate their followers and help them more easily anticipate future events. Third, resilient leaders are better equipped to function in changing environments in order to support their followers.
High and low degrees of self-monitoring in an individual has also been suggested as an antecedent of authentic leadership. Self-monitoring reflect how likely someone is to actively construct a public image that aligns with the expectations of others.Gangestad, S. W., & Snyder, M. (2000). Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 126(4), 530-555. It has been proposed that low self-monitoring leads to a higher degree of authentic leadership characteristics because low self-monitors and authentic leaders both act in a way that is consistent with what they believe and value. However, empirical research has not supported this theory thus far.Tate, B. (2008). A longitudinal study of the relationships among self-monitoring, authentic leadership, and perceptions of leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 15, 16–29.
Mediators Among the proponents of authentic leadership, there are many theories regarding why authentic leadership is an effective leadership strategy.
Authentic leadership has been shown to promote team members' belief in the team's ability to succeed, known as team potency, which has in turn been shown to improve team performance.Lester, S. W., Meglino, B. M., & Korsgaard, M. A. (2002). The antecedents and consequences of group potency: a longitudinal investigation of newly formed work groups. The Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 352–368.Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823–847. This occurs because authentic leadership behaviors promote team virtuousness which, in turn, promotes team potency and performance.
Authentic leadership has also been shown to encourage team performance by promoting trust in the group or organization, because follower trust in the leader will encourage increased loyalty to the organization, increasing performance as a result.
Research into the mechanisms of authentic leadership is ongoing, but it is becoming clear that authentic leaders engender an emotional and/or psychological response from their followers that leads to an increase in individual and team performance.
Consequences