University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The influence of authentic leadership attributes on credibility: how administrative leaders in an academic medical center build, maintain or lose credibilty

(USC Thesis Other)

The influence of authentic leadership attributes on credibility: how administrative leaders in an academic medical center build, maintain or lose credibilty

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running Head: INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 1

THE INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES ON
CREDIBILITY: HOW ADMINISTRATIVE LEADERS IN AN ACADEMIC
MEDICAL CENTER BUILD, MAINTAIN OR LOSE CREDIBILITY

by

Matthew McElrath

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2013

Copyright 2013 Matthew McElrath
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 2
Table of Contents
List of Tables 4

List of Figures 5

Chapter 1: Introduction 6
Background 6
Problem Statement 9
Purpose of the Study 10
Limitations and Delimitations 11
Definitions of Key Terms 11

Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 12
Introduction 12
Leadership Authenticity 14
Leadership Credibility 16
Demonstrating Authenticity and Credibility 17
The Loss of Authenticity and Credibility 19
Summary 21

Chapter 3: Methodology 23
Introduction 23
Organization Demographics 24
Sample Population 24
Instrumentation 26
Data Collection 29
Data Analysis 30
Summary 31

Chapter 4: Results 32
Participant Demographics 32
Examining Authentic Leadership 34
Examining Credible Leadership 41
Implications of Authenticity and Credibility 45
Implications of the Absence of Credibility and Authenticity 50
Discussion 53

Chapter 5: Conclusions 56
Summary 56
Study Conclusions 57
Implications 59
Limitations 60
Future Research 61
Final Thoughts 61

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 3
References 63

Appendices
Appendix A: Invitation Letter 72
Appendix B: Survey 73
Appendix C: Interview Protocol 75

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 4
List of Tables
Table 3.1: Authentic Leadership Questionnaire Sample Questions 26
Table 3.2: Credibility Survey Questions 27
Table 3.3: Section A Interview Questions 28
Table 3.4: Section B Interview Questions 29
Table 4.03: Results for First Factor of Authenticity 35
Table 4.04: Results for Second Factor of Authenticity 36
Table 4.05: Results for Third Factor of Authenticity 36
Table 4.06: Results for Fourth Factor of Authenticity 37
Table 4.07: Overall Results 39
Table 4.08: Knowledge and Expertise 42
Table 4.09: Passion and Enthusiasm 42
Table 4.10: Trust 43
Table 4.11: Overall Credibility Results 43
Table 4.12: Correlation 46

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 5
List of Figures
Figure 4.01: Survey Participants by Age Grouping 33
Figure 4.02: Education Level of Participants 33

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 6
Chapter 1: Introduction
Background
Through times of tumult and uncertainty, leadership has been seen as critical to a
group or society’s survival through the crisis. Scholars have looked at those
characteristics of leadership that are most effective. Waldman (2001) examined the
effectiveness of transactional and charismatic leaders in managing through organizational
uncertainty. They found that, during stability, neither leadership style was significantly
more effective. However, during uncertainty or a crisis, charismatic leadership attributes
correlated to higher levels of perceived effectiveness. Leavy (2003) describes these
specific leadership attributes as context, conviction and credibility. Conviction and
credibility are seen in the emotional expression of the leader. Credibility is the conclusion
about the leader that he/she is to be believed, is competent, and can be trusted (Kouzes &
Posner, 2011).
Credibility has never been in greater need than in the last decade. The collapse of
financial institutions, the housing market, and the economy have led to the erosion of
public confidence. Instead of relying on leadership through these tribulations, many have
lost confidence in leadership. This loss of leadership credibility has come at a time when
leadership ethics is also waning; Enron, WorldCom, Fannie Mae, Lehman Brothers,
Countrywide Mortgage, Bernie Madoff provide examples of eroding credibility. It
appears that the lack of leadership credibility in the marketplace comes at the same time
as a lack of ethical leaders. The question is how these aspects of leaders relate to one
another. How do ethical practices demonstrate authenticity in leaders? Is leadership
authenticity antecedent to credibility?
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 7
The basis of authenticity is a model that self-sacrificial behavior by leaders
creates a sense of comfort for followers. This is a concept further reinforced by Madera
(2009). He found that, when leaders express sincere sadness and acceptance of
responsibility in times of crisis, followers perceive the leader to be more effective.
However, the emotional response must be sincere or genuine. If the behavior is insincere,
followers and customers will not support the leader or the organization. (Watson, 2007)
Gardner (2005) considers these expressive attributes and self-sacrificial behaviors
to be key elements of what they consider “authentic leadership.” Their theory emerges
from the positive psychological theories and emphasizes self-awareness and positive self-
regulated behaviors (Bandura, 1997 & Luthans, 2007). Specifically, the theory espouses
that authentic leaders know themselves and their beliefs. They are transparent, showing
clarity in values, reasoning, and actions. They possess the positive psychological capital
of confidence, hope, optimism and resilience, and finally, they are known and respected
for their integrity (Walumbwa, 2008).
What is clear from the concept of authenticity is alignment and clarity with one’s
personal values. As Hughes (2005) notes, this involves self-awareness, balanced
processing of information, relational transparency, and authentic behavior. It is when a
crisis arrives that the test of authenticity is met. Followers look to a leader to determine
his/her authenticity. When a crisis occurs, they examine the congruence between the
leader’s espoused values and the leader’s actions (Hughes, 2005). Not only should
leaders show consistency, but he/she should also show levels of transparency in their
emotions. Gardner (2005) points out that this is a critical balance between showing a
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 8
level of emotion consistent with one’s values and not displaying this in an extreme or
inappropriate manner.
Burn’s (1978) seminal work on leadership and more recent works by Sinek (2009)
and Zaffron (2009) outline the behaviors of effective leaders. It appears from this
research that the key for a leader is to set a clear direction through the turmoil and be
transparent regarding the emotional struggles through the difficulty, but exude a sincere
confidence in the organization to succeed. With authenticity, staff members are more
likely to believe the sincerity of the leader and follow him/her. With authenticity, the
leader is more likely to draw in team members to solve the crisis and emerge. The
challenge for any leader is to remain calm and demonstrate that balanced emotional
expressiveness while in the midst of hardship.
To emerge from a crisis and set forth a new path, the focus requires building a
more capable leadership cadre. The new leaders must embody the traits and behaviors of
the “authentic leader.” Certainly, they must have the operational skills necessary to
manage their respective areas, but, more importantly, they must demonstrate an
emotional expressiveness and collaboration with their staff. This is even more
challenging in the face of healthcare reform and market turbulence. Healthcare leaders
must find a way to build that trust. They know that, to emerge from this crisis, they must
be more than “willing” it to be different. However, leaders of academic medical centers,
in particular, have struggled through rapid environmental change and have struggled to
develop competent leaders to keep pace. Pololi (2009), in two studies, noted the
challenges leaders of academic medical centers in that they have to align personal values
with organizational culture change. As Souba (2002) put it, “the shakeup of the health
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 9
care industry over the past decade has generated an enormous amount of anxiety,
frustration, and dismay” (p. 139). There are academic medical centers which are taking
deliberate steps to overcome these challenges and build leaders with an ethical foundation
as the guide. (Chervenak & McCullough, 2004).
This study examines another academic medical center going through the same
deliberate transformation. Beginning September, 2010, all of the management staff of this
particular academic medical center began enrolling in a 20 week program of leadership
development, called ‘boot camp.’ This cohort based program was designed specifically
for this management team with the expressed purpose of skill development to build
authentic leaders. Members of these cohorts provide a unique sample of leaders to
examine the relationship between authentic leadership behaviors and leadership
credibility.
As Rizutto (2008) noted, the path of recovery requires adaptation, trust, and
strong leadership. The leadership team of this AMC is committed to learning from the
challenges of the day. They have set forth a plan to build authentic leaders and engage
their workforce like they have never done before. If they are successful, they may not
merely withstand the challenges of the day, they may have created a completely new,
energized organizational culture.
Problem Statement
Leaders cannot be effective unless they have a high level of credibility in the view
of their followers. In order to develop leadership credibility, individuals must
demonstrate their authenticity. When authenticity in leadership is demonstrated,
followers show positive interpersonal behaviors towards team members. Likewise, when
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 10
leaders demonstrate high levels of neuroticism, followers demonstrate negative
interpersonal behavior towards team members. How then can authentic leadership
behaviors inform the improvement of team effectiveness? There is little research
evidence that the attributes of leadership authenticity are antecedents to leadership
credibility. Furthermore, this relationship of leadership authenticity and credibility has
not been studied in the context of administrative leadership in an academic medical
center.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between authentic
leadership behaviors and the development and maintenance of credibility. Furthermore, it
explores how the actions of authentic leaders with credibility influence team behavior.
This study occurs in an urban academic medical center which is experiencing a
tremendous amount of organizational change.
The study explored the following questions:
1) What are the behaviors and traits demonstrated by administrative leaders that result in
their being considered authentic leaders by their staff?
2) What are the behaviors and traits demonstrated by administrative leaders that result in
their being considered credible by their staff?
3) What type of employee behavior and interpersonal conduct occurs in departments with
administrative leaders who are highly authentic and credible?
4) What are the leadership behaviors that result in the loss of an assessment of leadership
authenticity or credibility?
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 11
Answers to these research questions may inform future development of leaders in
academic medical centers.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study is limited to a single academic medical center in an urban setting.
Study participants were members of the medical center’s management team who had
recently completed management training. Observations and data gathering were limited
by scope and time constraints.
Definitions of Key Terms
Authenticity –
Defined as leaders who consistently demonstrate the following four behaviors;
self-awareness, transparency, ethical and moral conduct, and balance processing. (Avolio,
Gardner, & Walumbwa, 2008)
Beneficial employee behavior –
Defined as follower behavior in a team context that is promotive, discretionary,
and extra-role oriented (LePine & Van Dyne, 1998).
Credibility –
Defined as someone who consistently demonstrates the following three behaviors;
trustworthiness, expertise, and dynamism (Berlo, Lemert & Mertz, 1969).
Neuroticism –
It is defined as a negative cognitive approach and self-perception. The
characteristic behaviors are expressed anxiety, anger, and defensiveness (Brown &
Trevino, 2006)
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 12
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature
Introduction
“Hateful to me as the gates of Hades is that man who hides one thing in his heart
and speaks another” Homer’s Iliad, 850BC
(MacKenrdick, 1952, p. 31)
Homer knew almost three thousand years ago the importance of integrity in
leadership. The study of leadership has continued through the millennia. However, for
much of that time, the focus of leadership thought and theory centered on “great men”
ideals. Homer’s Hero Warrior, Machiavelli’s Prince, or Nietzsche’s great blond beast
were all character leaders throughout the ages. It has been easier to look at kings and
leaders as heroes or scapegoat then to understand the role of all involved in the leadership
of a country, organization or a community. (Burns, 1978)
With the emergence of psychological theory in the late 19
th
century and early 20
th

