Forschung

Self-Awareness ist die Fähigkeit, sich selbst korrekt einzuschätzen. Doch wie ist es um die eigene Self-Awareness bestellt? Und welchen Einfluss hat dies auf das eigene Wohlbefinden und das Verhalten im Job?

In diesem Promotionsprojekt wird untersucht, welche Rolle Self-Awareness im Arbeitskontext spielt. Im Mittelpunkt stehen sowohl kurzfristige tägliche Schwankungen von Self-Awareness und deren Auswirkungen auf das subjektive Wohlbefinden, als auch auf objektiv beobachtbare Indikatoren. Darüber hinaus wird erforscht, wie Self-Awareness auf andere Personen im Arbeitsumfeld wirkt und welche Bedeutung sie für Zusammenarbeit und Führung hat. Ziel des Projekts ist es, die Mechanismen und Auswirkungen von Self-Awareness systematisch zu verstehen .

Ansprechpartnerin: Vera Hebel

Mehr Info: https://www.uni-bamberg.de/scrl

Führung in Organisationen erlebt aufgrund von Digitalisierung einen gravierenden Wandel. Anders als je zuvor, verändert sich die Arbeitswelt in einer hohen Geschwindigkeit und Unternehmen müssen schnell reagieren, um sich der veränderten Arbeitswelt anzupassen (Contreras, Baykal, & Abid, 2020). Führung ist definiert als „ein formeller oder informeller, kontextbezogener und zielbeeinflussender Prozess, der zwischen einer Führungsperson und ihren Geführten, Gruppen von Geführten oder Institutionen stattfindet.“ (nach Antonakis & Day, 2018). Mit „neuen Arbeitsformen“ wie Homeoffice und hybridem Arbeiten erleben Organisationen eine veränderte Führung. Der Begriff „electronic“ oder „e-leadership“ meint nicht nur eine Erweiterung existierender, traditioneller Führung, sondern eine substantielle und fundamentale Änderung von Führung (Avolio & Kahai, 2003). So können durch Telearbeit Hierarchien und Prozesse verändert werden (Cortellazzo et al., 2019), die Schaffung einer Teamidentität durch die Führungskraft wird zentral und durch die Reduktion sozialer Kontakte gewinnen Kommunikation, demokratische Abstimmungsprozesse und Vertrauen zunehmend an Bedeutung (vgl. Contreras et al., 2020). Unternehmen benötigen Instrumente und Feedback zur Gestaltung von Führung in veränderten Arbeitswelten. Insbesondere in diesen Zeiten des Wandels der Arbeit ist dies zur Aufrechterhaltung und Wiederherstellung von Gesundheit und Leistungsfähigkeit erforderlich. Das Projekt LeA (Leading Digital and Agile) unterstützt Führungskräfte beim Umgang mit neuen Herausforderungen in der Arbeitswelt. Es werden Einzelcoachings realisiert und Führungskräfte erhalten mit der erelate App eine wissenschaftlich fundierte, innovative App, die Führung technisch unterstützt.

Projektziel

Durch state-of-the-art 1:1 Coachings erhalten Führungskräfte systematisch und wissenschaftlich fundiert Rückmeldung über ihr Führungsverhalten und die Wirkung ihres Verhaltens. Das Coaching ist auf die individuellen Ziele der Führungskräfte zugeschnitten und bearbeitet relevante Themen der teilnehmenden Führungskräfte (z.B. Zielklärung, Feedback in Organisationen, Gestaltung von Führungskraft-Mitarbeitenden Beziehungen). Die Transfersicherung findet durch die begleitende Nutzung der erelate App im Führungsalltag statt. Einzigartig und innovativ bietet die App die Möglichkeit, eine nachhaltige und erfolgreiche Beziehung zu Mitarbeitenden aufzubauen und zu erhalten. Die App bietet Möglichkeiten zur Bewertung, Reflexion und zum Austausch. Die App als digitales Online-Tool erleichtert Ihren Führungsalltag und ist nach wissenschaftlichen Standards und Expertise entwickelt und evaluiert.

