outras leituras

Future leadership research to address:Proposition 1a: Higher levels of leader self-efficacy (LSE) will result in higher levels of leader emergence and performance.Proposition 1b: LSE will be moderated in its impact on leader emergence and performance by the extent to which the LSE matches the demands of the task and the context in which the leader is embedded.Proposition 2a: Specific forms of leader efficacy and generalized leader efficacy will reinforce one another and interact in building overall leader efficacy.Proposition 2b: Leaders with a greater breadth of generalization of their LSE will be more adaptable across contexts and situations.Proposition 3a: A leader’s level of thought efficacy will be related to the leader’s ability to learn and formulate leadership solutions.Proposition 3b: Higher levels of leader thought efficacy are expected to result in higher levels of leader development, emergence and performance.Proposition 4: Leaders’ level of efficacy for self-motivation will be related to the level of effort they allocate to both thinking through and performing in challenging circumstances.Proposition 5a: Leaders’ assessment of the utility of various means available for task performance will influence the determination of their overall efficacy beliefs in a given domain.Proposition 5b: LSE will be mediated by the leader’s means efficacy in terms of LSE’s relationship with performance.Proposition 6: Leaders with more complex, efficacious self-concepts will develop a broader set of efficacious scripts that are primed for automatic use across wider domains of leadership situations.Proposition 7: Through their display of efficacious behaviors, followers and leaders will reinforce the efficacy of each other over time.Proposition 8a: Efficacious follower and leader behaviors will predict collective leadership efficacy at both individual and collective levels of analysis.Proposition 8b: Collective leadership efficacy will promote collective agency, energizing groups and teams to engage and perform to achieve challenging organizational goals.Proposition 9: As the more senior leadership in an organization repeatedly achieves successes over time, a collective attribution (i.e., shared mental model) that signals higher organizational efficacy will become part of the organization’s culture, thus guiding it to higher levels of collective efficacy, collective agency, and in turn performance.Proposition 10: An efficacious organizational climate and/or culture will be conducive to the development of leadership efficacy at individual (micro) and collective (meso) levels, ultimately sustaining higher organizational (macro) levels of efficacy.Proposition 11: LSE being state-like can be developed for positive impact on performance through role modeling, vicarious learning, persuasion, arousal, raising the salience and perceived utility of leadership means, and focused mastery training interventions.Proposition 12: The level of leader developmental readiness (i.e. learning goal orientation and self-awareness) and methods of reflection will impact the development of LSE, through self-concept changes, in both leaders and followers, and in turn will impact their respective performance.Research Question 1: How might integrating leadership orientations and styles with the various levels and domains of efficacy help further clarify how and in what ways leaders employ various leadership styles across situations, and in turn impact motivation and performance?Research Question 2: In what way does the content and structuring of leaders’ efficacy beliefs, as represented across the social roles contained in their self-concepts, influence their engagement and performance across leadership roles and levels of difficulty of tasks within those roles?Texto integral