century, this narrow view of leadership began to change. The rationale was that great
leaders were born with a set of attributes. This notion was put forth by Bernard (1926)
who theorized that, if a set of leadership attributes could be agreed upon, and then they
could be used to select future leaders. The unanswered question was deciding upon what
attributes matter in leadership that is demanded in so many contexts.
From attribute based theory, leadership study evolved to behavior-based
approaches. This aligned with the emergence of B.F. Skinner’s (1953) behavioral
theories. If leadership is observed and found to be effective, then leadership behaviors
can be cataloged and prescribed. Halpin (1954) researched the leadership behaviors of
combat pilots. Researchers Hemphill and Coons (1957) extended this work in their
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 13
development of behaviorally-based leadership questionnaires. Mitchell (1970) reinforced
the construct validity of these behaviorally-based approaches to leadership.
What the early leadership theorists began to examine was the relational aspect of
leadership. Leadership is defined as much by the interaction between the leader and
follower as it is by the actions of the leader. Fundamentally, it is a social process.
(Barker, 2001) Bass (1990) identified that the flaw in many early leadership research was
the focus on trying to isolate behaviors and interactions. The misguided approach was
that, through the analysis of discrete events, a model of leadership could emerge.
However, Pirsig (1991) noted the limitation in taking a strictly empirical approach to
leadership study. He noted the importance of the pattern of value. The analysis of these
patterns evolved into what is known as ‘contingency theory’. (Horner, 1997) This
perspective of leadership focuses on the interaction between leader and situation or leader
and followers. Early work in understanding this approach was done by Hollander and
Julian (1969) who describe the leaders-follower dynamic and the process of influence in
the relationship.
The quintessential framework of contingency theory was developed by Hershey
and Blanchard (1969, 1996). Their theory was that leadership approach is best defined by
the intended outcome of the interactions. They examined task and relationship
dimensions as predictors of the optimal leadership style. However, this theory, like many
contingency or situational approaches to leadership at the time, lack empirical support for
the concept (Higgs, 2002) This has led to contemporary leadership theories that have
harkened back to the trait theories of the early twentieth century but now in the context of
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 14
followership. That is, follower behavior becomes the definition of leadership
effectiveness.
Leadership Authenticity
Research in the past two decades began to examine workplace behaviors that had
high correlation to positive organizational environments. This has occurred as new
models of leadership have emerged. Avolio & Bass’s (1999) early research was intended
to empirically examine what was meant by the terms ‘visionary’, ‘charismatic’ or
‘transformational’ leader. In their research, they found support for the concepts of
charisma, mental inquiry, and individual attention being correlated to positive leadership
behavior. An additional branch of inquiry was being completed by Luthans focusing
more specifically on positive work place behavior. Luthans and Stajkovic’s (1998) meta-
analysis highlights the correlation between self-efficacy and workplace performance.
Positive self-imagine and confidence has a positive impact on productivity. Luthans
(2002) expanded this analysis to posit that there are three individual workplace behaviors
with high correlation to effective organizational behavior: “confidence, hope and
resiliency” (p. 695). Kernis (2003) further expands this notion and argues that self-
esteem is actually reinforced by individual ‘authenticity.’ He notes that this concept of
‘authenticity’ includes four elements; it is relational in nature, it is action oriented, it
includes self-awareness and it demands unbiased processing of information.
Kernis and Luthans’ work is further expanded by Ilies et al (2005) who propose a
model of ‘authentic leadership.’ They define the personal characteristics of leadership
authenticity as “self-awareness, unbiased processing, authentic behavior/acting and
authentic relational orientation” (p. 373) Avolio and Gardner (2005) refine the definition
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 15
of leadership authenticity more. They see the inherent human limitations in considering
that leaders would process information in an ‘unbiased’ manner; citing the work of Fisk
& Taylor (1991). All individuals will exert some level of bias to all situations.
Consequently, Avolio and Gardner (2005) instead use the term “balanced processing.”
To this definition, Avolio and Gardner include that authentic leaders are ‘self-
aware.’ This concept of self-awareness refers to leaders understanding of their thoughts,
emotions, beliefs and preferences; in other words, to “know oneself” (p. 320). However,
leadership is grounded in action. That is, authentic leadership is defined by how followers
respond to leadership behavior. Specifically, May et al. (2003) articulate the connection
between moral or ethical leadership behavior and authentic leadership. They see
leadership as a “social influence process” where the moral character of the leader
influences the types of decisions and behaviors exhibited (p. 248). In fact, according to
May (2003), it is through the leader’s transparent decision making process, moral
courage, moral resiliency and authentic actions, that their authentic leadership is
demonstrated. At the heart of authentic leadership is an understanding that individuals are
functioning at a high cognitive, emotional and moral level. (Walumbwa, et. al., 2008)
However, the specific relationship between the leader’s demonstration of ethical behavior
and its impact on credibility will be explored later.
The working definition of authentic leadership as developed by Gardner, Avolio,
and Walumbwa (2005) based on Luthans (2002) early work, is summarized by
Walumbwa (2008) as “a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both
positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-
awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balance processing of information, and
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 16
relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive
self-development” (p. 94). Walumbwa (2008) and his colleagues have articulated a way
to operationalize this definition into a set of leader behaviors. This led to the development
of a leadership behavior assessment tool specifically intended for the empirical
measurement of authentic leadership in a work setting. Known as the “Authentic
Leadership Questionnaire” (p. 97), this tool was found to be valid in assessing authentic
leadership behaviors.
Leadership Credibility
Another important characteristic of leaders is whether their own followers believe
what they hear, read, or see from them. Given the ethical lapses in recent decades, leaders
are often questioned for their integrity (Kouzes & Posner, 2005). In these cases, what a
follower may be assessing is the leader’s ‘credibility.’ Credibility is defined by trust.
Researchers in the communications field have examined the ‘credibility’ or
trustworthiness of information sources. (Hovland and Weiss, 1951) Later researchers
found that, when communicators are previously considered experts, reliable, and have
good intentions, then the information conveyed is considered credible. (Elliot, 1963;
Giffin, 1967) The sources of credibility evolved to focus on respect, attraction and trust.
(Simons, 1970). O’Keefe (1990, 2008) and Pornpitakpan (2004) further clarified what is
known as ‘source credibility’ and described the key elements as trustworthiness, expertise
and dynamism. Individuals who are assessed high in each of these dimensions are
considered credible. In later work, Sobel (1985) reinforced that, more than the presence
of attributes, action plays a key role in the development and maintenance of credibility.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 17
That is, the consistency of words and deeds are a critical element to being considered
credible.
A review of literature regarding the issue of organizational cynicism reinforces
the importance of the consistency of words and actions. Dean (1998) found that cynicism
in organizations is a result of a lack of belief in the integrity of organization based upon
an inconsistency of words and behaviors. Organization members see principles sacrificed
for expediency. Kouzes and Posner (2005) find that the basis of organizational cynicism
is leadership behavior. They also see that credibility is the foundation of leadership. This
is consistent with early research they conducted on the relationship between leadership
and credibility (Posner & Kouzes, 1988). They found that assessment of leadership
credibility is correlated with leadership behavior. Specifically, their research supports
five sets of behaviors that correlated with leadership credibility: ‘challenging the process,
inspiring a shared vision, enabling others to act, modeling the way, and encouraging the
heart’ (p. 529). Gabris (2000) had similar findings in the examination of leadership
credibility in the public sector.
Demonstrating Authenticity and Credibility
Kouzes and Posner’s (2005) work outlines the behaviors staff expect of their
leaders. They find that leaders must articulate for themselves and others the values and
principles they expect to lead by; these are the beliefs that will guide them. Next, leaders
must show consistency between words and actions. Leaders can be demanding of their
staff, but they must demonstrate that they are demanding of themselves. “You can only
lead people where you are willing to go.” (p. 361) Furthermore, leaders build credibility
by listening to staff, building a community with their staff, developing the skills of staff,
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 18
and allowing themselves to be open to learning. They have utilized this set of leadership
behaviors, which are outlined in an assessment tool known as the “Leadership Practices
Inventory”.
Examining leadership behavior in a crisis or during significant periods of change
can be a better measure of effectiveness. As Publilius Syrus (Lyman, 1856) quipped
centuries ago, "anyone can hold the helm when the sea is calm." (p. 37) Smits (2003)
specifically identified the personality traits of extroversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, emotional stability and openness to experience as critical to crisis
management. Halverson (2004) expands these attributes to focus on the role of self-
sacrifice. They found that leadership effectiveness in a crisis correlates strongly with self-
sacrificial behavior. These behaviors are demonstrated by leaders who give up rewards or
abstain from using power for personal benefit. These actions instill follower trust.
This work reinforces the model that self-sacrificial behavior by leaders creates a
sense of comfort for followers. A concept further reinforced by Madera (2009). He found
that, when leaders express sincere sadness and acceptance of responsibility in times of
crisis, followers perceive the leader to be more effective. However, the emotional
response must be authentic. If the behavior is inauthentic or unethical, followers and
customers will not support the leader or the organization. (Watson, 2007)
Gardner (2005) considers these expressive attributes and self-sacrificial behaviors
to be key elements of authentic leadership. Specifically, the authentic leader knows
him/herself and his/her beliefs. They are transparent, showing clarity between values,
reasoning and actions. They possess the positive psychological capital of confidence,
hope, optimism and resilience, and finally, they are known and respected for their
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 19
integrity. (Walumbwa, 2008) What is clear from the concept of authenticity is alignment
and clarity with one’s personal values. As Hughes (2005) notes, it involves self-
awareness, balanced processing of information, relational transparency, and authentic
behavior. It is when a crisis arrives that the test of authenticity is met. For followers, they
look to a leader to determine their authenticity. When a crisis occurs, they examine the
congruence between the leader’s espoused values and the leader’s actions. (Hughes,
2005). Not only should leaders show consistency, but they should also show levels of
transparency in their emotions. Gardner (2005) point out that this is a critical balance
between showing a level of emotion consistent with one’s values and not displaying them
in an extreme or inappropriate manner.
In higher education, the same conclusion was reached by Pfeffer (1981) and later
confirmed by both Latta (2005) and Randall (2006) Expressive leadership attributes and
authenticity appear to be the keys to success in handling a crisis. With authenticity, staff
are more likely to believe the sincerity of the leader and follow them. With authenticity,
the leader is more likely to draw in team members to solve the crisis and emerge. The
challenge for any leader is to remain calm and demonstrate that balanced emotional
expressiveness while in the midst of hardship. The new leaders must embody the traits
and behaviors of the ‘authentic leader.’ Certainly, they must have the operational skills
necessary to manage their respective areas, but, more importantly, they must demonstrate
an emotional expressiveness and collaboration with their staff.
The Loss of Authenticity and Credibility
Although crisis and change may provide opportunities for leaders to excel, they
also provide the context for leadership failures. McCall and Lombardo (1988, 1990)
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 20
conducted early research on executive leaders who struggled and derailed in their careers.
Their research was repeated in an international setting, with consistent results. (McCall &
Hollenbeck, 2002). The findings illustrate a combination of operational issues and
personality traits resulted in their struggles. The issue of the leader’s traits or style are
consistent with the studies of credibility and authenticity. According to McCall &
Lombardo (1990), derailed executives were “abrasive, intimidating, aloof, arrogant, and
betrayed trust” (p. 26). This was confirmed in international executives as well as. In
many cases, the flaws in personality would be overlooked so long as the organization
succeeded. However, when faced with a crisis or faltering performance, these personality
flaws would quickly be noticed and found unacceptable. (McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002)
Interestingly, research has found that leadership failures, mishaps, or crisis, per se,
do not lead to losses of credibility. Kouzes and Posner (2002) found that credibility is not
lost by a failure; it is lost by not admitting the failure or passing the blame to others.
Ironically, the leaders’ open admission of failure and their taking personal responsibility
for it actually increases follower perception of their credibility. The most important thing
a leader should do when a mistake is made is to “admit it” (Kouzes and Posner, 2011). In
contrast to this are the leaders who hide mistakes or blame others. Lack of personal
accountability for mistakes erodes credibility quickly. As Hughes (2005) found, staff
examine carefully the consistency or inconsistency between a leader’s words and actions.
If mistakes occur, staff members expect not only the apology, but to see the leader’s
remorse demonstrated in shared suffering. As Kouzes and Posner (2011) put it, “they do
expect some form of reparation or personal participation in the hardship. The amends
should fit the problem.” (p. 150)
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 21
Poor or abusive leadership not only leads to loss of credibility, it is also found to
affect an assessment of followers’ views of a leader’s ethics and trust. Brown and
Trevino (2005, 2006) found that negative leader behaviors; anxiety, anger, and
neuroticism expressed toward staff, are inversely correlated with perceptions of leaders as
ethical. These types of leaders are more prone to conflicts, defensive social interactions,
and more hostile to others. Walumbwa and Schaubroek (2009) found that this type of
‘leader neuroticism’ is negatively correlated with ethical leadership (p. 1278). They also
found that follower assessment of a leader’s ethical orientation influences how staff
behave in the work setting. If the leader is considered ethical, the psychological safety in
the work setting is high and staff members demonstrate this through intra-staff support,
encouragement, and coaching. Likewise, if the leader is not perceived as ethical, this type
of team supportive behavior is not apparent. This team behavior and language is seen as
antecedent to authentic leadership. (Walumbwa & Schaubroek, 2009)
Summary
This review of literature supports the development of a construct of leadership
authenticity. Authentic leaders are known as leaders who are self-aware, process
information in a balanced way, exhibit relational transparency with those they lead, and
promote a positive ethical climate. This ethical climate is also a key ingredient of trust. It
is workplace trust that is also foundational in leadership credibility. However, credibility
demands more than good intentions. Credibility is assessed through consistent alignment
between words and actions. Organizational cynicism has been found to emerge in
organizations or settings where leadership credibility is absent. Where authenticity and
credibility are given the greatest opportunity to emerge is in the midst of change and
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 22
crisis. However, the crisis merely provides the stage for the leader to demonstrate his/her
authenticity. It is also possible that the leader will not demonstrate authenticity, but will
demonstrate abusive or neurotic behavior. The research has demonstrated the behavioral
antecedents to authentic leadership and credible leadership.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 23
Chapter 3: Methodology
Introduction
Referenced research illustrates that leaders cannot be effective unless they have a
high level of credibility in the view of their followers. Furthermore, when authenticity in
leadership is demonstrated, followers show positive interpersonal behaviors towards team
members. Likewise, when leaders demonstrate high levels of neuroticism, followers
demonstrate negative interpersonal behavior towards team members. However, in the
literature there is little evidence of a direct relationship between leadership authenticity
and leadership credibility. The purpose of this study was to examine whether leadership
authenticity attributes are antecedents to leadership credibility. In addition, the research
examines the impact of inauthentic leadership and lack of credibility. These leadership
dynamics are examined in the context of leadership in an academic medical center.
The methodology used to examine these issues is a mixed methods approach.
Quantitative techniques utilizing valid research tools aid in the understanding of the
existence of authentic or credible leaders in the study organization. However, this data
does not provide insight into the context of organizational life and the impact these
leadership attributes, or lack thereof, have on the workforce. Qualitative research
methodology and the use of interviews allow the research to explore the impact the
leaders have on the organization in the words of those who experience it. This approach
may also provide insight into the organizational relationship between credibility and
authenticity.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 24
Organization Demographics
This study was conducted in an academic medical center in an urban setting. This
medical center is comprised of hospitals, outpatient services, ancillary services, teaching
facilities and research laboratories. Staff members employed in this medical center
perform myriad functions in a variety of health professions for this tertiary care center.
The workforce consists of over 500 physicians and scientists, 3000 healthcare
professionals and over 4000 education/research staff. This medical center is owned and
affiliated with a large, nationally recognized, research university. Professors, scientists,
and staff of the university have numerous collaborative initiatives under way with
colleagues in the medical center.
The academic medical center is organized along service and discipline lines. This
is typical of a medical center: radiology, admitting, pharmacy, nursing, internal medicine.
The organizational structure reflects the established medical and surgical disciplines:
cardiology, neurology, vascular surgery, neurosurgery, transplant medicine, urology, and
orthopedics, to name just a few. The medical center staff provide diagnostic, therapeutic
care, or administrative support service to the medical staff and their patients.
Sample Population
The medical center is organized in a hierarchical structure. At the lowest level are
supervisors or managers. These individuals provide direct instruction and guidance to the
staff they manage. They typically supervise from 5 to 50 members of a team who may
cover a unit, service or area up to 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. These are individuals
who have the credentials, licensure or certifications of the staff they manage, e.g. nurse,
pharmacist, radiology technician, or lab scientist. Individuals in this category may also
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 25
work in a variety of disciplines that provide administrative support to the medical center,
e.g. admitting, accounting, human resources, marketing, or facilities. Above the first line
supervisors or managers are typically directors. Directors lead multiple, related clinical or
administrative areas. These individuals typically hold the licensure or credentials of at
least one of the areas they lead. Above the director is senior leadership. Individuals at this
level lead a variety of functions or disciplines. This level includes such roles as the
associate administrator for professional services, chief financial officer, and chief nursing
officer.
Individuals selected for this study were drawn from the first level of management
ranks; supervisors and managers. This population is comprised of approximately one
hundred and seventy five individuals. Within this population, a sample cohort of sixty
five were invited to participate in this study. This sample population consists of all
individuals who recently completed a sixteen week management development training
program. These training programs began in the fall of 2009 and three cohorts of
participants joined the program. The last session was completed in January, 2012. This
sample was selected for two reasons. Because participants have recently completed the
development program, they may have greater sense of management self-awareness. This
may lead to more insightful understanding of the leadership dynamics of the
organization. Secondly, because they are in leadership positions themselves, they may
have insight regarding their own leadership and the leadership attributes of the directors
and senior executives who provide them with leadership. These individuals are
demographically diverse in gender, age, ethnicity, and educational attainment. They all
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 26
share a common level of organizational authority and experience in management in an
academic medical center.
Instrumentation
Data for this study was obtained through the use of an on-line survey and through
one-on-one interviews. The first research question is, “What are the behaviors and traits
demonstrated by administrative leaders that result in their being considered authentic
leaders by their staff?” Data to answer this question was obtained from study participants
through the use of the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire.
1
This survey tool was
delivered electronically through the use of electronic survey software. The survey
instrument consists of sixteen statements which were answered utilizing a Likert scale.
Table 3.1
Authentic Leadership Questionnaire Sample Questions
Authentic Leadership Questionnaire Three Sample Questions
My leader: Not at all Frequently
Says exactly what he or she means 0 1 2 3 4
Tells you the hard truth 0 1 2 3 4
Admits mistakes when they are made 0 1 2 3 4