In recent years, there has been increasing interest in the concept of servant leadership, as studies have shown a large variety of positive results. This dissertation aims to enhance the understanding of the relationship between servant leadership and follower behaviors and experiences. To this end, I present three empirical articles that focus on the associations of servant leadership with follower performance and well-being and the methods used to examine the leadership construct as an explanatory variable. Because research on servant leadership has been conducted mostly without contextualization, Studies 1 and 2 explore whether servant leadership is also beneficial in the still underresearched crisis context. Specifically, Study 1 investigates the associations between servant leadership perceptions and followers’ performance (i.e., adaptivity and proactivity) and delves into mediating mechanisms between the constructs. Study 2 takes a dynamic perspective and focuses on the trajectories of and relationship between servant leadership perceptions and follower well-being (i.e., exhaustion) during a crisis. These longitudinal studies have several strengths—however, they should not be causally interpreted. As this is an issue that relates to many studies on servant leadership (and leadership in general), Study 3 deals with the question of whether the effects of servant leadership determined in research so far are robust and what can be done to conduct causally identified studies.

Studies 1 and 2 are based on a longitudinal survey among teachers in a German private school association (N = 129) with four measurement points approximately two months apart. Data collection was conducted during the first eight months of the COVID-19 crisis; the first measurement started in March 2020, when the first measures such as curfews were taken. Still, the two studies are independent as they only overlap regarding perceived servant leadership as an explanatory variable. The path model in Study 1 showed that servant leadership perceptions were related to both followers’ adaptivity and proactivity via basic psychological need satisfaction. There were no direct relationships between servant leadership perceptions and follower adaptivity or proactivity, and there was no indirect association with adaptivity via procedural justice. The mediating relationship between servant leadership perceptions and proactivity was negative. The study indicates that followers’ needs should not be overlooked in the crisis context to help them cope with crises and that servant leadership is an appropriate means to achieve this goal. At the same time, Study 1 points to the potential negative effects of servant leadership on proactivity via procedural justice in certain circumstances.
Based on conservation of resources theory, Study 2 examined the development of the association between servant leadership perceptions and exhaustion during the first eight months of a crisis. Using latent growth curve modeling, the results showed that servant leadership perceptions were both inter- and intraindividually related to followers’ exhaustion. Between-person, a higher level of servant leadership perceptions was associated with a lower level of exhaustion. Within-person, a greater decrease (increase) in servant leadership perceptions was related to a greater increase (decrease) in exhaustion. Additionally, the univariate trajectories of the constructs yielded that servant leadership perceptions decreased over the study period. The decrease slowed from T1 to T3 before servant leadership perceptions increased again between T3 and T4. Teachers’ exhaustion did not increase on average during the first eight months of the crisis. The trajectories of and associations between the constructs are thus complex and can vary over time. Furthermore, the findings suggest that servant leadership is appropriate for reducing the negative effects of crises on followers’ exhaustion.

Study 3 investigated the current state of research regarding causality in the field of servant (and authentic) leadership and provides recommendations on how causally identified studies on these leader behaviors can be conducted to enable researchers to meaningfully inform science and policy. First, endogeneity bias and issues in experimental design are discussed as central problems that can prevent causal inferences from studies on the effects of servant leadership. Then, the current state of research on servant and authentic leadership as explanatory variables is summarized through systematic reviews. The results indicate that the lack of causal examinations is highly prevalent. As guidance in this regard, two ways in which causal research on the effect of servant leadership (perceptions) could be cleanly conducted are described: well-designed randomized experiments and instrumental variable regression. To illustrate the recommendations, an exemplary experiment was conducted using manipulated leader behavior as an instrument for follower perceptions. In this randomized lab experiment, the effect of a combined stewardship and authenticity manipulation, as well as the perceptions thereof, on individual task performance were examined. The experiment did not reveal an effect of either combined stewardship and authenticity behavior or perceptions thereof on performance.
 

