Toor, S U R and Ofori, G (2009) Authenticity and its influence on psychological wellbeing and contingent self-esteem of leaders in Singapore construction sector. Construction Management and Economics, 27(3), pp. 299-313. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
'Authentic leadership' has emerged as an important subject in the management science literature. Although several scholars have presented their viewpoints about authenticity and authentic leadership, there is scarcity of empirical evidence on what leaders can really gain from being authentic. The results of the questionnaire-based survey with 32 leaders suggest that authenticity is significantly correlated with psychological well-being and negatively correlated with contingent self-esteem. Regression analysis also shows that authenticity successfully predicts psychological well-being. These findings indicate that authenticity results in healthy psychological functioning of leaders and hence several positive work-related outcomes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | authentic leadership; authenticity; contingent self-esteem; psychological well-being; Singapore |
| Index terms: | construction sector, management science, questionnaire, evidence, well-being, survey, regression analysis, Singapore |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, mental health and wellbeing, industry analysis, statistical analysis, management, Geography |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Health and Safety |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here