The statements are intended to measure the following four leadership attributes;
self-awareness, transparency, ethical or moral conduct, and balanced processing of
information. The survey tool has gone through extensive validation. (Avolio & Gardner,
2005; Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, et.al. 2008; Walumbwa & Schaubroeck, 2009)
The second research question is, “What are the behaviors and traits demonstrated
by administrative leaders that result in their being considered credible by their staff?”
Data to answer this question was obtained through the use of a survey tool and from

1
Copyright ©2007 Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ) by Bruce J. Avolio, William L. Gardner, and
Fred O. Walumbwa. All rights reserved in all medium.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 27
individual interviews. Survey participants were asked to assess the degree to which their
leaders demonstrate a series of behaviors based on eleven statements. These were valued
utilizing a Likert scale.
Table 3.2
Credibility Survey Questions
Credibility on-line survey questions
Assess to what extent your leader does the following:
Not at all To a great extent
They practice what they preach: 1 2 3 4 5
They walk the talk: 1 2 3 4 5
Their actions are consistent with their words: 1 2 3 4 5
They follow through on commitments: 1 2 3 4 5
They keep their promises: 1 2 3 4 5

The basis for these statements being used to assess leadership credibility is the
recent work of Kouzes & Posner (2011) and their earlier research assessing management
credibility (Posner & Kouzes, 1988). Leadership credibility was also being assessed
utilizing two open-ended interview questions. These questions are drawn from early
research by Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz (1969) on assessing the credibility of information
sources. Since these survey questions and interview questions were developed for this
study, issues of content validity may limit the application of the results.
The third research question is, “What type of employee behavior and
interpersonal conduct occurs in departments with administrative leaders who are highly
authentic and credible?” Data to address this question was obtained from individual
interviews. Interviewees were asked three open ended questions.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 28
Table 3.3
Section A Interview Questions
Interview Questions Section A
1. Think of a leader about whom you are likely to say “If it is good enough for
them, it is good enough for me.” Describe why you have that conclusion about
the leader? What have they said or done, what is it about them that makes you
reach this conclusion?

2. Describe a time when a leader’s actions were consistent with their words. What
happened? What was your response?

3. Describe a time when a leader made a difficult decision based on high standards
of ethical conduct? What happened? What was your response?

The interview questions are designed to elicit feedback from participants
according to the credibility framework from Kouzes and Posner (2011) and authenticity
framework from Avolio, Gardner, & Walumbwa (2007). Interviews will be recorded,
transcribed, and the responses coded for analysis.
The final research question is a corollary to the third question, “What are the
leadership behaviors that result in the loss of an assessment of leadership authenticity or
credibility?” Data to address this question were obtained through the use of individual
interviews. Participants were asked three open ended questions that are contrasting in
context and were intended to measure the behavioral impact of managers who do not
demonstrate authenticity or credibility.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 29
Table 3.4
Section B Interview Questions
Interview Questions Section B
1. Describe a time when a leader did not keep their promises or commitment?
What happened? How did you respond?

2. Can you think of an example when a leader initially did not keep a promise but
later in time kept promises or sought way to reinstate their credibility? What
happened? How did you respond to them? Why?

3. Describe a time when a leader was indifferent to the guidance, ideas or
feedback from others? What happened? How did you respond?

