Board Chair Authentic Leadership and Nonexecutives’ Motivation and Commitment

Guerrero, Sylvie; Lapalme, Marie‐Ève; Séguin, Michel

doi:10.1177/1548051814531825

Cited by 37 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this argument is contested in recent studies, in which scholars suggested that a separate board chair can facilitate greater collaboration with the CEO and other board members, resulting in a better firm performance (Bezemer et al, 2018; Krause, 2017; Morais, Kakabadse, & Kakabadse, 2020). In fact, the authors found that effective board chairs help alleviate board–CEO conflicts, orient board members to more strongly emphasize shareholders' interests, and engage in productive discussions by facilitating a participatory environment (Bezemer et al, 2018; Guerrero, Lapalme, & Séguin, 2015; Shekshnia, 2018; Veltrop et al, 2020). They influence an organization's capacity to achieve goals and build high morale among employees as a result of their organizational awareness (Bailey & Peck, 2013; Y. D. Harrison & Murray, 2012).…”

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

The role of the board chair—A literature review and suggestions for future research

Banerjee

Nordqvist

Hellerstedt

2020

Corporate Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Question/Issue: The role of the board chair has become increasingly complex in recent decades. Research on corporate governance has called for and has initiated the pursuit of more research for the purpose of creating a better understanding of the role of board chairs. We reviewed 234 academic articles published in 66 journals, structured the existing research according to an Input-Process-Outcome-Contexts framework, and provided a future research agenda for studies on the role of the board chair. Research Findings/Insights: Our review reveals that the number of published studies on the position of the board chair has grown over the last two decades. Although extant research is dominated by quantitative studies exploring the impact of the board chair position on financial performance, frequently drawing on agency and stewardship theory, recent work has moved beyond this focus and has added valuable insights. The Input-Process-Outcome-Contexts framework used to structure the extant research reveals that future research should pursue topics related to all components of the framework and that opportunities exist to draw from a broader set of theories. Theoretical/Academic Implications: Based on the framework, we formulate seven specific research topics that can add valuable insights into the role of the board chair and suggest theories that can help inform research pursuing these topics. Taken together, these topics have the potential to create valuable insights into how board chairs are appointed, develop competencies, and interact and work with the CEO, the top management team, the board, and other stakeholders while acknowledging the influence of contextual factors, such as ownership, diversity, the firm's development stage, and external events and trends. Practitioner/Policy Implications: Our review shows a growing global movement toward prescribing more corporate governance regulations and separating the positions of the board chair and the CEO. We show that many aspects need to be considered when choosing a governance configuration and when appointing a board chair because this role is becoming increasingly demanding.

show abstract

Section: Review Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

The role of the board chair—A literature review and suggestions for future research

Banerjee

Nordqvist

Hellerstedt

2020

Corporate Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This shows that although AL only has a minimum impact on people with low motivation, it is a more effective leadership style than authoritarian leadership. Guerrero, Lapalme, and Séguin (2015) hypothesised that a safety climate would mediate the relationship between the chair's AL style and non-executives' pro-organisational motivation.…”

Section: Relationship Between Authentic Leadership and Job Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between Authentic Leadership, Work-related stress and Job motivation A Mixed Methods Study

Keil¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Work-related stress (WRS) continues to present as a significant workplace hazard and is the cause of numerous employee and organisational issues (Kompier et al., 2000; O’Keefe et al., 2014; WHO, 2013). Moreover, there is an increase in WRS in the health care sector (see Russell et al., 2018). Studies have shown that WRS and related outcomes harm the quality of care received by users in health care settings (Boamah et al., 2017; Galletta et al., 2016; Van Bogaert et al., 2013; Wong & M. Giallonardo, 2013). Due to the prevalence of management malfeasance, ethical conduct, or lack thereof in corporate and governance leadership, and increased societal challenges (e.g., economic downturn, climate change and corporate scandals etc.), attention towards Authentic Leadership (AL) is growing (Gardner et al., 2011; Neider & Schriesheim, 2011; Walumbwa et al., 2008). However, although the research on perceptions and benefits of AL is growing, it remains limited, especially in the intellectual disability (ID) sector. This research demonstrates that poor leadership and stress can be significant contributors to decreased job motivation (JM), which in turn negatively affects staff and can have a substantial impact on the welfare of the people who avail themselves of ID services. Using a multi-strategy research design, this study examined the relationship between AL, WRS, and JM in the intellectual disability sector in Ireland. Overall results showed that perceived AL of one’s supervisor significantly decreased WRS and improved JM. The results demonstrate the important role leaders have in preventing negative employee, service user and organisational outcomes.

show abstract

“…This participative leadership differs from the notion of participative leadership in educational reform studies, which focuses on distributed leadership in schools, as it does not refer to some shared influence in decision-making by a school leader with his or her employees (Somech, 2005). Rather, this supervisory board chair participative leadership refers to a supervisory board chair's openness to all board members' input in the decision-making process by giving them all a chance to voice their opinions and encouraging them to express their ideas (Guerrero et al, 2015). This prevents some members from feeling put off and developing negative feelings towards the group, leading to fault lines, decline in cohesion or detrimental relationship conflicts (Machold et al, 2011).…”

Section: Chair Participative Leadershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

The multidimensionality of conflict in supervisory boards in education in the Netherlands

Heemskerk¹

2019

Educational Management Administration & Leadership

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to clarify the effects of conflicts on the task performance of supervisory boards in education. Management studies on conflicts on corporate boards sometimes find a positive effect and sometimes a negative effect on the performance of boards. These mixed findings are considered a result of the triggering of harmful personal conflicts through disagreements about process and content within boards. In order to gain more insight into the complex ways in which conflicts influence the effectiveness of supervisory boards in education, a multidimensional operationalisation of conflict has been designed, in which three different types of conflict – task, process and relationship conflict – are distinguished. Chairs of the executive boards of schools in the Netherlands (N = 300) were questioned via a survey on various conflict dimensions and their supervisory board’s task performance. The results of hierarchical regression analyses underscore the need for a multidimensional approach to conflicts on supervisory boards in education. Task conflict has a positive effect and relationship conflict a negative effect, while process conflict seems to have no significant effect on supervisory board effectiveness. Furthermore, task conflicts have a mitigating, rather than a triggering, effect on relationship conflicts. Supervisory boards in education should therefore not avoid substantive discussions on the differences of opinion among their members to be more effective.

show abstract

Board Chair Authentic Leadership and Nonexecutives’ Motivation and Commitment

Cited by 37 publications

References 73 publications

The role of the board chair—A literature review and suggestions for future research

The role of the board chair—A literature review and suggestions for future research

The relationship between Authentic Leadership, Work-related stress and Job motivation A Mixed Methods Study

The multidimensionality of conflict in supervisory boards in education in the Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About