Definition of Leadership and different perspectives

In this part of the paper, the different literary works that explain the relationship in between authentic leadership, Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and Psychological Capital (PsyCap) of the employees has been examined. It would shed light on the various perspectives of the scholars on this topic. With the same, a special focus has been laid on the process of building psychological capital of the employees and the impact of emotions on the performance of the employees.

Leadership is considered differently by different people. It is defined as the ability of reaching a common goal by means of combining the efforts of oneself and the others. Bryson (2018) have defined leadership as the ability of directing, guiding, embodying a vision in different organisational settings. According to Gupta (2014), leadership can be seen as the “art of inducing compliance”. Moreover, Northouse (2017) have defined leadership as the “series of personal traits and attributes that are possessed by the leader”.  

The authentic leadership has been emerged as one of the key components in the studies of positive leadership right since its conceptualisation in the late 1970s and the theoretical extension as one of the core construct in the leadership theory. According to Joo and Jo (2017), the authentic leadership is the one that forms the core of Positive Organisational Behaviour in any organisation. It is referred to as the pattern of leadership behaviour that is responsible for promoting positive psychological capacities along with positive and productive ethical environment in the work place. Furthermore, Shamir and Eilam-Shamir (2018) have regarded authentic leadership as the style of leadership which fosters well-balanced processing of the data and information and greater self-awareness among the leaders. It also fosters self-development among both the leaders and their sub-ordinates. With the same, according to Laschinger et al. (2014), authentic leadership is one of the processes by means of which the leaders get highly aware of how they think and behave regarding the context in which they make operation and are seen by the others. Moreover, Hirst et al. (2016) in this context have claimed that authentic leadership is “higher-order, multidimensional construct, comprised of self-awareness, balanced processing, relational transparency, and internalization of a moral or ethical perspective”.

Psychological Capital or PsyCap refers to the positive psychological condition of development that is characterised by having a strong confidence for putting in the required efforts for succeeding in the challenging tasks and in this way, it makes a positive and productive attribution regarding the success and failures of achieving the goals. As per Wang et al. (2014), “Positive psychological capital represents positive psychological states that contribute to higher levels of effectiveness and flourishing in organizations”. However, by drawing its foundation from the subject of positive psychology, the positive organisational behaviour seeks for integrating positive psychology into the workplace with the intention of leveraging the individual level of positive constructs for improving the organisational level results. As per Youssef-Morgan and Stratman (2017), PsycCap provides a clear conceptual model of how the individual psychological resources allow the individuals and the organisations for performing in more efficient manner. It is also to note that the constraints of Psychology Capital is characterised by a total of four facets called HERO- Hope, Self-Efficacy, Resilience and Optimism. This represents a positive psychological capabilities which aid in efficient and effective functioning of both the individuals as well as the organisations. With the same, it is also to mention in this context that Psychological Capital focuses on the strengths instead of the weaknesses of the organisations and the individuals. Each of the above mentioned facets emphasise on motivational prosperity for accomplishing a goal and to succeed.

Authentic Leadership

According to the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory, leadership refers to the process that is focused on the interaction in between the leaders and their followers (Martin et al. 2016). This theory suggests that the supervisors do not make use of same style in dealing with all the subordinates but they instead develop a new type of relationship with each of the subordinates. It is to state that the subordinates in the relationships with high quality exchanges gain a greater attention and high evaluation of performance. Also, there are several researchers that suggests that the quality of the LMX has a great impact on the workplace experiences of the subordinates. LMX also entails the extent to which the followers and the leaders develop a mutually beneficial, trusting and self-directed relationship. Most of the researchers have claimed that the organisational social processes results in a vertical dyadic relationships. Herman and Dasborough (2016) in this context have stated that “LMX is a multidimensional construct and propose that LMX relationships may develop in many ways and the relationships are based on three varying amounts of “currencies of exchange”. Such currencies of exchange involves the involvement of both the parties in the dyad of leader-member and with the same, this explain what each of the individual could bring to the relationship. As per Gu, Tang and Jiang (2015), the three currencies of exchange are the task related behaviours, loyalty of one other and simply liking each another.

The core of Positive Organisational Behaviour that is very important for increasing the Psychological Capital of the employees and for improving the psychological climate is formed by authentic leadership. According to Wang et al. (2014), authentic leadership enhance the performance of the employees, their trust levels as well as their psychological capital (PsyCap). This in turn influence their citizenship behaviours. With the same, PsyCap is also significantly correlated with the transformational and therefore, the authenticity leadership along with the evidence of a positive correlation in between the PsyCap exists. It is also to mention that according to the accumulated evidences in this regard, it has been indicated that the Psychological Capital of the employees is related to their respective attitudes as well as in their strength.