In summary, this dissertation provides first evidence that servant leadership can be beneficial in the crisis context but that it can also have unintended negative effects. Additionally, pitfalls in servant leadership research that severely limit the validity of empirical studies in the field are pointed out. To support the conduction of solid, causally identified research, recommendations to improve research are provided, along with an illustrative experiment. In this way, this dissertation contributes to the state of research on servant leadership in context and over time as well as on its associations with follower performance and well-being and the potential underlying mediating mechanisms of these relationships. Additionally, the presented roadmap can help advance research on servant leadership with robust studies.

Kontakt: annika.schowalter(at)uni-bamberg.de 

Recent research has shown that leadership behaviors are not only related to followers’ well-being, but also to leaders’ well-being, such as emotional exhaustion or affectivity. However, several aspects remain open, such as the role of multiple leadership behaviors, including passive leadership, the role of the understanding of well-being, mediating mechanisms, the directionality of the associations, and relevant leader-related factors. Additionally, most studies did not account for the fact that leadership and well-being fluctuate not only between but also within leaders, for example, on a daily or weekly basis. Therefore, in the present studies, I investigated the association between leadership and leader well-being in more detail by addressing the open aspects outlined above. Across these studies, I built on the full-range model of leadership and the Conservation of Resources theory as a theoretical basis.
 

In Study 1, I examined the potential reciprocal relationships between transformational leadership and leaders’ emotional exhaustion and vigor. I assumed that higher levels of transformational leadership are associated with higher levels of well-being. Furthermore, I investigated whether these relationships are mediated by leaders’ resources. To test these assumptions, I conducted a week-level online study across three weeks with 132 leaders. Random intercept cross-lagged panel analyses revealed that transformational leadership was positively related to well-being and resources, both between and within leaders. However, within-leader associations existed only within one week, but not from one week to the next. 
 

In Study 2, I investigated ideal leadership behaviors as a factor associated with whether actual daily leadership behavior is positively or negatively associated with leaders’ well-being. Specifically, I focused on trait ideal (i.e., the leadership behavior the leader generally wants to show) and daily actual (i.e., the leadership behavior the leader actually showed on a specific day) full-range leader behaviors and basic need satisfaction and emotional exhaustion as well-being indicators. I assumed congruence between trait ideal and daily actual leadership to be most beneficial for leaders’ well-being and tested my hypotheses in a ten-day diary study with 90 leaders. Response surface analyses did not support the hypothesized congruence effects. On an exploratory basis, I found support for linear and curvilinear associations between daily leadership and well-being, but no direct or interactive relationships with ideal leader behaviors.
 

Study 3 acknowledged that leaders can show multiple leadership behaviors within one day (i.e., daily leadership profiles), and that profile membership can change from one day to the next. Additionally, I considered that the interplay of these daily behaviors could change the association with leaders’ daily well-being. Therefore, I used latent profile analysis to investigate which daily leadership profiles exist, the stability of profile membership across one week, and their associations with leaders’ emotional exhaustion and affectivity mediated by their daily thriving and time pressure. In a diary study across five consecutive working days (N = 289 leaders), I found three daily leadership profiles with varying stability across the week. The profiles were differentially related to leaders’ well-being, being in part simultaneously positively and negatively associated with leaders’ well-being, depending on the well-being indicator. In addition, there was support for the mediating role of daily thriving and time pressure.
 

Taken all three studies together, leadership behavior was related to different indicators of leader well-being at the within- and between-person level. From a resource-based perspective, the findings indicate that especially transformational leadership and contingent reward behaviors seem to be resources for leaders and are associated with greater well-being. In contrast, passive leadership showed rather stable negative associations with leaders’ well-being. At the same time, the studies show the importance of a differentiated investigation of leadership behavior and leader well-being because the associations varied greatly depending on the co-occurrence of multiple single leadership behaviors within one day. These results extend and specify our knowledge of the relevance of leadership behavior to leaders’ well-being, provide insights for future research, and have implications for leaders, leadership training and coaching.

