Study: Clear stance, clear direction | Page 4

04 | 1 2 3 MOTIVATION: The positive role of authentic leadership and behaviour in organisations DRIVERS of authentic behaviour OBSTACLES to authentic behaviour in organisations MAIN RESULTS OF THE STUDY 1 2 3 Companies can create an environment that promotes authentic behaviour of managers and employees – in fact, this leads to better results than simply demanding authenticity in a leadership model. The surveyed managers report that an authentic leadership stance has a positive effect on the PERFORMANCE of their employees and employee teams. Their assumption is that employees are more likely to align themselves with authentic managers in times of uncertainty and that transformation processes have a better chance of success when led by authentic leaders. The study demonstrates what features of the corporate environment are particularly strongly correlated with authenticity, and suggests ways in which companies can promote authentic behaviour and leadership. Accordingly, the strongest DRIVERS of authenticity in companies are: > authority that is grounded more in personal expertise (expert power) than in power vested in one’s hierarchical position in the organisation > a corporate culture that values individuality and at the same time encourages a feeling of belonging > work processes that enable employees to make autonomous decisions OBSTACLES that work against authenticity include, in particular: > the sheer size of an organisation or company > work-family conflict > “surface acting”, i.e. activities in which individuals have to display emotions which they do not actually feel > personal belief systems that affirm the existence of strong status and power differentials in organisations. 4 5 The study provides indications that companies can, for the most part, overcome these obstacles to authentic behaviours if their employees consider their work to be important and they feel valued and unique in their organisation. An intercultural COMPARISON between Germany, Russia, and the UK reveals that, on average, managers in Russia are less affected by work-family conflict. Personal distinctiveness and a sense of belongingness are equally strong factors influencing authenticity for Russian and British managers, whereas a feeling of belongingness is the more important of the two to those surveyed in Germany. There is also a clear difference when it comes to the leadership style of line managers: in the UK, leadership style plays a less prominent role for the experience of authenticity compared with its importance in Germany and Russia. As far as ORGANISATIONAL AND CULTURAL STRUCTURES are concerned, companies can prepare the ground for more authenticity and credibility by finding new models of collaboration and involvement and new forms of hierarchy. However, this presupposes a shift to a dramatically different understanding of transparency, participation and leadership culture. CONCLUSION: the speed and complexity of changes in the corporate environment require companies to adapt constantly and be willing to change at any time. Particularly in times of uncertainty, managers need to know they have the TRUST of their employees. With conventional hierarchical mechanisms breaking down, corporate management is in need of a new leadership paradigm. Authenticity in leadership can play a key role in this.