How a powerful audience and audience feedback moderate the relationship between performance-approach orientation and exaggerated self-promotion

Abstract

The drive for employees to perform well may tempt them to practice exaggerated self-promotion tactics. The supposition is that those with a strong performance-approach orientation are especially inclined to do this, but that contextual variables are relevant. In this study, I examined the influence of the combination of two contextual variables (perceived audience power and feedback) on the relationship between performance-approach orientation and exaggerated selfpromotion. A sample of 277 employees from two companies participated in the study. I found that the presence of a powerful audience weakened the positive relationship between performance-approach orientation and exaggerated self-promotion if the feedback from that audience was highly salient, and that a powerful audience strengthened this relationship if the salience of this feedback was low.

Authenticity or Self-Enhancement? Effects of Self-Presentation and Authentic Leadership on Trust and Performance

“…These results based on the newly developed scales for authentic and exaggerated self-enhancement may help resolve the mixed findings of self-promotion identified in previous studies given that existing scales conflate "valid claims of competence" with "exaggerating one's competence" or "lying" (cf. Molleman, 2019). Our new measures for authentic and exaggerated self-enhancement can also complement Yun, Takeuchi, and Liu (2007), who developed a new scale for self-enhancement motives (e.g., "I like to present myself to others as being a friendly and a polite person") but did not distinguish whether these motives are authentic or exaggerated.…”

“…When targeting the latter, individuals may choose to self-enhance in a number of ways, including boasting, providing truthful biographical narratives, exaggerating successes, claiming credit, or humblebragging (Sezer et al, 2018). However, a clear theoretical or empirical distinction is lacking between promoting one's genuine or inauthentic attributes, with many assuming that self-promoters are at least embellishing their actual strengths (Molleman, 2019).…”

“…Lastly, exaggerated self-enhancement occurs when people present a false image of themselves by exaggerating how good they are, taking credit for things outside of their sphere of control, avoiding blame, or denying responsibility for failure (Ames, Rose, & Anderson, 2006; Assor & Tal, 2012). Exaggerated self-enhancement differs from authentic self-enhancement in that the strengths emphasized are not truly possessed by the focal person (Molleman, 2019). As a self-presentation behavior, exaggerated self-enhancement is defined in the current study as fabricating or embellishing one's positive attributes.…”

“…Studies on self-enhancing self-presentation tactics have likewise failed to distinguish clearly between promoting one's actual strengths ( authentic self-enhancement) and exaggerating or falsifying one's strengths ( exaggerated self-enhancement; Molleman, 2019). This limitation is important because these two forms of self-enhancement differ in terms of veracity.…”

What is the narrative for practice? A review of recommendations on feedback and a guide to writing impactful practical implications

“…Using the multiple contextual levels as our guiding classification (Miraglia & Johns, 2021), we found that 66% of these conditions were related to the individual level , which covers the characteristics of the feedback recipients. These span demographic characteristics such as age (Besen et al, 2013; Wang et al, 2015) and work experience (Dahling et al, 2012); and individual traits and states, including the Big Five (Guo et al, 2017), fixed versus growth mindset (Zingoni, 2017), self‐confidence (Bailey & Austin, 2006), self‐efficacy (Bailey & Austin, 2006), performance approach orientation (Molleman, 2019), learning goal orientation (Son & Kim, 2016), and feedback orientation (Gabriel et al, 2014).…”