These questions are designed in alignment with Kouzes and Posner (2011) theory and are
consistent with prior research by Walumbwa and Schaubroek (2009) regarding the
impact of manager neuroticism.
Data Collection
Once study participants acknowledged agreement to participate, they were sent an
email with instructions to log into an established electronic survey tool. The survey tool
consisted of twenty-seven items and five demographic questions. Participants scored each
item based on a 5 point Likert scale. The survey took no more that 15-20 minutes to
complete. At the conclusion of the on-line survey, all participants were invited to
participate in a one-on-one interview.
Interviews were conducted in a private office setting. Participants were notified
that all interviews would be tape recorded. The participants were given the opportunity to
end the interviews at any time and were able to ask that their information be withdrawn
from the study. Participant data was coded for anonymity purposes and any quotes
referenced used a pseudonym. Taped interviews were transcribed and coded by theme.
Interviews were structured to last no longer than thirty minutes.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 30
Data Analysis
Data collected from the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire and on-line
credibility questions was transferred from SurveyMonkey into the Statistical Package for
the Social Sciences (SPSS). Participant demographic data and responses were be coded in
SPSS. This allowed for statistical testing to be conducted on the data set including
reliability, correlation, multiple regression, and frequencies. This enabled analysis to be
done to see whether correlations exist with demographic factors. Additional analysis was
completed to see whether correlations exist between data regarding levels of leadership
authenticity and levels of leadership credibility.
Interview data was analyzed based on code mapping (Anfara, Brown &
Mangione, 2002). This code mapping technique involved an initial coding and surface
content analysis. A second level of analysis was conducted to identify pattern variables.
This led to a third level of analysis where patterns were applied to the theories and the
underlying research questions for this study. Ivankova, Creswell and Stick’s (2006)
approach for mixed methods research was applied. In this study, quantitative data
collection utilizing the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire© and a custom designed
survey were completed. Once survey data was collected and analyzed, selected
participants were interviewed. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and the text data
was coded. Coding of data led to thematic analysis and examination of thematic data
relative to the underlying theory of this study and the underlying research questions.
Essentially, Creswell’s (2007) Grounded-Theory approach to qualitative research was
applied. This required an advanced level of categorization and inter-relating the
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 31
categories to see how the interview data narrated the relationship between leadership
authenticity and leadership credibility.
Summary
The mixed methodology examined the assessment of leadership authenticity and
credibility from a cohort of mid-level managers in an academic medical center. First, the
Authentic Leadership Questionnaire© and an additional survey instrument were used to
measure the authenticity and credibility of leaders in this medical center. Surveys were
scored using a Likert-type scale and data were analyzed with SPSS. Second, personal
interviews provided content to assess the behavioral impact of staff who experience
authentic and credible leaders and how they observe those leaders behaving. Finally,
interview data provided content to assess how leaders lose credibility and authenticity.
The interview data was coded for themes, analyzed for patterns and a grounded
theoretical approach was used to address the research questions.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 32
Chapter 4: Results
This chapter provides a review and analysis of the findings from this study
regarding the relationship between leadership authenticity and leader credibility. The
purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between authentic leadership
behaviors and the development and maintenance of credibility. A secondary purpose was
to explore how the actions of authentic leaders with credibility influence the workplace
environment.
Data was collected from an electronic survey instrument and from one-on-one
interviews. The survey invitation letters were distributed via email to a population of
sixty two supervisors and managers of an urban academic medical center. Volunteer
participants were solicited and provided a link to the instrument on Survey Monkey.
Once participants completed the on-line survey, they were given an opportunity to
volunteer to participate in one-on-one recorded interviews. In addition, supplemental
materials were gathered from the organization and examined to provide additional
insights into the organizational context for the findings of this study. This study occurs in
an urban academic medical center which is experiencing a tremendous amount of
organizational change.
Participant Demographics
A total of sixty-two supervisors and managers were invited to participate in this
study. Thirty three agreed and completed the on-line survey tool for a total response rate
of 53.2%. The majority of supervisors and managers in the medical center are female
(63%). Of the participants who responded to the on-line survey, 85% are female. The
majority of the survey participants are over forty and the median age band was 50-59.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 33

Figure 4.01. Survey Participants by Age Grouping
Figure 4.02 illustrates that the participant group is highly educated. All
participants attended college and the majority had more than an undergraduate degree.
Only 10% of participants had less than a college degree, and 60% had at least one
graduate degree.

Figure 4.02. Education Level of Participants
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 34
Participants were also asked to identify whether they had recently attended a
leadership development program offered by the medical center. Forty-two percent of
participants had attended this training and fifty-eight had not.
Interview subjects were drawn from participants in the on-line survey. These
subjects volunteered to participate in one-on-one interviews at the completion of the
survey tool. A total of eight (8) participants volunteered to be interviewed. Seven
interviewed were females (87.5%) and one interviewed was male. The age of interview
participants ranged from 29 to 63 and the median age was 53. All interview participants
obtained at least a Bachelor’s degree and the majority (62.5%) had a Master’s degree.
The participants were all well experienced in the management role. The expressed years
of managerial experience ranged from 2 years to over 30 years and the average years of
experience was 18.87 years. The majority of these participants had also recently
completed the internal management development program offered by the medical center.
Examining Authentic Leadership
Research Question One: What are the behaviors and traits demonstrated by
administrative leaders that result in their being considered authentic leaders by their staff?
Aviolo, Gardner and Walumbwa (2007) measure authentic leadership based on
the demonstration of four sets of leadership behaviors; transparency, moral or ethical
conduct, balanced processing of information and leader self-awareness. In this study,
survey participants evaluated the behaviors of their leaders utilizing the Authentic
Leadership Questionnaire©. Table 4.03 summarizes survey participant results for the first
factor of authenticity. The overall mean for this behavioral trait is 2.884.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 35
Table 4.03
Results for First Factor of Authenticity
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Transparency 33 0 4 3.00 1.031
Transparency 33 0 4 2.82 1.158
Transparency 33 0 4 2.82 1.131
Transparency 33 1 4 3.09 .879
Transparency 32 0 4 2.69 1.203
Valid N 32

Results suggest a high level of perceived behavior by leaders who openly demonstrate
their emotions, whose expressed emotion is consistent with behavior, who openly admit
mistakes, and who encourage others to express true feelings. These results are actually
higher than those of a similar study in which nursing staff rated the relational
transparency of their leaders in a healthcare organization at a mean of 2.49 and SD 1.01
(Wong, 2010).
The second aspect of authentic leadership is that the leader demonstrates decision
making which is ethical and allows for a perceived internalized moral perspective. The
ALQ© measures this with four questions. The results for this study are displayed in table
4.04. The overall mean for this trait is slightly lower at 2.873. However, these results still
suggest a higher level of this trait. In Wong’s (2010) study, the leader mean for this trait
was 2.51 and the standard deviation was 1.03. In a similar study of experienced nurses in
a healthcare organization, Laschinger (2012) found this internalized moral perspective on
the part of leaders in that health care organization to have a mean of 2.53 and a standard
deviation of 1.01.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 36
Table 4.04
Results for Second Factor of Authenticity
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Moral/Ethical 33 0 4 2.85 1.278
Moral/Ethical 33 1 4 2.88 1.083
Moral/Ethical 33 0 4 2.76 1.146
Moral/Ethical 33 0 4 3.00 1.090
Valid N 33

The third leadership trait examined was balance processing of information. This
factor examines the degree to which the leader seeks out information from multiple
sources prior to making decisions and seeks a variety of opinions, especially contrary
ideas. With this particular trait, the demonstration of behavior which illustrates
consideration of data in an objective manner and unbiased processing of information is
key. This trait is measured with three questions and the study results are listed in table
4.05.
Table 4.05
Results for Third Factor of Authenticity
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Balanced Processing 33 0 4 2.27 1.039
Balanced Processing 33 0 4 2.67 1.190
Balanced Processing 33 0 4 2.45 1.325
Valid N 33

The overall mean for this leadership trait with this study group is 2.46. These results are
lower than those of the other two traits of transparency and having a moral or ethical
grounding in decision making.
In Wong’s (2010) study, the results were a mean of 2.31 with a standard deviation
of 1.11, and, in Laschinger’s (2012) study, the results were a mean of 2.32 and a standard
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 37
deviation of 1.10. Interestingly, in all three studies, this leadership trait was perceived to
be demonstrated at a lesser extent than the first two traits (transparency and moral/ethical
orientation). The results may lend some research support for the findings of Fisk and
Taylor (1991) on the difficulties leaders have in truly remaining unbiased in decision
making.
Given the evaluation of these traits by followers in these three studies, the test of
bias may not rest in the objectivity of the decision-making process, but in the belief of
followers regarding the influence of one of more sources on the leader. Certainly, in this
study, the results suggest that followers perceive leaders struggling, to some extent, to
remain completely unbiased in their decision making. Balance processing of information
may be one area to examine further.
The final aspect of Authentic Leadership Questionnaire© is how well leaders
understand themselves. This trait measures the leader’s behavior in self-reflection and in
seeking critical feedback from followers. It measures whether leaders are seen as not only
seeking this information but are perceived as actually incorporating it into future
behavior. Do they modify their behavior from the feedback they receive? The trait is
known as “self-awareness.” Table 4.06 summarizes the results from this study. The trait
was measured with four questions.
Table 4.06
Results for Fourth Factor of Authenticity
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Self-Awareness 33 0 4 2.15 1.460
Self-Awareness 32 0 4 2.22 1.313
Self-Awareness 32 0 4 2.59 1.160
Self-Awareness 33 0 4 2.58 1.146
Valid N 31
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 38
Interestingly, this trait was actually rated the lowest of all of the leadership
behaviors examined. The mean was 2.38. Both Laschinger (2012) and Wong (2010)
found similar comparative results, with means of 2.07 and 2.06, respectively.
Overall, the results of the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire© administered to
this study group illustrate that this set of followers consider leaders in this healthcare
setting to be authentic leaders “fairly often,” to use the survey term. The overall mean for
the ALQ was 2.68. These overall results are higher than the findings of Wong (2010) in a
healthcare setting, which yielded a mean of 2.35and a standard deviation of.99, and
higher than the results found by Laschinger (2012), which provided a mean of 2.37 and a
standard deviation of .98 in a different healthcare organization.
ALQ data was also analyzed with the Pearson’s correlation to verify the internal validity
of this tool with this study cohort. The results are illustrated in Table 4.07 and are
consistent with similar studies utilizing the ALQ (Walumbwa, 2008; Wong, 2010;
Laschinger. 2012).

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 39
Table 4.07
Overall Results
Transparency Moral/Ethics Balanced Self-
Awareness
Transparency
Pearson Correlation 1 .623
**
.574
**
.594
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 165 132 99 131
Moral/Ethics
Pearson Correlation .623
**
1 .657
**
.502
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 132 132 99 131
Balanced
Pearson Correlation .574
**
.657
**
1 .555
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 99 99 99 98
Self-Awareness
Pearson Correlation .594
**
.502
**
.555
**
1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000
N 131 131 98 131
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