Kontakt: lennart.poetz(at)uni-bamberg.de 

Kontakt: stefanie.richter-killenberg(at)tu-dresden.de

Recovery research has demonstrated that leisure time and leisure activities are crucial for employees’ recovery, psychological well-being, general health, and job performance. Because leisure time offers opportunities to recover and gain new resources (e.g., energy), employees may also anticipate their leisure time while still working. Hence, I investigated in three studies whether the anticipation of leisure time is related to employees’ work engagement, a positive, motivational work-related state associated with employees’ well-being and job performance. 
In Study 1, the focus was on pleasant anticipation of a planned leisure activity and work engagement. Pleasant anticipation is a positive, affective reaction because of a future event with a high probability of occurrence. I assumed that pleasant anticipation indicates an upcoming resource gain, and therefore, pleasant anticipation may positively relate to employees’ work engagement. In addition, recovery-related self-efficacy (RRSE) was investigated as a moderator in this relationship. Two online studies were conducted: Study 1a (N = 87 employees) covered one working day, and Study 1b (N = 84 employees) contained five days within one working week. The results revealed that pleasant anticipation was positively related to work engagement between persons but not within persons. RRSE was not found to be a moderator. 

Study 2 investigated whether employees think of their upcoming leisure time during the working day. Hence, the construct of leisure thoughts was introduced, and two types of leisure thoughts were differentiated, namely thoughts of leisure time (ToLT) and thoughts of a planned leisure activity (ToPLA). I argued that pleasant anticipation of a planned leisure activity relates to the frequency of ToPLA, yet not of ToLT, and that both types of leisure thoughts occur more frequently at the beginning and the end of the working day. Furthermore, as leisure thoughts may distract employees from the task at hand, they may negatively relate to work engagement across the working day and within one hour. However, ToPLA may also be positively associated with work engagement in the subsequent hour when the planned leisure activity has a positive leisure plan valence. In sum, the findings from a one-day online survey with hourly measurement points (N = 89 employees) supported the hypotheses for the occurrence of both types of leisure thoughts. Furthermore, ToLT were negatively related to work engagement across the working day, and ToPLA were negatively related to work engagement within the same hour. However, the relationship between ToPLA and work engagement in the subsequent hour was negative when the leisure plan valence was positive. 

Based on the findings from Study 1 and Study 2, Study 3 shed light on leisure thoughts as a mechanism, which connects pleasant anticipation of a planned leisure activity and work engagement. Thus, ToPLA were examined as a mediator between pleasant anticipation and work engagement on a daily level. Furthermore, morning recovery was incorporated to ascertain whether recovery (i.e., a consequence of past leisure time) and the anticipation of leisure time simultaneously explain work engagement. In addition, because pleasant anticipation of a planned leisure activity only referred to a specific leisure activity, general anticipation of leisure time was introduced as a cognitive, overall evaluation of employees’ entire leisure time after the working day. An online diary study (N = 148 employees) across one week was conducted. The results revealed that general anticipation of leisure time, yet not pleasant anticipation of a planned leisure activity, and morning recovery were positively related to work engagement within persons. Furthermore, pleasant anticipation of a planned leisure activity was positively related to ToPLA, but ToPLA was not related to work engagement; thus, ToPLA was not found to be a mediator. 
Across three studies, different variables referring to the anticipation of leisure time were positively or negatively associated with work engagement, indicating that upcoming leisure time is crucial for present work engagement. The findings extend the understanding of leisure time, have practical implications for recovery training and work engagement interventions, and pave the way for further research on the anticipation of leisure time and leisure activities.

