2020
DOI: 10.1108/ijotb-05-2019-0065
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impostor phenomenon: considerations for leadership practice

Abstract: PurposeThe impostor phenomenon (IP) is a psychological cycle experienced by individuals who, despite successes, are plagued by self-doubt and a concern of being identified as fraudulent. IP research is typically focused on the psychological well-being of those who experience IP, examining antecedents and outcomes of IP. Research on organizational impact is limited with few studies examining IP’s influence on leadership practices. The purpose of this paper is to discuss IP and explore the value of mitigating IP… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
2

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
6
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The literature suggests that impostorism can undermine the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of allyship and other values-driven behaviors because it may result in either episodic or consistent negative emotional states centered on the fear of being exposed as a fraud (Vergauwe et al, 2015;Leary et al, 2000). Importantly, impostorism may result in the person adopting elaborate psychological shielding mechanisms to protect themselves from their preoccupation of being exposed as incompetent, particularly in workplaces where their actions are under scrutiny (Filarowska, & Schier, 2018) and the shielding behaviors are reinforced by the organization's culture (Downing et al, 2020). Defense mechanisms (see archetypal personas colloquially called Perfectionist, Superman, Natural Genius, Rugged Individualist, and Expert, Clance, 1985;Young, 2011) may allow the person with the impostorism to project confidence and authority, but also provide built-in excuses that can be deployed to explain away inaction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The literature suggests that impostorism can undermine the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of allyship and other values-driven behaviors because it may result in either episodic or consistent negative emotional states centered on the fear of being exposed as a fraud (Vergauwe et al, 2015;Leary et al, 2000). Importantly, impostorism may result in the person adopting elaborate psychological shielding mechanisms to protect themselves from their preoccupation of being exposed as incompetent, particularly in workplaces where their actions are under scrutiny (Filarowska, & Schier, 2018) and the shielding behaviors are reinforced by the organization's culture (Downing et al, 2020). Defense mechanisms (see archetypal personas colloquially called Perfectionist, Superman, Natural Genius, Rugged Individualist, and Expert, Clance, 1985;Young, 2011) may allow the person with the impostorism to project confidence and authority, but also provide built-in excuses that can be deployed to explain away inaction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Impostorism experienced in the workplace is also negatively associated with work-related outcomes. Importantly, drawing on conservation of resources theory, Hudson and González-Gómez (2021) suggest that impostorism depletes employees' psychological resources, explaining associations with low work efficacy and low job satisfaction (Downing et al, 2020;Vergauwe et al, 2015). As a relatively new area of empirical research and practice in the work context, there are few clear standards, guidelines, interventions, or training on allyship (e.g., see review depicting dearth of concrete solutions, Lau et al, 2022).…”
Section: Hypothesized Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, Jackson (2018) asserts that leaders who struggle with IP are likely to be more risk averse, indecisive, and tend to procrastinate more than their low–IP leader counterparts, thus inhibiting their efficacy in making important decisions especially in critical or crisis situations. Drawing on leader member exchange theory, Downing et al (2020) also suggest that self–doubt associated with IP hinders the development of high–quality interactions with followers and risks the formation of “out–groups.” This may explain Bechtoldt's (2015) finding that high–IP managers were more likely to delegate both routine and challenging work to followers they perceived as having persistent self–doubts about their own ability. This similarity bias could restrict nonpreferred employees’ advancement—a common challenge for individuals of minoritized identities—given the role of challenging assignments has on visibility and skill development.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the study results offer theoretical and practical data about resilience that may support school leadership, influence their training and mentoring, and promote the managerial abilities that principals need to demonstrate during the sensitive period of entering principalship. Moreover, the study results may shed light on resilience-damaging factors (Downing, Arthur-Mensah, & Zimmerman, 2020; Papaioannou et al, 2022) and help design support systems for principals while they prepare for and enter this role.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%