In addition to the ALQ, a subset of participants completed one-on-one interviews
with questions designed to elaborate on their understanding of authentic leadership and
how it is portrayed in the work setting. Participant interview results lend another view of
how followers see that authenticity of leaders is fostered. Participants describe
authenticity as a process rather than an end point. For them, it is a process of “building
authenticity” and the way to do so is a result of a variety of demonstrated behaviors. First,
the leader needs to demonstrate transparency. This transparency is shown in how the
leader communicates with lower level staff. As one participant stated, “transparency,
honesty, openness to listen, integrity, consistency, those are the things that come to mind”
(int. 6). Another participant described this as “being fair, being honest, and open, and
respectful even in light of maybe a highly charged or difficult situation” (int. 1).
This concept of transparency and openness does not imply the leader is
indecisive. A participant remarked that the leader may not agree or follow the advice of
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 40
their staff. For the participant, the leader’s authenticity is built on how they respond to the
feedback. Soliciting ideas and showing genuine interest is critical; “they offered you the
chance to explain why you wanted something done a certain way” (int. 2). The leader
then followed this up by explaining why they were taking a different approach and
complimenting the validity of the suggestion that was offered. This described
transparency and balanced processing of information is consistent with the data solicited
from the ALQ survey instrument.
There is also an element of action in the participants’ assessment of leadership
authenticity. They remarked that the authentic leader was able to balance information
even when faced with a crisis. One participant remarked, “being able to reach quickly,
but making a judgment between a reflexive response, that may be premature, and getting
the information that will provide for a balanced response” (int. 1).
The final aspect of authenticity described by participants is the role of leadership
integrity. There is an element of alignment of one’s personal set of values. One
participant described it in the following way; “I think authentic leadership comes from a
personal commitment. I subscribe to our professional life shouldn’t be separated in that
uh, you’re work should be your life mission, and if it isn’t then you shouldn’t be doing
what you’re doing” (int. 1). Participants described that authentic leaders are ones whose
actions align with their personal set of values. That level of personal alignment was
critical to their seeing the leader as authentic. This also relates to their seeing the leader
as acting in a way which demonstrates professional alignment with ethical behavior. One
participant put it this way:
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 41
…if you don’t believe the person that the person at the helm is authentic, I don’t
see that you can trust that what they’re saying is accurate, that direction that
they’re taking is the right direction. Um, you know authenticity I think really
equates to the strength of a leader, and so if that’s not there, I feel like leaders
really fall flat, and no one, they don’t have any followers, they don’t have
believers who really believe in the vision or their mission. (int. 5)
Survey and interview findings suggest that these study participants assess
authenticity in leadership in ways consistent with Walumbwa and Avolio’s model.
Leaders who are authentic behave in ways that are open or transparent, demonstrate
integrity and moral conduct, are self-aware and consistent with their personal values, and,
finally, they are balanced in processing information and honest. These behaviors are seen
by participants as key to the development of follower trust. The issue of trust has
implications for other aspects of this study.
Examining Credible Leadership
Research Question Two: What are the behaviors and traits demonstrated by
administrative leaders that result in their being considered credible by their staff?
It is proposed that credibility can be assessed by followers when examining three
sets of behaviors in leaders: trustworthiness, expertise, and dynamism (Pornpitakpan,
2004). In this study, survey participants were asked to rate their leaders utilizing a Likert-
type scale. The first aspect of credibility measured was knowledge. The results indicate
that participants consider their leaders to have a high level of knowledge and expertise
(Table 4.08)

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 42
Table 4.08
Knowledge and Expertise
Credibility N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
1. Knowledge 33 0 4 3.15 1.064
2. Expertise 33 1 4 3.00 .901
Valid N 33

The second aspect of credibility is enthusiasm, also known as “dynamism” by
Kouzes & Posner (2005). This aspect describes the level of engagement the leader has
with his/her staff and the area they are responsible for. This is a trait which is outwardly
expressive, visible, and emotive. Table 4.09 outlines the level of dynamism for this group
of leaders.
Table 4.09
Passion and Enthusiasm
Credibility: N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
1. Passion 32 1 4 3.50 .880
2. Enthusiasm 33 1 4 3.45 .833
Valid N 32

These results indicate a high level of perceived leadership enthusiasm and the low
standard deviation suggest that the assessments are tightly clustered at this high level.
The last aspect of credibility is trustworthiness. In this study, this aspect was
assessed through three questions probing the consistency of leader promises and their
follow-up actions, their keeping of commitments that are made to followers, and their
being leaders whom followers believe can be “trusted.” The mean scores for this aspect
of credibility were lower than dynamism or knowledge (Table 4.10). The SD shows
greater disparity of scores for this group. This may suggest that this is an area of focus for
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 43
leaders in this organization. It is also a finding that has some consistency with the
findings regarding research question one. Trust appears to be a critical aspect of the
survey group’s evaluation of their leader’s authenticity and also appears to be a factor in
the survey group’s evaluation of their leader’s credibility.
Table 4.10
Trust
Credibility N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
1. Keeps Word 33 0 4 3.00 1.199
2. Trusted 33 0 4 3.03 1.104
3. Is Consistent 32 0 4 2.84 1.247
Valid N 32

The questions utilized in this study were developed by the researcher and not
previously studied or validated. It is, therefore, prudent to assess the internal validity of
the survey questions. This was accomplished utilizing Pearson’s correlation test. The
results are illustrated in table 4.11. Results show significant correlation between the
questions, suggesting that there is an appropriate level of internal validity in the tool.
Table 4.11
Overall Credibility Results
Passion Knowledge Trustworthy
Passion
Pearson Correlation 1 .545
**
.561
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 66 66 66
Knowledge
Pearson Correlation .545
**
1 .664
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 66 66 66
Trustworthy
Pearson Correlation .561
**
.664
**
1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 66 66 99
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 44
Interview participants struggled to articulate what the phrase “credible leader”
meant to them. In fact, as one participant remarked “you really can’t so much create it or
buy it, it just happens” (int. 3). They struggled with the label, as if it were too broad a
descriptor, but, when pressed for clarification, described a number of traits they
considered essential. This type of leader is one who is “true to what they believe in” (int.
4). The participant actually described how to carefully examine the leader to determine if
s/he was sincere. If determine the leader is found to be sincere, then participants are apt to
listen carefully to them.
Another participant described a similar process of assessment of the leader’s
believability. This participant described the credible leader as someone you believe in
and trust (int 5). Another participant described this aspect of trust in leaders as relating to
honesty. As s/he put it “…I don’t think you could ever go wrong if you’re honest” (int. 6)
This participant framed leadership credibility as being based on “it really is, is honesty,
integrity, openness, you know I was told once that I’m too honest, and to me I don’t think
there is such a thing” (int. 6).
Another participant described a credible leader as someone who steps right in
when a crisis hits. “When the chips are down and the leader really steps in and is first on
the scene and first to volunteer … that’s when credibility happens” (int. 6). This
participant went on to describe how the leader’s credibility was enhanced by his/her
presence beyond what is expected. The participant described the leader who “signed up
for the minimum required and who stayed the entire time even though it wasn’t requested
or expected” (int 6). This aspect of credibility is described as a willingness to commit to
more than expected and going beyond expectations.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 45
Participants also described a related aspect of credibility when facing a crisis, and
that was courage. One participant described a leader who faced the loss of advertising
and public condemnation for running a controversial story about a corrupt businessman.
The leader faced the crisis with courage, ran the story, and, to the staff, he demonstrated
his credibility. The participant responded in the end “…we all felt really proud that we
were able to do that” (int 6). Another participant described this as ‘“risk tolerance,”
Survey and interview results indicate a variety of behaviors and traits that lend
themselves to follower belief in leadership credibility. Results suggest that leaders must
be knowledgeable. Experience in handling situations, especially tense or crisis-laden
encounters, comprises the first set of contributing factors. Next, leaders must demonstrate
a level of enthusiasm. This passion or commitment to what they are leading is critical in
follower support. In a tough situation, this enthusiasm or commitment to a cause can be
demonstrated through behavior that is viewed as courageous. The leader does not shy
away but steps right in. Finally, the credible leader is someone who is believable. That is,
s/he is trusted. The importance of the role of trust in the development of credibility is as
critical as it was in participant views of how leaders demonstrate authenticity. This theme
reemerges as the participant data is examined further.
Implications of Authenticity and Credibility
Research Question Three: What type of employee behavior and interpersonal conduct
occurs in departments with administrative leaders who are highly authentic and credible?
Although survey questions did not explicitly solicit answers regarding the
relationship between authenticity and credibility, an examination of the correlations
between the two sets of data provides an interesting comparison (Table 4.12).
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 46
Table 4.12
Correlation
Authenticity Credibility
Authenticity
Pearson Correlation 1 .507
**

Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 527 231
Credibility
Pearson Correlation .507
**
1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 231 231
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

