Understanding the Influences on Leader Self-Efficacy: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Study
This thesis presents a Constructivist Grounded Theory study regarding the influence of subjective interpretation of experience on one’s self-belief as a leader. Leader self-efficacy (LSE) is considered a proven foundation for leader performance. A review of the LSE literature reveals that a within-person focus on interpretation of experience, as a potential influence on LSE, is not evident to date. As a result, this study set out to investigate how one’s individual interpretation of experience may influence LSE and contribute new knowledge to the antecedents of LSE and leader-development.
This study applied a qualitative interpretive methodology, using Constructivist Grounded Theory (CGT). The study involved participants from a global, multi-national technology company. 150 participants opted into the research and were surveyed using a validated LSE survey tool. Survey participants were classed into high and low scoring LSE groups. The study involved a comparative analysis of 21 semi-structured interviews with participants across the two groups. CGT methods were applied to explore how these individuals interpret their experience and the influence on their LSE. Follow-up member checking interviews, conducted with 17 of the original interview participants, demonstrated positive resonance for the research findings, across all participants.
A Reflective Positivity (RP) process emerged as a fundamental social process and a core influence on LSE. RP represented a unified intrapersonal reflection process, revealing a rich composition of characteristics involved in interpretation of experience, which together influence LSE. These integrated characteristics consisted of participants actively interpreting their experience through a Symbiotic Positivity, a term derived from the data, which involves a positive and mutually beneficial connectedness to growing with others. This Symbiotic Positivity was coupled with an intentional, reflective practice involving their present and past experiences, with their future intentions, in a dynamic momentum process (termed Reflective Momentum). This process occurred in close temporal proximity to their leadership actions. The synergistic interaction of Symbiotic Positivity with Reflective Momentum, within the RP process, served to reinforce participants’ LSE and their perceived enhanced leadership performance outcomes.
Activation levels of the RP process differed based on LSE level, revealing a continuum configuration of the RP process. Data revealed that different characteristics of the RP process were salient at high and low LSE levels. This continuum pattern provided a detailed, nuanced insight into the individual differences within RP at different LSE levels and its impact on LSE. Through CGT methods, this study allowed greater insight into the distinctions and complexities of interpretation amongst participants.
The study contributes to new knowledge in several ways. The discovery of the Reflective Positivity process contributes new knowledge regarding the role of intrapersonal processes in influencing LSE, providing a more nuanced understanding regarding the critical role of interpretation of experience. This finding contributes original knowledge to the LSE literature whereby RP emerged as an antecedent of LSE. Further, the explication of the characteristics of Reflective Positivity at high and low LSE levels, and the synergy amongst the core categories within RP, provide a detailed platform for future research. The study demonstrates the strengths of applying a qualitative analysis within an organisational setting, specific to the domain of LSE, where interpretive studies are not common. The research contributes fresh insights for leadership-development and suggests a range of novel, practical applications. The discovery of the Reflective Positivity process was revealed as the basic social process that participants engaged in, achieved through the application of a Constructivist Grounded Theory method.
History
Year
2020Thesis type
- Doctoral thesis