Leader self-structure: a framework for positive leadership

By S. Hannah, R. Woolfolk, R. Lord. 2009

171 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We expand the conceptualization of positive leadership and hypothesize that leaders' ability to influence followers across varied complex situations will be enhanced through the development of a rich and multifaceted self-construct. Utilizing self-complexity theory and other aspects of research on self-representation, we show how the structure and structural dynamics of leaders' self-constructs are linked to their varied role demands by calling forth cognitions, affects, goals and values, expectancies, and self-regulatory plans that enhance performance. Through this process, a leader is able to bring the “right stuff” (the appropriate ensemble of attributes) to bear on and succeed in the multiple challenges of leadership. We suggest future research to develop dimensional typologies related to leadership-relevant aspects of the self and also to link individual positive self-complexity to more aggregate positive organizational processes. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3c8e45efcfee35d76e3c9a548dc81b26f2ed1cb7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. Bruce J. Avolio
2. S. Hannah
3. P. Lester
4. P. D. Harms
5. O. Epitropaki
6. Douglas R. May
7. R. Kark
8. G. Vogelgesang

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

1. Bruce J. Avolio
2. S. Hannah
3. R. Lord
4. R. Kark
5. O. Epitropaki
6. Stefanie K Johnson
7. C. Mainemelis
8. S. Murphy

Citations in the corpus

• Reviewing Leadership Styles: Overlaps and the Need for a New ‘Full‐Range’ Theory (2017, unknown): “A study by Hannah and colleagues approaches leader behavioral complexity through a socio-cognitive approach, suggesting that leaders can possess multiple self-identities (Hannah et al. 2009).”
• Mentoring Impact on Leader Efficacy Development: A Field Experiment (2011, methodology): “While we used this construct as a relevant control, it appears that the extent individuals feel and see themselves as being a leader influences their engagement in and benefit from leader development experiences, as various scholars have suggested (e.g., Day & Harrison, 2007; DeRue & Ashford, 2010; ”
• Moral Maturation and Moral Conation: A Capacity Approach to Explaining Moral Thought and Action (2011, methodology): “Based on the discussion of cognitive differentiation presented earlier, more complex individuals can better tailor their working self across a broader range of situations (Hannah et al., 2009b; Lord et al., 2011; Rafaeli-Mor & Steinberg, 2002).”
• The benefits of a long-lens approach to leader development: Understanding the seeds of leadership (2011, background): “Furthermore, research shows that currently active identities are important cues for accessing leadership skills which have been previously developed (Hannah et al., 2009).”
• A framework for understanding leadership and individual requisite complexity (2011, background): “In addition, self-structures provide the frameworks for building, organizing, and implementing leadership skills (Hannah et al., 2009; Lord & Hall, 2005).”
• Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review ☆ (2017, background): “Their subsequent work (Lord & Brown, 2001; Lord & Brown, 2004; Hannah et al., 2009) emphasized how leaders communicate values that influence follower identities and act as role models for follower identity construction.”