These results suggest that there is a statistical correlation between follower
assessment of leadership authenticity and assessment of leadership credibility. In fact,
this relationship is illustrated by one interview participant who remarked, “I think
credibility is rooted in authenticity, or authenticity, in other words authenticity will lead
to credibility. Um, I think credibility is a byproduct of authenticity. You really can’t so
much create it or buy it, it just, it happens when a leader’s authentic” (int. 5). Even in the
interview, the participant described the intertwining of the two concepts from their
perspective.
Other interview participants also remarked about this interconnectedness of
authenticity and credibility. They share a variety of responses to leaders whom they
consider authentic and credible. First, this type of leader is more likely to be listened to.
One participant described this in the negative, remarking, “Well, I’m not going to really
listen to somebody I don’t think is authentic and credible” (int. 6). The participant also
described that a leader who was not authentic and credible would be ignored or “not
given the time of day.” Another participant remarked that an authentic and credible
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 47
leader would be listening to his/her staff. Consequently, the staff would “open up” with
this type of leader and share more.
Participants described that the authentic and credible leader creates an
environment of trust. One participant described the concept in the negative; “if you don’t
believe the person that the person at the helm is authentic, I don’t see that you can trust
that what they’re saying is accurate, that direction that they’re taking is the right
direction” (int 3). This type of leader also creates an environment of enthusiasm and
passion. One participant described that this type of leader sets the tone by stating,
“because if you’re passionate and you enjoy what you’re doing you’re going to produce”
(int 2). Another equated this type of passion as part of a leader’s personal mission. The
participants describe this type of leader as one who has alignment between self and
his/her behaviors as a leader. These elements of one’s person are expressed in behaviors
as leader:
And I feel like if that bleeds through and becomes your passion and drive for
being who you want to be in your job, it naturally makes you an authentic leader.
I don’t think it should be hard. I don’t think it should be difficult to be that (int. 1)
Another participant stated, “it’s part of your DNA. I think that’s what makes you an
authentic leader, and I don’t think you can cross that over.” This type of leader is also
described as someone who delegates authority but with appropriate accountability. This
was stated as follows:
And I tell my staff, ‘You know I give you permission to screw up, what I don’t
give you permission to do is nothing. You know, do something, if you don’t feel
right about it, don’t do it. If you feel confident that you’re making the right
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 48
decision, then go with it, and if it was the wrong decision we’ll talk about it.’ (int.
2)
Therefore, the authentic and credible leader is seen as one who sets expectations for staff.
There is a level of performance accountability. S/he is not a leader who only focuses on
fostering workplace bliss.
In addition to leadership expectations, this type of leader is seen as one who
fosters open communication in the work unit. These behaviors of the authentic and
credible leader were summed up by one participant in the following way:
..the ability to be really honest and as transparent as possible, even if you’re in a
high level position. Uh, the ability to really communicate with your staff, so to
talk through things with them, listen to what they’re saying, provide feedback,
and work together as a team to really come up with ideas. I think it’s also the
ability to, not micromanage, so to be able to trust your staff, to pass stuff on, and
know that you’ve trained them well enough or you’ve hired good enough people
that you can give projects to them and know that they’re going to take care of it.
(int. 1)
The sentiments express the combination of personal attributes of honesty, trust, and self-
awareness with the management behaviors of communication, feedback, teamwork, and
delegation.
Survey participants also described the type of environment that is created when a
leader demonstrated authenticity and credibility. These followers shared that they observe
employees “who are more cheerful and more engaged; volunteerism for organizational
projects and initiatives increase” (int. 4). Another participant shared similar thoughts
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 49
regarding employee engagement and initiative when the leader demonstrates authenticity
and credibility:
Employees are positive, team players, and are willing to go the extra mile for their
leaders and their team. Employees take pride in their work, are responsible and
feel personally accountable for the tasks on their plate. In general, these
employees tend to have a higher morale, display a strong work ethic, are
optimistic and are goal-oriented. (int. 6)
Another participant described employees in this type of environment as “engaged, 100%
supportive and willing to go the extra mile without thinking” (int. 2). These participants
describe a list of laudable and tangible workplace benefits for leadership authenticity and
credibility.
What is interesting is that the observed workplace benefits that are described
relate to worker productivity. That is, the described leadership behaviors appear to create
a positive work environment which is also highly productive. One participant even used a
reference to Dwight Eisenhower to illustrate this point:
I think of Dwight Eisenhower's statement that a true leader is one that gets people
to do something because THEY want to do it, not because they are asked or told.
Employees of authentic and credible leaders are happy and enjoy coming to work.
(Int 2)
This participant believes that this type of leader creates and environment where
employees are productive without direct control of the leader. The leader behavior creates
the workplace environment where employee initiative and productivity emerges.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 50
Implications of the Absence of Credibility and Authenticity
Research Question Four: What are the leadership behaviors that result in the loss of an
assessment of leadership authenticity or credibility?
All participants described their experiences with leaders as a bias of trust and
respect. That is, when they first met their leader, they gave him/her an appropriate level
of respect and were cautiously trusting of the person. However, through incidents in the
workplace, these relationships eroded. The stories were painful.
I’ve seen it recently. As a matter of fact, I saw it this week, and it hurts me to
know that this person’s doing the same thing to other people even to her leader,
and the leader can’t do anything about it. But very disrespectful and very um, it’s
just its horrible. It’s horrible when I saw it this week. I almost wanted to say
something, but it wasn’t my place... But it was embarrassing. It’s disrespect. It’s,
it’s very disrespectful, I respect you not just because of who you are, but because
of where you are, and it took you time to get to this spot, and I admire everything
about you, right. And somebody could sit here and put you down, and I can’t tell
them anything, you know what I mean? It’s not a good feeling, but it’s happening.
(int. 6)
Participants describe the behaviors of leaders who do not have credibility nor are
authentic as a combination of lack of communication, lack trust in staff, and lack of
personal accountability. These leaders do not listen to staff. Instead, their typical mode of
communication is in the form of a directive.
Rather than taking a balanced approach to processing information, these types of
leaders make decisions from a predetermined mindset. One participant described this
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 51
approach this way; “they have their ideas and they’re kind of set in their mind, and they
may be outwardly perceived to listen, but they’ll always come back to you know, their
idea and what they want to do it, and rarely I feel are they open to the way others see it”
(int. 3). Another participant echoed these comments and described how the leader should
“really communicate” with his/her staff, “listen to what they are saying” and provide the
staff with feedback, thereby working “together as a team to really come up with ideas”
(int. 1). When this is not the case, the leader is not viewed as authentic or credible. They
are indifferent to guidance or feedback from others. Another participant described his/her
leader as:
…very defensive about any kind of collaboration or feedback, and um it really
created a wedge on the team, um, was very destructive, and um, uh, this person
actually I think had a little bit of insight and at least in words asked for help,
asked for coaching, but wasn’t open to it, because when it when we tried to
embark on some coaching, it was received, um, not in the spirit that it was
offered. So, it really created a negative climate for the team. (int. 5)
It appears as if the attempts to be receptive to feedback, when not sincerely followed, are
more destructive to the team, than the leader who is indifferent to feedback from the
onset.
The second set of behaviors which result in the perception of lost credibility are
those relating to lack of personal accountability. That is, this type of leader does not take
personal responsibility for outcomes unless the results are positive. S/he may have good
intentions, but s/he is unable to deliver upon them and finds excuses in everyone else or
myriad issues in the organization. The participant describes this situation as “greed and
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 52
just arrogance about his role” (int. 1). Another described that, when failure occurs, s/he
blamed everyone else. (int. 3)
The last set of behaviors affecting authenticity and credibility relate to the leader’s
trust in staff and staff’s trust in the leader. It is a reciprocal relationship. One participant
described that, when leaders do not even give their staff a chance to perform, it is
detrimental to the organization and detrimental to staff morale. When leaders do not show
trust in staff, staff stop trying and lose their motivation (int. 3). Another described that, in
this situation, “people felt let down, and they felt they weren’t getting anywhere” (int. 1).
One participant summarized the resulting environment created by the untrusting leader in
the following way:
Employees are often negative, unmotivated and/or bitter about their jobs,
especially in cases when leaders are unrecognizing of hard work. These
employees tend to care little about their jobs and are especially adverse to doing
any more than the bare minimum to ‘get by.’ Often times, I think these employees
struggle with doing good work because they question whether their good work
has any meaning at all. (int. 6)
The type of unproductive environment this leadership behavior created has potential for
far reaching organizational impact.
Participants summarize a variety of other organizational impacts when leaders are
not credible or authentic. As one participant put it, “When leaders are not authentic or
credible, employees are unhappy and stressed. They are frustrated with the situation and
are usually not appreciated for their contributions. They, therefore, usually do not stay
too long in their jobs” (int. 2). Another described the environment as full of “confusion,
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 53
bad attitudes, stressed out employees, anger, tears, gossipers, etc., not really able to
accomplish much.” (int. 3) It is a department that is “nothing short of chaotic” (int.1).
The role of authenticity and credibility seems to be critically important to the creation of
a productive work environment as perceived by this sample of research participants.
Discussion
According to Walumbwa, Avolio et al. (2008), the behaviors characteristic of an
authentic leader are transparency in interpersonal conduct, moral and ethical framework
for decision making, balanced processing of information, and self-awareness of personal
attributes and effectiveness. Participating managers in this studied healthcare
organization reflect consistency in their perception of leadership authenticity with
Walumbwa’ s findings. The findings in this organization were also consistent with the
findings of Laschinger (2012) and Wong (2010) in their studied organizations.
When leadership is perceived as demonstrating significant levels of authentic
leadership behavior, the perceived impact by participants is a work environment which is
productive and engaging. These are findings that are consistent with Walumbwa and
Schaubroek’s (2009) research in a financial services organization. Conversely, when
leaders do not behave in an authentic manner, the perceived result in this study is a
tremendously negative work environment with angry and bitter staff.
Study participants struggled to see the clear distinction between the behaviors
classified as “authentic” and those that result in a leader’s being considered “credible.”
That is, participants described these overarching labels as almost interchangeable.
Leaders who were authentic were credible and leaders who were credible were
considered authentic. However, although the summary labels led to participant confusion,
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 54
the underlying behaviors were clear. Participants shared the importance of leadership
enthusiasm, expertise, and trustworthiness as essential to the perception of leadership
credibility. These findings are consistent with the findings of Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz
(1969) on source credibility. They also align with Kouzes and Posner’s (2011) findings of
leadership credibility. In particular, the findings suggest that the trustworthiness of
leaders is of critical importance. This may also be influenced by the current
organizational context.
The organization examined in this study experienced tremendous change at the
time of this study. Ownership of the medical center changed from a for-profit parent
company to a not-for-profit university merely three years prior to this research. This
change in ownership may have a mitigating impact on the results of this study. However,
notwithstanding these organizational factors, participants still have strong perceptions
about the impact of leadership behaviors on their credibility and authenticity.
It is clear from the results that participants place high value on the importance of
trust in the behavior of leaders. An organizational employee engagement survey
conducted in this organization in the spring of 2012 found that only 64.6% of the
workforce believed their manager can be trusted. In addition, only 62% of employees
believed their managers communicate effectively, and 63.3% perceived leaders recognize
employees for ideas or suggestions (Press-Ganey, 2012). These recent employee survey
responses suggest that, overall, the organization struggled with the effectiveness of its
leadership.
Although the perceived level of authentic leadership behaviors is greater than
both Laschinger (2012) and Wong (2010) found in their respective healthcare
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 55
organizations, this organization was certainly challenged at the time of this study. What is
more, the leadership trait found least common to leaders in this organization was “self-
awareness.” This may imply that, although there are significant leadership issues to
address, leaders may not perceive their personal role in addressing them.
In summary, the participants in this study perceived the factors leading to
leadership authenticity in a manner consistent with Walumbwa et al. (2008) and as being
the result of leadership transparency, moral reasoning, balanced processing of
information, and self-awareness. Participants also perceive leadership credibility to be a
product of enthusiasm, expertise, and trustworthiness. In particular, trustworthiness was
found to be of key importance in this organization. Where leaders demonstrate these
behaviors and traits, participants view the work environment to be highly engaging and
productive. The absence of these types of leaders results in an angry, disengaged, and
non-productive work setting.
Chapter five explores the implications of these findings. If leadership authenticity
and credibility are seen as critical to positive workforce behavior, then this provides
implications for the development of future healthcare leaders. However, chapter five also
examines the limitations of this research. The findings in this study organization may not
be transferrable to myriad organizations and industries. This points to the importance of
additional future research. The subject of leadership continuously evolves and our
understanding of human dynamics in social settings continuously grows.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 56
Chapter 5: Conclusions
Summary
Warrren Bennis (2009) describes leadership as “alchemy,” an apt metaphor for
the mortar and pestle blending of attributes, skills, and values of an individual with
responsibility and authority struggling through the day. The question for Bennis and
decades of leadership scholars is what the right blend of ingredients for effectiveness is.
This study proposed that leaders cannot be effective unless they have a high level of
credibility in the view of their followers. Credibility is a product; it is a conclusive
assessment by followers. Researchers Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz (1969) and Kouzes and
Posner (2011) see that the essential ingredients in the development of credibility are
enthusiasm, expertise and trustworthiness.
This study attempted to validate the essential elements in the development of
leadership credibility. In addition, this study examined the essential ingredients to
leadership authenticity to determine what is necessary for a leader to be considered
authentic. When authenticity in leadership is demonstrated, studies find followers show
positive interpersonal behaviors towards team members. Likewise, when leaders exhibit
behaviors that are inauthentic, research finds followers demonstrate negative
interpersonal behavior towards team members (Walumbwa, 2009). This study attempted
to examine the influence of leadership authenticity and credibility in an academic medical
center.
The intent is to explore how authentic leadership behaviors inform the
improvement of team effectiveness. The purpose of the study was to examine the
relationship between authentic leadership behaviors and the development and
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 57
maintenance of credibility. Furthermore, this study explored how the actions of authentic
leaders with credibility influence the work environment. There is little research evidence
that the attributes of leadership authenticity are antecedents to leadership credibility. This
study attempted to shed some light on this relationship.
This study was conducted in an urban academic medical center. Healthcare
experienced tremendous change in the decade prior to this study with advances in
science, cost pressure, and government initiated healthcare reform. The site of this study
endured these market changes and their own changes in organizational ownership. The
medical center was a for-profit hospital within a national chain of acute care facilities and
became one of a few hospitals owned and managed by a not-for-profit urban research
university. This organizational context may provide influence on the results, but it also
highlights the importance of having effective leadership.
Study Conclusions
First, this study found that a team of managers in this academic medical center
assess authenticity in leadership in ways consistent with Walumbwa and Avolio’s model.
The study found leaders who are authentic behave in ways that are open or transparent,
demonstrate integrity and moral conduct, are self-aware and consistent with their
personal values, and, finally, ensure that they have a balance of ideas and information
available to them when they make decisions. When participants see these behaviors
exhibited, it is key to the development of follower trust. The importance of follower trust
was an issue that ran throughout this study.
Second, the study found that there were a certain set of behaviors and traits that
