Positive leadership psychology: Authentic and servant leadership in higher education in Pakistan
The literature about leadership styles and their effectiveness is vast but very limited in the context of Pakistan. Authentic leadership refers to genuine leaders who exercise effective management through self-authenticity while servant leadership refers to those inclined to place others before them...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article PeerReviewed |
| Language: | English English Indonesian |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://repository.unair.ac.id/124626/2/1.7-DianEkowati_Artikel_PositiveLeadership.pdf https://repository.unair.ac.id/124626/1/1.7_DianEkowati_Turnitin_Positive-leadership.pdf https://repository.unair.ac.id/124626/3/1.7-DianEkowati_KualitasKaril107.pdf https://repository.unair.ac.id/124626/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-020-01051-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01051-1 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Universitas Airlangga |
| Language: | English English Indonesian |
| Summary: | The literature about leadership styles and their effectiveness is vast but very limited in the context of Pakistan. Authentic leadership refers to genuine leaders who exercise effective management through self-authenticity while servant leadership refers to those inclined to place others before themselves. Since the two distinct leadership styles were identified, both have attracted increasing researchers’ attention to explore their numerous possible applications in organizations and individual psychology. A conceptual framework based on authentic leaders (positive psychology) and servant leaders (serving others first) was hypothetically modeled and tested through 380 survey questionnaires randomly distributed among university employees. Overall, 323 responses were selected for the quantitative analysis of data, using SPSS v25., Jamovi v1.2.17, and Smart PLS v3.2.8. The results revealed that authentic leadership is a significant predictor of commitment and performance in contrast to the servant leadership style in the educational environment of the country. Religiosity was found to be an external locus of control and moderator of the study which was significantly associated with leadership styles and commitment. The influence of authentic leadership on employees is evident. Therefore, organizations may keep in mind the key characteristic of personal authenticity in future hiring. Servant leadership, though present in employees, does not effectively predict organizational outcomes. However, based on these factors, training can be designed to ensure the performance and commitment of employees. |
|---|