Bouckenooghe, Zafar and Raja (2015) have stated that when the relationships of leader-follower are authentic, the relation then promote an honest and open communication because of deeply held shared values and the promotion of the pursuit and the achievement of the shared goals. With the same, Newman et al. (2014) in this context have stated that authentic relationships describe the relationship in between the leaders, their followers and the others. It is to state that the mutually reciprocal relationship allow the process of self-development among the leaders and the followers. It also fosters a clear understanding of the inter relationship of the professional associations. Ozturk and Karatepe (2018) have added to this view that the cohesion of the relationship in between authentic leadership and LMX is not based on the perception what leader possess or the actions of the followers. Instead, it is based on the judgments of the attribution that are made by the followers and the leaders about the intentions, authenticity and the effectiveness of the others. Moreover, Baron, Franklin and Hmieleski (2016) have conducted an empirical study in this context. He have found that that authenticity is very strongly related to the effectiveness of the leadership and that the LMX is the mediator in between the leadership effectiveness and the authenticity. Also, the leaders who are considered to be responsible and authentic are better capable of forming positive and productive relationships with their direct report and hence, they are considered to be effective and efficient in nature.

Psychological Capital

As per Luthans, Youssef and Avolio (2015), authentic leadership apply a great influence by means of a set of different psychological qualities. These qualities are known as “psychological capital” or PsyCap. The professional employees are the employees who perform work that require advanced training and education. Such employees are the physicians, layers, teachers etc. On the other hand, the administrative employees are the ones who main duties are to involve the support of the business like the public relations, the human resource staff or accounting. For the professional employees, their psychological capitals are built through trust, hope, and money and job satisfaction. With the same, administrative employees, too, have a very strong psychological contact with the level of satisfaction that they have with their work. It is to note that as per Baron, Franklin and Hmieleski (2016), Psychological Capital of these employees are linked with the appraisals, job satisfaction and their desired objective results. As per Humphrey, Ashforth and Diefendorff (2015), the emotional labour are is the process of emotion regulation in which employees are engaged in managing their expressions and feelings for the fulfilment of the emotional need of their job. Kwok, Cheng and Wong (2015) have claimed that “Positive psychological capital is a moderator between emotional labour, burnout and job satisfaction”. It moderates the link in between the emotional labour and the resulted variables. For building Psycap in these employees, hope, resilience, optimism is very necessary. The blue collar employees are the ones whose job need a manual labour. They typically work with their hands. Such employees include the plumbers, aircraft mechanics etc. While the work of the white collar employees are performed in an office setting. They include engineers and architects. According to Hassan and Jan (2017), positive PsyCap among the white collar employees are built through hope, optimism, resilience and self-efficacy. Moreover, O’Donohue, Martin and Torugsa (2015) have stated that PsyCap needs to be considered as one of the tools for the companies to make use of their efforts for recruiting, retaining and enhancing the organisational outcomes. Understanding the PsyCap by the generational cohort is very beneficial for the organisations in this regards. As per Ellerbrock (2017), generational cohort in any workplace could be categorised into Baby Boomer, Traditionalist, Gen Z, Generation X and Millennials. For all of them, hope, optimism, resilience and self-efficacy are very important to build their Psychological capital.

According to Ekkekakis and Zenko (2016), emotion is a conscious experience that is characterise by an intense and deep mental activity as well as a certain level of pleasure and displeasure. As per Lauriola and Weller (2018), emotion is interlinked with the temperament, mood, motivation, disposition and personality. Emotions are the pure human psychological phenomena and every employee is very critically effected by their behaviours in their workplace. The emotions of the employees along with his overall temperament have a notable effect on his performance in his job and at the same time, it also influences his decision making skills, leadership style, rate of turnover and team spirit. However, Van Deursen et al. (2015) have stated that emotions have both type of positive and negative impact. They influence on the way in which people think and act. It also affect the way in which man respond to the challenges and his or her functions under pressure. Furthermore, as stated by Nguyen, Groth and Johnson (2016), emotions impact on the judgement of the employees and also on how they handle the difficult situations at workplace. Notwithstanding this fact, it is also to state that the demand of the contemporary day workplace have coupled with globalisation and this have highly influenced the need for the employee trainings in the workplace, particularly, in the areas of emotional intelligence and their mental agility. It is to state that the employees who deal with work related issues, stress and lack of motivation and creativity in the workplace result in lower performance for the company.

Leader-Member Exchange

The survival of any company until today is highly dependent how emotionally attached the employee is with the workplace and with this work. It is also to note that the attachment of the employees with the workplace is highly depended on the factors like the behaviour of their seniors and peers towards them. The study conducted by Anitha (2014) in this regard has highlighted the fact that the more the leaders build emotional bonding with the employees, the more likely are the employees to give their best towards their job. This is due to the fact that employees are very critically affected by the behaviours of the other people in the workplace. Moreover, according to Pennebaker and Smyth (2016), “People who continually suppress their emotions have been found to be more prone to disease than those who are emotionally expressive”. This automatically results in decrease of the job performance.

References:

Anitha, J., 2014. Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance. International journal of productivity and performance management, 63(3), p.308.

Baron, R.A., Franklin, R.J. and Hmieleski, K.M., 2016. Why entrepreneurs often experience low, not high, levels of stress: The joint effects of selection and psychological capital. Journal of management, 42(3), pp.742-768.

Bouckenooghe, D., Zafar, A. and Raja, U., 2015. How ethical leadership shapes employees’ job performance: The mediating roles of goal congruence and psychological capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(2), pp.251-264.

Bryson, J.M., 2018. Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. John Wiley & Sons.

Ekkekakis, P. and Zenko, Z., 2016. Measurement of Affective Responses to Exercise: From “Affectless Arousal” to “The Most Well-Characterized” Relationship Between the Body and Affect. In Emotion measurement (pp. 299-321).

Ellerbrock, G., 2017. Intergenerational Ontology & Leadership: Uniting the Multigenerational Workforce. Pepperdine University.

Gu, Q., Tang, T.L.P. and Jiang, W., 2015. Does moral leadership enhance employee creativity? Employee identification with leader and leader–member exchange (LMX) in the Chinese context. Journal of Business Ethics, 126(3), pp.513-529.

Gupta, N., 2014. Effects of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance: a Study of Selected Brick Klins in Jammu Region. In International Conference on Management and Information Systems.

Hassan, S. and Jan, F.A., 2017. Psychological Capital Intervention towards perceived White Collar Crime and Employee’s Job Related Attitude in Pakistan. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 11(2).

Herman, H.M. and Dasborough, M.T., 2016. Leadership and leader–member exchange (LMX). In Encyclopedia of Human Resource Management. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Hirst, G., Walumbwa, F., Aryee, S., Butarbutar, I. and Chen, C.J.H., 2016. A multi-level investigation of authentic leadership as an antecedent of helping behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), pp.485-499.

Humphrey, R.H., Ashforth, B.E. and Diefendorff, J.M., 2015. The bright side of emotional labor. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(6), pp.749-769.

Joo, B.K. and Jo, S.J., 2017. The effects of perceived authentic leadership and core self-evaluations on organizational citizenship behavior: The role of psychological empowerment as a partial mediator. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 38(3), pp.463-481.

Kwok, S.Y., Cheng, L. and Wong, D.F., 2015. Family emotional support, positive psychological capital and job satisfaction among Chinese white-collar workers. Journal of Happiness Studies, 16(3), pp.561-582.

Laschinger, H.K.S., Wong, C.A., Cummings, G.G. and Grau, A.L., 2014. Resonant leadership and workplace empowerment: The value of positive organizational cultures in reducing workplace incivility. Nursing Economics, 32(1), pp.5-18.

Lauriola, M. and Weller, J., 2018. Personality and Risk: Beyond Daredevils—Risk Taking from a Temperament Perspective. In Psychological Perspectives on Risk and Risk Analysis (pp. 3-36). Springer, Cham.

Luthans, F., Youssef, C.M. and Avolio, B.J., 2015. Psychological capital and beyond. Oxford University Press, USA.

Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A. and Epitropaki, O., 2016. Leader–member exchange (LMX) and performance: A meta?analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), pp.67-121.

Newman, A., Ucbasaran, D., Zhu, F.E.I. and Hirst, G., 2014. Psychological capital: A review and synthesis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), pp.S120-S138.

Nguyen, H., Groth, M. and Johnson, A., 2016. When the going gets tough, the tough keep working: Impact of emotional labor on absenteeism. Journal of Management, 42(3), pp.615-643.

Northouse, P.G., 2017. Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice. Sage Publications.

O’Donohue, W., Martin, A. and Torugsa, N., 2015. Understanding individual responses to failure by the organisation to fulfil its obligations: examining the influence of psychological capital and psychological contract type. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(1), pp.131-147.

Ozturk, A. and Karatepe, O.M., 2018. Frontline hotel employees’ psychological capital, trust in organization, and their effects on nonattendance intentions, absenteeism, and creative performance. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, pp.1-23.

Pennebaker, J.W. and Smyth, J.M., 2016. Opening up by writing it down: How expressive writing improves health and eases emotional pain. Guilford Publications.

Shamir, B. and Eilam-Shamir, G., 2018. “What’s your story?” A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. In Leadership Now: Reflections on the Legacy of Boas Shamir(pp. 51-76). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Van Deursen, A.J., Bolle, C.L., Hegner, S.M. and Kommers, P.A., 2015. Modeling habitual and addictive smartphone behavior: The role of smartphone usage types, emotional intelligence, social stress, self-regulation, age, and gender. Computers in human behavior, 45, pp.411-420.

Wang, H., Sui, Y., Luthans, F., Wang, D. and Wu, Y., 2014. Impact of authentic leadership on performance: Role of followers’ positive psychological capital and relational processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), pp.5-21.

Wang, H., Sui, Y., Luthans, F., Wang, D. and Wu, Y., 2014. Impact of authentic leadership on performance: Role of followers’ positive psychological capital and relational processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), pp.5-21.

Youssef-Morgan, C.M. and Stratman, J.L., 2017. PSYCHOLOGICAL CAPITAL. Managing for Resilience: A Practical Guide for Employee Wellbeing and Organizational Performance, p.53.