led to the development of follower belief in leader’s credibility. The findings are
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 58
consistent with Kouzes and Posner’s (2011) work on credibility. Results found that a
leader must be knowledgeable. Expertise in handling operations or difficult situations,
contributes to follower assessment of a leader’s knowledge. Next, leaders must
demonstrate a high level of enthusiasm. This passion or commitment to what they are
leading is critical in follower support. It is in tough situations where this enthusiasm to a
cause can be seen in behavior that is perceived to be courageous. Finally, the credible
leader is someone who is believable, meaning that s/he is trusted. The importance of the
role of trust in the development of credibility is as critical as it was in participant views of
how leaders demonstrate authenticity.
Third, the study found that, when a leader is considered authentic and credible,
followers are more engaged and demonstrate initiative. Followers in this type of setting
are more apt to volunteer to take on departmental projects or suggest improvements. This
environment of trust creates more positive employee voice behavior. These findings are
consistent with Walumbwa and Schaubroek’s (2009) research. This environment is
described as engaging, productive, and full of employee initiative and enthusiasm. These
are very tangible workplace behaviors with the potential for significant productivity gains
by fostering this type of environment. Demonstrating leadership authenticity and
credibility is more than just creating a happy workplace. There are significant
contributions to the success of a team.
In contrast, participants found that, when leaders are not transparent, are biased in
their decision making, act unethically, or are unwilling to accept any self-criticism, they
are not perceived as authentic leaders. Likewise, when leaders are not enthusiastic,
knowledgeable or trustworthy, followers do not consider them credible leaders. When
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 59
leaders are neither credible nor authentic, employees are miserable. These findings
reinforce that, in these environments, employees express feeling of stress, sadness,
frustration and under-appreciation. This frustration may manifest itself in poor attitudes,
poor customer service, lower productivity and potentially greater intra-team conflict. For
those employees who are compelled to remain in the work setting, this lack of
engagement may ultimately fall into cynicism. Findings are consistent with Kouzes and
Posner’s (2005) belief that the basis of organizational cynicism is leadership behavior.
For those who are not compelled to remain in the organization, their answer typically is
to leave the organization or transfer away from the leader’s scope of authority. In short,
the role of authenticity and credibility seems to be critically important to the creation of a
productive work environment as perceived by this sample of research participants.
Implications
In recent years, the focus of workplace productivity improvements has been on
utilizing quality techniques, time and motion studies, and workplace redesign. These
“lean” techniques certainly have their place in the workplace, but they will not account
for all the gains in worker productivity (Cusumano, 1994). The role of an effective leader
is critical to workplace productivity. This study further demonstrates the important role
that leaders play in creating an environment of trust and productivity. Given the
importance that credibility and authenticity have in creating this positive workplace
environment, this suggests that organizations should examine the effectiveness of their
leaders along these two spectrums. If their leaders are neither authentic nor credible, then
the organization should initiate efforts to coach and develop their leaders in cultivating or
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 60
strengthening these skills. The investment of time and cost will certainly provide
dividends in the return of worker productivity.
Limitations
This study has a variety of limitations. The study participants were all members of
management in an academic medical center. Given that they were members of
management, the results may have differed if data had been gathered from rank and file
employees. The managers may have a more comprehensive understanding of the
dynamics of leadership and, thereby, skew the results towards common views of
leadership that they hold.
Second, the study was conducted in a single urban academic medical center.
Findings may be specific to this particular industry. Although limited studies were found
to have similar results in other healthcare settings (Laschinger, 2012; Wong, 2010), the
results may not be transferable to leaders in other industries. This study did not test for
the impact of being in an urban setting. It is possible that the workforce or organizational
dynamics may be influenced by the metropolitan setting.
Third, since a single organization was examined, the results may be influenced by
the particular issues the study organization is experiencing. Study participants shared
their stories of the tremendous changes the organization experienced. These changes may
have influenced the results and may not be reflective of other organizations.
Fourth, the majority of study participants are female. That is, the female
population within both the survey participants and the interview participants exceed 85%.
Gender may be a contributing factor in the perception of leadership effectiveness. Finally,
over 90% of study participants had at least a bachelor’s degree, and many of those had a
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 61
master’s degree. This high level of education is not characteristic of the medical center’s
workforce nor of the working population in the United States. The educational level of
this study population may limit the transferability of study conclusions to a wider group
of organizations.
Future Research
Although the study of leadership has continued through the millennia, the theories
of authentic leadership from Gardner, Avolio and Walumbwa,(2005) are less than a
decade old. Their Authentic Leadership Questionnaire was only validated four years prior
to this study. There are more opportunities to explore the role of authentic leadership in
healthcare. To date, only limited studies have been conducted with nursing leadership
(Laschinger, 2012; Wong, 2010). A wider span of health care organizations should be
examined; organizations in a variety of demographic and cultural settings.
Theories regarding leadership credibility have even more opportunity for future
research. To date, no validated tools have been developed to measure the credibility of
leaders. Utilizing the research theories of Berlo, Lemert, and Mertz (1969) and Kouzes
and Posner (2011), future research can validate whether the essential ingredients in the
development of credibility are enthusiasm, expertise and trustworthiness. Once validated
tools have been developed, researchers could expand the examination of the relationship
between leadership credibility and authenticity.
Final Thoughts
As organizations struggle through change, they lean on internal organizational
leaders to guide the way. When those efforts falter, the effectiveness of the leader may
become a typical factor to suspect. This study continues the dialogue of how leadership
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 62
effectiveness is understood and of the critical skills leaders need to demonstrate to their
teams every day. Calling out the importance of having credible or authentic leaders is not
enough. Organizations need leaders who seek a balance of information from all sides
before making decisions. They need leaders who are transparent and openly share their
passions, struggles, doubts, and convictions with their staff ,. They need leaders who are
of high moral and ethical character. They need leaders who are honest with themselves
about their strengths and weaknesses leaders. They need leaders who are knowledgeable
and experienced. They need leaders with passion and excitement. Finally, they need
leader who can be trusted and foster trust in the organization. When they have leaders
with all these attributes, the workforce is engaged and productive. In short, organizations
need leaders who are authentic and credible.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 63
References
Anfara, V.A., Brown, K.M, & Mangione, T.L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage:
Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 28-38.
Avolio, B.J. & Bass, B.M. (1999). Re-examining the component of transformational and
transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441-462.
Avolio, B.J. & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the
root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Barker, R.A. (2001). The nature of leadership. Human Relations, 54, 4, 469-494.
Bass, B.M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership. New York, NY: The
Free Press.
Bennis, W. & Biederman, P.W. (2009). The Essential Bennis. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Berlo, D.K., Lemert, J.B. & Mertz, R.J. (1969). Dimensions for evaluating the
acceptability of message sources. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(4), 563-576.
Bernard, L.L. (1926). An introduction to social psychology. New York: Holt.
Brown, M.E., Trevino, L.K. & Harrison, D.A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social
learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 117-134.
Brown, M.E. & Trevino, L.K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions.
The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616.
Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 64
Chervenak, F.A. & McCullough, L.B. (2004). An ethical framework for identifying,
preventing, and managing conflicts confronting leaders of academic medical
centers. Academic Medicine, 79(11), 1056-1061.
Creswell, J.W., Hanson, W.E., Clark, V.L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative research
designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236-
264.
Cusumano, M.A. (1994). The limits of ‘lean’. Sloan Management Review, 35. 27-32.
Dean, J.W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of
Management Review. 23(2), 341-352.
Douglas, C., Ferris, G.R. & Perrewe, P.L. (2005). Leader political skill and authentic
leadership. Authentic leadership theory and practice: origins, effects and
development monographs in leadership and management. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Elliot, T., Carlsmith, J.A. & Merrill, J. (1963). Communicator credibility and
communication discrepancy as determinants of opinion change. The Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(1), 31-36.
Fiske, S.T & Taylor, S.E. (1991). Social Cognition. 2
nd
ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
Gabris, G.T., Golembiewski, R.T. & Ihrke, D.M. (2000). Leadership credibility, board
relations and administrative innovation at the local government level. Journal of
Public Administration Research and Theory. 1, 89-108.
Gardner, W.L., Avolio, B.J., & Walumbwa, F.O., eds. (2005). Authentic leadership
theory and practice: origins, effects and development monographs in leadership
and management. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 65
Giffin, K. (1967). The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of
interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin. 68(2),
104-120.
Halpin, A.W. (1954). The leadership behavior and combat performance of airplane
commanders. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 49(1), 19-22.
Halverson, S.K., Holladay, C.L., Kazama, S.M. & Quinones, M.A. (2004). Self sacrificial
behavior in crisis situations: The competing roles of behavioral and situational
factors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 263-275.
Hemphill, J.K. & Coons, A.E. (1957). Development of the leader behavior description
questionnaire. In R. M.Stogdill & A.E. Coons (Eds.) Leader behavior: Its
description and measurement. Columbus OH: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio
State University.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K.H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training &
Development Journal, 23(5), 26-34.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K.H. (1996). Revisiting the life cycle theory of leadership.
Training & Development Journal, 50(1), 42-47.
Higgs, M. (2002). How can we make sense of leadership in the 21
st
century? Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, 24(5), 273-284.
Hollander, E.P. & Julian, J.W. (1969). Contemporary trends in the analysis of leadership
processes. Psychological Bulletin, 71(5), 387-397.
Horner, M. (1997). Leadership theory: past, present and future. Team performance
management, 3(4), 270-287.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 66
Hovland, C.I & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication
effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 635-650.
Hughes, L.W. (2005). Developing transparent relationships through humor in the
authentic leader-follower relationship. Authentic leadership theory and practice:
origins, effects and development monographs in leadership and management.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Ilies, R., Morgeson, F.P., & Nahrgang, J.D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic
well being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly,
16(3), 373-394.
Ivankova, N.V., Creswell, J.W. & Stick, S.L. (2006). Using mixed methods sequential
explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18, 1, 3-20.
Kernis, M.H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological
Inquiry. 14(1), 1-26.
Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z. (2002). The Leadership Challenge. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey Bass.
Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z. (2005). Leading in cynical times. Journal of Management
Inquiry, 14(4), 357-364.
Kouzes, J.M. & Posner, B.Z. (2011). Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 67
Laschinger, H.K.S., Wong, C.A., & Grau, A.L. (2012). Authentic leadership,
empowerment and burnout: a comparison in new graduates and experienced
nurses. Journal of Nursing Management. Accepted for publication December,
2011, 1-12.
Latta, G.F. & Myers, N.F. (2005). The impact of unexpected leadership changes and
budget crisis on change initiatives at a land-grant university. Advances in
Developing Human Resources, 7(3), 351-367.
Leavy, B. (2003) Understanding and triad of great leadership - context, conviction and
credibility. Strategy & Leadership, 31(1), 56.
Luthans, F. & Stajkovic, A.D. (1998). Self-efficacy and work related performance: A
meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240-261.
Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695-706.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C.M., Avolio, B.J. (2007). Psychological capital. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Lyman, D. (1856). Moral sayings of Publius Syrus a Roman slave. Boston, MA: Barnard
& Co.
Madera, J. M. & Smith, D.B. (2009). The effects of leader negative emotions on
evaluations of leadership in a crisis situation: The role of anger and sadness.
Leadership Quarterly, 20(2). 103.
May, D.R., Avolio, B.J., Chan, A.Y.L., & Hodges, T.D. (2003). Developing the moral
component of authentic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 32(3), 247-260.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 68
MacKendrick, P.L. & Howe, H.I. (1952) Classics in Translation, Volume 1: Greek
Literature. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
McCall, M.W., Lombardo, M.M., & Morrison, A.M. (1988). Lessons of experience: how
successful executives develop on the job. New York: Free Press.
McCall, M.W. & Lombardo, M.M. (1990). Off the track: Why and how successful
executives get derailed. Bottomline, 7(9), 24-30.
McCall, M.W. & Hollenbeck, G.P. (2002). Global fatalities: When international
executive derail. Ivey Business Journal, May/June, 74-78.
Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.:Prentice-Hall.
Mitchell, T.R. (1970). The construct validity of three dimensions of leadership research.
The Journal of Social Psychology, 80, 89-94.
O’Keefe, D. (1990). Persuasion: Theory and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
O’Keefe, D. (2008). Elaboration likelihood model. In The International Encyclopedia of
Communication. Donsbach, W. ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Pirsig, R.M. (1991). Lila: An inquiry into morals. New York: Bantam.
Pololi, L., Conrad, P., Knight, S., & Carr, P. (2009). A study of the relational aspects of
the culture of academic medicine. Academic Medicine. 84(1), 106-114.
Pololi, L., Kern, D.E., Carr, P., Conrad, P., & Knight, S. (2009). The culture of academic
medicine: Faculty perceptions of the lack of alignment between individual and
institutional values. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 24(12), 1289-1295.
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The persuasiveness of source credibility: A critical review of
five decades’ evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(2), 243-281.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 69
Posner, B.Z. & Kouzes, J.M. (1988). Relating leadership and credibility. Psychological
Reports, 63, 527-530.
Randall, L.M. & Coakley, L.A. (2007). Applying adaptive leadership to successful
change initiatives in academia. Leadership and Organization, 28(4), 325-335.
Rizzuto, T.E. & Maloney, L.K. (2008) Organizing chaos: Crisis management in the wake
of Hurricane Katrina. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39(1), 77
– 85.
Simons, H.W. Berkowitz, N.N. & Moyer, R.J. (1970). Similarity, credibility, and attitude
change: A review and a theory. Psychological Bulletin, 73(1), 1-16.
Sinek, S. (2009) Start with Why: How Great Leader Inspire Everyone to Take Action.
Portfolio: New York, N.Y.
Skinner, B.F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Smits, S.J. & Ezzat, N. (2003). Thinking the unthinkable: Leadership’s role in creating
behavioral readiness for crisis management. Competitiveness Review, 13(1), 1-23.
Sobel, J. (1985). A theory of credibility. Review of Economic Studies, 52(4), 557-573.
Souba, W.W. (2002). Academic medicine and the search for meaning and purpose.
Academic Medicine, 77(2), 139-144.
Stajkovic, A.D. & Luthans, F. (1998). Social cognitive theory and self efficacy: Going
beyond traditional motivational and behavioral approaches. Organizational
Dynamics, 26, 62-74.
Van Dyne, L. & LePine, J.A. (1998). Helping and voice extra role behavior: Evidence of
construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 108-119.
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 70
Varella, P., Javidan, M. & Waldman, D. (2005). The differential effects of socialized and
personalized leadership on group social capital. Authentic Leadership Theory and
Practice: Origins, Effects and Development Monographs in Leadership and
Management. 107-137
Waldman, D.A., Ramirez, G.G., House, R.J. & Puranam, P. (2001) Does leadership
matter? CEO leadership attributes and profitability under conditions of perceived
environmental uncertainty. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 134.
Walumbwa, F.O., Avolio, B.J., Gardner, W.L., Wernsing, T.S., Peterson, S.J. (2008).
Authentic leadership: development and validation of a theory-based measure.
Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.
Walumbwa, F.O., Avolio, B.J., Zhu, W. (2008). How transformational leadership weaves
its influence on individual job performance: the role of identification and efficacy
beliefs. Personnel Psychology, 61(4), 793-825.
Walumbwa, F.O. & Schaubroek, J. (2009). Leader personality traits and employee voice
behavior: Mediating roles of ethical leadership and work group psychological
safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1275-1286.
Watson, T. (2007) Reputation and ethical behavior in a crisis: predicting survival.
Journal of Communication Management, 1(4), 371.
Wilson, R.K. & Rhodes, C.M. (1997). Leadership and credibility in n-person
coordination games. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41(6), 767-791.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 71
Wong, C.A., Laschinger, H.K.S., & Cummings, G.G. (2010). Authentic leadership and
nurses’ voice behavior and perceptions of care quality. Journal of Nursing
Management, 18, 889-900.
Zaffron, S. & Logan, D. (2009) The Three Laws of Performance: Rewriting the Future of
Your Organization and Your Life. Jossey Bass: San Francisco.