Kontakt: sebastian.seibel(at)uni-wuerzburg.de

With the current dissertation, I aimed to shed light on antecedents of abusive supervision from a leader perspective. First, I investigated whether leader narcissism is associated with abusive supervision (Research Question 1). Building on a two-dimensional approach to narcissism (Back et al., 2013), I differentiated between leaders’ narcissistic rivalry and admiration. Second, building on threatened egotism theory (Baumeister, Smart, & Boden, 1996; Bushman & Baumeister, 1998), I examined which underlying cognitive processes could explain the relationship between leader narcissism and abusive supervision (Research Question 2). Third, I tested how follower behavior influences narcissistic leaders and their underlying cognitive processes, thus evoking abusive supervision (Research Question 3). The present dissertation includes three manuscripts composed of two empirical studies each (see Chapters 2 to 4) and a mini meta-analysis corroborating some of the research findings (see Chapter 5). 

In the first manuscript (see Chapter 2), a direct positive effect of leaders’ narcissistic rivalry on abusive supervision was proposed along with a moderated mediation suggesting that supervisor-directed deviance will moderate the indirect effect of leaders’ narcissistic rivalry on abusive supervision via perceived self-esteem threat. Hypotheses were tested in two studies: a field study with leader-follower dyads and an experimental vignette study with a leader sample. Across both studies, I found that leaders high in narcissistic rivalry were more likely to show abusive supervision. However, this effect was independent of followers’ supervisor-directed deviance and leaders’ perceived self-esteem threats could only in part explain why leaders high in narcissistic rivalry had abusive supervision intentions. 

In the second manuscript (see Chapter 3), I hypothesized that leaders’ narcissistic rivalry would be positively associated with abusive supervision. Furthermore, I proposed that leaders high in narcissistic rivalry would be particularly prone to show abusive supervision in response to followers’ organization-directed deviance, but to a lesser degree in response to followers’ supervisor-directed or coworker-directed deviance. Finally, I hypothesized that leaders’ injury initiation motives, but not their performance promotion motives, would explain why these leaders showed abusive supervision in reaction to followers’ organization-directed deviance. I conducted an experimental vignette study and a mixed-methods study with leader samples to test the hypotheses. Across both studies, leaders’ narcissistic rivalry was positively associated with abusive supervision. Furthermore, only in Study 1 (but not in Study 2) there were differences in the effect sizes of leaders’ narcissistic rivalry on abusive supervision depending on the type of follower behavior, but not in the expected direction. Finally, leaders’ injury initiation motives, but not their performance promotion motives, explained why these leaders engaged in abusive supervision in response to followers’ organization-directed deviance. 
 

In the third manuscript (see Chapter 4), I proposed that leaders’ narcissistic rivalry, but not admiration, would be positively associated with abusive supervision. Furthermore, I proposed an indirect effect via leaders’ injury initiation motives and a moderation of this indirect effect by type of follower behavior (differentiating between counterproductive work behavior [CWB], organizational citizenship behavior [OCB], and task performance [TP]). Two experimental vignette studies with samples of working adults were conducted. Results revealed that only leaders’ narcissistic rivalry, but not their admiration, was positively related to abusive supervision. Furthermore, leaders showed abusive supervision because they experienced injury initiation motives. The indirect effect was significant in all conditions of follower behavior, but significantly stronger when followers showed CWB than when they showed TP. 
Finally, I conducted a mini meta-analysis (see Chapter 5) to obtain a more precise estimate of the relationship between leaders’ narcissistic rivalry and abusive supervision. More specifically, I conducted a meta-analysis of the effects of leaders’ narcissistic rivalry on abusive supervision from this dissertation’s primary studies. Results indicated that the association between leaders’ narcissistic rivalry and abusive supervision was moderately positive in size, which again stresses the idea that leaders’ narcissistic rivalry is an important precursor of abusive supervision. 

Overall, the findings of this dissertation underline the idea that abusive supervision results from a complex interplay between leaders’ personality, underlying cognitive processes, and follower behaviors. These findings expand the understanding of abusive supervision from a leader perspective and offer fruitful directions for future research. Limitations (e.g., in terms of theoretical and methodological considerations) are discussed along with practical implications for practitioners and organizations.

Kontakt: iris.gauglitz(at)uni-bamberg.de

Kontakt: Jetmir Zyberaj