Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

The Ties That Bind Humility and Leadership

Sun, October 15, 9:00 to 10:30, SQUARE, Studio 206

Short Description

The presentation will share recent research on overconfidence and the impact cultural and gender differences have on an individual’s overconfidence levels and their leadership effectiveness. In contrast, the presenter will examine the definitions of, fallacies about, and development of humility.

Detailed Abstract

Although human behavior is complex and often unpredictable, one of the more consistent findings in social-psychological research is that people often see themselves to be better than others on different personal characteristics (Myers 1995). For example, in 2002 research conducted by Rowatt, Ottenbreit, Nesselroade and Cunningham found that significantly more than 50% of individuals estimated they were above average on desirable traits and below average on undesirable traits when comparing themselves to others. This is in line with Myers (1995) research who found that 90% of college faculty rated themselves as superior to their average colleague.

These findings are troubling, especially when they are compared to recent research supporting humility as an important personal and professional characteristic. Even though humility has received very little attention in the social science research, the construct has gained more attention lately in Positive Organizational Psychology and the study of leadership. Collins (2001), in his book Good to Great, found that leaders in the most enduring successful companies demonstrated a blend of determination and personal humility. These “Level 5” leaders, as he called them, were better able to entertain different perspectives, manage others emotions, and connect back to the organizational goals than those who had low levels of humility. Furthermore, recent research suggests that humility predicts prosocial behaviors such as generosity (Exline & Hill, 2012; LaBouff, Rowatt, Johnson, Tsang, & Willerton, 2012) self-esteem (Exline & Geyer, 2004), better performance on the job (Exline, 2012) and forgiveness (Powers Nam, Rowatt, & Hill, 2007).

In this session we will first look at the influence overconfidence has on our perception of organizational leadership related activities. Specifically, the session will present data from recent research on overconfidence and the impact that cultural and gender differences have on an individual’s overconfidence levels. These findings will lead to a larger discussion on the impact that overconfidence has on our ability to lead effectively.

In the second half of the session, we will address the role humility plays in mitigating overconfidence and aiding in the development of effective leadership. In order to accomplish this task, we will present a brief literature review of humility including the multiple definitions associated with humility, current fallacies connected to humility and establish the ties that currently exists between humility and current leadership theory. Finally, we will address humility development and how it might effectively be incorporated into organizational practices and leadership development programs.

If an individual or organization were to develop a true sense of humility, the problems associated with subjectivity and self-serving biases could potentially cease. Having humility then would mean being confident about one’s own capabilities, but also realistic about one’s own shortcomings. Attributing humility in these areas would also mean being optimistic and positive about the future, but carefully considerate about present realities. As Morris, Brotheridge, and Urbanski (2005, p.1332) suggest, “Authentically humble leaders understand their strengths, weaknesses and limitations, and recognize how dependent they are on forces outside of themselves. Such individuals appreciate that they do not all the answers and, as a result, actively seek out their contributions of others as a means of overcoming their individual limitations.”

Participant