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 72
Appendix A
Invitation Letter

Matthew McElrath
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California

June 27, 2012

Dear colleague,
My name is Matthew McElrath, and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of
Education at University of Southern California. I am conducting a research study as part
of my dissertation, focusing on how leaders build, maintain or lose credibility and how
this relates to their being considered ‘authentic leaders’. I would like to invite you to
participate in the study.
If you agree, you are invited to participate in taking an on-line survey. The survey is
anticipated to take no more than 30 minutes to complete.
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FJ569TQ
Participants can also volunteer to participate in a 1 on 1 interview. These interviews are
anticipated to last approximately 45 minutes and may be audio-taped.
Participation in this study is voluntary. Your identity as a participant will remain
confidential at all times during and after the study.
If you have questions or would like to participate, please contact me.
Thank you for your consideration,

Matthew McElrath
Matthew.mcelrath@health.usc.edu
323-823-5526
University of Southern California
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 73
Appendix B
Survey
Leadership Credibility and Authenticity
On-line survey questions delivered to participants via Survey Monkey©
1. What is your gender?
Male Female

2. Which category below includes your age?
21-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or older

3. What is the highest level of school you have completed or the highest degree you
have received?
Less than high school High school degree or equivalent
Some college but no degree Associate degree
Bachelor degree Graduate degree
4. Have you completed the Trojan Leadership Bootcamp?
Yes No

Questions 5 through 20 are from the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ) ©
2007 by Bruce J. Avolio, William L. Gardner & Fred O. Walumbwa. Permission was
obtained to utilize the tool but restrictions only permit a sample of questions may be
reproduced in this report.
All questions used the following Likert-type scale:
Not at all Once in a while Sometimes Fairly often Frequently

5. My leader says exactly what he or she means
INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 74
8. My leader tells you the hard truth
11. My leader makes decisions based on his or her core values
17. My leader seeks feedback to improve interactions with others
Questions 21 through 27 were developed by the author for this study.
All questions used the following Likert-type scale:
Not at all Once in a while Sometimes Fairly often Frequently
21. My leader is passionate about the issues that are important to him or her
22. My leader is knowledgeable of the areas he or she leads
23. My leader’s actions are consistent with their words
24. My leader is enthusiastic about the things he or she are committed to
25. My leader is considered an expert in the areas she or he leads
26. My leader keeps his or her promises
27. My leader is someone you can trust.

28. Please share any comments regarding this survey topic

29. If you are interested in participating in a one-on-one interview, please email
contact information to: matthew.mcelrath@health.usc.edu

INFLUENCE OF AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP ATTRIBUTES 75
Appendix C
Interview Protocol
Leadership Credibility and Authenticity
One on one Interview Questions:
1. Please explain what behaviors and traits result in leadership credibility.
2. Talk about a leader about whom you are likely to say “If it is good enough for
them, it is good enough for me”.
3. Describe a time when a leader’s actions were consistent with their words.
4. Describe a time when a leader made a difficult decision based on high standards
of ethical conduct?
5. Describe a time when a leader sought feedback and listened carefully to improve
their interactions or reach a better decision?
6. Talk about a leader about whom you would likely say “If they say something is so
or say it’s good, I tend to doubt the statement”.
7. Describe a time when a leader did not keep their promises or commitment?
8. Describe a time when a leader initially did not keep a promise but later in time
kept promises or sought ways to reinstate their credibility?
9. Describe a time when a leader was indifferent to the guidance, ideas or feedback
from others?
10. Please explain what behaviors and traits you believe result in authentic
leadership.
11. Do you think there is a relationship between the authenticity of a leader and their
credibility? Explain
12. What type of employee behaviors have you observed in departments with
administrative leaders who are highly authentic and credible?
13. What employee behaviors have you seen when the leader is not authentic or
credible?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study explored the essential elements in the development of leadership credibility. In addition, it examined the behavioral aspects of leadership authenticity to determine what is necessary for a leader to be considered authentic. When authenticity in leadership is demonstrated, this study found followers show positive interpersonal behaviors towards team members. Likewise, when leaders exhibit behaviors that are inauthentic, followers demonstrate negative interpersonal behavior towards team members. This study confirmed the influence of leadership authenticity and credibility in workplace productivity in an academic medical center. There is little research evidence that the attributes of leadership authenticity are antecedents to leadership credibility. This study shed some light on this relationship. ❧ Thirty three mid-level managers participated in the study. Data was gathered utilizing the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire ©, a newly designed survey of credibility and one on one interviews. This study was conducted in an urban academic medical center. This organizational context may provide influence on the results, but it also highlights the importance of effective leadership.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Strategies used by superintendents in developing leadership teams

PDF

Senior-level student affairs' administrators' self-reported leadership practices, behaviors, and strategies

PDF

The secondary school principal's role as instructional leader in teacher professional development

PDF

The perceived importance coaches have on student-athletes' academic performance

PDF

Effective leadership practices of catholic high school principals that support academic success

PDF

Effective leadership practices used by middle school principals in the implementation of instructional change

PDF

Leadership strategies, skills, and professional approaches utilized by effective senior-level student affairs administrators at urban universities

PDF

Superintendents increase student achievement by selecting effective principals

PDF

Effective strategies that urban superintendents use that improve the academic achievement for African-American males

PDF

Effective strategies urban superintendents utilize that improve the academic achievement for African American males

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Leadership traits and practices supporting position longevity for urban school superintendents: a case study

PDF

An examination of successful leadership behaviors exhibited by middle school principals in stimulating and sustaining African-American students' achievement on the California Standards Test in ma...

PDF

The characteristics of high schools that have successfully implemented Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

PDF

An examination of the leadership practices of Catholic elementary school principals

PDF

Strategies used by superintendents in developing leadership teams

PDF

The successful implementation of STEM initiatives in lower income schools

PDF

Latinas in the superintendency: the challenges experienced before and after obtaining the superintendency and strategies used for success

PDF

Should it say or should it go: how successful superintendents build, shift, and transform district culture in an age of increasing accountability

PDF

An examination of autonomy and leadership in Los Angeles Unified School District pilot schools

Asset Metadata

Creator McElrath, Matthew F. (author)

Core Title The influence of authentic leadership attributes on credibility: how administrative leaders in an academic medical center build, maintain or lose credibilty

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 01/09/2013

Defense Date 12/11/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag authenticity,Credibility,healthcare,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor García, Pedro Enrique (committee chair), Castruita, Rudy Max (committee member), Morrison, Michael (committee member)

Creator Email matthew.mcelrath@health.usc.edu,mcelrathmatthew@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-125953

Unique identifier UC11292252

Identifier usctheses-c3-125953 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-McElrathMa-1389.pdf

Dmrecord 125953

Document Type Dissertation

Rights McElrath, Matthew F.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA