University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Impostor phenomenon determinants in research and development organizations

(USC Thesis Other)

Impostor phenomenon determinants in research and development organizations

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Impostor Phenomenon Determinants in Research and Development Organizations
by
Kenneth Michael Schow

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2021

© Copyright by Kenneth Michael Schow 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Kenneth Michael Schow certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Anthony Maddox
Michael Deer
Patricia Tobey, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
Abstract
This study applies Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory (SCT) and its three determinants of
personal traits, behavior, and the environment to examine the influence of the impostor
phenomenon for research and development organization (RDO) employees. The study's purpose
was to determine the extent that SCT determinants influence technology employee's impostor
phenomenon experience, perceived self-efficacy and to reveal interventions for RDOs to reduce
the impostor phenomenon in the workplace. This study's participants included 12 employees of
RDOs who had less than one year of tenure in their positions and were either engineers,
engineering leaders, or technical program managers. The data analysis phase took the
phenomenological approach to understand the participant's impostor experience and compared
the common themes from 12 individual qualitative interviews. The study's findings indicated that
all three SCT determinants influenced RDO employees' impostor phenomenon experience and
perceived self-efficacy. Based on the interview results, this study concludes with organizational
recommendations drawn from the research literature to mitigate the impostor phenomenon in
RDOs.
Keywords: imposter phenomenon, imposter syndrome, social cognitive theory, research
and development organizations

v
Dedication
To my extraordinary wife who gave me all of the love, support, and encouragement to pursue my
dreams.

vi
Acknowledgements
I want to thank everyone who played a role in supporting me in this academic
accomplishment. Thank you to my parents and family for helping me through the journey and
allowing me to stay focused. I also want to acknowledge and extend my sincere gratitude to my
dissertation committee for their feedback and support. I would like to specifically thank Dr.
Michael Deer for his years of mentorship, advice, and feedback throughout the journey.
Finally, I'd like to acknowledge the support of my fellow students. The camaraderie we
shared helped get through the long nights of writing and editing. Thank you all for your
unwavering support and friendship through the process.

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 3
Impostor Phenomenon and Research and Development Organizations ............................. 5
Context of the Field of Practice .......................................................................................... 6
Technology Employees ....................................................................................................... 7
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 9
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 10
Importance of the Study .................................................................................................... 11
Theoretical Framework and Methodology........................................................................ 12
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 12
Organization of the Dissertation ....................................................................................... 13
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 15
The Impostor Cycle........................................................................................................... 16
Impostor Phenomenon Personal Typologies .................................................................... 17
Impostor Personality Traits ............................................................................................... 20
Impostor Demographics .................................................................................................... 24
Etiologies of the Impostor Phenomenon ........................................................................... 27

viii
Family Characteristics of Impostors ................................................................................. 28
Impostor Family Interactions ............................................................................................ 30
Impostor Phenomenon and Adolescence .......................................................................... 33
Transition into the Technology Workforce....................................................................... 35
Impostor Phenomenon in Research and Development Organizational Settings .............. 36
Mental Health Implications of the Impostor Phenomenon ............................................... 40
Comorbid Mental Disorders ............................................................................................. 42
Barriers to Mediating the Impostor Phenomenon ............................................................. 43
Coping with the Impostor Phenomenon ........................................................................... 46
Coping Strategies .............................................................................................................. 47
Strategies for Mitigating the Impostor Phenomenon ........................................................ 49
Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................................... 54
Social Cognitive Theory Determinants ............................................................................. 55
Reciprocal Determinism ................................................................................................... 57
Self-Efficacy ..................................................................................................................... 58
Sources of Self-Efficacy ................................................................................................... 61
Strategies for Increasing Self-Efficacy ............................................................................. 68
Motivation ......................................................................................................................... 70
Contributing Motivational Theories ................................................................................. 71
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 75
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 77
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 78
Methodological Framework .............................................................................................. 78

ix
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 79
Participant Criteria ............................................................................................................ 80
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 81
Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 82
Interview Procedures ........................................................................................................ 83
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 84
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 87
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 88
Bias, Positionality, and Assumptions................................................................................ 91
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 92
Limitations and Delimitations........................................................................................... 93
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 95
Interview Methodology ..................................................................................................... 95
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 96
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 97
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 97
Participant Demographics ................................................................................................. 98
Frequency of the Impostor Phenomenon Symptoms ...................................................... 100
Predictors of the Impostor Phenomenon ......................................................................... 103
Research Question One Results ...................................................................................... 105
Research Question Two Results ..................................................................................... 125
Other Notable Findings ................................................................................................... 130
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 132

x
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Evaluation Plan ............................................................... 133
Research Question Three Results ................................................................................... 133
Implementation and Evaluation Plan .............................................................................. 148
Implementation and Evaluation Plan Summary ............................................................. 166
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................. 166
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 167
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 169
References ................................................................................................................................... 170
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix ........................................................... 191
Appendix B: Interview Protocol Introduction ............................................................................ 192
Appendix C: Interview Protocol Questions ................................................................................ 194
Appendix D: Study Eligibility Questions ................................................................................... 196

xi
List of Tables

Table 1: Summary of Participant Job Titles 98
Table 2: Summary of Participant Demographics 100
Table 3: Frequency of Impostor Phenomenon Symptoms 102
Table 4: Predictors of the Impostor Phenomenon 105
Table 5: Self-Attributions of Career Success 109
Table 6: Participant Coping Behaviors 113
Table 7: Perceived Effect on Productivity 115
Table 8: Perceived Effect on Motivation 117
Table 9: Recommendations for Environmental Interventions 124
Table 10: Perceived Ability to Meet Supervisor Expectations 127
Table 11: Perceived Job Performance Compared to Peers 129
Table 12: First to Graduate College in Their Family 130
Table 13: Kirkpatrick New World Model Levels 150
Table 14: External and Internal Organizational Outcomes 151
Table 15: Critical Behavior for Evaluation 153
Table 16: Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 155
Table 17: Components of Learning Program 161
Table 18: Components to Measure Reactions 163
Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix 191

xii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Reciprocal Determinism 58
Figure 2: Conceptual Framework 77

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Impostor phenomenon (IP) is defined as the psychological experience of feeling like an
intellectual fraud (Clance & Imes, 1978). People who experience IP tend to attribute their
academic or career achievements to external factors like luck and feel like they do not deserve
their achievements (Clance & Imes, 1978; Tao & Gloria, 2019). Researchers Clance and Imes
(1978) first studied and described IP in high-performing undergraduate, graduate, and
professional women. They found that the participants felt like they could not meet their self-
imposed high standards of excellence which resulted in increased mental stress and worry about
being exposed as a fraud (Clance & Imes, 1978). Although the initial research on IP concluded
that only women experience its effects, later studies revealed that men also experience IP at
similar rates and intensity (Clance, 1985; Fatemi, 2017).
Impostor phenomenon affects employees both globally and within the United States
(US), with estimates that between 70% to 82% of people experience it at some point in their
career (Bravata et al., 2020; Gravois, 2007). The IP is not a diagnosable mental condition;
however the most commonly reported symptoms include mental distress, worry, and depression
(Clance & Imes, 1978). Although individuals suffering from IP feel like a fraud at work, they
tend to be high-performers and valued employees (Tao & Gloria, 2019). This is important
because feeling like a phony can negatively affect the motivation and productivity of
indispensable employees (Ravindran, 2016).
While a substantial body of knowledge on the impostor phenomenon exists in academia,
there is a dearth of research on IP in research and development organizations (RDOs). An RDO
is defined as an organization that creates and utilizes technology systems to produce products or
services (Levi & Slem, 1995). Although RDOs are often identified with well-known technology

2

companies like Google or Facebook, they also exist in other industries such as banking, retail,
and consumer products. These organizations create the technologies that allow companies to do
business through the Internet via the development of services, websites, and mobile applications.
Although many people experience fraudulent feelings throughout their careers, working
within RDOs may increase the prevalence of IP due to the increased rate of technological change
and job stress. The purpose of this study is to examine Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory
(SCT) determinants and their effect on the impostor phenomenon experience and self-efficacy of
technology employees employed within RDOs. This study also seeks to reveal organizational
interventions for the impostor experience.
Research and development organizations are especially susceptible to IP and its negative
effects on employee productivity and mental health. In 2018 a survey of 10,402 technology
employees by Blind.com found that 58% of the participants experienced IP in their jobs (Kim,
2018). Other large research and development technology companies such as Google realize that
IP is a significant issue for their employees. In a 2017 internal study conducted by Google’s
Human Resources department, the company found that 50% of their employees experienced IP at
work (Brown, 2019). In addition, the same study revealed that the Google employees surveyed
attributed their hiring to luck and timing rather than their abilities (Brown, 2019). In other words,
half of the employee’s Google surveyed felt undeserving of their positions because they believed
they were intellectual frauds.
Understanding the IP in RDOs is important to study due to the negative employee and
economic business outcomes it produces. For example, without ways to mediate the negative
consequences of IP, the United States (US) economy stands to lose billions a year in lost
economic productivity through employee turnover and absenteeism costs (Marsden, 2016;

3

Richmond et al., 2017). In addition to the quantitative costs to the economy, finding way to
mediate IP may increase employee wellbeing and mental health.
Background of the Problem
Clance and Imes (1978) first revealed the impostor phenomenon in a clinical
psychological research study of successful women and coined the term to describe the
experience. The research population included 150 mostly White women between the ages of 20
and 45 who were successful undergraduate, graduate, and working professionals (Clance &
Imes, 1978). The researchers revealed that these participants applied their family’s socio-gender
stereotypes when assessing their skills and accomplishments (Clance & Imes, 1978). The results
of their research indicated that because the participant’s achievements did not match their
family’s social expectations, the women felt undeserving of their success. The researchers also
found that women tended to attribute their career success to factors like luck or the ability to
influence others instead of their intelligence or capabilities (Clance & Imes, 1978). In addition,
Clance and Imes (1978) discovered that the impostor phenomenon made the participants feel like
they do not belong in their positions. These types of fraudulent feelings may reinforce the mental
perception that their accomplishments were unearned and instead attributed their achievements
to extra effort and persistence rather than aptitude (Terborg & Ilgen, 1975).
The IP body of literature focused mainly on higher education faculty and college student
populations and settings (Clance & Imes, 1978; Clark et al., 2014; Cokley et al., 2013). The
primary purpose of the student-based academic research was to reveal the prevalence of IP in
undergraduate populations and analyze how it affects academic performance. To help de-
intensify fraudulent feelings, academic institutions found that undergraduate assistance programs
helped students cope with their emotional response to fraudulent feelings (Parkman, 2016). The

4

research also indicated that student’s mental health and overall productivity were negatively
correlated to impostor feelings in undergraduate students (Cokely et al., 2013; Gibson-Beverly &
Schwartz, 2008). In other words, decreased mental health often predicted the impostor
phenomenon and led to reduced productivity for the students.
Recognizing and decreasing the effects of IP for students is a common premise
throughout the literature. Although the initial IP studies focused on students, researchers have
since reviewed other settings and populations that experience IP, such as healthcare and
generalized business settings (Morrison & Owler, 2018; Ravindran, 2016). However, there were
no known studies identified that examined the IP within RDOs.
Many different reciprocal social factors affect IP prevalence and intensity. The research
showed that complex connections between social interactions, gender stereotypes, and mental
health levels may influence the occurrence of IP feelings in students (Clance & Imes, 1978;
Fraenza, 2016; Ross et al., 2001). Social environmental factors and parental influence may also
contribute to impostor feelings (Clance et al., 1995). The mix of these different factors may
affect the intensity of IP symptoms based on the personal attributes and socio-economic
positionality of an individual. For example, people with families that reinforce gender
stereotypes tend to exhibit increased impostor feelings (Clance & Imes, 1978; Cokley et al.,
2015). Also, individuals that display interest in employment areas outside of societal
expectations and norms may also receive negative feedback from their families, which may
subconsciously affect their sense of belonging throughout their career (Clance, 1985).
Although IP cannot be diagnosed, it can be self-reported and observed in clinical settings
(Mak et al., 2019; Ravindran, 2016; Tiefenthaler, 2018). In addition to fraudulent feelings, IP can
induce other psychologically associated symptoms like anxiety and worry, which may inhibit the

5

learning of new skills and reduce work productivity (Morrison & Owler, 2018). These feelings of
inadequacy and self-doubt can further stall career growth and significantly decrease the mental
health of high-performing employees (Hampton & Feller, 2019; Neureiter & Traut-Mattausch,
2016). The negative effects of IP on mental health and self-efficacy can also lead to reduced job
satisfaction and ultimately attrition in the workplace (Barrow, 2019). Understanding the
prevalence, intensity, and attributional factors is important to mitigating the adverse mental
effects of the IP for technology employees. To identify the psychological distress of workers,
organizations must be able to identify the symptoms of IP in the workforce and provide
interventions to reduce the negative effects within RDOs.
Impostor Phenomenon and Research and Development Organizations
The fast pace of innovation and learning in RDOs can intensify the thoughts of feeling
like a phony for employees. As an example, Clance et al. (1995) found that IP feelings intensify
whenever employees start a new job or need to learn a new skill. This finding is significant
because RDO employees must constantly adapt to the demand for new skills in the workplace.
The pace of change and the short half-life of software development skills dictates that employees
must learn new and relevant job skills every 12 to 18 months (Johnson et al., 2017). Also, the re-
skilling of employees for future work demands is critical to businesses if they want to maintain a
relevant workforce in the technology industry (Towards a Reskilling Revolution, 2019).
Position tenure in a job can also affect the intensity of feeling like an impostor.
Rakestraw (2017) found that the symptoms of the IP increase when people start new jobs, tasks
or need to learn new skills. Within the technology industry, the demand for specialized skills and
the need to understand emergent technology demonstrates the importance of understanding how
technology employees experience IP. Also, extending the research on IP for technology

6

employees is imperative because organizations need to find innovative ways to promote learning
while reducing the adverse mental effects of IP in the workplace. Without the ability to decrease
employee IP feelings and adapt quickly, businesses risk losing their employees in an industry
that changes rapidly.
In addition to the need to quickly learn skills, RDO employees change jobs at increased
rates compared to other industries. For example, Volini et al., (2019) reported that technology
employees change jobs every two years on average. In addition, another survey found that 67%
of technology employees were currently open to changing jobs (Majority of Surveyed Tech
Employees, 2018). These statistics are significant because Parkman (2016) asserted that
employees could experience increased fraudulent feelings when taking on new roles and
challenges at work. It is important for technology companies to understand the effects of IP on
technology employees because it may affect the psychological well-being of employees who are
required to learn new skills and often change roles. Mitigating IP feelings of employees may also
have implications for both improving mental health and reducing job turnover in RDOs.
It is important to understand that within the existing body of IP literature, there were no
studies identified that focused on the impostor phenomenon within a RDO context or setting.
Also, there were no known associated studies discovered that explored IP grounded in Bandura’s
(1986) SCT determinants and the concept of self-efficacy related to RDOs. This study extended
the existing qualitative research on IP and revealed the SCT factors that influence the impostor
phenomenon experience of technology employees and their perceived job self-efficacy.
Context of the Field of Practice
The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2014) stated that there
is no single definition of the technology industry. However, RDOs exist in almost every large

7

business in the United States. Businesses use technology as a tool to transform their businesses
through research, development, and product innovation. Companies also use their RDOs to
expand their customer base utilizing the Internet to provide consumer goods and services. Some
of the biggest and most recognizable technology companies like Apple, Facebook, and Google
create products that serve billions of consumers globally. However, other companies like
airlines, retailers, and banks also utilize their RDOs to produce valuable online services for their
customers and provide real-time access to products and services through their websites and
mobile applications.
Technology employees and RDOs are critical to the United States (US) economy and
create a considerable percentage of jobs and total wages. For example, in 2016, technology
companies accounted for 14.5 million jobs, and roughly 10% of the total wages of all workers
(Wolf & Roberts, 2018). Future job projections also show that technology jobs are also one of
the fastest-growing areas of employment. Wolf and Roberts (2018) estimated that the technology
sector expects to grow by 1.1 million jobs from 2016 to 2026 and will represent 18.7% of the
total economic output in the United States (US) by 2026. To meet these current and future job
demands, employers must be able to retain productive technology employees.
Technology Employees
Emerging technical jobs across all industries require employees to understand the latest
technology and programming languages (Towards a Reskilling Revolution, 2019). Also, there is
a strong demand for technology employees with science, technology, engineering, and math
(STEM) skills. Technology jobs with titles that include software development or system
engineering often require four-year degrees and professional certifications from accredited
universities and colleges. These specialized skills and educational requirements make finding

8

and hiring qualified candidates difficult for employers. As an example, in 2014 the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (2014) estimated that there were nearly double the
number of technology job openings as qualified applicants.
The increased demand for technology talent also allows employees to switch employers
often. In a survey analysis of full-time employees, the job networking company LinkedIn found
that technology workers change companies more than any other industry at a rate of 13.2% per
year (Booz, 2018). The scarcity of employees with specific technology skills and the market
demand makes the reduction of employee turnover critical to maintaining organizational
productivity for businesses.
Due to the economic demand for technology employees, organizations often offer
increased pay over other industries and unique benefits to compete with the rising demand and
prevent attrition. Wolf and Roberts (2018) stated that in 2018 the median technology employee
made $70,230 a year which was more than double the national median income for all other non-
technology industries of $34,800. Additionally, technology jobs tend to come with ancillary
employee benefits. For example, technology jobs tend to be less affected during times of
economic recession than other industries (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
2014). Also, technology workers often have the unique ability to work from home and
employees do so at twice the rate of other industries (U.S. Census Bureau, 2016).
Although technology workers are in demand, the pool of available candidates is less
demographically diverse than other industries. For example, the research showed that the
technology industry consists primarily of men. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (2014) data showed that men make up roughly 64% of the high-tech workforce
while women were only 36%. At the executive level, gender diversity ratios significantly

9

decrease. The latest employment statistics in the US showed that men made up 80% of the
executive level positions with only 20% of women making up the rest of the population (U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2014). In addition to gender, employees tend to be
younger in age than in other industries. For example, the U.S. Census Bureau (2016) found that
half of all technology employees are between the age of 25 and 44.
It is important to understand the different IP experiences by demographic in RDOs due to
homogeneity of the employee base. Because IP may affect the majority of employees at some
point in their careers, it may negatively affect diversity ratios in the workforce by facilitating job
attrition for underrepresented employees. For example, if an older adult woman joins a RDO that
consists of primarily young male engineers, the IP along the gender bias they may experience
could make them feel like they do not belong, which may result in job turnover. This scenario
suggests the examining IP in RDOs may have implications for increasing workforce diversity.
Resolving the employee diversity problem is also important because the literature suggests
companies with increased diversity ratios are more innovative and have significantly higher
investment returns (Hunt et al., 2015).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to understand how the SCT determinants of personal traits,
behaviors, and the environment influence the impostor phenomenon experience for technology
employees and to reveal solutions for mitigating the phenomenon. Technology employees are
defined as anyone employed within an organization that focuses on the research and
development of technology products or services. All other ancillary business positions like
accounting and human resources were purposefully excluded from this study. The research
participants included a population of 12 technology employees that were directly involved in the

10

product research and development process and had less than one year tenure in their position.
Tenure is important to control for because fraudulent feelings tend to intensify when taking on a
new position (Rakestraw, 2017). To guide the inquiry process, this study utilized Bandura’s
(1986) SCT framework and its reciprocal social determinants of personal traits, behavioral and
environmental factors that influence the IP experience. In addition, the ancillary SCT concept of
self-efficacy helped expose the relationship between IP and employee productivity and
motivation.
This study’s research extended the existing body of IP knowledge by evaluating the SCT
determinants that affect the impostor experience of technology employees. Also, this study is the
only identified literature focused on the technology industry that utilized the phenomenological
approach to assess the IP experience and perceived self-efficacy of technology employees
through SCT determinant factors. By examining RDO employees as participants, this research
extends the existing body of IP knowledge and further informs future IP research within RDO
settings. Finally, this study provided a foundation for future research on IP interventions for
RDOs which may be transferable to other organizational and job settings.
Research Questions
The research questions that informed this study are as follows.
1. How do the three social cognitive theory determinants of personal traits, behaviors, and
the environment affect the impostor phenomenon experience for research and
development organization employees?
2. How does the impostor phenomenon affect the self-efficacy of research and development
organization employees?

11

3. What can research and development organizations do to mitigate the effects of the
impostor phenomenon for employees?
Importance of the Study
Across all industries in the US, the research showed that at least 70% of employees
experience IP at some point in their careers (Gravois, 2007). Within RDOs, it is particularly
important to retain and facilitate stable mental health for employees to be productive. Studying
IP is important because it can negatively affect productivity, motivation, and employee retention
rates by reducing job satisfaction. The fraudulent feelings that accompany IP contribute to the
self-belief that employees do not belong in their positions which creates negative job
perceptions. Consequently, these negative perceptions can lead to attrition and absenteeism in the
workplace (Nunes et al., 2018; Ravindran, 2016). These findings are noteworthy because the cost
of replacing technology workers can equal up to 150% of the employee’s salary (Rigoni &
Nelson, 2016).
In addition to attrition, employees who suffer from IP can experience reduced
productivity by attempting to meet self-imposed high standards (Ravindran, 2016). In other
words, employees may overwork due to their impostor feelings which may lead to reduced
motivation and productivity. This mental job stress may also contribute to employee turnover
intention, decreased motivation, and job burnout (Kim & Lee, 2009; Vaughn et al., 2020).
Without further research and investigation on IP in RDOs, the US economy stands to lose
billions per year in both lost productivity and employee replacement costs (Marsden, 2016;
Richmond et al., 2017).
This study also aimed to address gaps in the literature identified by other researchers. For
example, KH and Menon (2020) explained there is a lack of research on the impostor

12

phenomenon that includes specific organizational context like RDOs. Also, Ling et al. (2020)
asserted that more research is needed to examine how position tenure affects the intensity of the
impostor experience. This study aims to address both of these research needs by extending the
existing literature to understand the impostor phenomenon experience in the context of RDOs
while controlling for employee tenure.
Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The theoretical framework that informed this study is Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive
theory. This theory asserted that three main factors influence human behavior: personal traits,
behavior, and the environment. Additionally, Bandura’s (1986) SCT concept of reciprocal
determinism described how the three SCT determinants interact with each other and the IP
experience to influence perceived self-efficacy. These factors combine in complex ways to affect
perceptions of employee self-efficacy which may affect work productivity (Chemers et al.,
2011). This study focuses on how the interrelation of the three SCT factors and perceived self-
efficacy affect the IP experience of technology employees. Bandura’s (1986) SCT is appropriate
to utilize because the research showed that the concept of self-efficacy and impostor
phenomenon are significantly and negatively correlated which may have consequences for
improving productivity and motivational levels in the workplace (McDowell, 2015). In other
words, finding ways to increase an individual’s perceived self-efficacy may dimmish impostor
phenomenon feelings.
Definition of Terms
• Impostor phenomenon is the experience of feeling like an intellectual fraud (Clance &
Imes, 1978).

13

• Impostor refers to an individual that is experiencing the symptoms of the impostor
phenomenon.
• Research and development organization (RDO) is any organization that creates and
utilizes technology systems to produce technology products or services (Levi & Slem,
1995).
• Impostorism is the psychological worry of being exposed as a fraud (Tao & Gloria,
2019).
• Self-efficacy is the level of belief in one’s capabilities relative to an assignment or job
(Bandura, 1997).
• Attribution refers to the mental self-appointment of achievements due to an internal
opinion or perception (Kelley & Michela, 1980).
• Motivation is the intrapersonal behavior that compels action to accomplish a task
(Vroom, 1964).
• Fraudulent feelings are the psychological symptom of the impostor phenomenon that
individuals experience about being exposed as incompetent in their job (Clance & Imes,
1978).
Organization of the Dissertation
This study comprises five chapters in total. Chapter one includes an introduction to the
problem of practice, background on the impostor phenomenon, the context of the field of
practice, the importance of this study, guiding research questions, and key definitions. Chapter
two includes a review of the IP literature related to the problem of practice including an analysis
of the impostor phenomenon etiologies, self-efficacy, and the effect on the perceived motivation
and productivity of technology employees. Chapter three examines the research methodologies

14

utilized in this study and includes the research approach, participant criteria, sampling methods,
interview questions, and a description of participant protections. Chapter four includes a detailed
analysis of the interview results and key findings. Chapter five contains recommendations from
this study supported by literature and provides a detailed evaluation plan for implementing and
evaluating the recommendations. This study concludes with implications for practice and
recommended areas for future research.

15

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Impostor phenomenon (IP) is characterized by the worry and anxiety of being exposed by
others as a fraud (Clance & Imes, 1978). Research psychologists Pauline Clance and Suzanne
Imes (1978) identified the impostor phenomenon during a study of high-achieving women at
Georgia State University in 1978. Through analysis of individual and group psychotherapy
sessions, the researchers noticed a common theme of women attributing their success to external
factors such as luck rather than internal factors such as intelligence or ability (Clance & Imes,
1978). For example, women participants cited overestimation of their abilities and mis-grading
by professors as reasons for how they obtained their positions in academia (Clance & Imes,
1978). To investigate their findings further, Clance and Imes conducted a study focused on
uncovering the fraudulent feelings of 150 undergraduate, graduate, and professional women. The
study population ranged in age from 25 to 45, and all the women were considered successful due
to their past achievements in attaining advanced degrees or other professional accomplishments
(Clance & Imes, 1978).
Through individual interview sessions with these participants, certain patterns and themes
emerged. To start, Clance and Imes (1978) noted that the participants exhibited worry and
anxiety over being exposed as a fraud and felt undeserving of their accomplishments. Although
the women were all objectively successful, they all failed to attribute their achievements to
intelligence or hard work (Clance & Imes, 1978). This misattribution of success caused the
participants to feel like frauds and induced worry about being exposed as a fraud by others. From
their research, Clance and Imes (1978) coined the term the impostor phenomenon to name the
experience that they uncovered. Individuals who exhibit impostor phenomenon characteristics
are known as “impostors” because they do not attribute their success to their ability (Clance,

16

1985). Those that exhibit impostor syndrome also tend to be perfectionists and strive to be the
best in both their personal and professional lives (Clance, 1985). Although impostors may worry
about being revealed as a phony, on the surface they may seem confident in their work (Clance,
1985). Also, Clance (1985) described other feelings associated with IP including fear of failure,
guilt, and denial of their achievements.
The Impostor Cycle
In addition to the identification of the impostor phenomenon, Clance and Imes (1978)
created a theoretical framework to identify and describe the various stages of the IP experience.
The framework asserted that the impostor phenomenon acts like a repeating cycle for those who
experience its symptoms. The IP cycle begins with initial anxiety over a perceived difficult task
or challenge. Impostors then exhibit one of two different maladaptive approaches to accomplish
the task. One of the options impostors take is over preparation. Impostors fear failure, so they
spend more time preparing than necessary to accomplish the task (Clance, 1985). The second
option is procrastination or task avoidance. Basically, an individual’s fraudulent feelings cause
fear and anxiety, which prevents impostors from completing their tasks until the last minute
(Clance, 1985). Once the task is complete, those that over-prepared for the task tended to
attribute their success to effort, and those that procrastinated tended to attribute their
achievement to luck (Clance & Imes, 1978). After briefly reflecting on their accomplishment,
Clance and Imes (1978) found that impostors gained some sense of mental relief but eventually
discounted any previous positive feedback on their work due to their external attributions of
success. In other words, impostors do not attribute their achievements to ability. Instead, they
believe that they were successful due to their efforts in over-preparation or luck (Clance & Imes,
1978).

17

The impostor cycle reinforces the perception that impostors do not deserve credit for their
accomplishments. Instead, individuals with IP believe that truly smart people do not have to
over-prepare and could achieve the same success without the additional stress or effort they
exerted (Clance, 1985). Ironically, Clance (1985) found that those who put extra effort into their
accomplishments often recognize their unnecessary behavior yet persist in believing that over-
preparation is the only way to succeed (Clance, 1985).
The impostor cycle may repeat again as fraudulent feelings tend to return at the beginning
of the next project or task. For those that fall into the impostor cycle, the psychological
experience decreases the ability to remain focused, motivated, and productive at work (Clance,
1985). The impostor cycle and accompanying feelings can also negatively affect feelings of self-
efficacy (Tao & Gloria, 2019). Although most impostors may be able to sustain the IP cycle
multiple times, the literature revealed that job burnout and emotional exhaustion eventually
result from repeated progressions (Hutchins, 2015). Understanding the impostor cycle and its
various stages are important to breaking the pattern and mitigating the recurrence of this
phenomenon for technology employees.
Impostor Phenomenon Personal Typologies
To better understand the impostor phenomenon, one must look at the types of behaviors
and attitudes that impostors exhibit. This section contains the description of the collective
impostor behaviors that are common across the literature.

18

Misattribution of Achievements
A common symptom of IP is misattribution of the reasons behind their success. Instead
of taking credit for their achievements and attributing them to their intelligence and capability,
those experiencing the impostor phenomenon believe external factors like chance contributed to
their success (Clance & Imes, 1978). These misattributions are important to understand since
they are foundational to the impostor phenomenon.
Studying the impostor phenomenon also has associations with attributional theories in
psychology. For example, the IP attribution process is much like the inverse of the self-serving
attribution bias. Whereas people with self-serving attribution bias assume more credit for success
and blame failure on external circumstances, those suffering from IP ascribe their success to
external factors like luck (Arkin et al., 1980; Clance & Imes, 1978) Understanding these
different attribution types is important for understanding employee attributions of success and
mitigating IP in the workplace.
Fear of Being Exposed as a Fraud
Fraudulent feelings characterize IP, and those affected by the experience feel like
performers who have deceived others about their abilities (Breeze, 2018). For example,
impostors fear being exposed due to self-doubt about their capabilities including decreased self-
efficacy about their job. Also, individuals may fear that their skills and abilities may not match
the level of their position. For example, impostors may fear that they have been promoted to a
position where they are incapable of being effective (Ladonna et al., 2018). These fears lead to
irrational thoughts of being exposed by colleagues and superiors at work.
The fear of being exposed can also lead to a lack of belonging at work (Breeze, 2018).
For example, people who experience IP believe that they do not deserve their success. They may

19

also believe that they do not deserve to be in their position. These feelings of belonging at work
are important because they have implications for motivation, productivity, and turnover intention
(Kuna, 2019). This finding is significant because the technology industry already has one of the
highest rates of turnover across all industries at 13.2% (Booz, 2018). In addition, feeling like a
fraud and having a decreased sense of belonging may lead to turnover of an organization’s most
vulnerable and valuable employees (Cokley et al., 2013).
Fear of Failure
The fear of failure is a well-recognized symptom of the impostor phenomenon and can
negatively impact the mental health of individuals (Clance, 1985). Difficult goals or task
achievements in life always come with the possibility of failure; and to achieve success, people
must take risks. For impostors, the thought of taking a risk and failing to succeed is anxiety-
inducing (Clance, 1985). This psychological experience results in the fear of failure and can
prevent individuals from pursuing opportunities at work. For example, impostors may avoid
taking on a difficult or ambiguous task at work for fear of failing and being further exposed as a
fraud to their organization (Fried-Buchalter, 1997).
Fear of Success
There are many different reasons people who experience IP fear success and
opportunities. The fear of failure can stem from various socio-demographic factors. For example,
impostors from lower socio-economic classes may exhibit guilt for surpassing their parent’s
income or accomplishments (Harvey & Katz, 1985). This guilt combined with fraudulent
feelings may contribute to the impostor cycle and cause procrastination due to the fear of
succeeding. In addition, the research showed that the response to this type of fear ranges from
perfectionist coping tendencies to reactive and irrational behavior (Haney et al., 2018). These

20

reactions can also cause reduced work productivity and result in missed career opportunities or
achievements (Haney et al., 2018; Harvey & Katz, 1985). In other words, the fear of success
becomes a self-fulfilling action that prevents further career growth for impostors.
Another factor in the fear-driven response to success is gender stereotypes. For example,
Clance and Imes (1978) found that their participants feared being socially rejected for achieving
success outside of their social gender expectations and stereotypes. As a result, they revealed that
women may purposefully avoid accomplishments that go against these gender stereotypes to
avoid perceived negative social consequences (Clance & Imes, 1978). For example, a woman
who is interested in a STEM field may avoid that career path for fear that they do not belong due
to socio-expectations from their parents or community. This fear of success is particularly
problematic for women entrepreneurs today. Since leadership is generally associated with
masculine attributes, women may avoid taking an executive position or starting their own
businesses for fear of social rejection (Ladge et al., 2019). This fear of success by breaking social
norms has implications for increasing gender diversity in fields like technology that have
traditionally been seen as masculine careers.
Impostor Personality Traits
Impostors also exhibit different personality traits that are difficult to observe in work
settings. For example, many impostors feel like they are wearing a mask of success that others
see yet they feel like frauds hiding behind it (Harvey & Katz, 1985). The research is conflicted
on whether individuals suffering from IP tend to be introverted or extroverted personalities
(Cromwell et al., 1990). However, the research tends to agree that individuals that experience IP
feelings tend to be high-performing individuals at work and exhibit perfectionist tendencies
(Clance, 1985).

21

It is also worth noting that there is some disagreement in the literature about how to
define an individual that suffers from the impostor phenomenon. For example, Hawley (2019)
stated that if a person feels like a phony at work but does not have the skills to do their job, they
may not actually have the impostor phenomenon. This section details some of the primary
personality traits that contribute to the impostor phenomenon from the review of the literature.
Feeling Undeserving of Success
Part of the IP experience is the feeling that you are not deserving of your professional
accomplishments. At work, impostors are often hardworking and dependable employees who in
the past may have taken on difficult projects and accomplished them with perceived ease (Clance
& Imes, 1978). These characteristics make those suffering from IP hard to observe as an outsider
since impostors appear to be extremely competent and successful within their organizations
(Clance, 1985). However, mentally they experience extreme worry and anxiety of being exposed
as frauds to others in their organizations.
Perfectionist Tendencies
Perfectionism is defined as a personal disposition to achieve that refuses to accept any
actions or outcomes that are not perfect (Burhrman et al., 2020). Clance (1985) found that one of
the main traits people with the impostor phenomenon exhibit is perfectionist tendencies. Also,
impostors tend to have a strong need to be the best at what they do and constantly seek approval
and feedback from others (Cromwell et al., 1990). Individuals suffering from IP also expect to
easily accomplish difficult and complex tasks with little effort (Clance, 1985). This is a problem
for impostors because taking on different challenges typically involves new learning, and
becoming proficient at a task takes effort and time to learn. For someone with IP, expending the
additional effort to learn can further signal that they lack the ability to accomplish things with

22

ease (Clance, 1985). For example, if a technology employee with perfectionist tendencies needs
to learn a new programming language and struggles with the task, they may feel like a failure.
The feelings of inadequacy increase the mental stress and self-efficacy of the employee which
can increase impostor feelings.
Anxious Personality Traits
In addition to perfectionism, people with IP tend to exhibit anxious personality traits. The
research showed that anxiety was a significant predictor of the impostor phenomenon
(Armstrong & Shulman, 2019). To illustrate, Rohrmann et al. (2016) found in a study of business
leaders across multiple industries that those with impostor feelings showed increased levels of
anxiety and stress at work. Managing anxiety is important because it has implications for
improving overall mental health and reducing the symptoms of the impostor phenomenon.
Being the First in the Family
Individuals that are the first in their family to accomplish a major life achievement can
experience fraudulent feelings due to their perceived lack of belonging. For example, the
research revealed that those who are first to graduate college often feel the negative effects of the
impostor phenomenon (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017). These feelings may derive from the guilt of
exceeding family standards, and not conforming to their family’s traditional expectations. As an
illustration, a woman whose family owns and operates a construction business and is the first in
her family to graduate college may experience guilt over her choice to not continue with the
family business. To address these types of personal feelings, schools and universities
implemented impostor phenomenon training programs to address incoming student’s fraudulent
feelings (Parkman, 2016). However, more research is needed to ascertain the immediate and
long-term efficacy of these type of programs.

23

Fearfulness
Being fearful is another personality trait of those suffering from impostor feelings. This
personal trait affects impostors in complex ways. Not only do impostors fear being revealed as a
fraud, but they also fear both success and failure. To illustrate, an impostor may not take on a
new project because they fear they will be unsuccessful and experience the shame of public
failure (Clance, 1985). These irrational concerns can stem from complex family and social
interactions. As an example, a family may reinforce the message that their children should not be
more successful than their fathers (Clance, 1985). This message tends to follow impostors into
their adult life which creates worry and fear about surpassing their family’s
accomplishments. Ultimately, the fear of failure and success stems from illogical thoughts about
the future and what might happen if individuals break socio-familial barriers with their
achievements.
Being the Only Person from a Specific Demographic in an Organization
Being the only person in an organization from an underrepresented demographic can lead
to feelings of doubt and lack of belonging (Peteet et al., 2015). These feelings can exacerbate
symptoms of the IP. For example, if a woman engineer joins an RDO and is the only woman on
her team, they may wonder if they were hired as a token employee rather than for her skills and
abilities. This feeling of not belonging may lead to reduced job satisfaction and ultimately lead to
job turnover (Kuna, 2019). Focus on underrepresented impostors is important to study because it
has implications for increasing employee diversity in single demographic dominated teams found
in RDOs. In other words, if interventions exist to help prevent impostor feelings, people from
underrepresented backgrounds may feel less like an outsider at work which can reduce attrition
in the workplace.

24

Unwillingness to Accept Praise
Individuals who suffer from IP often lack the ability to accept praise for their
accomplishments from others. The mind of an impostor can also distort the way praise is
received so much so that they never accept it (Clance, 1985). Instead of accepting compliments
for their success, individuals with IP often downplay their abilities or the reputation of the person
giving the praise (Clance, 1985). In other words, people may not trust the judgment capabilities
of the person appraising their work (Harvey & Katz, 1985). For example, if an impostor receives
praise from their supervisor, they may discount it as the supervisor not having all the details of
their work and therefore assume the praise was not warranted. This mindset could also cause
strain on work relationships because an impostor may seem ungrateful or untrusting to others at
work. Additionally, impostors may believe that individuals are trying to ingratiate themselves
with praise because they may want something from them. As an illustration, an individual with
impostor tendencies may think their supervisor is only giving them praise so they will take on
even more work in the future (Harvey & Katz, 1985). In extreme cases, Harvey & Katz (1985)
revealed that people suffering from IP could even discount promotions and refuse to accept their
new roles.
Impostor Demographics
In addition to personality traits, personal demographics can play an important role in
predicting the impostor phenomenon. Through a review of the literature, this section details the
three specific characteristics which include gender identity, socio-economic status, and ethnicity
that may predict the impostor experience. These characteristics are important because they have
implications for mediating the impostor phenomenon in diverse and underrepresented

25

populations. In addition, this body of research could point to ways in which employers can
increase and retain the diversity of their workforce (Chrousos & Mentis, 2020).
Gender Identity
Although the impostor phenomenon research originated as a feminist concept through
Clance and Imes’ (1978) study of successful cisgender women, there are discrepancies in the
impostor phenomenon literature around gender and the incidence rate of impostor phenomenon.
Initially, Clance and Imes (1978) claimed that the impostor phenomenon only affected women
and that men did not experience the phenomenon. However, Clance (1985) eventually
established that the impostor phenomenon could negatively affect those that self-identify as both
men and women equally. Additional research on the topic further revealed that gender identity
was not a significant indicator of the prevalence of fraudulent feelings (Bernard et al., 2002;
Cromwell et al., 1990; Rohrmann et al., 2016). However, additional literature revealed that
impostor feelings might affect the intentions of cisgender men and women to remain in STEM
jobs (Blondeau & Awad, 2018; Brauer & Proyer, 2019). For example, given the same perceived
levels of self-efficacy and impostor feelings, men were more likely to persist with their STEM
jobs than women (Blondeau & Awad, 2018). This finding is significant because it has
implications for understanding why women may leave their STEM jobs at increasing rates.
Overall, more research is needed on how gender identity affects the impostor phenomenon
experience and how individuals cope with their feelings.
Socioeconomic Status
The research showed that socioeconomic status is a factor that may predict impostor
feelings. For example, those in lower socio-economic classes exhibited impostorism at increased
frequency and intensity (Macinnis et al., 2019). In a study of postsecondary students, Macinnis et

26

al. (2019) found that students of lower socio-economic classes exhibited increased feelings of the
impostor phenomenon. In addition, the research revealed that for those in lower economic
categories, having friends who had higher economic status intensified their fraudulent feelings
(Macinnis et al., 2019). This research is significant because it may have implications for the
formulation of impostor phenomenon support groups and employee assistance programs
organized by people in comparable socioeconomic categories. For example, employers could
match employee mentors and trainers from similar economic status and backgrounds to increase
the efficacy of their programs.
Different Ethnicities and Cultures
A review of the literature also showed that the majority of impostor phenomenon
research focused mostly on White populations and participants within the US. This gap in the
literature is important because RDOs have become increasingly global and the impostor
phenomenon affects employees from all cultures (Sakulku & Alexander, 2011; Schroeder, 2018).
The research also revealed that impostor phenomenon disproportionately affects historically
underrepresented groups (Bernard & Neblett, 2018; Cokley et al., 2013). In a study of 240
ethnically diverse college students, Cokley et al. (2013) found that ethnically underrepresented
groups experienced increased psychological stress and impostor feelings. In addition, certain
ethnicities can experience the impostor phenomenon more than others. For example, the research
showed that Asian students tended to exhibit the highest rates of the impostor phenomenon
(Cokley et al., 2013). However, more research is needed to examine the impostor phenomenon
experience for other historically underrepresented groups.
The research also exposed multiple strategies to reduce fraudulent feelings in
underrepresented populations. For example, assigning senior student mentors to college students

27

may help alleviate impostor symptoms (Dancy & Brown, 2011; Sturges, 2018). These mentors
gave student participants an outlet to talk about their feelings which helped mediate the impostor
phenomenon. In addition to mentorship, the research recommended the creation of formal
support services to mitigate the effects of IP (Peteet et al., 2015). As an example, schools and
workplaces could implement counseling services on-site for students to discuss their feelings and
experiences with the impostor phenomenon. The literature showed that by making these services
available, underrepresented students could get professional help to mitigate their impostor
phenomenon symptoms (Peteet et al., 2015).
Etiologies of the Impostor Phenomenon
Although there are no identified causes of the impostor phenomenon in the literature,
Clance and Imes (1978) observed that participants in their study had similar etiologies and
family traits. The researchers found that these socio-familial factors were predictors of how
participants experienced the impostor phenomenon later in life (Clance & Imes, 1978). For
example, the types of early parent-child interactions are one of the predictors of fraudulent
feelings. Parents of impostors often label their children according to certain societal archetypes
(Clance & Imes, 1978). For example, parents may label one of their children as the “smart”
child, while another may be labeled as the “caring” child. These labels are formative for the
child, and the expectations to conform to their label from their family are reinforced through
interactions with their parents. For example, the “caring” child may be recruited to take care of
their grandparents while the “smart” child is encouraged to study math at home. Through this
parental reinforcement, children begin to assume the role the family assigned to them and then
try to behave according to the family’s expectations. The research showed that these early
childhood interactions could predict the prevalence and intensity of how children experience the

28

impostor phenomenon (Clance & Imes, 1978). Understanding the initial causes of impostor
phenomenon is important because it has implications for explaining the phenomenon earlier in
life rather than simply treating the symptoms as adults (Mullangi & Jagsi, 2019).
Although parents of children who have fraudulent feelings tend to label their children by
their perceived abilities, they are often mistaken in their assessments of their children. To
illustrate, the “caring” child can develop into adulthood and surpass the academic achievements
of the “smart” sibling in the family. This leads to cognitive confusion for the “caring” child
because they do not believe they should be intelligent. To cope with their fraudulent feelings, the
caring child might attribute their success to external factors like luck or chance rather than their
own intellectual abilities. As an illustration, the “caring” child could pass a difficult math test
with no mistakes but instead of attributing their success to their ability, they may believe that the
teacher made an error while grading their tests.
Family Characteristics of Impostors
The research showed that the effects of early stereotypes and the overemphasis of
achievements in childhood interactions increased impostor feelings in children (Clance & Imes,
1978). The roles that families assign to their children influence self-perception and the
motivation to take on new tasks. As the child develops and enters the workforce, these early
socio-familial interactions predict the impostor phenomenon and follow individuals throughout
their entire career (Clance & Imes, 1978; Harvey & Katz, 1985; Ladge et al., 2019). Clance &
Imes (1978) asserted that two types of family characteristics emerged in their research that
predicted fraudulent feelings in their research participants. This section offers a brief description
of the predictor characteristics for the impostor phenomenon.

29

Child Archetypes
The first group of research participants came from families that stereotyped their
children’s abilities during childhood. In other words, impostor families assigned specific
characteristics to their children like being smart. These expectations meant that the children felt
like they had to fulfill the archetype their parents assigned to them (Clance & Imes, 1978;
Harvey & Katz, 1985). Effectively, the children felt undeserving of their accomplishments
because they were supposed to be the “caring” child instead of the “smart” one. The research
discovered that these same fraudulent feelings, family expectations, and misattributions often
followed the children into their adult life (Clance & Imes, 1978).
Overemphasis of Achievements
The second type of impostors originated from families that overemphasized their
children’s personal accomplishments and intelligence. Essentially, parents overexaggerated how
special or difficult the children’s achievements were to achieve relative to other children. For
example, if the child completed a simple task such as completing their homework, parents would
proclaim their child to be a “little Albert Einstein” to the rest of the family. Children in this
category had such high expectations from their families that they had difficulty achieving them
throughout life (Clance & Imes, 1978).
Due to the overemphasis of their abilities, the participants in Clance and Imes’ (1978)
study began to doubt whether they could ever live up to the expectations of their family. This
self-doubt increased the intensity of fraudulent feelings. Effectively, the overexaggerated image
projected on them by their family negatively influenced their self-perception and resulted in the
participants cultivating impostor feelings. To cope with these fraudulent feelings, the research
participants avoided taking on difficult challenges at work or school to avoid the fear of failure

30

and potential embarrassment of their families (Clance & Imes, 1978). In other words, the
participants avoided difficult goals for fear of failing and letting their family’s expectations
down.
Impostor Family Interactions
Family interactions are one of the main factors in the etiology of the impostor
phenomenon. To illustrate, Clance (1985) found that impostor families exhibit four main
attributes that predict how children experience the impostor phenomenon. These interactions
derive from parental interactions and how they communicate with their children. Also, families
may apply more than one of these attributes at once to intensify their children’s fraudulent
feelings (Clance, 1985). This section details and explains Clance’s (1985) four main predictors
of the impostor phenomenon.
Inconsistent Parental Feedback on Their Children’s Capabilities
The first attribute that may predict the impostor phenomenon in children is inconsistent
feedback. Families that give inconsistent feedback which conflicts with the external perception
of a child’s abilities can promote impostor feelings in their children (Clance, 1985). For example,
the communication a child receives about their intelligence might be different at school versus at
home, which creates psychological confusion around which message the child should believe. As
in the homework example discussed earlier, a child may be told they are as smart as Albert
Einstein for finishing their homework, but their aptitude scores at school show that the child is in
the lower 50
th
percentile ranking of students.
The mixed messages and feedback a child receives from their parents and teachers
creates psychological confusion for the child about which opinion they should believe (Clance,
1985). If the child chooses to believe the feedback received from their teacher, then the child

31

begins to feel like a fraud at home because they feel like they cannot meet the level of high
praise given to them by their parents. In other words, giving feedback to children that is
consistent with feedback received at school may have implications for decreasing fraudulent
feelings in children (Clance, 1985).
Overemphasis on Success
The second attribute that can predict the impostor phenomenon in children is their
family’s overfocus on success. Impostor families tend to put extra importance on their child’s
success. These families reiterate that to be successful, the child must be smart, have natural
ability, and be able to learn quickly (Clance, 1985). To reinforce the message, families make
explicit negative comparisons to other “non-successful” family members (Clance, 1985). For
example, the child may be coerced to do their homework because they do not want to end up like
their unsuccessful Uncle Joe. These messages from family members can cause the child
psychological distress and fear due to the repercussions of not being successful (Clance, 1985).
Because the child does not want to disappoint their family’s expectations, the child may
constantly strive for perfection in school and other areas of life. This drive for success may lead
the child to believe that they will never be successful enough for their family (Clance, 1985).
Even though the child may be successful, they still feel like a fraud because they have not met
their family’s unreasonable expectations of success.
Feeling Like an Outsider in the Family
The third attribute that can predict the impostor phenomenon in children is the feeling of
being an outsider within their family. This happens when the traits and skills that the family
value does not match up with the child’s abilities. Clance (1985) gives an example of a
mathematically gifted child within a family of artists and musicians. Although the child has

32

exceptional talent in mathematics, the family may ignore or downplay the child’s skills because
it does not match with what the family values (e.g., music). This reaction causes the child to feel
like an outsider and believe that they will never be good enough to meet their family’s
expectations (Clance, 1985). As the child progresses in school and receives recognition for their
mathematical ability, the child may discount the praise they receive because it does not fit in
with their socio-familial expectations. By never being able to meet their family’s expectations,
children feel like outsiders within their family (Clance, 1985). This leads them to constantly
strive to meet expectations in areas outside of their expertise.
Lack of Childhood Praise
The fourth attribute that may predict the impostor phenomenon in children is the lack of
familial praise. Like families that overemphasize their children’s accomplishments, children that
receive very little praise also experience the impostor phenomenon’s effects later in life (Clance,
1985). Children that come from families with high expectations for success may receive
diminished feedback on their accomplishments. These types of families “expect” excellence
from their children and presume they can accomplish complex tasks with ease (Clance, 1985).
Therefore, when the child accomplishes a significant task, the family dismisses their
accomplishment as what was expected from the child to be part of the family. To illustrate this
concept, parents may not recognize a child’s high score on a college entrance exam even though
the child may have prepared for a year to successfully take the test.
These types of parental interactions signal to the child that extremely difficult tasks are
expected to be completed with ease (Clance, 1985). Because the child had to prepare and study
for a year, the child may feel like they did not meet their family’s expectations since the test was
not “easy” enough for them even though they excelled at the test. This lack of familial praise

33

indicates to the child that their efforts were not good enough and they begin to feel like a fraud
because they cannot meet their family’s expectations (Clance, 1985).
Parenting Styles
Aside from socio-familial interactions, parenting styles are yet another contributing factor
to the occurrence of fraudulent feelings in children. The research showed that parenting methods
that decrease self-esteem may increase IP prevalence during childhood (Yaffe, 2020). As an
example, children with parents that are overly protective tend to exhibit increased fraudulent
feelings (Yaffe, 2020). In other words, if the children’s parents do not give them the opportunity
to attempt difficult tasks as a child, they may believe that they are incapable of accomplishing
things by themselves which may decrease the confidence in their abilities. By overprotecting
their children, parents inadvertently sabotage their self-esteem through a perceived lack of trust
in their capabilities. For these reasons, it is important to recognize how parenting techniques and
the complex factors that are etiologies have an impact on the impostor phenomenon.
Impostor Phenomenon and Adolescence
In addition to childhood experiences, adolescence is another critical period where young
adults must start to think about their path in life and learn new skills to facilitate their chosen
career path (Bandura, 1997). This stage of development is important for understanding other
etiologies of the impostor phenomenon. For example, the symptoms of the impostor
phenomenon in adolescent children occur at roughly the same percentage as adults (Caselman et
al., 2006). The research also revealed that early signs of impostor feelings during childhood and
adolescence are predictors for the IP later in life (Clance, 1985). In other words, impostor
feelings experienced during adolescence may follow individuals into their adult careers. As such,

34

studying adolescence and IP may have implications for mitigating the symptoms both early and
later in adult life.
The research revealed multiple different strategies to help address the fraudulent feelings
of adolescents who suffer from the impostor phenomenon. Caselman et al. (2006) found that
adolescents can mediate IP feelings by confiding in close friends about their impostor feelings.
For example, talking to trusted friends and close family about fraudulent feelings may help
decrease fraudulent feelings (Caselman et al., 2006). Overall, more research is needed to mitigate
the impostor phenomenon in early adulthood to prevent it from following individuals into their
adult careers.
The parenting styles that influence the impostor phenomenon and create social anxiety in
adolescence may follow individuals into college life (Yaffe, 2021; Yaffe, 2020). This is
important to note because the impostor phenomenon can decrease the sense of individual
competence and the ability to relate to other students in school (Vaughn et al., 2020). For
example, the IP may increase a student’s fraudulent feelings which may predict other serious
mental symptoms like anxiety and depression (Tigranyan et al., 2020). This is particularly
important for on-campus students because the research showed that there is an increase in the
intensity of IP symptoms for students in traditional on-campus versus online programs (Fraenza,
2016). However, the research noted that since college is a transitory stage in life, that more
longitudinal research is needed across cohorts to understand the effects of IP in college students
as they enter the workforce (Levant et al., 2020). These types of studies have implications for
identifying the various etiologies and possible discrete interventions at different life stages.

35

Transition into the Technology Workforce
College students entering the technology workforce can experience intensified fraudulent
feelings because the switch from school to the professional work environment is a major life
transition (Gallagher, 2019). Former college students tend to worry more about achieving
success in the work environment because the demands are different from school (Clance, 1985).
Additionally, these newly graduated employees may feel additional pressure to perform based on
self-comparisons to their more established peers (Clance, 1985). These stressors can both cause
fraudulent feelings and make new technology employees feel like they do not belong in their
position.
Impostor feelings may also decrease a new employee’s self-efficacy which may also
affect their ability to learn (Clance, 1985). As an example, if a new college hire joins a RDO
composed of senior engineers, the new employee may observe how the team accomplishes
difficult projects with ease while they struggle to learn simple tasks. The contrast between
observing their peer’s effort compared to theirs may signal to the new employee that they do not
have the capability to do their job.
For new employees there is an intense amount of pressure for new employees to prove
their value quickly to their employers. Also, the anxiety and worry of a new job can facilitate the
impostor cycle for recent graduates (Clance, 1985). To illustrate, a new college graduate may fall
into the impostor cycle by procrastinating or over-preparing for their new job. Both IP coping
mechanisms are mentally exhausting and may predict job burnout and mental exhaustion for new
employees (Clance, 1985). Finding ways to mitigate this impostor experience has implications
for both the productivity and mental health for those employees entering the workforce from
college.

36

Impostor Phenomenon in Research and Development Organizational Settings
The impostor phenomenon is well-studied in both academic and healthcare organizational
settings (Armstrong & Shulman, 2019; Aubeeluck et al., 2016; Vaughn et al., 2020). However, a
review of the literature showed there was no identified research on IP and its effect on
technology employees in RDO settings. This section describes how IP can affect employees in
RDOs, and the effect it has on their productivity and motivational levels.
New Positions and Projects
In addition to entering the workforce from college, the research showed that taking on
new positions or projects can also significantly increase the IP experience (Clance, 1985). This is
important to understand because technology employees change jobs often, and are required to
continuously learn new skills to stay relevant in their organizations (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). As
an example, the research revealed that technology employees tend to change jobs on average
every two years (Majority of Surveyed Tech Employees, 2018). The literature also showed that
the reason most technology employees switch jobs is for new opportunities and job growth
(Majority of Surveyed Tech Employees, 2018). This is important because although employees
change jobs often, they may experience reduced learning, motivation, and productivity in their
new positions due to the impostor phenomenon.
Impostor Phenomenon and Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction derives from how people perceive and feel about the various aspects of
their jobs and is an important factor in employee motivation and productivity (Morrison &
Owler, 2018; Spector, 1997). Bravata et al. (2020) also asserted that IP negatively affects job
satisfaction and may increase mental exhaustion in employees. This is important to recognize
because RDOs change at an accelerated pace, which can create employee stress. In fact, one

37

study of technology employees revealed that up to 54% of the participants experienced insomnia,
depression, and anxiety due to their job stressors (Padma et al., 2015). These so-called
technology stressors define an individual’s struggle to adapt to new technology in the workplace
and can contribute to reduced job satisfaction (Padma et al., 2015).
Hutchins et al. (2018) also found that IP can decrease employee job satisfaction by
reducing the available mental resources needed to perform a job. To illustrate, if an employee is
constantly worried about being exposed as a fraud at work, they will have less time to focus on
their job productivity. These IP coping strategies bring about the additional cognitive overhead
that may lead to emotional exhaustion for employees (Hutchins et al., 2018). This lack of focus
can ultimately contribute to decreased job satisfaction and ultimately employee attrition.
To mitigate the mental distractions of IP, employers should create feedback mechanisms
and programs that help remediate impostor feelings at work. Specifically, the research revealed
that mentorship programs, employee social support groups, and consistent job feedback might
reduce impostor feelings (Hutchins et al., 2018; Lee & Morfitt, 2020; Martinez & Forrey, 2019).
These interventions can help temporarily relieve impostor feelings for employees by giving them
the opportunity to talk about their feelings with others. However, since the impostor
phenomenon works cyclically, the positive effects of these programs may diminish over time
(Clance & Imes, 1978).
Impostor Phenomenon and Work Motivation
The impostor phenomenon can negatively affect motivation when performing work tasks
(Clance & Imes, 1978). Motivation is defined as the intrapersonal behavior that compels a
person’s action to accomplish a task (Vroom, 1964). A review of the literature showed that
individuals with increased levels of IP feelings are less motivated to accomplish their goals and

38

avoid career planning (Hutchins et al., 2018). Reduced motivations in employees suffering from
IP may stem from both the fear of success or the fear of failure (Clance, 1985). To illustrate, if an
individual feels like a fraud and lacks self-efficacy, they may not believe they can accomplish a
task and their motivation is negatively affected (Neureiter & Traut-Mattausch, 2016).
Motivation is also a key construct to study in RDOs because technology jobs tend to be
self-directed. Unlike other industries where the work can be repetitive with few degrees of
freedom, technology jobs are more free-form. Technology employees are expected to create new
and innovative solutions to problems without specific guidance on how to accomplish their
deliverables. However, employees with IP might procrastinate and reduce their work output due
to a lack of motivation which could affect their career growth and impact their company’s
productivity (Hutchins et al., 2018).
Neureiter and Traut-Mattausch (2016) found that IP may also negatively impact
employee’s motivation for career growth. In a study of college students and working
professionals, the research found that fraudulent feelings dissuaded individuals from taking on
new opportunities. In other words, the participants lacked self-efficacy due to their impostor
feelings, which caused them to pass up valuable career opportunities. The same study also found
that IP negatively affected the motivation of employees to look for new projects and positions
(Neureiter & Traut-Mattausch, 2016). For example, employees with fraudulent feelings often
turned down new opportunities when presented to them because they did not feel like they
deserved them. Studying work motivation and the impostor phenomenon is important for
employees to both help grow their careers and expand their learning opportunities.

39

Impostor Phenomenon and Job Productivity
Job productivity is defined as the perceived performance of an employee’s work
outcomes (Ling et al., 2020). Employees with impostor syndrome tend to underestimate their
accomplishments and believe that they do not perform at the same level as their organizational
peers (Clance & Imes, 1978; Clance et al., 1995). These feelings of inadequacy can lead to
reduced or underestimated employee job productivity (Ling et al., 2020). To illustrate, an
employee may be performing well in their job but perceive that they are underperforming which
may cause worry about being fired due to a perceived lack of productivity.
A review of the literature also showed that anxiety and depression which are often
comorbid with impostor feelings, significantly reduced job productivity and outcomes (Erickson
et al., 2009; Mortensen, 2014; Pyc et al., 2017). The impostor phenomenon can affect job
productivity in multiple different ways. First, an employee experiencing the impostor
phenomenon may be worried about their lack of perceived job performance which creates job
anxiety. For example, an employee may objectively perform well at work, but believe they do
not meet their high standards which may cause anxious feelings. Second, the same individual can
experience diminished work performance because their anxiety and decreased self-efficacy make
them more likely to underperform or procrastinate on tasks (Mortensen, 2014).
Both cases contribute to productivity loss for the organization. Not only do businesses
lose economic productivity from reduced employee output, but they must also provide services
and counseling to mitigate their employee’s fraudulent feelings and anxiety. Therefore, studying
job productivity is important because it has implications for improving both employee mental
health and job productivity outcomes within RDOs.

40

Mental Health Implications of the Impostor Phenomenon
The American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM)
(2013) does not officially recognize the impostor phenomenon as a mental disorder. Therefore,
there is no formalized treatment for the experience. Although it is not a treatable condition, the
impostor phenomenon can negatively impact mental health in many other ways. For example,
the research showed that IP often manifests along with other serious psychological symptoms
such as anxiety, depression, guilt, and low self-esteem (Cusack et al., 2013; Ravindran, 2016;
Tiefenthaler, 2018). In addition, the research showed that mental stress was significantly linked
to the impostor phenomenon (Hampton & Feller, 2019; Levant et al., 2020). These recognized
mental health disorders are common predictors for IP, which can increase fraudulent feelings,
and lead to mental exhaustion at work (Fraenza, 2016).
The IP shares many of the same symptoms and origins of generalized anxiety disorders.
Much like IP, generalized anxiety symptoms tend to manifest in children and follow people into
adulthood (Robichaud et al., 2019). In addition, those afflicted with anxiety tend to worry about
things that are untrue or unlikely (Bandelow et al., 2017; LaFreniere & Newman, 2020). For
example, an individual with generalized anxiety may become anxious because they believe that
their supervisor is going to fire them without cause. These irrational beliefs mimic the impostor
phenomenon experience and anxiety disorder research may offer possible solutions for future
treatment methodologies including self-care, psychotherapy, and pharmacology (Chrousos et al.,
2020).
Maintaining mental health is critical for technology workers to remain motivated and
productive. Engineering and technology jobs are knowledge-based, and therefore employees are
required to have the mental acuity to do their jobs well. The additional stress that comes with

41

impostor feelings can waste valuable mental cycles that could be otherwise used to increase
productivity at work. Also, IP may make it difficult for an individual to concentrate on projects
that require creativity and innovation. Instead of focusing on their job or learning, the employee
may be more concerned about their peers exposing them as an intellectual phony.
Severe symptoms of anxiety can also affect an employee’s sense of belonging, which
makes impostors feel like an outsider in their organization (Vaughn et al., 2020). This finding is
important because fraudulent feelings can cause job burnout and turnover intentions (Kuna,
2019). For example, if people do not feel as if they are intellectually equal to their peers, they
may look for another job.
Increasing employee diversity is another significant issue RDOs face. The impostor
phenomenon may have negative implications for hiring people from underrepresented
demographics who do not feel like they belong in the technology industry. This aspect of
belonging is important because it also has implications for maintaining diversity in RDOs as they
are less diverse than other industries (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2014).
For example, a woman with impostor feelings in a RDO that is predominantly male may
experience both fraudulent feelings from the impostor phenomenon and a lack of belonging due
to their gender identity. These combined effects of IP, gender bias, and stereotype threat may
drastically decrease a person’s feeling of belonging at work, which can lead to increased and
costly job turnover (Fraenza, 2016; Kuna, 2019). To understand this phenomenon, additional
research is needed to analyze the stack-up effects of the impostor phenomenon and gender biases
in the technology workforce.

42

Comorbid Mental Disorders
Impostor phenomenon occurs when high-performing professionals refuse to believe they
deserve their achievements, which increases their fraudulent feelings (Clance & Imes, 1978).
Although the APA does not officially recognize it as a disorder, the research suggests that IP is
transdiagnostic and shares other significant relationships with diagnosable mental conditions
(Urwin, 2018). Cusack et al. (2013) found that in a study of 506 participants, there were
significant links to IP and multiple different maladaptive symptoms, beliefs, and personality
traits including neuroticism. This section describes the three main mental disorders and traits that
are predictors of the impostor phenomenon.
Perfectionism
The research found significant ties between the impostor phenomenon and perfectionist
traits (Cusack et al., 2013; Pannhausen et al., 2020). Specifically, the literature revealed that
perfectionism was a significant predictor for and often comorbid with IP (Cusack et al., 2013;
Thomas & Bigatti, 2020). In addition to anxiety, individuals with perfectionist tendencies tend to
obsess over past accomplishments that they perceived as not being perfect, which further
facilitated impostor feelings. In other words, an impostor may reflect on a past project that was
perceived to not have been perfect which then drives their overpreparation for the next project.
Anxiety
Because impostors have such high standards that are often not met, anxiety is common
for those who suffer from the phenomenon. Research showed that generalized anxiety is the
second-highest predictor for IP behind perfectionist personality traits (Fraenza, 2016). In fact,
professional psychologists recommend that the individuals who experience anxiety along with IP
feelings treat the underlying generalized anxiety disorder first to help mediate their

43

transdiagnostic fraudulent feelings (Bernard et al., 2002). Given the positive and persistent
relationship with IP, treating underlying anxiety first may have implications for decreasing
fraudulent feelings in individuals (Rakestraw, 2017). This is important because treatments for
anxiety may lead to similar interventions for the impostor phenomenon.
Depression
In addition to anxiety, impostors experience other distressing psychological effects.
Tigranyan et al. (2020) revealed that there is a significant correlation between IP feelings and
depression. Further research supported and suggested that impostor feelings may be a predictor
for depression (McGregor et al., 2008). However, it is important to note that no research
indicated that depression was a predictor for the impostor phenomenon.
Barriers to Mediating the Impostor Phenomenon
Although the literature revealed different mediation strategies for the impostor
phenomenon, there are many different challenges and barriers to addressing IP symptoms for
technology employees. For example, the research showed that there are different types of
impostor personas, causes, and behaviors that predict fraudulent feelings in employees (Clance,
1985; Langford & Clance, 1993). These different factors make diagnosis and treatment of the
impostor phenomenon challenging.
The following section details the various barriers to treating the impostor phenomenon
and its symptoms. For this study, Bandura’s (1986) SCT determinants of personal traits,
behavior, and the environment act as a theoretical guide to analyzing those suffering from the
impostor phenomenon. These three cognitive determinants also have implications for future
interventions and treatment for those suffering from the impostor phenomenon.

44

Personal Traits
Langford and Clance (1993) found that there are multiple personality traits and factors to
consider when assessing how to treat impostor feelings. The research recommendations primarily
focused on different types of talk therapy to explore the confounding factors and causes of the
phenomenon. For example, therapists can focus on family history to reveal the reasons impostors
strive for perfection and feel pressured to achieve (Langford & Clance, 1993). By exploring their
childhood and parental interactions, those afflicted with the impostor syndrome may be able to
better understand the etiologies of the impostor phenomenon.
Behaviors
Impostors exhibit certain behaviors that can be triggers for the impostor phenomenon.
For example, Chakraverty (2020) found that self-comparison to peers and having to ask others
for help were some of the primary triggers of IP in graduate students. To mediate these triggers,
the research recommended group therapy to help change the thoughts and behaviors of impostors
(Matthews & Clance, 1985). In other words, therapists can help impostors challenge the fears
and thoughts that cause employees to feel like they do not deserve their accomplishments.
Additionally, the research recommended utilizing cognitive-behavioral techniques like
identifying impostor feelings and addressing them through self-talk (Clance, 1985). As an
illustration, if an individual finds themselves comparing their success to others, they could
recognize the impostorism symptoms and adjust their behavior by reminding themselves that
they are successful and do not need to compare themselves to others.
Impostor phenomenon beliefs about success and self-worth are another important area of
focus for treatment and interventions. The research showed that low self-esteem is a predictor of
the impostor phenomenon (Schubert & Bowker, 2019). Impostors also tend to exhibit a positive

45

relationship between their accomplishments and their self-esteem (Bernard et al., 2002). For
example, someone suffering from the impostor phenomenon may temporarily get a reprieve from
their anxiety by accomplishing a difficult task. However, after a brief period, the individual may
fall back into the impostor cycle and the worry of being exposed as a fraud returns (Clance &
Imes, 1978). For this reason, therapists should focus on recognizing impostor beliefs and
mitigating behavioral triggers that promote the impostor cycle for those suffering from the
impostor phenomenon.
The Environment
The work environment is another area which can facilitate or mitigate impostor feelings.
The work environment is important to understand because the research showed that up to 58% of
technology employees experience the impostor phenomenon at work (Kim, 2018). Also, the
work environment is particularly important for technology employees who feel like impostors
because of the fast pace of innovation in their jobs. For example, the half-life of a technology
skill is roughly 12 to 18 months (Johnson et al., 2017). This means that individuals must quickly
learn new skills to do their job and adapt to their changing work environment.
Those afflicted with impostor feelings may lack the self-efficacy to acquire new skills,
which in turn may decrease their motivation to learn and eventually decrease their productivity.
To mitigate this effect, employers can facilitate learning in the work environment by investing in
employee environmental resources (Richmond et al., 2017). For example, if an employee has
access to training, example materials, and mentors they are much more likely to succeed at
learning the new skill (Bandura, 1997). Therefore, understanding the environmental triggers and
negative reinforcing factors that contribute to the impostor phenomenon for technology
employees is critical to mediating its effects.

46

Coping with the Impostor Phenomenon
A review of the literature showed that there are many different strategies utilized to cope
with the feelings associated with the impostor phenomenon. Lawton et al. (2020) found that
recognizing fraudulent feelings and discussing them with trusted peers can reduce the intensity
of the impostor phenomenon. Additionally, formal employee assistance programs (EAPs) that
provide coaching and training can help mitigate the negative mental health effects of IP and
reduce absenteeism (Hutchins et al., 2018; Nunes et al., 2018; Richmond et al., 2017). Many of
these programs offer individualized assistance and therapy sessions for employees to discuss
their fraudulent feelings with licensed therapists. However, more research is needed on the long-
term efficacy of these approaches to coping with the impostor phenomenon in the technology
work environment.
Examining the way impostors cope with their fraudulent feelings can help reveal future
interventions in the workplace. For example, individuals can attempt to evade their IP feelings by
disengaging from projects or tasks that increase the intensity of IP (Hutchins et al., 2018). As an
example, an individual with a stressful project that brings about IP feelings may procrastinate to
avoid the work. These maladaptive coping mechanisms can decrease employee motivation to
progress and thus reduce productivity in the workplace.
Avoidant coping mechanisms like procrastination are particularly harmful because they
can increase mental stress, which contributes to job burnout and lack of motivation (Hutchins et
al., 2018). As an example, if an employee disengages from a difficult project, they may receive
increased pressure from their superiors as the deadline for the project approaches. This increased
pressure from their supervisor further increases stress which may intensify the employee’s worry

47

and anxiety. By avoiding and denying their IP feelings, individuals can delay more efficacious
therapy which can lead to job burnout and depression.
Coping Strategies
A review of the literature showed a lack of specific clinical coping treatment strategies
identified for the IP (Bravata et al., 2020). However, the research revealed multiple different
ways by which individuals often self-cope with the impostor phenomenon. As an example,
Hutchins and Rainbolt (2017) described four different ways by which impostors may cope with
their feelings. These include seeking social support, validating their success, engaging in
maladaptive behaviors, and positive self-talk. The research also showed that most individuals
suffering from IP employ two or more of these different approaches to cope with their impostor
feelings (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017). For example, an individual may seek social support from
friends and engage in positive self-talk when their impostor feelings are most intense. The
interaction between these strategies is important to understand because they have implications
for successfully mitigating IP without resulting in maladaptive personal behaviors. The
description of Hutchins and Rainbolt’s (2017) four impostor coping strategies is as follows.
Social Support
Social support involves talking to trusted family or friends about impostor feelings.
Hutchins and Rainbolt (2017) found that discussing fraudulent feelings with other trusted
individuals helped alleviate the symptoms of IP. This coping strategy is meaningful because it is
not maladaptive in nature and can easily be employed by people suffering from IP. However, this
approach may not help relieve other comorbid disorders that predict IP such as anxiety or
depression.

48

Validation of Success
The validation of success is a cognitive technique that objectively reflects on past
accomplishments to validate an individual’s personal attributions (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017).
Essentially, individuals acknowledge their past success and consider the reasons behind their
achievements. For example, keeping a journal of major accomplishments and their feelings
associated with those accomplishments can help those suffering from the impostor phenomenon
objectively accept their past success (Wilkinson, 2020). These strategies also help impostors
reinforce the attribution of their accomplishments to personal ability.
Maladaptive Behaviors
Individuals should avoid maladaptive behaviors when coping with the impostor
phenomenon. Some of the maladaptive behaviors the researchers identified included behaviors
like substance abuse and working excessively to suppress impostor feelings (Hutchins &
Rainbolt, 2017; Mir & Kamal, 2018). By employing these strategies, individuals can increase
their risk of burnout and mental exhaustion at work (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017). In addition,
relying on substance abuse to cope with the impostor phenomenon can result in severe health and
family issues.
Positive Affirmation
Positive affirmation can help individuals cope by recognizing their accomplishments. The
research showed that positive self-talk helped diminish IP feelings by reaffirming that
individuals earned their success through their ability (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017). For example,
when individuals feel like a fraud at work, they could repeat to themselves that they are not a
fraud and that they earned their position through their ability. This strategy may work well in

49

combination with the validation of personal success techniques. To illustrate, an individual could
use their written journal of accomplishments to reinforce their positive self-affirmations.
Strategies for Mitigating the Impostor Phenomenon
Self-Recognition of Symptoms
The impostor phenomenon affects the way individuals feel, think, and act in their
workplace (Harvey & Katz, 1985). The research is conflicting regarding whether those that
experience IP can ever be cured of their impostor feelings. However, there is a body of literature
that claims that symptoms may decrease over time with self-practice techniques (Gluckman,
2017; Rakestraw, 2017). Since IP is not a recognized mental disorder, it is imperative to
understand how to mitigate the effects and symptoms of IP that technology employees
experience. Aside from coping strategies, there are other ways to decrease the symptoms of IP
including the cognitive recognition of impostor feelings.
It is imperative that individuals recognize and understand IP so they can seek the
appropriate resources needed to help overcome it. Clance (1985) found that most people have
trouble identifying their symptoms and the underlying causes of the impostor phenomenon. This
is important because identifying fraudulent feelings and self-recognizing the phenomenon can
help reduce the anxiety of fraudulent feelings (Atkin, 2020; Harvey & Katz, 1985). For example,
the research showed that impostor phenomenon awareness programs for employees helped
decrease mental stress at work (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017).
Managing Impostor Feelings
The research showed that there are different ways to mitigate impostor feelings. One
strategy to mitigate IP is to journal fraudulent feelings over time. By writing down when one
feels like an impostor, individuals can recognize when they are in the impostor cycle and find

50

ways to break out of it (Clance, 1985; Harvey & Katz, 1985). Journaling is particularly important
to describe their fraudulent feelings relative to what the person accomplished. This technique is
significant because it shows the contrast between how that person feels and what they achieved
(Clance, 1985). Also, written self-reflection gives impostors the opportunity to revisit the
situation that triggers impostor thoughts and acknowledge their behaviors as part of the process.
By reflecting on their accomplishments, impostors can reduce anxiety-inducing episodes (Craig,
2018). In other words, a journal can become a way to reflect and understand how an individual
interacts within the impostor cycle-which can lead to decreased impostor feelings
Another strategy for reducing the effects of IP is for individuals to consciously limit the
amount of worry they experience. Clance (1985) recommends that people compare an upcoming
stressful task to similar successful past accomplishments. For example, if an individual has a big
presentation coming up, those suffering from IP could think back to a time they gave a similar
presentation that was successful. From there, individuals can create a mental expectation of how
they will react to their IP feelings in the situation and be able to consciously limit their stress
(Clance, 1985). Individuals can also use mental visualization to foresee themselves
accomplishing the future task without anxiety to help alleviate their IP symptoms (Clance, 1985).
Overall, acknowledging previous accomplishments may help alleviate feelings of inadequacy
and worry for impostors.
The impostor cycle can be mentally exhausting for those suffering from IP due to the
over-preparation it triggers individuals to put into tasks. The fear of failure and perfectionist
tendencies may also cause individuals to spend unnecessary hours on projects. These
maladaptive coping mechanisms are essential to mitigate because they can lead to mental
exhaustion and job burnout (Clance & Imes, 1978). To reduce the amount of overpreparation, the

51

research recommended experimenting with non-critical projects to find the right amount of time
needed to accomplish a task (Clance, 1985). As an illustration, an individual can assess the
amount of time needed for a difficult but non-critical task and then deliberately reduce the time
allocated to prepare (Clance, 1985). From there, individuals can consciously adjust the time
needed relative to the outcomes to find the “right” amount of time to allocate to projects. This
exercise is important because it teaches those who tend to overwork how to limit the time spent
on projects, which will eventually lead them to avoid burnout.
Another important way to break the impostor cycle is to understand the ways in which
impostors process and accept positive feedback. Although receiving feedback and praise are
common for those suffering from IP, most impostors do not recognize the importance of
receiving recognition (Clance, 1985). Like the other ways of mitigating IP feelings, the research
recommends impostors create a journal or email folder that details significant anchor
accomplishments along with a narrative of their feelings and the praise they received for each
achievement (Clance, 1985). In other words, as a person accomplishes things, they can write
down what they accomplished, how they felt about it, and the specific praise they received from
others. Each accomplishment could then be reviewed relative to their fraudulent feelings and the
external feedback they received. Reviewing the feedback also helps impostors identify why they
are unaccepting of deserved praise. This exercise may help individuals suffering from IP take a
more objective view of praise and ultimately be more accepting of it.
Cognitive Behavioral Treatment Strategies
Aside from journaling, the research revealed other steps individuals can take to decrease
the intensity of IP feelings. Harvey and Katz (1985) recommend four different exercises to help
individuals prevent fraudulent feelings. The first step is to recognize when impostors are most

52

likely to experience IP symptoms. This allows individuals to recognize patterns and set
expectations for IP feelings, which can reduce the intensity of their symptoms. If individuals
have an idea of when to expect the IP, they can take steps to help reduce the effects or plan for it
to avoid being mentally overwhelmed by the effects (Harvey & Katz, 1985).
Once people can recognize the triggers of IP feelings, the second step is to reduce the
symptoms through positive self-talk (Harvey & Katz, 1985). To reduce the severity of impostor
feelings, individuals can mentally remind themselves that the IP is just a temporary feeling. In
other words, individuals can remind themselves that IP means they only feel like a fraud, and
they are not actually a fraud. Harvey and Katz (1985) recommend that individuals assess their
impostor feelings and determine if they are based on reason or are irrational in nature.
The third step to mitigate IP is to decrease mental stress and attempt to relax (Harvey &
Katz, 1985). The IP can cause worry, fear, and generalized anxiety. These symptoms may reduce
both employee job performance and motivation (Badawy et al., 2018). The combined effects of
stress and the IP also make it increasingly difficult to cope with fraudulent feelings (Harvey &
Katz, 1985). To moderate these fears, individuals should focus on self-relaxation techniques such
as focused breathing, physical activity, or listening to relaxing music.
The fourth step for decreasing IP feelings involves breaking down complex projects into
smaller parts. The research showed that people can experience IP when taking on new jobs or
complex tasks. Instead of focusing on the worry and anxiety of IP experience, individuals should
channel their thoughts into breaking down the difficult task that is causing their symptoms
(Harvey & Katz, 1985). For example, if an individual needs to figure out how to learn a new
programming language, they should learn the smallest basic functionality of it first. By
deconstructing the task, the discrete parts seem more manageable which can alleviate some of

53

the anxiety people experience. In addition, breaking tasks down into smaller parts allows the
individual to form a strong knowledge base to learn from. This process also helps those who tend
to procrastinate on tasks due to the overwhelming amount of work presented to them. Taking a
complex project and breaking it into smaller parts or goals may increase self-efficacy along with
reducing the tendency to procrastinate (Clance, 1985; Bandura, 1997; Tosi et al., 1991).
Environmental Interventions
In addition to personalized interventions for the impostor phenomenon, the research
explored how the environment affects IP (Feenstra et al. 2020; Slank, 2019). Outside of
generalized research environments, the body of literature revealed a few specific coping
strategies for impostor feeling in business environments and settings. For example, Hutchins
(2015) found that there were two adaptive coping strategies that academic faculty at universities
employed when experiencing IP thoughts. The research indicated that the teachers and
facilitators benefited from employing self-directive and supportive approaches to address their
feelings. Specifically, the faculty employed humor to express their fraudulent feelings and
conversed with their support network to help alleviate impostor symptoms (Hutchins, 2015).
The research also revealed that cognitive recognition and mindfulness are effective
coping strategies for business leaders (KH & Menon, 2020; Lawton et al., 2020). For example,
KH and Menon (2020) found that business leaders often used techniques like meditation and
breathing exercises to reduce impostor feelings. These relaxation techniques have the added
benefit of reducing the ancillary IP symptoms of anxiety and worry. To help promote these
coping strategies in business environments, companies may construct programs that build
awareness of the impostor phenomenon, and provide on-site resources to discuss impostor
feelings (McClurg & Jones, 2018).

54

Hutchins and Rainbolt (2017) also recommended specific approaches such as formal
employee training to recognize impostor symptoms, facilitated workgroup discussions, and
additional support for those transitioning jobs. Also, Ramsey and Spencer (2019) stated that
facilitating role-playing scenarios in groups for those who experience fraudulent feelings may
have implications for mediating the IP at work. Without environmental work programs and
interventions to cope with impostor feelings, organizations risk employee job burnout and the
other long-term negative effects of avoidant coping strategies.
Other Mitigation Strategies
A review of the literature revealed other strategies that may be effective in reducing IP
feelings. For example, connecting with others to discuss impostor feelings was a common
intervention recognized across the research (Hutchins & Rainbolt, 2017; Lee & Morfitt, 2020).
The research also recommended talking about IP feelings with trusted colleagues, mentors, and
mental health professionals (Chapman, 2017; Rakestraw, 2017; Sturges, 2018).
In addition to talk therapy, the literature recommended speaking with mental health
professionals to address any other underlying mental disorders. Since IP is often comorbid with
anxiety, depression, and worry, health care professionals may be able to treat the other
underlying symptoms that intensify IP (Bravata et al., 2020; Chapman, 2017). Remediating the
other treatable mental health issues can help provide mental cycles to address IP without being
overwhelmed by the combined mental effects. By seeking help from a professional, any other
underlying symptoms of depression or anxiety can also be identified and treated.
Theoretical Framework
Bandura’s (1986) SCT provided the guiding theoretical framework for this study.
Psychologist Albert Bandura formulated the SCT by studying children’s behavior and learning

55

processes. Bandura (1986) asserted through SCT that people learn through observing and
modeling others. Bandura explained in his theory that learning occurs through the interaction of
concepts including personal traits, behavior, and the environment (Bandura, 1986). These
concepts may interact together in complex ways to affect learning, motivation, and the
achievement of individual goals (Bandura, 1986).
The SCT presented a way to examine technology employees experiencing the impostor
phenomenon and their perceived productivity and motivational levels. Specifically, SCT may
help illuminate common learning concepts like self-efficacy, motivation, and achievement
attributions. These same constructs interact with the impostor phenomenon experience and can
be used to explore the relationships between SCT determinants and the effect on technology
employee productivity and motivation. Also, by relating SCT determinants to the impostor
phenomenon, Bandura’s (1986) framework may help reveal ways to mitigate technology
employee impostor symptoms.
Social Cognitive Theory Determinants
Personal attributes, behaviors, and the environment are the three SCT determinants that
reveal how individuals learn and achieve goals (Bandura, 1986). This section provides a brief
overview and a description of each concept. The SCT determinants are important to understand
because they play an important role in assessing self-efficacy, perceived motivation, and the
productivity of technology employees who experience the impostor phenomenon.
Personal Traits
Bandura (1986) stated that personal attributes and thoughts directly influence an
individual’s motivation levels and self-efficacy toward learning. In other words, if a person
believes they are proficient at a certain type of task, they are more likely to be motivated to start

56

and persist through a similar one. As an example, if a writer has written multiple successful
books, they can use their previous experiences to motivate themselves to write another book.
However, personal traits can also decrease self-efficacy and motivation levels. To illustrate, if an
individual misattributed a past achievement to something other than their ability such as luck or
effort, their self-efficacy can decrease. These misattributions of past accomplishments can
negatively affect outcome expectations and perceived self-efficacy. Ultimately, misattributions
may affect an individual’s motivation to learn or persist in accomplishing a task.
Behavior
Behavioral factors play a part in the self-efficacy of individual goal setting and the
motivation to learn new skills (Bandura, 1986). People use social interactions and modeled
behaviors to influence their learning based on the outcomes they experience. Depending on
whether the interactions are positive or negative, our behaviors and attitudes toward the task
change accordingly (Bandura, 1986). As an example, if a child who plays soccer receives
negative feedback about their skills from other children, it may cause the child to quit playing
soccer (behavior) and dislike the sport altogether (attitude).
Environment
Finally, the environment is an important factor in learning and motivation. Environmental
concepts like social norms, access to resources, and external influences can shape the way people
learn (Bandura, 1986). To be successful at a task, individuals must have the environmental
resources to help facilitate their learning (Bandura, 1986). As an example, if a software engineer
must learn a new skill at work, companies should provide external support for the task to
facilitate the learning. In this situation, environmental support would include opportunities such
as formal training, access to books on the topic, and a place to experiment with newly acquired

57

skills. Without the support of their surrounding environment, employees may experience
decreased motivation to attempt new learning experiences.
Reciprocal Determinism
To describe the interactions between the three SCT determinants, Bandura (1986) coined
the term reciprocal determinism. Reciprocal determinism helps explain how a person learns and
reacts to situations through the interaction of their personal traits, behaviors, and the environment
(Bandura, 1986). For example, Bandura (1986) gives the example of how a child that likes
school (personal trait) will study extra hard to achieve high marks (behavior). To reward the
behavior, the teachers may give the child special privileges in class (environment). These
reciprocal interactions can also affect the other children because they learned through observing
their classmates that studying can lead to other privileges (Bandura, 1986). In this case, each
determinant interacted with the others to influence the child, the teacher, and the other student’s
behavior as well.
Learning can originate from any of the three determinants, and it can occur in any order
(Bandura, 1986). For example, if a child observes other children playing soccer and having fun
(personal trait) they are motivated to play along with the other children (environment). If the
child’s experience is positive, they are more likely to continue to practice and continue to play
soccer (behavior).

58

Figure 1
Reciprocal Determinism

Note. Adapted from Bandura (1986).

Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is defined as the perceived belief in “how well one can execute courses of
action required to deal with prospective situations” (Bandura, 1982, p. 122). Self-efficacy is
critical to understanding the impostor phenomenon because the research showed it has mediating
effects on fraudulent feelings (McDowell et al., 2015). In addition, the literature showed that
self-efficacy has a significant and negative relationship with the impostor phenomenon (Tao &
Gloria, 2019). In other words, those with increased levels of self-efficacy tend to have decreased
impostor feelings. This is important because increasing perceived self-efficacy may have
implications for treating the impostor phenomenon. Also, the self-efficacy component of SCT
has implications for increasing employee productivity and motivation within RDOs. At work,
self-efficacy enables employees from a behavioral perspective to start and persist through
difficult tasks (Bandura, 1978). Without increased levels of self-efficacy, people tend to

59

procrastinate starting new projects, or they give up easily when faced with adversity while
completing a task.
The three SCT determinants of personal traits, behaviors, and the environment can
influence levels of self-efficacy in individuals (Bandura, 1986). The determinants interact to
enable self-efficacy through reflection of personal beliefs and past experiences. Basically, if
people have done similar tasks in the past like the one presented to them, their confidence for
accomplishing the task will increase. This behavioral determinant reinforces focus, practice, and
persistence to accomplish difficult projects (Bandura, 1986). The environmental determinants
provide additional external resources that help facilitate and expedite progress on difficult tasks.
In other words, it is easier to learn a new language if everyone around you in your environment
speaks the language you are trying to learn. Together, these determinants form the underpinnings
of learning and motivation that build and reinforce self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy is central to Bandura’s (1986) SCT concept of individual agency, which
stated that people must believe in their abilities, or they will not have the motivation to achieve
their goals (Bandura, 2000). In other words, motivation to accomplish goals comes from
reflecting on past similar experiences that increase the confidence of individuals. Take for
example, a senior technology employee that completed multiple big and ambiguous projects in
the past. Because they were successful with the other projects, they may be motivated to take on
similar projects in the future because they built a foundation of self-efficacy through prior
experiences. However, someone new to their position may not have the initial confidence to start
what is perceived as a daunting project due to their lack of previous experience.
Self-efficacy is also important to understand because people with strong beliefs in their
abilities “think, feel, and behave differently from those who have doubts about their capabilities”

60

(Bandura, 1988, pp. 285). Confidence and belief in one’s ability may help reduce the mental
stressors that reduce energy and increase burnout at work. Those that exhibit increased self-
efficacy at work feel in control of their environment and believe they have the skills to solve
emergent situations without additional worry about whether they can address the problem
(Bandura, 1997).
People with increased self-efficacy also have greater motivation and the willingness to
act on opportunities and challenges (Bandura & Cervone, 1986). To put it another way, people
with confidence in their ability to achieve will take on bigger challenges and positions over time.
Additionally, efficacious individuals can quickly recover from failures at work and feel a sense
of control over their work environment (Bandura, 1994). However, those that lack self-efficacy
may pass up new positions and opportunities due to their fear of failure or inability to decide on a
path forward.
Aside from enhanced motivation, self-efficacy may reduce stress and ultimately improve
employee’s mental health (Bandura, 1994). Having confidence in one’s ability reduces the
cognitive uncertainty of whether that task can be accomplished and thus decreases mental stress.
Instead of focusing on these additional stressors, employees can reinvest their psychological
energy into starting, persisting, and accomplishing difficult projects. Therefore, learning to
improve self-efficacy is important because it has important indications for increased employee
productivity and motivation.
According to Bandura (1997), self-efficacy is a primary determinant for individual task
mastery and goal attainment. In other words, individuals tend to not persist through a difficult
task without a sense of self-efficacy. The research also showed that self-efficacy is also a
predictor of increased individual performance (Bandura, 1986; Day & Allen, 2004). The added

61

motivation and tenacity that comes from self-efficacy may help individuals accomplish difficult
tasks in an expedited manner. However, a common cause of performance breakdown is the
failure to maintain enough levels of self-efficacy to persevere through difficult tasks (Bandura,
1997). Therefore, building and sustaining self-efficacy levels is key to maintaining task
momentum and achievements over time.
Besides increased motivation and productivity, self-efficacy is also positively correlated
with employee determination and motivation to accomplish their learning goals (Bandura, 1997).
Those individuals with increased self-efficacy are often recognized at work for their tenacity to
accomplish tasks and are rewarded with additional career growth opportunities, promotions, and
raises. Overall, self-efficacy may be a significant factor in increasing both productivity and
motivation in work environments.
Sources of Self-Efficacy
According to Bandura (1997), self-efficacy can be built from the three sources of mastery
experiences, vicarious learning, verbal persuasion, and manipulation of physiological states.
Each of these areas interacts with one another to influence an individual’s self-efficacy beliefs.
Although each efficacy method is not equally effective, combined, they represent a powerful set
of tools that can be used to significantly increase self-efficacy.
Mastery Experiences
Of the four methods to increase self-efficacy, mastery experiences are the strongest
predictor for building increased confidence in one’s abilities (Bandura, 1989). Mastery
experiences are also a way to build self-efficacy by structuring goals in a manner that does not
mentally overwhelm people. This method also includes reflecting on past accomplishments to
build confidence and breaking down complex tasks into smaller parts. Reflecting on past success

62

and accomplishments raises self-expectations, which in turn increases the likelihood of self-
efficacy toward future goals (Bandura, 1997).
Bandura (1997) also stated that to build efficacy within difficult tasks, people must break
down large tasks into small more achievable ones. Without deconstructing difficult goals, the
expectation of completion decreases, and the psychological ability to persist is diminished.
However, completing smaller tasks that work toward a bigger goal can slowly build confidence
and develop self-efficacy. Also, without adequate framing, large tasks may decrease levels of
perceived self-efficacy in individuals. For example, if a learner repeatedly fails at a task because
it is mentally overwhelming, the perceived ability to accomplish the goal diminishes and they do
not persist (Bandura, 1997).
The amount of effort and energy allocated to personal goals may directly relate to self-
efficacy and a person’s ability to maintain motivation. Achieving goals and exerting effort leads
to skill acquisition, which in turn can be used for even greater achievements (Bandura, 1997). It
is also important to structure goals so they are achievable but difficult enough to build
confidence. Building self-efficacy entails sizing the learning opportunities based on the
individual’s capabilities and efficacy levels. To promote the learning process, individuals must
constantly self-assess how they feel about their progress while attempting difficult tasks. For
example, if an employee struggles during the middle of a complex project, they should reassess
why they are struggling and further break down the tasks until they feel their level of perceived
efficacy increases. This diagnostic check is important because struggling to attain a skill can be a
psychological signal of low capabilities to individuals. As a result, this process can decrease self-
efficacy (Bandura, 1997). If an individual persists on a task for too long without making

63

progress, their motivation and perception of their ability to complete the task may decrease
(Bandura, 1997).
Vicarious Learning
Individuals learn by observing the experiences of others through what Bandura (1986)
calls the vicarious learning experience. As an example, for technology employees, it is easier to
learn basic coding skills by watching senior employees code before attempting to do it
themselves. However, learning by observing others to accomplish difficult tasks is a less reliable
source of self-efficacy. To learn vicariously, the task must be clearly linked to outcomes. In the
programming example, if an individual watches someone code but never sees a clear
accomplishment from their effort, the experience is confusing for the learner and does not
facilitate increased knowledge acquisition. Essentially, if a person observes behavior but cannot
directly link it to the outcome, their expectations of accomplishing a similar task decrease
(Bandura, 1986).
Instead of vicarious learning through simply watching others, modeling behavior and
actions is a more effective way to build self-efficacy. Bandura (1997) gives the example of a
high jumper who knows how high they can jump in comparison to others and how they can
observe and learn skills from the other more proficient athletes. Learning through others may
also increase the confidence of people who are already efficacious (Bandura, 1997). Therefore,
to build self-efficacy vicariously, it is better to have experts model the behavior rather than
simply observing complex tasks with unclear links to outcomes.
Like mastery experiences, vicarious learning can also negatively affect self-efficacy if not
utilized correctly (Bandura, 1997). For example, individuals must respect the person modeling
the task. If people perceive the person modeling the behavior to be less competent than they are,

64

the vicarious learning experience is not as effective. Also, observing others that we deem like
ourselves fail at a complex task lowers our perceived ability to accomplish the goal (Bandura,
1997). This same phenomenon also applies when we observe others complete their goals, but
struggle greatly during the process. Instead of promoting confidence, people reassess their
capabilities relative to the person and the effort they expended (Bandura, 1997).
Bandura (1997) stated that for vicarious learning to be effective, individuals must also
observe someone they deem competent finish a difficult task without excessive toil. If these
conditions can be met, modeling through social comparison can provide an effective mechanism
to learn. However, the conditions modeled must be clearly and directly related to outcomes
(Bandura, 1997). However, if learners observe others that fail or struggle to accomplish a task, it
creates uncertainty in personal abilities which may result in decreased self-efficacy (Bandura,
1997).
Verbal Persuasion
Verbal persuasion is the method of inspiring people to believe that they can take on or
persist through a difficult task (Bandura, 1997). Persuasion is the least effective of the four
strategies for building self-efficacy but can be readily used as a method to encourage others
(Bandura, 1997). As an example, people can verbally encourage others to persist through
difficult tasks when they are struggling to accomplish goals. Like vicarious learning, the success
of this technique relies on the perceived trustworthiness of the person giving the encouragement
and the type of recommendations. To illustrate, a senior technology employee that gives specific
encouragement to a junior employee will have increased message validity to the junior employee
receiving the message.

65

External feedback from others can also be an effective technique to bolster self-
confidence while individuals expend effort on accomplishing a task (Bandura, 1997). That is to
say, persuasion tends to work when used during the task rather than to get started on a task. Also,
those that receive positive encouragement while trying to complete their goal tend to persist
longer, which leads to greater rates of completion (Bandura, 1997).
Communication and positive feedback may also increase feelings of self-efficacy. To
ensure feedback reinforces self-efficacy, the messages must come from respected individuals and
be framed in a way that relates to an individual’s performance (Bandura, 1997). To illustrate,
positive feedback at regular intervals that calls-out specific smaller accomplishments of a bigger
complex job can improve self-efficacy, motivation, and persistence. However, feedback that
focuses on the person’s increased level of effort expended may negatively affect confidence
(Bandura, 1997). In other words, giving feedback on how many hours a learner spent on a task
may decrease self-efficacy. Because increased effort is a psychological signal of lack of ability,
this type of feedback is counterproductive to the learner’s motivation (Bandura, 1997).
Verbal persuasion can help facilitate the learning process through specific feedback that
modifies the learner’s approach to the task. Because learners cannot accurately and objectively
judge their performance relative to a task, external feedback can help correct task behavior
(Bandura, 1997). In other words, verbal feedback can help correct the things that the learner
cannot see and help expedite the learning process. However, most people believe that they are
the best judge of their aptitude and abilities (Bandura, 1997). Thus, the trustworthiness of the
person offering the feedback and verbal persuasion is important for this technique to work
(Bandura, 1997). This is important because if people do not trust the person’s capabilities, the
feedback is perceived as not valid and disregarded. To illustrate this, if a senior technology

66

employee receives feedback from a new junior-level employee, the validity of the feedback will
be diminished because the senior employee perceives that they “know better” due to their
seniority. Therefore, the level of perceived capability in the person providing encouragement
must be considered when utilizing verbal persuasion as a technique to increase efficacy.
In addition to trust, the type of appraisal feedback matters when attempting to sustain
learning motivation. Verbal persuaders should focus their attention on the achievement of
smaller milestones that are relatively close to completion (Bandura, 1997). If the feedback solely
focuses on past accomplishments or the completion of the overall task, the feedback could be
overwhelming and weaken both the self-efficacy of the learner and the credibility of the person
giving the feedback (Bandura, 1997).
In summary, for verbal persuasion to make an impact on individuals, it must be from a
credible source such as a senior employee and given at both the right time and at the right level
of specificity. Without these factors, the task performers may disregard the feedback as
misleading, which in turn reduces self-efficacy and the effectiveness of the method altogether
(Bandura, 1997).
Stress Reduction
Another method for increasing self-efficacy includes reducing psychological stressors to
increase or decrease an individual’s perceived ability to complete a task. In certain
circumstances, moderately increased stress and anxiety can temporarily increase the level of self-
efficacy to deal with urgent situations (Bandura, 1997). For example, the stress of starting a new
job can motivate people to work extra hard to learn and quickly create value in their new
position. These perceived low to moderate levels of stress and anxiety can increase productivity
and the motivation to learn (Bandura, 1997). However, people with intense and elevated levels of

67

stress can induce paralyzing internal thoughts of fear that can cause procrastination and worry,
which ultimately decreases task performance and productivity (Bandura, 1986).
A learner’s level of stress and anxiety is important to understand because the self-
perception of an individual’s physiological state also affects task perseverance. Badura (1997)
found that low to moderate levels of stress and anxiety can temporarily increase motivation
levels and heighten skills in individuals. These moderate levels of stress help activate skills and
can promote performance and learning. However, severe levels of stress diminish task
persistence and the willingness to learn (Bandura, 1997).
Managing cognitive stressors is a primary strategy to increase self-efficacy and reduce
the negative effects of anxiety. Increased levels of anxiety and stress during learning may signal
a lack of ability for employees struggling to accomplish a difficult task (Bandura, 1997). These
feelings can again amplify stress, which creates additional fear and worry that interferes with the
cycle of learning.
A person’s mood can also positively and negatively affect feelings of self-efficacy. To
deal with the stressors that interfere with learning and self-efficacy, individuals must improve
their physical and emotional states (Bandura, 1997). Since people deal with and experience
anxiety differently, there is no single recommendation for stress reduction. Instead, individuals
must assess their levels of stress and mitigate the effects individually to increase perceived self-
efficacy.
Additionally, individuals tend to remember physiological symptoms and map those
memories to feelings that can influence future states of arousal. This is particularly important
because physical conditions such as sweating for example can be psychologically interpreted as
an emotional state of worry or fear (Bandura, 1997). To illustrate, if you experience nervousness

68

and a racing pulse while giving a speech, you will expect the same result while completing this
task in the future. Those with diminished rates of self-efficacy are particularly vulnerable to this
effect (Bandura, 1997). The research also showed that learners who misinterpret physiological
symptoms may be susceptible to general anxiety and even panic attacks (Bandura, 1997). Going
back to the speech example, the orator’s racing heart may evolve into a full-blown panic attack
for those with decreased levels of self-efficacy.
The physiological state of an individual is an important factor in building self-efficacy for
multiple reasons. Intense physical reactions from stress directly relate to emotional states within
learners, and can be predictors for reduced self-efficacy. However, moderate levels of stress can
increase motivation and sharpen attention to complex tasks. To mitigate the negative effects of
physiological reactions, individuals must self-assess the types and levels of stress and find ways
to mediate the effects to preserve their levels of self-efficacy. To help reduce mental distress,
cognitive techniques such as focused breathing, meditation, and moderate exercise can help
decrease symptoms of anxiety (Bandura, 1997).
Strategies for Increasing Self-Efficacy
Bandura (1988) revealed three different ways to increase self-efficacy including
modeling, guided practice, and real-world experiences. It is important to note that Bandura’s
(1988) steps represent a sequential process that progressively builds self-efficacy and new
learning capabilities. The implementation of these techniques helps build a foundation of self-
efficacy when attempting to learn new skills. This section details and describes the
recommendations for building self-efficacy. This is important because self-efficacy may mediate
impostor feelings through its negative relationship with the impostor phenomenon.

69

Task Modeling
Modeling is the most effective way to develop skills to achieve difficult tasks (Bandura,
1988). By having someone model a task and then give specific feedback on how to improve,
individuals can expedite the learning process. As an illustration, it is easier to learn to swing a
golf club if you can watch someone do it first. Effective ways of modeling also include breaking
down the complex task into smaller parts under simulated circumstances before practicing in
real-life scenarios. By breaking down the subset of tasks, people avoid being cognitively
overwhelmed by the enormity of complex skills. This process also allows the learner to practice
in a sequential fashion rather than all at once. To demonstrate effective modeling, if a golfer
wanted to correct their swing, they could first focus on perfecting and adjusting their back-swing
technique before focusing on the other key phases of the swing like striking the ball or club
follow-through.
Guided Practice
After correctly learning the fundamentals of a task, people must perfect their skills
through the application of what Bandura describes as guided practice (Bandura, 1988). Guided
practice is defined as repeated skills practice along with external feedback through coaching.
Skills practice also gives learners the chance to hone their skills in a non-critical situation. It is
imperative that learners get corrective feedback on their performance because self-reflection
alone is not enough to improve (Bandura, 1988). External feedback is also important because
our internal perceptions do not allow us to objectively observe our actions and correct mistakes
(Bandura, 1988).

70

Real-World Experience
The final step in learning a new skill is adapting all the learning and practice to successful
real-world experiences to build self-efficacy. Learners must be able to translate their new skills
into realistic conditions before they gain self-confidence in their abilities (Bandura, 1988).
Circling back to the golf example, the golfer must be able to transition their skills from the golf
range to the course. Once this process is accomplished and validated through repeated practice,
people feel a sense of accomplishment and are willing to take on even more challenging
problems and tasks (Bandura, 1988). This same concept translates directly to the business
environment where individuals can try out their new skills in low-pressure situations to build
self-efficacy.
Motivation
In addition to reciprocal determinism, SCT also explains the motivational factors that
contribute to learning and achievement. Bandura’s (1997) self-efficacy theory is based on an
agentic perspective which theorizes that individuals learn through self-reflective development
processes. Put another way, people are motivated based on their perceived abilities and through
a reflection of past experiences to learn, adapt, and change (Bandura, 2001).
Bandura (1986) also stated that an individual’s expectation of future performance or
success is linked to past outcomes and attributions. That is to say, if an individual was successful
at a similar task in the past, their self-efficacy and motivation to achieve the new task would
increase. In addition, people must attribute their accomplishments to their ability rather than
external factors such as chance. If people do not believe they earned their accomplishments
through ability, their self-efficacy and motivation may not improve (Bandura, 1997). Individuals

71

need to believe in their ability to achieve based on past experiences. These past experiences
increase motivation and persistence to complete new tasks (Bandura, 1997).
Contributing Motivational Theories
Bandura (1997) stated that individuals motivate themselves by visualizing future desired
goals. Individuals also act based on the self-perception of their capabilities to achieve a goal
(Bandura, 1997). Essentially, an individual must be able to clearly see the desired end state of a
task or project to produce enough motivation to enable them to persist through difficult tasks.
Simply put, if people believe they can accomplish something, they tend to persist at it. Since
technology companies’ employee motivation is a key construct of this study, this section will
describe some of the other existing theories on motivation that connect self-efficacy and SCT to
employee’s motivation to learn and achieve their goals. Also, this section details the
supplemental theoretical frameworks that contributed to this study to help explain motivation and
the effects on self-efficacy on the IP experience.
Attribution Theory
The attribution theory of motivation stated that individuals assign internal and external
personal judgments known as attributions to their accomplishments and outcomes (Kelley &
Michela, 1980). Attribution theory is a factor in understanding technology employee motivation
and the complex ways by which learners associate their success with their abilities. External
attributions consist of factors outside of a person’s control, such as being late to work because
their alarm clock did not go off due to an overnight power outage. In this case, the outcome of
being late to work was due to the external attribution of the power outage. External factors are
largely perceived to be out of a person’s control and therefore tend to reduce self-efficacy levels
since the outcome cannot be attributed to an individual’s ability.

72

Internal attributions are judgments that connect task outcomes to a person’s innate ability
or effort. For example, a college student that passes a difficult test could attribute their success to
internal factors such as their test-taking ability or the amount of effort they invested in studying
for the test. These internal attributions can become motivating factors for future achievements
and can positively influence self-efficacy levels (Bandura, 1997). To illustrate, self-efficacy will
increase because the student attributed their success to their abilities and can therefore apply their
confidence to future tests.
There are other ways that personal attributions can affect motivation and self-efficacy and
the impostor phenomenon. For example, attributing past success to personal effort can have an
effect on an individual’s confidence and may signal to the person that they are not capable of a
task (Bandura, 1997). To illustrate, if a person believes they accomplished a task through
extraordinary effort rather than ability, their self-efficacy toward the task will decrease. In
addition, attributing past failures to external attributions and uncontrollable factors decreases a
learner’s motivation to achieve their learning goals. Essentially, learners must feel like they have
control over the outcome and have an understanding that the external factors will not sabotage
their efforts.
Also, the types of attributions people make influence their impostor phenomenon
experience. The research shows that the misattribution of past accomplishments to external
factors, such as luck or increased effort, can increase symptoms of impostor phenomenon and
decrease self-efficacy (Clance & O’Toole, 1987). To illustrate this point, if an individual who
was recently promoted at work for their capabilities attributes their new job to luck rather than
their ability, they will feel like they did not earn the position which decreases their self-efficacy.

73

Overall the literature stated that more research is needed to understand the complex interactions
between attributions, self-efficacy, and the impostor phenomenon (Urwin, 2018).
Expectancy Theory
Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory highlights another way by which individuals achieve
goals in the workplace. The expectancy-value theory stated that motivation comes from expected
outcomes, behaviors, and the effort required for an individual to reach their goals (Bandura,
1997). The expectancy-value theory asserted that people assess their self-efficacy and the
expected future outcomes from tasks to generate motivation. For example, if a college student
believes that they can secure a good job if they complete their college degree, then their
motivation to complete the degree may increase. However, the opposite can also be true. If the
same student thinks their degree will not result in employment upon graduation, the motivation
to finish their degree may decrease. This type of reasoning is flawed because individuals do not
have all of the current information necessary to make expectancy decisions. In the case of the
college student, their motivation is based on limited point-in-time knowledge of future labor
statistics and employment rates for college graduates. Therefore, it is important to note that the
expectancy theory decisions are based on an individual’s beliefs and not data.
The expectancy theory can also help explain the way in which technology employees
experience impostor phenomenon. For example, impostors may pass up career opportunities
because they presume they will fail if they attempt a new project or position. If a person
experiencing IP takes on a new project, and they believe the project will fail because they do not
have the right resources, their motivation to complete the project subsequently decreases.

74

Goal Setting Theory
Goal setting theory stated that individuals conceive high standards for themselves and use
goals as motivation to meet those standards (Bandura, 1997). Goal setting theory focuses on
distinct personal goals as a key influencer for self-guided motivation (Locke & Latham, 2006).
In other words, people create a perception of what they want to become and work backward from
that future persona to develop goals as a pathway to get to their expected state. For example, a
technology employee that wants to become a senior-level engineer will analyze the criteria for
the position and create personal goals to meet the job guidelines.
There are three main factors that influence goal setting theory: self-evaluation, self-
efficacy, and adjustment of standards (Bandura, 1997). Self-evaluation helps moderate
achievement expectations and progress toward goals which then influences self-efficacy. For
example, if progress toward a goal slows down, self-evaluation readjusts outcome expectations
and in turn, lowers self-efficacy. However, if progress toward a goal is steady, expectations
increase along with self-efficacy until the goal is achieved (Bandura, 1997). To illustrate, a
person might conclude that they should be able to type at least 60 words per minute at work.
Their belief transforms into a goal, and the person becomes motivated to make progress towards
that goal. During the task of accomplishing the goal, self-evaluation on progress signals whether
people should persist or lower their expectations. Once the goal is achieved, individuals re-
adjust their standards and may take on different or more challenging goals (Bandura, 1997). For
example, the person who learned to type 60 words per minute may use their past success and
typing proficiency to reassess their expectations and increase their goal to 80 words per minute.
Goal theory stated that the more people believe in themselves through self-efficacy, the more
effort they extend to accomplish larger goals (Bandura, 1997).

75

Goal theory can also help explain how technology employees suffering from the impostor
phenomenon can increase self-efficacy, motivation, and ultimately productivity. If an individual
feel like they do not belong in their position, they will not set higher goals for themselves
(Bandura, 1997). Essentially, impostors feel like they have already been promoted to a level at
which they are incompetent and will soon be exposed by others. Therefore, goal theory can help
explain why highly capable technology employees do not seek to take on new opportunities or
positions that offer career growth.
Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework is defined as the guiding principles for research and provides a
way to understand the interactions between the key concepts of a study (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The conceptual framework for this study was grounded in Bandura’s (1986) SCT to help
inform the three research questions and provide a structure for gaining a deeper understanding of
the impostor phenomenon in RDOs. Like Bandura’s (1986) concept of reciprocal determinism
for learning, this conceptual framework asserted that personal traits, behaviors, and the
environment influence the impostor phenomenon and perceived self-efficacy. In other words, the
three SCT determinants interact to impact an individual’s IP experience. Additionally, this
conceptual framework shows how the interactions affect self-efficacy, which may mitigate the
impostor phenomenon given its negative relationship. These constructs interrelate with each
other bi-directionally and in complex ways that affect each technology employee differently,
based on an individual’s personality traits, behaviors, and their environment.
The conceptual framework in figure 2 demonstrates how impostor feelings can originate
from the three SCT determinants that influence the impostor phenomenon in RDOs. These
determinants may also affect perceived self-efficacy, which the research showed has a negative

76

relationship with the impostor phenomenon (Barrow, 2019). In other words, decreased self-
efficacy tends to result in increased symptoms of the impostor phenomenon and vice versa.
Together, these two concepts affect the way technology employees experience the impostor
phenomenon, which may influence the sense of belonging in their positions.
The reduced sense of belonging and an increase in fraudulent feelings can affect both
employee productivity and motivation. If an individual does not believe they can accomplish a
task, they are less likely to start and pursue accomplishing it. In addition, the worry of feeling
like a phony can reduce productivity by increasing anxiety and mental distractions (Mortensen,
2014). This conceptual framework functions like a balanced lever on a fulcrum where the
impostor phenomenon symptoms may increase through the SCT determinants, which in turn
lowers self-efficacy. However, this framework also suggests that increasing employee self-
efficacy may decrease employee impostor feelings. Overall, this conceptual framework sought to
highlight the interactions between IP, the three SCT determinants, and employee self-efficacy.

77

Figure 2
A Conceptual Framework for the Impostor Phenomenon

Conclusion
The review of the literature in this chapter summarized the research related to the
impostor phenomenon’s effect on technology employees in the United States’ motivation and
productivity. The literature review also covered current and prospective interventions for
mitigating impostor feelings in the workplace. For the guiding theoretical framework, this study
explored Bandura’s (1986) SCT to address the personality traits, behaviors, and environmental
determinant factors that influence the impostor phenomenon experience in RDOs. The following
chapter includes the complete methodological approach for this study. Chapter three also
includes detailed sections on the research approach, the participating stakeholder’s
demographics, data collection, and justification for the overall methodology.

78

Chapter Three: Methodology
This study aimed to understand how personality traits, behaviors, and the environment
affected technology employees' impostor phenomenon experience. This study also identified the
types of interventions that RDOs can implement to mitigate their workforce's impostor feelings.
Additionally, this study focused on participants from different RDOs that varied in
organizational size and roles in the technology development process to help explore the impostor
phenomenon.
Drawing from Bandura's (1986) SCT, this study explored the three reciprocal
determinant factors of personality traits, behaviors, and the environmental effects on impostor
feelings. The participants were limited to engineers, engineering managers, and technical
program managers that had experienced or were currently experiencing the impostor
phenomenon. These roles and titles were selected because they represented the majority of
technical roles within RDOs.
The research questions that guided the methodology and analysis of data are:
1. How do social cognitive determinants affect the impostor phenomenon experience for
research and development employees?
2. How does the impostor phenomenon affect the self-efficacy of research and development
employees?
3. What can research and development organizations do to mitigate the effects of the
impostor phenomenon for employees?
Methodological Framework
This research study utilized the qualitative methodological approach. This methodology
was selected because qualitative research provides a rich data-set that may reveal experiences

79

and phenomena experienced by participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interviews were utilized
to gather descriptive experiential data about the participant’s encounters with the impostor
phenomenon. Also, interviews contributed to this study of the impostor phenomenon by helping
the researcher gain a rich understanding of the impostor phenomenon experience for RDO
employees. The interview protocol and questions used for the participant interviews consisted of
both open, closed, and semi-structured questions to promote discussion from participants.
Participating Stakeholders
This study's stakeholders were all employees in RDOs who had in the past or were
currently experiencing symptoms associated with the impostor phenomenon. Also, the
participants were all employed in their respective positions for less than a year. These criteria
were important because the research showed that starting jobs may intensify impostor feelings
(Clance, 1985). Explicit criteria were given to the participants in advance to determine their
eligibility in this study. The target participant sample size for this study was 12 RDO employees
in total. This number of participants was chosen to capture enough data to gain a rich
understanding of experiences and to reach data saturation on the theoretical concepts of this
study.
Participants with roles outside of RDOs, such as accounting or human resources
employees, were purposefully excluded from participation. All participants held titles that fit this
study's aforementioned parameters, which included engineers, managers, or technical program
managers. These roles were relevant to the research because they represented specific RDO
functions and roles. Also, each of these roles works closely with the other in the technology
development process. Finally, the participant's employer and job level all varied within their

80

organization. It was also imperative to this study that the participant stakeholders had previous
experience with the impostor phenomenon and could recall their feelings and symptoms in detail.
Sampling Method and Selection Process
The selection of research participants is critical to any research study's validity (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). Since there were specific criteria needed for the participants, this study
employed non-probability convenience sampling for participant selection. Convenience sampling
also allowed the researcher to select the most relevant participants for data collection. This study
utilized the researcher's extended professional network and referrals from other participants
through snowball sampling for recruiting purposes. This study also showed that 12 interviews
were enough to achieve data saturation with the responses, and no further interviews were
needed. Common overlapping data is important because recurring themes in interviews may
indicate that a study has reached data saturation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The complete set of
relevant demographic requirements for this study included the below criteria.
Participant Criteria
• Technology employees in RDOs who had been in their position for less than a year.
While the impostor phenomenon can affect employees of any tenure, recent hires are
relevant because the research shows that impostor feelings intensify when taking on new
positions (Clance, 1985). This criterion also adds to the reliability of this study by
normalizing the tenure of employees according to the existing research.
• Technology employees with job titles and responsibilities including engineers, managers,
and technical program managers. By centralizing on three job titles, this study sought to
reveal any common differences in the impostor experience by role (if any).

81

• The participants had to have previously experienced or were currently experiencing
impostor phenomenon and willing to disclose their experience. Participants needed to be
able to describe in-depth at least one experience with the impostor phenomenon. For
example, participants had to be able to describe a time that they felt like a fraud in their
position.
• The participants had to be willing to disclose details about their job, age, and gender
identity.
• The participants had to be able to participate in a video recorded interview about their
personal impostor phenomenon experiences and reveal the impact it had on their
motivation and job satisfaction levels.
Instrumentation
This study explored how (Bandura, 1986) SCT determinants of personality traits,
behaviors, and the environment affected technology employees’ perceived motivation and work
productivity. The qualitative research method of interviews helped examine the stakeholder’s
experience with the IP in rich detail by taking a phenomenological approach to the research. The
phenomenological approach is relevant to this study because it helped describe and understand
the participant’s lived experience. Through the interviews, this study addressed three research
questions which focused on the impostor phenomenon’s effect on the perceived levels of
employee productivity, motivation, and possible organizational interventions.

82

Interviews
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) stated that interviews are the primary method of data
collection in most qualitative research. This study's research methodology was qualitative and
utilized video conference interviews as the primary method of data collection. An interview
protocol (Appendix C) was created to guide the participant interviews, which contained open-
ended questions aimed at revealing the impostor phenomenon from participants. This interview
protocol included both demographic and semi-structured questions on the IP and perceived self-
efficacy. Also, the interview protocol listed other possible probe questions to explore concepts
that participants only superficially covered in their answers.
The structured interview protocol also helped facilitate a conversational approach to the
interviews by starting with broad, open-ended questions about the participant's job and life
experience before diving into more specific questions focused on answering the research
questions. This methodological approach of asking broad and unassuming questions is important
because it can help establish trust between the researcher and participant (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
The interview questions targeted three different parts of the participant's background and
experience. In the first stage of questioning, participants answered questions about their
demographics and employment background. This step provided a foundation for comparing the
participant's age, gender identity, tenure, and role. Second, the interview questions explored
concepts that were common predictors of the impostor phenomenon. For example, specific
interview protocol questions focused on the social cognitive determinants that influence impostor
feelings, such as personal traits, behaviors, and the working environment. The third and final
phase of interview questions explored the participant's personal experiences with the impostor

83

phenomenon and perceived self-efficacy. From these three different questioning areas, the
participant's answers were compared to their employment demographic, SCT determinant
factors, and impostor symptom descriptions to accurately present the participant's research data
profile.
In addition to the interview protocol, a conceptual framework codebook was created to
ensure the interviews and questions cover all this study's key concepts. This codebook helped
inform questions in the interview protocol and increased the open-ended questions' validity by
targeting specific research concepts. For example, the codebook included specific a priori
constructs such as self-efficacy, attributional descriptions, and perceived motivational and
productivity levels.
Although the qualitative interviews helped reveal rich insight into the participants'
experience, there were some risks associated with this approach. Since the interviews were semi-
structured, the data set compiled was unique to this study and not transferable to other research.
However, the qualitative research method revealed deep insight into the impostor phenomenon
experience that could inform future research questions. For example, the qualitative data and
results could be used as the foundation to create future quantitative surveys or mixed-method
studies that may further illuminate the impostor phenomenon in a related technology or business
setting.
Interview Procedures
For this study, 12 interviews were conducted by the researcher over three months to
accommodate participant identification and scheduling. The research initially aimed to interview
participants at their respective company locations to improve this study's validity. However,
given the circumstances of the COVID-19 global pandemic, all interviews were conducted

84

virtually and recorded over Zoom video conferencing software. This approach to the interviews
reduced the amount of non-verbal observation but allowed the researcher to quickly transcribe,
annotate, and replay the interviews for further investigation. Participants received no
compensation for engaging in this study and could opt-out at any point of the research process.
Data Collection
This study explored the SCT determinants that influence the impostor phenomenon's
effect on technology employee's motivation and productivity (Bandura, 1986). The qualitative
research method of interviews was used to compile themes and concepts related to this
study. Creswell and Creswell (2017) stated that the researcher is the primary instrument of data
collection in qualitative studies. Therefore the researcher must be prepared to collect and analyze
participant data. This study's qualitative method included collecting and organizing data to find
patterns for analysis and then working deductively to make assertions about the impostor
phenomenon.
Burkholder et al. (2016) asserted that individual interviews are best used for qualitative
research to reveal phenomena that cannot be observed. This study aimed to understand the
impostor phenomenon and utilized one-on-one interviews between the researcher and the
participants. During these interviews, semi-structured interview questions were used to provide
the participants with a platform to describe their feelings related to each question.
Merriam and Tisdale (2015) stated that semi-structured questions could also help reveal
each participant's rich personal experiences. The semi-structured questions in this study were
relevant because the data collection focused on the lived experience of those afflicted by the
impostor phenomenon. These interview questions also allowed the participants to tell their
stories in a personalized way while still relevant to this study's three research questions.

85

Additionally, the interview protocol's key questions were directly related to the conceptual
framework for this study, which included personal attributes, behavior, and the environment to
reveal their effect on employee motivation and productivity.
Interview Protocol
The interview protocol utilized several types of Patton's (2014) research questions to
elicit meaningful experiential responses from participants. For example, this study employed
behavioral, opinion, and feeling question types to gain a richer understanding of how each
participant experiences the impostor phenomenon (Patton, 2014). Also, to facilitate discussion
around the primary research questions during the interviews, probing questions were used in the
interview protocol to elicit participant responses further. Probe questions are defined as follow-
up interview questions that ask the participant to expand on a question they already briefly
answered (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The primary interview questions addressed the research concepts and questions by
focusing on the conceptual and theoretical framework determinants constructs. These concepts
included the participant's perceived self-efficacy, motivation, and productivity at work. Each
interview question focused on a primary concept in this study to better understand the impostor
phenomenon's experience and effect on technology employee's motivation and productivity
levels.
The semi-structured interview protocol (Appendix C) utilized Zoom video conference
software for the 12 interviews. This protocol permitted better access to participants and allowed
the use of transcription services built into the video conferencing software as another data
collection method. Qualitative interviews were imperative to this study because the impostor
phenomenon cannot be observed, and the researcher was reliant on participants to reveal their

86

experience through the interview process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The semi-structured
interview protocol for this study also contained probe questions that allowed flexibility within
the discussions during the interview process.
Being able to ask great questions helps promote better research data collection (Merriam
& Tisdell, 2016). For this study, a mix of different types of questions was used to explore the
participant's experiences with the impostor phenomenon. The interview protocol included 22
questions, each mapped to a specific research question or the theoretical framework. The
participant questions were purposefully ordered from broad to narrowly focused as the
interviews progressed to help facilitate a conversational tone during the interviews. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) found that this type of approach created a base rapport for the participants to
answer specific research questions later in the interview process.
Interview Procedures
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) stated that a researcher must accurately identify the right
participants to collect relevant information from the interview process. After receiving the
University of Southern California's (USC) Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, the 12
interviews were conducted over three months to allow for the participant selection process and
schedule interviews. Before the interviews, the stakeholder participants were asked about their
experience to ensure they met this study's criteria (Appendix D). After the interviews, all
participants were asked if they know anyone in their network that they thought might meet this
study's criteria and would be willing to participate. Naming another colleague was not
mandatory, and the participants could choose to decline the question. However, the researcher
ensured that subject or social desirability bias did not occur between participants and the referrals
for those that did provide an additional participant. For example, the participants were asked to

87

keep their experience with the researcher confidential. This process ensured that all of the
participants had the same understanding of the research during the time of their interviews.
Due to the COVID-19 global pandemic, interviews did not occur in the participant's work
setting as initially planned. Instead, online video conferencing interviews were utilized as the
primary data collection method. Each interview was between 60 and 90 minutes long, depending
on the participant's answers. The interviews also used Zoom video conference software which
allowed the researcher to remain present during the interview while reviewing any non-verbal
cues or data afterward from the video recordings. The interview process utilized real-time
transcription software built into the Zoom video conference software to transcribe the interviews.
The researcher corrected any mistakes in the transcription by replaying the interviews as needed.
In addition to recording the interviews and transcribing the data, the researcher also took notes
on the questions, probes, participant's reactions, and any non-verbal cues observed during the
conversations.
Data Analysis
The interview protocol for this study and the three research questions were derived from
the fundamental concepts of job productivity and motivation along with the SCT determinants of
personality traits, behaviors, and the environment. All interviews utilized secure video
conferencing software and transcribed by the researcher for further analysis and accuracy. The
handwritten notes from each interview were coded with timestamps that mapped to various
sections of the interview. This process complemented the data consisting of other cues or
observations from the participants. All transcription information was kept in a single encrypted
and secured cloud storage account to ensure participant confidentiality. The names of
participants or their employers were purposefully excluded from the data transcription, analysis,

88

and collection process to preserve confidentiality. Once the video recordings and notes were
reviewed and coded, all identifying participant data were destroyed to further preserve
participant confidentiality.
The data analysis process included reviews of the video recordings and coding of each
participant's transcript to key constructs. To illustrate, the researcher searched for pre-identified
and emergent themes from the participant interviews and coded them into a table that contained
concepts and factors such as personal traits, behaviors, the environment, and self-efficacy. The
researcher identified common themes and outliers from the participant responses according to
their impostor phenomenon experience from this data set. Also, the researcher utilized a
codebook and interview transcripts to help provide linkage to the conceptual framework and any
reciprocal interactions between key study concepts. Throughout the data analysis phase, the
researcher reviewed and analyzed the data according to the conceptual and theoretical
frameworks.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Merriam and Tisdale (2016) state that the rigor required for credible qualitative research
is different from quantitative studies. For this study, every effort was made to increase the
credibility of the interviews and data collection process. Also, to increase the credibility of this
study, the research employed multiple different research strategies and techniques.
Triangulation
Although qualitative research can never reveal participants' objective reality, it is
important to ensure the credibility of the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To promote the
credibility of the research, this study attempted to triangulate data sources. Triangulation uses
multiple data sources to converge on a single theory or research result (Merriam & Tisdell,

89

2016). This study employed multiple well-researched theories to triangulate how participants
experienced the impostor phenomenon. To illustrate, this study utilized Bandura's (1986) SCT
along with other seminal attributional and motivational theories such as Vroom's
(1964) expectancy theory. Combining these theories allowed the researcher to explore multiple
different hypotheses and relate the theories through a common conceptual framework. For
example, adding attributional frameworks provided insight into how personal attributions of
success affect self-efficacy, which may predict impostor feelings. Exploring these linkages
between frameworks allowed this study to explain other relevant concepts that a single theory
could not.
In addition to utilizing multiple theories, this study employed triangulation through its
data collection methods. For example, the interviews were recorded through video conference
software, allowing the researcher to observe and note any non-verbal cues after the interview
process. Also, the interviews' transcription permitted the researcher to map the participant's
words to timestamps in the video. This process allowed the review of data that might have been
previously missed during the initial interviews. Finally, the interviews' handwritten notes were
coded along with the transcripts to give a rich multi-dimensional data set for each participant.
Together, these sources of data, including video, notes, and transcripts, represented a data
collection approach that helped reveal the lived experience of the participants and their
experience with the impostor phenomenon.
Respondent Validation
Validating participants' responses after data collection or "member checks" can help
validate and increase the research's credibility (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This process may also
help validate participants' perspectives and rule out any possible misinterpretation of the research

90

questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To validate responses in this study, the researcher asked
participants at the end of each interview to validate the research assumptions based on the
interview's participant responses. This process was accomplished by walking each participant
through the researcher's notes on the insights gathered while allowing them to comment or
expand on their answers. This process also helped validate and reinforce the participant's point of
view relative to the data collected.
Data Collection Engagement
Knowing how many participants to interview and identifying data saturation in a study
helps increase the credibility of research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For this study, a sample of
12 technology employees participated and shared their experiences with the impostor
phenomenon. This number of participants in this study was sufficient because the researcher
reached data saturation of similar impostor themes and concepts. For example, the results
revealed the similar ways in which the participants experienced impostor phenomenon
symptoms. The interview data collection also uncovered common and divergent experiences
among the participants. Overall, observing both data saturation and alternative explanations for
later research questions added to the credibility of this study.
Expert Review of Interview Questions
Multiple additional scholars and researchers reviewed this study's interview protocol to
further increase the interview questions' credibility. For example, members of the researcher's
USC dissertation committee and multiple peer research students reviewed and commented on all
interview questions. Also, mock interviews with USC students were utilized to ensure the
questions are clear, easily understood, and devoid of jargon.

91

Bias, Positionality, and Assumptions
The researcher’s positionality was a significant consideration for the credibility of this
study. Because the researcher had an extensive professional network across RDOs, participants
may have felt social pressure to respond positively to questions that supported this study.
Participants were purposefully sampled from outside of the researcher’s close personal and
professional network to mitigate this effect.
In addition to positionality, the researcher’s identity was a consideration for this study.
Examining identity is important because the researcher had experienced the impostor
phenomenon in the past while working in RDOs. The interview protocol sought to understand
both the underlying hypothesis and any alternate explanations to mitigate this phenomenon. This
process was important to reduce researcher bias and forced this study to explore alternate ideas
as part of the process. By purposefully seeking out data that rejects the researcher’s experience
with the impostor phenomenon, the researcher attempted to reduce the chance of participant
projection bias.
Based on the literature review, this study assumed that the majority of employees in
RDOs experience the impostor phenomenon in their work settings. To mitigate bias in this
assumption, the researcher ensured that all data collection methods did not exclude valuable
contradictory data that may reveal data outside of the researcher’s expectations. For example,
this study sought to understand any other possible causes of decreased self-efficacy and types of
impostor phenomenon experiences throughout the interview process.
To further reduce bias, the interview protocol utilized open-ended questions that allowed
participants to describe their feelings and experiences without intervention from the researcher.
Also, by using a codebook for the research topics and constructs, the researcher collected and

92

coded data in a standardized way. This process reduced both the risk of biased data transcriptions
and data analysis.
Ethics
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) stated that ethics are important for research studies since
their validity relies on the researcher's ethics. Since this study dealt with human participants,
maintaining ethics and confidentiality standards was imperative to protect the research
subjects. To guide this study, the researcher utilized some of Patton's (2014) research checklist of
ethical issues to preserve research ethics. This section details the ways and means by which this
study sought to maintain research ethics.
For this study, the researcher took special care to inform and ensure the confidentiality of
all participants. All participants received study information that explained the purpose and
criteria for this study. This study's problem of practice and the methods used for data collection
and analysis were described before the interviews took place. The additional information helped
ensure that all participants understood the details of this study. The information also made it
clear that participation was entirely voluntary and that participants can leave this study at any
point in time without penalty. The researcher also clearly listed the eligibility criteria, which
included being employed in a technology position with tenure of less than one year and previous
experience with the impostor phenomenon.
After disclosing information on this study's purpose, participants were asked to consent to
participate. The researcher explained any foreseen risks to the participants and allowed them to
ask questions. Also, the researcher detailed how the participants' confidentiality would be
protected and the data collection procedures for storing data. Lastly, the researcher clearly stated
that participants could revoke their consent before, after, or during the interviews.

93

Limitations and Delimitations
Research limitations reveal potential gaps or factors in study designs that may influence
research results (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2019). Other researchers should consider the
limitations of this study when interpreting the findings and results. Since the research was
qualitative and employed interviews as the primary data collection method, the sample size of
participants was limited to 12 technology employees. Also, although the participants worked in
RDOs, their tenure, titles, and positions varied. Additionally, the research participant’s baseline
mental health was not measured or considered. The research only explored the participant’s
perceived impostor phenomenon feelings and self-efficacy. The theoretical framework that
unpinned this study utilized Bandura’s (1978) SCT and focused on the self-efficacy and
attributional concepts that interact with the impostor phenomenon. Below are multiple other
limitations noted for this study.
• This study utilized convenience sampling which makes it hard to generalize to other
populations
• This study relied on the truthfulness of the participant’s eligibility disclosure and
responses
• This study relied on past experiences with the impostor phenomenon and other details
that are dependent on the memory and recall of the participants
Delimitations define the overall scope and boundaries of a research (Theofanidis &
Fountouki, 2019). These are variables that were within the researcher’s control and helped define
the boundaries of this research study. Delimitations included the restriction of participants
employed outside of RDOs. For example, employees in accounting, finance, or human resource
organizations were purposefully excluded. In addition, anyone employed under 12 months in

94

their position was eliminated from research consideration. The full list of delimitations for this
study are listed below.
• This study gathered data from participants and purposefully excluded other positions and
titles outside of the defined population.
• All data was collected from participants that had personal experience with the impostor
phenomenon or are currently experiencing symptoms.
• The job roles of all participants included engineering, engineering leaders, and technical
program managers.

95

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
This study sought to reveal the influence of Bandura’s (1986) SCT determinants and
perceived self-efficacy on technology employee’s experience with the impostor phenomenon.
Qualitative interview data was collected through video conferencing software as described in the
interview protocol and data collection sections of Chapter three. The participants for this study
included 12 different technology employees who had been in their positions for less than a year.
All participants were selected through convenience sampling, starting with the researcher’s
professional network with additional participants recommended for this study through snowball
sampling. This chapter reveals the results from the 12 separate interviews on the impostor
phenomenon conducted over three months.
Interview Methodology
The 12 research participants were all interviewed remotely through the use of video
conferencing software which included transcription capabilities for data analysis and coding. For
the interviews, the researcher had to specifically enable the transcription functionality in addition
to the default video recording settings for all interview sessions. Once the participants joined the
video conferencing room, the researcher described the purpose of this study to the participants
and verbally asked for permission to begin recording. Only when the participants stated they
were ready did the researcher start the recording. After the interviews, the researcher stopped the
recording and copied the transcript into a password-protected Google document accessible only
to the researcher without the participant’s name or organization to further ensure confidentiality.
Once the transcript was copied to Google Docs, the researcher then deleted the video recording
from the Zoom video conferencing portal. All data coding and analysis were then completed
through the document transcript which contained no personal identifying information from the

96

interview sessions. After the data coding was complete, the document transcripts were then
deleted to further preserve the confidentiality of the participants.
During the 60 to 90-minute interview sessions, the researcher asked a total of 22 different
questions (Appendix C). The goal of these questions was to reveal the participant’s lived
experience with the impostor phenomenon. To help the flow of the interview and to facilitate the
data analysis process, the questions were grouped into six discrete categories: participant
demographics, understanding of the impostor phenomenon, personality traits, behavior, the work
environment, and perceived self-efficacy.
After the interviews, participants were asked to validate their responses to the
researcher’s questions and assumptions which provided participants with the opportunity to
validate and expand on the researcher’s data. This process of respondent validation is important
because it may increase the internal validity of participant’s responses (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). The researcher restated each question with a brief summary of the participant’s responses
and solicited feedback on the preliminary findings. The participant then either confirmed the
researcher’s data or clarified their responses. In addition, at the end of the interview, the
participants were asked to identify any potential participants from their network that may be a
good fit for this study. A total of four of the 12 participants were identified through this snowball
methodology.
Data Analysis
The results revealed in this section came from the data analysis of 12 different qualitative
interviews which focused on the impostor experience of technology employees. The guiding
questions from the interview protocol sought to understand the impostor phenomenon experience
through the lens of Bandura’s (1986) SCT and its three primary determinants of personal traits,

97

behaviors, and the environment. This study also sought to reveal the impostor phenomenon
experience for technology employees and its effect on their perceived job productivity,
motivation, and self-efficacy. This section highlights the results and summarizes the findings in
detail.
Research Questions
To gain a rich understanding of how technology employees experience the impostor
phenomenon, this study took the phenomenological approach to analyze the guiding research
questions. In other words, the researcher sought to understand the lived experience of the
participants as it related to the impostor phenomenon. The research questions that guided the
data analysis were:
1. How do social cognitive theory determinants affect the impostor phenomenon experience
for research and development organization employees?
2. How does the impostor phenomenon affect the self-efficacy of research and development
organization employees?
3. What can research and development organizations do to mitigate the effects of the
impostor phenomenon for employees?
Participating Stakeholders
The interview criteria for this study required that participants had less than one year of
tenure in their positions. Also, all 12 participants had job titles that included engineering,
engineering management, or technical program management. At the time the interviews took
place, all 12 participants were employed at 12 different for-profit companies, all within their
respective RDOs. The total number of employees at the participant’s public and private
corporations ranged from thousands of employees to under a hundred.

98

Participant Demographics
Job Titles
Although 12 participants are a relatively small sample considering the significant number
of RDO employees in the United States, this study covered a variety of different participant
demographics. The participant job titles included engineers, engineering leaders, and technical
program managers. Each of these roles is important because they are highly technical roles that
contribute directly to the productivity of RDOs. In total, this study’s participants included nine
engineers (ENG), two engineering leaders (LDR), and one technical program manager (TPM).
Table 1 shows the 12 participants and their roles.

Table 1
Summary of Participant Job Titles
Job Title Number of Participants
Engineers (ENG) 9
Engineering Leaders (LDR) 2
Technical Program Manager (TPM) 1

99

Research and Development Organization Experience
All of the participants were employed in their current position for less than one year, and
the total amount of time in their positions varied in the number of months. In addition, the
participant’s total career experience in RDOs varied from two to 34 years. This study did not
require a certain amount of total career experience as part of the participant criteria, so the total
RDO career experience offered a unique opportunity to analyze the impostor experience from
multiple different perspectives.
Gender Identities
Of the 12 participant’s self-disclosed gender identities, eight self-identified as male, and
four self-identified as female. In total, the participant population was 66% male and 33% female.
It is worth noting that there was no target ratio for gender identity in this study. However, the
gender identity ratio showed that this study’s participant population was roughly the same as the
average RDO in the United States (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2014).
Educational Levels
Technology jobs often require specialized skills and capabilities. However, unlike other
engineering fields such as civil engineering, there are no professional certifications or specific
educational requirements needed to work in an RDO. The results showed that the highest level of
education varied across the 12 participants. In total, four participants attained a high school
diploma, seven had earned Bachelor’s degrees, and one participant held a graduate degree
(MBA). Six of the participants were the first to go to college in their family, and all 12
participants were the first in their family to work in RDOs. Table 2 describes the gender identity,
work experience, and education level of the 12 participants.

100

Table 2
Summary of Participant Demographics
Participant
Gender
Identity
Total RDO Working
Experience (Years)
Time in Current Role
(Months)
Highest Level of
Education
ENG1 Male 9 6 High School
ENG2 Male 11 2 Bachelors
ENG3 Male 13 6 Bachelors
ENG4 Male 14 6 Bachelors
ENG5 Male 20 8 High School
ENG6 Male 20 3 High School
ENG7 Male 20 7 High School
ENG8 Male 34 3 Bachelors
ENG9 Female 2 9 Bachelors
LDR1 Female 20 11 Bachelors
LDR2 Female 20 2 Bachelors
TPM1 Female 25 8 Graduate Degree

Frequency of the Impostor Phenomenon Symptoms
When the researcher asked about how often the participants experienced the impostor
phenomenon, the responses varied from constant impostor feelings to intermittent feelings once
or twice a month. For example, ENG2, who had recently started a senior engineering position
experienced IP continuously when they started their new job. The same participant also stated
that their impostor feelings did not subside until they felt like they “had a grasp on their new
position and their bosses’ expectations,” which they claimed took around “roughly six months to
achieve.” However, other participants stated that their impostor symptoms were more episodic in
nature. As an example, TPM1 mentioned they only felt like an impostor when they were asked
by their superiors to “take on new projects.” The participant also revealed that the ambiguity of a
new project often subsided after a few weeks along with the participant’s impostor feelings.

101

These findings indicated that there might be a difference between impostor phenomenon
symptoms when taking on a new project versus a new job. In other words, the results suggested
that a new task may predict decreased episodic impostor phenomenon symptoms with a
decreased duration, while a new job which may predict more prolonged or constant impostor
symptoms.
To illustrate how the frequency of impostor phenomenon symptoms changes over time,
the participants with over six months’ experience in their current position revealed that their
symptoms were most pronounced in the first three months of their new job. For example, ENG2
shared that they experienced impostor feelings “daily when they started their new job, but now
only experience their fraudulent feelings on a monthly basis.” The same participant also
explained that since they were recently hired into a senior position, they were unsure they could
“meet the job expectations of their new title.” In other words, the ambiguity of new job
expectations intensified their experience with the impostor phenomenon.
Other interview participants felt like the frequency of their impostor feelings depended on
the number and type of work interactions. For example, LDR1 stated that they felt confident in
their program management skill set with their immediate peers but felt like an impostor when
they interacted with their supervisor or other senior people outside of their organization.
Specifically, LDR1 described that they had “no problem running a meeting with their team” but
experienced worry and feelings of inadequacy when they met with other senior leaders and peers
across the organization. This finding is significant because it showed that impostor feelings
might increase when exposed to individuals outside of the organization or higher-ranking
employees.

102

Overall, the interviews revealed that the 12 participants experienced the impostor
phenomenon at different frequencies. The range of episodic impostor feeling incidences varied
from monthly to daily worry. For example, ENG6 and ENG8 each had three-month tenure in
their position and experienced the impostor phenomenon monthly, but ENG5 and ENG9 with
over eight months’ tenure experienced the impostor phenomenon weekly. These findings
suggested that employees experience the impostor phenomenon at varying and personalized
frequencies in their positions relative to their job tenure. Table 3 describes the participant tenure
in their positions and the frequency of impostor phenomenon symptoms.

Table 3
Frequency of Impostor Phenomenon Symptoms
Participant
Tenure in Current
Position (Months)
Frequency of Impostor
Phenomenon Symptoms
ENG1 6
Weekly
ENG2 2
Weekly
ENG3 6
Monthly
ENG4
6 Monthly
ENG5
8 Daily
ENG6
3 Monthly
ENG7
7 Monthly
ENG8
3 Monthly
ENG9
9 Weekly
LDR1
11 Monthly
LDR2
2 Weekly
TPM1
8 Weekly

103

Predictors of the Impostor Phenomenon
To understand the predictors of fraudulent feelings, the interviews focused on
understanding the primary factors and situations that predicted the impostor phenomenon. To
accomplish this task, the interview protocol asked the participants to describe their last
experience with the impostor phenomenon at work. Each participant’s description varied;
however all participants could accurately articulate the situations that predicted their impostor
feelings with clarity and in rich detail.
The 12 interviews highlighted the many different factors that contribute to the impostor
phenomenon within RDOs. For example, the interviews indicated that the work environment was
one of the primary factors that predicted the participants increased impostor feelings. To
illustrate, TPM1 stated that because they were a woman in a male-dominated technology field,
they felt that gender bias in their environment contributed to their impostor feelings. The
participant worried that the “boy’s club” at work would expose their self-perceived lack of
capabilities in their position. This finding may suggest that gender bias and the impostor
phenomenon may interact together with the environment to increase impostor feelings for
technology employees. However, further research is needed to understand the linkage between
gender bias in RDOs and the effect it has on the impostor phenomenon.
In addition to interactions with others at work, the level and title of a new position may
be a predictor of impostor feelings. For example, LDR1 explained that they had recently taken a
new leadership position and doubted if they could manage people at their new level. The
participant explained that they had never been responsible for a large team and felt like they had
to “figure it out on their own” to show their competence. This finding suggests that taking on a
job with no previous experience at the level of responsibility may be a predictor for the impostor

104

phenomenon. In other words, employees who are promoted into management may require
different interventions than employees who moved into a similar job title or level.
The results from the 12 interviews also showed that eight of the participants felt that job
expectations to operate systems and technologies outside of their capabilities caused episodic
symptoms of the impostor phenomenon. For example, ENG1 explained that the management of
“security firewalls” was a predictor for their impostor feelings. Additionally, ENG8 felt
inadequate at managing the Linux operating system which was a primary requirement in their
position. Since the participants felt inadequate at a specific technical skill required in their
position, the perceived lack of ability predicted their feelings of insecurity in their position.
Of the other predictors for participant’s impostor feelings, six participants identified that
taking on ambiguous and emergent projects was a primary indicator of impostor phenomenon.
Additionally, four participants felt that interactions in meetings between peers and superiors
fostered symptoms of the impostor phenomenon. Lastly, two participants stated that managing
unfamiliar technologies in their position predicted their impostor feelings. These findings
suggested that constantly changing job requirements to learn new technologies and interactions
with other more senior leaders at work may predict the impostor phenomenon for technology
employees. Table 4 reveals the common participant predictors for the impostor phenomenon.

105

Table 4
Predictors of the Impostor Phenomenon
Impostor Phenomenon Predictor Number of Participants
Receiving new projects or tasks from their supervisor 6
Work interactions 4
Managing unfamiliar technologies 2

Research Question One Results
This section highlights the results for research question one which sought to understand
how the three SCT determinants affect the impostor phenomenon experience for technology
employees. The three SCT determinants included personality traits, behaviors, and the
environment (Bandura, 1986). These determinants interact together to help offer a way to explain
the impostor phenomenon experience for technology employees. This section analyzes and
addresses each of the SCT determinant areas individually and includes a summary of results at
the end of each determinant’s area.
Personal Traits Results
Personal traits are important to understand within the context of the impostor
phenomenon because certain personality characteristics are often predictors for the impostor
experience. The following section examines the participant’s ability to describe the impostor
phenomenon and the frequency by which they experience its symptoms. This study also sought
to reveal whether participants exhibited any perfectionist personality traits and how participants
attributed their career success. Through the findings from the 12 different interviews, this section

106

highlights the results of research question one which attempted to understand how personal traits
affected the impostor phenomenon for technology employees.
Participant Understanding of the Impostor Phenomenon
The interview protocol specifically sought to understand if technology employees could
recognize and define the impostor phenomenon. This question is important because it may have
implications for building employee interventions that consider technology employee’s
knowledge and understanding of the impostor phenomenon. Also, if employees can identify their
experiences with the impostor phenomenon, they can seek appropriate help for their fraudulent
feelings.
When asked to describe the definition of the impostor phenomenon, the 12 participants
gave multiple different explanations. For example, ENG3 described their experience as “feeling
like I cannot do my job because I’m faking my skill set.” Additionally, ENG5 described the
impostor phenomenon as “feeling like you did not get your position due to your abilities.” As
another example, ENG9 described the impostor phenomenon as “an insecurity that makes you
feel like you did not obtain your position through your talent and abilities.” Of the twelve
participants, only ENG6 could not accurately describe some aspect of the impostor phenomenon.
Specifically, ENG6 explained that they “had never heard about the impostor phenomenon
before” but upon explaining it to them during the study disclosure process, they clarified that
they had “definitely experienced fraudulent feelings at work.”
Overall, the interviews revealed that all but one of the 12 participants recognized their
fraudulent feelings and could describe the symptoms of the impostor phenomenon. This finding
is contrary to Clance’s (1985) assertion that most individuals cannot recognize and put a name to

107

their impostor feelings. Also, this finding may suggest that there is increased recognition of the
impostor phenomenon in RDOs.
Perfectionist Tendencies
The interviews revealed that all 12 participants exhibited some form of perfectionist
tendencies. For example, when asked how participants prepare for big and ambiguous projects at
work, all of the participants described their preparation methodologies in specific detail
including how they overprepared. For example, ENG7 stated that they “plan projects out in detail
and I need to make progress on them every day.” Another participant (TPM1), stated that they
“plan for projects way in advance and that they needed to be well prepared for any questions
from my leadership team.” These types of responses are important to understand because they
highlight one of the maladaptive ways people cope with the impostor phenomenon through
excessive work and over-preparation in their jobs.
The interview responses also indicated that all 12 participants tended to ruminate over
upcoming projects, which gave them time to over-prepare. To illustrate, ENG9 explained to the
researcher their extremely detailed and specific methodology for collecting data, interacting with
team members, and defining all assumptions before exposing their project plan to executive
leadership. In other words, the participant had to have everything perfectly planned before
sharing their plan with their leadership team. Another participant (ENG7) described being
“extremely overwhelmed” with newly assigned and ambiguous projects because they felt a lack
of control due to the ambiguity of the new project. The same participant went on to explain that
the added anxiety and worry made them work harder than they should to accomplish the project.
To highlight their experience, ENG7 stated that the additional mental stress made them overwork
and that they “needed the project to be perfect” to overcome their anxious feelings.

108

Although all 12 participants described their personal perfectionist tendencies to the
researcher in detail, six of the participants during the respondent validation checks did not
believe they exhibited perfectionist tendencies in their work. After each interview, the researcher
validated the responses with the participants and explained how their responses matched up to
traits of perfectionism. Instead of agreeing with the association, six participants believed that
additional effort, perfectionism, and over-preparation were “just part of their job” and helped
them obtain their success in their positions. This finding suggests that technology employees
may not recognize their perfectionist tendencies which may lead to burnout and predict the
impostor phenomenon.
Misattribution of Career Success
During the interview process, the participants were asked a question about the specific
traits that made them successful throughout their careers. Overall, the 12 participants in this
study all demonstrated some form of misattribution for the reasons for their success. Each
participant described in detail the specific characteristics that contributed to their achievements
throughout their careers. For example, TPM1 claimed their career success was based on “brute
force” which helped push their projects through the organization. As another example, ENG2
stated that “persistence and social connections” helped them gain a recent promotion. In all, the
interviews found that all 12 participants attributed their career achievements to some form of
either social influence or additional work effort.
The results also found that eight of the 12 participants claimed to have significant social
influencing skills and could persuade others to work with them. For example, ENG6 claimed that
they were proficient at influencing through their “enhanced emotional intelligence” and ability to
read people. Additionally, the same participant stated that they could “influence people by

109

reading into their emotions about projects.” In this case, the participant attributed their success to
social influence rather than their technical capabilities. As another example, ENG6 stated that
part of their success resulted from “being sociable and very flexible with other people at work.”
In total, eight of the 12 participants felt that social influence helped them resolve conflicts which
in return resulted in their career success.
The other consistent personal trait that participants perceived made them successful in
their careers was their ability to learn. All 12 of the participants stated that they exercised
intellectual curiosity and learning in their positions. For example, ENG3 stated that they were a
“continuous learner which helps me keep up with the technology industry.” The participants all
felt that the ability to learn throughout a career in technology is important because of the constant
change in new technologies that employees must learn.
In summary, the interviews indicated that the participants attributed their success to traits
outside of their capabilities. The 12 participants stated that either effort, social skills, or their
willingness to learn were the primary reasons for their success. This finding suggests that
technology employees that experience the impostor phenomenon may tend to misattribute their
success to reasons other than the technical capabilities that are required to do their job. Table 5
describes the participant’s self-attributions for their career success.

Table 5
Self-Attribution of Career Success
Participant Self-Attribution of Career Success Number of Participants
Interpersonal skills 5
Ability to learn 4
Hard work or extra effort 3

110

Personality Traits Summary
This section explores the personality traits of technology employees and how they affect
the impostor phenomenon. The 12 interviews revealed that although the participant IP
experiences varied, they all shared a common understanding of the IP and its symptoms. The
findings also revealed that participants all experienced IP at different frequencies. Two of the
participants explained their impostor experiences took place within the trailing two weeks of
their interviews. The remaining participants spoke about their experiences within the last month.
For example, instead of describing a single impostor episode, they described their impostor
experience as an extended period of time such as when they onboarded in their new position.
This finding suggests that the frequency of impostor feelings may vary depending on situational
factors such as taking on new projects or positions.
The findings also indicated that the participants felt increased symptoms of the impostor
phenomenon in the first three to six months of their position. Of this study’s participants, seven
had over six months of experience in their current positions and stated that their symptoms
decreased after the first three months. This finding indicates that technology employees with less
than six months’ experience may experience increased impostor feelings.
When asked about the personal predictors of the impostor phenomenon, the participant
responses varied. For example, TPM1 stated that they only experienced impostor feelings when
taking on new roles and projects at work. However, two other participants felt like they
experienced the impostor phenomenon all the time until they became proficient in their new
positions. As an example, ENG5 indicated that their impostor symptoms were “paralyzing and
always with them” while working. Studying the chronicity of fraudulent feelings is significant
because it has implications for understanding the rate of reduced productivity for technology

111

employees. In other words, the results indicated that short episodic periods of the impostor
phenomenon might be less of a disruption to productivity than prolonged periods of worry that
distract from motivation.
The interviews also revealed that all 12 participants exhibited various levels of
perfectionist tendencies and over-preparation for projects. For example, the participants felt the
need to be both perfect and over-prepared for projects at work. Also, the participants stated that
they felt that their work must be presented in a way that was seen as exceptional to others.
However, it is worth noting that during the respondent checks six of the participants disagreed
that they exhibited perfectionist traits and normalized their perfectionist behaviors as part of their
job.
Finally, all 12 of the participants attributed their career success to some sort of social
influence or extra work effort to adapt rather than their capabilities to do the job. Not a single
participant mentioned their technical ability as the primary reason for their career success. In
other words, the results showed that the participants felt that they needed to work extra hard and
influence others to be successful even though their positions require highly technical skills and
capabilities to succeed.
Behavioral Results
Behaviors can influence how technology employees cope with the impostor phenomenon
and whether they remain productive and motivated at work. This section reveals the coping
responses of participants and the behaviors that affected their work productivity and motivation.
Coping With Impostor Feelings
When asked about how they dealt with the impostor phenomenon at work, all 12 of the
participants revealed the various ways in which they coped with their fraudulent feelings. For

112

example, TPM1 stated that one of their primary responses included “crying in the bathroom at
work.” This behavior stemmed from being frustrated that they felt like an impostor in their
position which resulted in crying as a response. Specifically, TPM1 worried that their peers and
superiors might discover that they were “not technical enough” for their position. In addition to
physical responses such as crying, the same participant also stated that they tried to normalize
their feelings by telling themselves that they were good enough for their position before
returning to work. Both of these behavioral responses showed how coping mechanisms could
result in both psychological (worry and anxiety) and physical responses (crying).
Further interviews examined the individual coping behaviors of the other participants.
For example, LDR1 explained that when they felt like an impostor, they spoke with coworkers to
validate their capabilities at work. To illustrate their point, the participant said that they
specifically sought out and “spoke with other peers and mentors” within their organization to
obtain perspective into their work performance and expectations. This coping behavior helped to
decrease their impostor feelings and reassured the participant of their capabilities. This adaptive
coping mechanism also helped normalize the participant’s feelings because their peers also self-
disclosed that they experienced the same feelings in the past. In other words, the normalization
of feelings with peers helped relieve the symptoms of the impostor phenomenon.
In addition to adaptive coping responses to the impostor phenomenon, three of the
participants exhibited maladaptive and repetitive physical coping behaviors. The three
participants each performed some form of maladaptive repetitive coping behaviors to deal with
their anxiety and stress from the IP. For example, ENG6 asserted that they repeatedly “rubbed
their eye” when they experienced fraudulent feelings at work. In addition, ENG5 and ENG1 both
stated that when they experienced the impostor phenomenon they “bite their fingernails.” These

113

findings indicate that the majority of the participants coped with their impostor feelings in very
different ways. Although there was minor overlap in the maladaptive results (e.g. nail biting), the
results in table 6 indicate that the impostor phenomenon coping mechanisms all varied for the 12
participants. Table 6 describes the different participant coping behaviors.

Table 6
Participant Coping Behaviors
Participant Coping Behavior
ENG1 Biting fingernails
ENG2 Journaling
ENG3 Listening to music
ENG4 Studying technology
ENG5 Biting fingernails
ENG6 Socializing with friends
ENG7 Working excessively
ENG8 Exercising
ENG9 Exploring anxiety causes
LDR1 Seeking feedback
LDR2 Talking to self
TPM1 Crying

114

Effect on Job Productivity
This section revealed the results of the impostor phenomenon’s effect on the 12
participant’s perceived job productivity in the workplace. The interview results showed that 11
of the 12 participants felt that the impostor phenomenon decreased or significantly decreased
their productivity at work. Only LDR1 stated that the anxiety they experienced due to the
impostor phenomenon improved their productivity.
When the researcher asked how often they perceived that the impostor phenomenon
interfered with their productivity at work, the 12 responses varied from intermittent episodes
during the week to constantly. For example, ENG2 stated that they felt distracted by their
fraudulent feelings and less productive for “long periods of time during the day.” In addition,
ENG5 shared that they found their impostor symptoms “paralyzing which affects my
productivity all of the time.” This finding highlighted that although the duration of decreased
productivity varied, all of the participants felt that when they experienced symptoms of the
impostor phenomenon, it significantly reduced their productivity at work.
Also, when the participants were asked “How do you think the impostor phenomenon
affects your productivity?” they responded that it negatively affected them in different ways. For
example, ENG7 stated that when they felt like an impostor, their productivity decreased because
they felt “anxious about being fired.” Additionally, ENG1 explained that the decrease in their
perceived productivity was due to the extra anxiety of feeling like a fraud. To illustrate, ENG1
explained that their impostor feelings “took mental cycles away that could be used for solving
hard problems at work.” In other words, the participant found that mental distractions like
anxiety, worry, and depression decreased their work outcomes and overall job productivity.

115

Although 11 of the participants stated that the impostor phenomenon reduced their job
productivity, LDR1 asserted that their impostor feelings drove them to work harder when the
tasks were unclear in their job. As an example, LDR1 stated that because the expectations for
their job were unclear, they were uncertain of which projects to work on and in what priority
order. Therefore, to compensate for the lack of direction, the participant worked harder to try and
accomplish more work in an effort to show their capabilities. In their words, the “impostor
phenomenon made me work harder and I tried to do all of the things at once, rather than the right
things.” However, this behavior led to a different type of reduced productivity through mental
exhaustion. Because the participant was unclear of their priorities, they wasted extra cycles on
projects that were not as important as others. This lack of clear priorities and feedback from the
participant’s superior intensified their impostor feelings, which resulted in them overworking as
a maladaptive coping mechanism on the wrong things which reduced their productivity. This
type of coping behavior can also lead to job burnout and mental exhaustion for employees
(Clance, 1985). Table 7 shows the perceived effect of IP on the participant’s job productivity.

Table 7
Perceived Effect on Productivity
Perceived Effect on Productivity Number of Participants
Significantly Decreased 5
Decreased 6
Increased 1

116

Effect on Work Motivation
The interviews revealed mixed findings when the participants were asked how the
impostor phenomenon affected their work motivation. For example, 6 participants stated that the
impostor phenomenon increased their motivation at work. To illustrate their point, ENG9 stated
that they use their impostor feelings to “motivate myself to learn new things.” Also, ENG7
reiterated that the impostor phenomenon motivated them to “get to work” in an effort to help
remediate their feelings of worry.
However, the other 6 participants explained that the impostor phenomenon significantly
decreased their motivation. For example, TPM1 stated that the impostor phenomenon caused
them to “overanalyze things through analysis-paralysis” which led to procrastination, mental
exhaustion, and reduced motivation at work. The same participant also stated that their feelings
of anxiety and lack of motivation tended to repeat and transfer to newly assigned projects. In
other words, the start of new projects predicted a lack of motivation for the participant. Also,
ENG1 reiterated that their motivation decreased due to “misaligned outcome expectations and
priority of tasks with their boss.” Because the participant lacked clarity on the priority of their
work, they exerted extra effort to accomplish tasks. However, since the task priorities were not
clear to the participant, they ended up doing work in the incorrect priority order. This led to
negative feedback on their work outcomes from their supervisor. To illustrate, the participant
explained that their supervisor would ask them questions like “don’t you know you should be
doing this task first?” The participant also stated the situation was “extremely demotivating” for
them. Since the participant expected to be praised for the extra work effort expended
(expectancy), the admonishment from their supervisor acted as a demotivating factor. In other
words, since the participant’s expectations were not met, the participant became demotivated.

117

These findings suggest a link between the impostor phenomenon, job expectancy outcomes, and
employee motivation. These findings suggest that the impostor phenomenon may influence an
individual to overwork (coping behavior) in hopes of gaining praise from their supervisor
(expectancy). However, if the individual’s feedback from their supervisor is negative (feedback),
employee work motivation may decrease.
In summary, the findings indicated that the impostor phenomenon affected employee
motivation in different ways. Also, the findings suggested that the intensity of the impostor
phenomenon symptoms may influence employee motivation. As an example, six participants
seemed to use their anxiety as a trigger to increase their motivation. However, the remaining six
participants experienced a significant decrease in motivation. These results suggested that the
intensity of impostor feelings may predict whether an individual’s motivation increases or
decreases. In other words, a person with decreased IP symptoms may be able to use their anxious
feelings to motivate themselves in their job. Whereas another person with intense impostor
feelings may experience significantly reduced motivation at work due to the extreme worry and
anxiety they feel at work. Table 8 describes the participant’s perceived effect of IP on their job
motivation.

Table 8
Perceived Effect on Motivation
Perceived Effect on Motivation Number of Participants
Decreased motivation 6
Increased motivation 6

118

Behavior Results Summary
This section explored the coping behaviors of technology employees that influence
motivation and productivity. The results showed that the impostor phenomenon coping behaviors
all varied for participants. The participant’s coping behaviors revealed both adaptive (journaling
and exercise) and maladaptive coping behaviors (excessive work and nail-biting). In addition to
coping, 11 participants stated that the impostor phenomenon significantly decreased their
productivity at work. Only LDR1 stated that their impostor feelings increased their job
productivity in an attempt to relieve their anxious feelings. However, the same participant also
revealed that they felt less effective and tended to overwork. The results also found that six of the
participants felt that impostor feelings increased their perceived job motivation while the other
six felt it decreased their motivation. The findings suggest that the impostor phenomenon can
have a significant effect on employee behavior, which could result in maladaptive coping
behaviors, productivity, and work motivation.
Environmental Results
Understanding the work environment in RDOs is a critical part of mediating impostor
feelings for technology employees. Analyzing the work environment may also reveal how
factors like company culture or interactions with peers and superiors contribute to the impostor
phenomenon experience. To decrease how employees experience the impostor phenomenon,
businesses must be able to understand the environmental factors that contribute to impostorism
in the workplace and mediate the environmental factors that promote it. This section reveals the
findings and participant recommendations related to impostor phenomenon in the work
environment.

119

Inaccurate Job Descriptions
When asked about how their job skills compared to their formal job description, all 12
participants stated that they did not meet all of the requirements in their job description. These
findings highlighted how job descriptions might be a predictor for impostor feelings and reduced
self-efficacy for technology employees. The results showed that participants either felt that they
lacked a specific skill in the job description or found the description too vague to compare to
their capabilities. For example, ENG8 stated that they “could not possibly be proficient in all of
the minor skills listed in their job description because there were too many criteria.” In other
words, the participant felt that no individual could meet all of the requirements of their formal
job description. Instead, the participant stated that they felt effective at the predominant skills
listed in the description and lacked some of the supplemental qualitative and technical skills. To
further illustrate the problem, TPM1 stated, “I’m better at leading transformation rather than
document writing or analysis.” This finding suggests that wording in a job description may also
affect the self-efficacy of technology employees. In other words, the findings suggest that fewer
specific terms for the same responsibilities in the job description may decrease impostor feelings.
To describe the misalignment with their job description, ENG3 stated that their “job
description didn’t actually match their job so I really don’t know where I stand with my boss.”
The participant went on to explain that because the expectations were vague and unclear, they
“did not know how my boss or peers would judge me.” This finding indicated that the difference
between the job description and the actual job diminished the participant’s self-efficacy, and
therefore facilitated impostor feelings. In other words, because ENG3 had no clear understanding
of their position, they felt like they could not meet the requirements. This led the participant to
feel that they did not belong in their position. In addition, the lack of job clarity also facilitated

120

the fear of being judged or exposed as a fraud by their supervisor or peers for the participant.
These results suggest that unclear, inaccurate, or missing job descriptions may increase the
impostor phenomenon for technology employees.
Lack of Supervisor Feedback
To understand the impact of how a supervisor's leadership style and interactions
contribute to the impostor phenomenon, one of the questions from the interview protocol asked
participants how their supervisor contributed to their impostor feelings. The research revealed
that all 12 participants identified their superiors as a significant factor that contributed to their
impostor phenomenon symptoms. For example, ENG7 stated that “My boss can control the level
of impostor phenomenon. They can either throw me into the fire or allow me to learn.” Another
participant (ENG6) explained that their supervisor “does not understand what I do” which led the
participant to experience impostor feelings about whether they belonged in their position. ENG6
further elaborated that during their annual performance review, they were always uncertain of
where they stood in the team rankings. This uncertainty caused significant worry for the
participant every year during the performance management yearly cycle. In other words, the lack
of clear performance feedback and attention to the participant’s work from their supervisor
created anxiety about being exposed as a fraud in their position.
In total, all 12 of the participants agreed that their supervisor was a significant
contributing factor to their impostor experience in the work environment. The results indicated
that the lack of clear expectations from a participant’s supervisor contributed to the participant’s
impostor symptoms. As an example, LDR1 explained that because there was no clear direction
on work priorities, they received feedback from their supervisor that they were doing the wrong
things at work. To LDR1, this feedback resulted in strong feelings of inadequacy that they

121

explained as “I am sure my boss thought I was an idiot” during the first six months in their
position.
In addition to setting clear expectations and providing feedback to their employees, the
results showed that supervisors that allowed their employees time to adjust and learn their new
position experienced reduced impostor feelings. Both ENG6 and ENG9 stated that they felt
decreased impostor feelings because their supervisor provided them with time to learn before
focusing on their job output. However, the participants with supervisors that did not allow them
to acclimate to their position experienced increased impostor feeling. For example, five of the 12
participants stated that their supervisor directly contributed to their impostor symptoms by
assigning them projects before they felt ready in their position. The five participants all further
explained that because their new position required them to work with certain technologies they
were not familiar with, it made them feel like an impostor. These results suggest that allowing
employees time to acclimate to their new position may reduce the symptoms of the IP.
Participant’s Recommendations to Reduce the Impostor Phenomenon
During the interviews, participants were asked an open-ended question on what they
would change in their work environment to reduce the impostor phenomenon. The responses
indicated ways that the participants felt the environment significantly contributed to their
impostor feelings. For example, four of the participants stated they would like more clarity about
their role and responsibilities from their supervisor. To illustrate the point, ENG3 stated that their
job description was “unclear which caused them to question whether they were the right person
for the job.” The same participant claimed that their supervisor had additional expectations for
them that were not communicated during the interview process. In other words, ENG3 went
through the hiring process under a false pretense of the position’s requirements and expectations.

122

Therefore, the hiring process contributed to their impostor feelings and further confused the
participant about their perceived “real” duties and job expectations. These findings suggest that
aligning the job expectations with supervisors may help mediate impostor feelings for new
employees.
When other participants were asked about what they would change in their working
environment to decrease their fraudulent feelings, both ENG1, ENG4, and LDR1 recommended
creating recurring feedback mechanisms with supervisors to gain insight into their work
outcomes and priorities. For example, LDR1 revealed that they had “no clue if they were
working on the right tasks” and that their supervisor was so busy that they could not meet with
them to gain clarity on their projects. Instead, the participant had to talk with their peers in other
organizations to receive feedback on their work. The participant also stated that although this
process helped them find the right priorities, it was incredibly inefficient. For example, the
LDR1 had to seek out multiple coworkers to gather enough data in order to determine the right
tasks and priorities to work on. To remediate the problem, the participant stated that they would
implement short weekly meetings with their supervisor to go over past accomplishments and
future priorities. The same participant then recommended a process that included weekly
meetings with their supervisor during the first three months of employment and then at a reduced
frequency after the employee is established in their position.
The participants also recommended other ways to decrease the impostor phenomenon in
their work environments. Four of the participants stated that aligning on clear expectations with
their supervisor would reduce their impostor feelings. Another three participants asserted that
employers should allow new employees the time to learn new and emergent technologies
required for the job and not just assume employees will learn “on the job.” Both ENG2 and

123

ENG5 recommended assigning onboarding mentors to new employees in order to give new
employees an informal and low-pressure way to ask questions about their work responsibilities.
In addition to mentorship, ENG9 and LDR2 recommended changing the work culture to focus on
learning instead of overemphasizing work outputs and productivity. Finally, ENG8
recommended that organizations could limit the number of technologies used to reduce the
amount of knowledge and capabilities employees would need to be successful within an
organization.
In addition to defining clear expectations at work, three of the participants asserted that
working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic further increased their pre-existing
impostor feelings. The participants stated that being remote from their team made it difficult to
communicate with their supervisor in a non-formal way. For example, ENG5 stated that they
could no longer ask informal and emergent questions. Instead they stated that “everything needs
to be formalized through a meeting” which set a more formal tone for their questions. This
finding suggests a need for less formal communication channels and has implications not only
for the COVID-19 global pandemic but for businesses that hire remote technology employees.
These findings indicated employee recommendations for environmental interventions that may
reduce IP in RDOs. Table 9 reveals the participant recommendations for reducing the impostor
phenomenon.

124

Table 9
Recommendations for Environmental Interventions
Recommended Environmental Interventions Number of Participants
Set clear expectations with employees 4
Allow time to learn the various job technologies 3
Provide a job mentor 2
Foster a culture of learning and experimentation 2
Limit the number of technologies used on the job 1

Environment Results Summary
Overall, the interviews indicated that the work environment is a significant predictor of
the impostor phenomenon for technology employees. This study’s findings indicated that
inaccurate or missing job descriptions might be a predictor of impostor feelings for technology
employees. For example, if the participant’s supervisor did not accurately represent the job
responsibilities or expectations when they started the job, the participants tended to feel like a
fraud. In addition, the leadership style of supervisors was found to be a significant contributor to
the impostor phenomenon for the participants. Five participants revealed that the lack of clear
work prioritization and infrequent interactions with their supervisor promoted the impostor
phenomenon. By their superiors not clearly setting job priorities, the participants had to seek
feedback from peers and other leaders within the organization. In addition, the lack of frequent
and timely feedback from their supervisor contributed to the participant’s impostor feelings. To
mediate these issues, two of the participants stated that adding short but frequent checkpoints
with their supervisor would reduce their impostor phenomenon symptoms.

125

When asked what they would change in the work environment to reduce the impostor
phenomenon, the participants revealed multiple different suggestions. The main participant
recommendations included suggesting that supervisors set clear work expectations, allowing
employees time to learn their new job, and providing a job mentor. These findings also suggest
that technology employees are cognizant of the common environmental predictors for the
impostor phenomenon and that they are able to recommend organizational interventions based on
their impostor experiences.
Research Question Two Results
Self-Efficacy Results
The goal of research question two was to understand how the impostor phenomenon
affects the perceived self-efficacy of technology employees. This section highlights the
participant’s findings and perceived self-efficacy according to their supervisor’s expectations,
job qualifications, and self-perceived capabilities compared to their peers.
Perceived Ability to Meet Supervisor’s Expectations
To understand the 12 participant’s perceptions of self-efficacy, the researcher asked the
participants to describe their perceived ability to meet their supervisor’s job expectations. This
question was important because it revealed how technology employees perceived their abilities
relative to their supervisor’s requirements of their position. When asked about their ability to
meet their supervisor’s expectations, 10 of the 12 participants felt confident they could meet their
supervisor’s expectations. However, during the interviews six of the participants revealed areas
in which they felt unconfident to meet their job expectations. For example, TPM1 stated that
they were “80% confident in their abilities to meet the expectations.” The same participant went

126

on to expand that they were proficient in most of the quantitative parts of their job but lacked
certain skills needed to meet all of the expectations.
Other participants stated that they were confident that they could meet expectations
although their supervisor did not describe them during the hiring process. For example, ENG1
explained that they had to learn the expectations of their job through trial and error at work. The
same participant also revealed that the process of trying to figure out their supervisor’s
expectations decreased their productivity and reduced their perceived job self-efficacy. In other
words, because the participant did not know the expectations of their job, they had no way to
accurately assess their capabilities, and therefore their job self-efficacy decreased. The findings
from both participants suggest that establishing expectations with their supervisor may
significantly increase self-efficacy for new technology employees.
The interviews also indicated that unclear work expectations and task prioritization in
their work environment negatively affected perceived self-efficacy and the impostor experience
for the participants. For example, LDR1 stated that when they started their position it was not
made clear where they should focus their time. Specifically, the participant stated that they were
“unsure about how to work within the new environment and the organization’s operational
maturity level.” Therefore, it was hard for the participant to understand where they could add
value and contribute to the work environment. The participant further explained that the lack of
clarity on what task to work on first was a predictor for their impostor feelings. These feelings
led LDR1 to question their abilities about whether they were qualified for their position. This
finding suggests that setting task priorities for technology employees when they start a new
position may decrease impostor feelings. To mediate this effect, the participants recommended
during the interviews that hiring managers could “meet with their employees during the first few

127

weeks of employment to set organizational context and expectations” in addition to allowing the
new hire to ask clarifying questions about the job. These findings suggest that RDO employees
with IP symptoms may exhibit the perceived self-confidence to meet their supervisor’s
expectations. Table 10 highlights the participant’s perceived ability to meet their supervisor’s
expectations.

Table 10
Perceived Ability to Meet Supervisor Expectations
Participant Ability to Meet Supervisor Expectations
ENG1 Confident
ENG2 Confident
ENG3 Confident
ENG4 Confident
ENG5 Confident
ENG6 Confident
ENG7 Confident
ENG8 Confident
ENG9 Confident
LDR1 Not confident
LDR2 Confident
TPM1 Confident

128

Participant Job Qualifications
To further reveal the perceived job self-efficacy of the 12 participants, the researcher
asked about which specific job responsibilities they felt unqualified for. Of the 12 participants,
11 stated that they were unqualified to work with miscellaneous technologies that were part of
their job responsibilities. For example, ENG1 felt unqualified to work with specific security
software technologies in their position. Another participant (ENG8) felt unqualified to work on
the Linux operating system. The types of technologies differed between participants, but 8
participants in total felt underqualified in at least one specific technology area. This finding
indicated that technology positions might foster increased impostor feelings because the jobs are
typically a unique amalgamation of skills and requirements that employees are unlikely to be
completely qualified to manage.
Self-Comparison to Peers
During the interviews, the 12 participants were asked to compare their skillset to that of
their organizational peer group within the same job role and level. The results found that seven
of the 12 participants perceived themselves to be average or below average compared to their
peers. The participants described their comparisons in different ways. For example, ENG3
explained that compared to their peers, they felt like they were “in the middle of the pack” when
they ranked their skills compared to others in the organization. Another participant (ENG2)
claimed that they were “way below others” when they compared their perceived knowledge to
their coworkers. This finding indicates that technology employees in the first year of their
position may exhibit reduced self-efficacy and feel only adequate or below adequate compared to
their peer cohort at work. Table 11 illustrates how the participants perceived their job
performance compared to their peers.

129

Table 11
Perceived Job Performance Compared to Peers
Participant
Perceived Job Performance Compared to
Peers
ENG1 Average
ENG2 Below average
ENG3 Average
ENG4 Above average
ENG5 Above average
ENG6 Below average
ENG7 Above average
ENG8 Below average
ENG9 Average
LDR1 Average
LDR2 Above average
TPM1 Below average

Self-Efficacy Results Summary
The interviews in this study revealed that 11 of the 12 participants felt confident in their
ability to meet their supervisor’s job expectations. However, 11 of 12 participants also felt they
were underqualified in at least one specific job requirement in their position. For example, eight
participants felt underqualified to support at least one type of miscellaneous technology. This
finding indicates that the lack of ability or understanding of a specific technology may decrease
perceived self-efficacy. In other words, if technology employees feel underqualified in a single
required technology, it may negatively affect their self-efficacy and sense of belonging for their
entire position.
When the participants were asked about their performance compared to their peers, the
results revealed that 11 of the 12 participants felt comparatively average or below average. This
finding suggests that participants felt only moderately efficacious in their positions. However,

130

more research is needed into why 11 participants felt confident in their ability to meet supervisor
expectations but only felt average or below-average performance when compared to their peers.
Other Notable Findings
Although the primary purpose of this study was to understand IP through the lens of
Bandura’s (1986) SCT, the results of this study revealed other notable findings that may
contribute to future IP research.
First to Graduate College
This study asked participants whether technology employees were the first in their family
to go to college or work within RDOs, and if so, how it impacted their fraudulent feelings. In
total, seven of the 12 participants held college degrees, but only ENG5 and ENG6 were the first
to go to college in their family. Neither of these two participants stated that being the first to go
to college affected their impostor symptoms. Although there were only two data points across the
12 participants, the participant responses showed no linkage between being the first person to
graduate college and increased impostor feelings. This finding suggests that being the first
person to go to college in their family may not be a predictor for the IP. Table 12 shows the
number of participants that were the first to graduate college in their family.

Table 12
First to Graduate College in Their Family
First Person to Graduate College Number of Participants
Yes 2
No 10

131

First to Work in a Research and Development Organization
The interviews revealed that all 12 of the participants were the first in their family to
work within an RDO. From the interviews, the data showed that being the first person in the
family that worked in a RDO may have contributed to their impostor feelings. For example, three
of the participants explained that their family did not “understand their job” and were confused
by the details of their occupation. Because the participant’s family did not understand the nature
of their work, the participants felt their positions were undervalued by their family. In other
words, because their family lacked an understanding of their job, the participants felt like they
did not get the family recognition they deserved for working in an RDO. This finding suggests
that a lack of family understanding of technology positions may contribute to increased impostor
feelings for technology employees.
Family Expectations for Success
The interview protocol for this study sought to understand the personal traits derived
from child-parent interactions. For this study participants were asked to describe their parent’s
expectations for their success during their childhood in an effort to understand if the interactions
negatively affected their fraudulent feelings. When asked to describe their family’s expectations
for their success, 10 participants stated that they had minimal expectations for success placed on
them by their parents. For example, ENG6 stated that they were expected to earn a college
degree but that their family had “low expectations for their career success.” In fact, the same
participant’s parents told them when they were a child that they would be happy if they could
eventually “take care of themselves.” The rest of the participants stated that their parents
expected them to at least “graduate high school” and “find a stable job.”

132

Of the 12 participants, only two stated that their family put extreme pressure on them to
succeed. For example, ENG4 stated that their family expected them to become a doctor after
graduating high school. The same participant further explained that they even went to a year of
medical school to appease their parents before switching to an engineering major. Also, ENG2
explained that their family reiterated that the participant was expected to “have lots of money
and be well-off.” Neither participant felt that their family pressure to succeed affected their
impostor feelings.
The interviews revealed that although there were basic educational and employment
expectations of their families, 10 of the participant’s parents did not over-emphasize the need to
be successful. Only two of the 12 participants’ parents reinforced a certain field or industry that
exemplified their ideals for “success” to their families. Instead, most families emphasized that
their children should strive to become self-sufficient without being overly prescriptive about
their children’s success. This finding suggests that modest family expectations of success may
not intermediate IP for technology employees later in life.
Conclusions
This chapter discussed the results and findings of 12 different qualitative interviews with
technology employees in the US who had experienced IP and been in their position for less than
one year. Bandura’s (1986) SCT acted as a theoretical guide for both the research questions and
the findings. This study specifically focused on the SCT determinants of personal traits,
behaviors, the environment, and self-efficacy. The interview findings revealed multiple different
relationships related to IP and the effect on technology employees. In addition, this study’s
findings revealed how technology employees experienced IP in the work environment from a
phenomenological perspective.

133

Chapter Five: Recommendations and Evaluation Plan
The purpose of this study is to understand how personal traits, behaviors, and
organizational environment influence how technology employees experience IP and to identify
organizational solutions for mitigating how employees experience its symptoms. To better
understand the IP, Chapter two explored the etiologies of the phenomenon in detail in addition to
providing a review of Bandura’s (1986) SCT and its three cognitive determinants. Chapter three
explained this study’s research methodologies and principles. Chapter four included the results
from the 12 technology employee interviews organized by personal traits, behaviors, and the
environment.
The next section answers research question three which presents what RDOs can do to
mitigate the effects of IP for employees. This chapter also details recommendations for RDOs
organized by the SCT determinants of personal traits, behavior, and the environment. In addition,
this study includes an evaluation plan constructed from Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016)
New World Kirkpatrick Model (NWKM). The NWKM provides a theoretical evaluation plan
that consists of four implementation levels. Each level is described in detail below and provides
guidance for implementing this study’s recommendations. The learning and evaluation plan in
this chapter also covers the specific implementation recommendations along with the expected
outcomes and metrics for organizations to measure progress.
Research Question Three Results
The third research question this study attempted to answer was what can research and
development organizations do to mitigate IP for employees? The recommendations in this
section are in order of Bandura’s (1986) three SCT determinants along with specific
recommendations for increasing employee self-efficacy. The first SCT determinant is personal

134

traits or attributes which can increase a person’s ability to learn and persist through tasks. The
second determinant is behavior, which influences productivity and the motivation to learn. The
third and final determinant is the environment, which can help provide the resources for
individuals to support learning. Lastly, the section concludes with recommendations for
increasing employee self-efficacy grounded by Bandura’s (1986) SCT determinant areas and
other supporting literature.
Personal Trait Recommendations
Personal attributes can both positively and negatively affect the perceived self-efficacy of
individuals and predict the IP (Clance, 1985; Bandura, 1986). This section explores the
recommendations for RDOs based on the personal trait findings in Chapter four.
Provide Employees Information About Coping With the Impostor Phenomenon
The results of this study revealed that 11 of the participants could define the IP and were
able to provide various descriptions of their experiences with its symptoms. However, none of
the 12 participants stated that their organizations provided them with information or the
resources to cope with its symptoms. Instead, the participants stated that they learned of IP
through other means, such as articles in various technology and online forums. Understanding
how to cope with IP is important because research showed that self-recognition and adaptive
coping mechanisms might subsequently decrease the intensity of impostor symptoms (Arleo et
al., 2021; Clance, 1985; Metz et al., 2020). In other words, if technology employees can
accurately cope with their impostor symptoms, they may be able to decrease the intensity of their
feelings.
To meet this need, the recommendation is for RDOs to provide procedural information
about coping with IP during the onboarding process or whenever employees change jobs within

135

the organization. Procedural knowledge is specifically important because it can explain the
various ways that technology employees can help resolve their impostor feelings (Krathwohl,
2002). The employee information should also include metacognitive ways for employees to self-
recognize the symptoms of IP and cope with their feelings. Prior research suggests that cognitive
recognition of IP and mindfulness are effective coping strategies for IP (KH & Menon, 2020;
Lawton et al., 2020). For example, organizations could highlight meditation and other breathing
relaxation techniques as ways to cope with their impostor feelings. By providing employees with
online information on IP, its symptoms, and where to attain professional help, employers may be
able to reduce fraudulent feelings for new employees and those changing jobs within an
organization (Metz et al., 2020).
Employees that can adaptively cope with their IP symptoms may also be able to reduce
their impostor tendency to overwork, which can ultimately lead to job burnout or negatively
affect the mental health of employees (Clance, 1985). The literature also indicated that self-
recognition of impostor feelings may reduce an individual’s anxiety about being exposed as a
fraud (Atkin, 2020; Harvey & Katz, 1985). In other words, if a technology employee knows that
generalized anxiety is one of the symptoms of IP they may be able to normalize their feelings
which may decrease their anxious feelings. Together, providing information and resources for
employees to understand their impostor feelings may prevent them from being overwhelmed by
work and reduce their feelings of anxiety.
Provide Employees With Information on How to Mitigate Perfectionist Tendencies
The findings from the 12 interviews showed that 11 of the participants exhibited
perfectionist tendencies in their work. For example, although 11 of the participants revealed that
they often either over-prepared and spent more time on work than they should, they normalized

136

the behavior by claiming that their actions were “just part of the job.” Mediating perfectionism is
important because it is one of the primary predictors for IP and may increase feelings of
depression and anxiety (Clance, 1985; Rassaby et al, 2021; Wright et al., 2021).
To address technology employee’s perfectionist tendencies in the workplace, the
recommendation is for organizations to train employees on how to recognize and mediate
perfectionist tendencies. Tobin and Dunkley (2021) discovered that individuals that needed their
work to be perfect found that reflection on the time to accomplish a task was a mediating factor
for their perfectionist tendencies. In other words, employees should examine the amount of time
spent on a task and adjust their expectations for future tasks to avoid over preparing. To facilitate
this feedback mechanism, employees should monitor their efforts to ensure that they do not
expend unnecessary time on tasks and projects (Spagnoli et al., 2021). To help facilitate this
behavior, employers and supervisors should provide employees with information about the
attributes of perfectionism, and ways to measure the time allotted to specific work tasks. For
example, organizations could use project management tracking software to allow employees to
track the amount of time used for each work item or task. Supervisors could then use the
employee data on the time spent on their tasks to reflect on their work and adjust the amount of
effort accordingly to prevent the employee from overworking.
In addition to facilitating employee mindfulness about perfectionist traits, RDOs could
offer online cognitive behavioral interventions to their employees. For example, Burhman et al.
(2020) created a framework for internet-based training focused on cognitive behavioral therapy
techniques to reduce perfectionism in the workplace. These strategies for work effort regulation
and perfectionist symptoms may have implications for reducing technology employee’s
perfectionist tendencies (Rozental et al., 2020; Spagnoli et al., 2021).

137

Reinforce Self-Attribution of Employee Accomplishments
Bandura (1997) found that misattribution of success can negatively impact an
individual’s perceived self-efficacy. The interview data showed that all 12 participants
misattributed either the primary reasons for their professional success. Instead, the participants
gave varying reasons for their accomplishments, including social influencing skills and the
ability to “emotionally read other people at work.” This finding is consistent with Clance and
Imes’ (1978) seminal IP research that stated impostors often lack the ability to take credit for
their accomplishments.
To mitigate this process, the recommendation is to provide employees with information
on achievement misattribution and its relationship to the IP. This recommendation is grounded in
research that showed that self-efficacy has a negative and mediating relationship with the IP (Tao
& Gloria, 2019). In other words, if technology employees misattribute their accomplishments,
their perceived self-efficacy may decrease, which can be a predictor of IP (Clance & O’Toole,
1987). To help mediate employee imposter feelings, organizations should also provide
employees with a way to track and reflect on their past professional accomplishments. For
example, organizations could provide job aids such as personal journals or access to performance
management records so employees can reflect on their previous accomplishments. Both of these
interventions may give employees a way to keep a record of past feedback.
To further reinforce their employee’s capabilities, supervisors should provide feedback
that directly connects their employee’s accomplishments to specific skills. For example, a
supervisor could praise an employee for a difficult technical project and specifically list the
employee’s capabilities that they employed to accomplish their goals such as technical ability or

138

problem-solving skills. This type of direct supervisor feedback may help employees correctly
attribute their achievements and decrease their impostor feelings.
Behavioral Recommendations
Behavior determines how much effort and motivation an individual puts into a task and
whether they will persist in completing it (Bandura, 1986; Clark & Estes, 2008). To counter IP
and increase employee motivation, productivity, and self-efficacy, organizations must provide
ways to encourage learning behaviors (Bandura, 1997). Within this study, there were multiple
behavioral needs revealed through the interviews with the 12 participants. This section provides
recommendations that promote behavioral change, which may reduce the employees experience
with IP and improve employee motivation and job productivity.
Offer On-Site Resources and Benefits to Support Coping Behaviors
The findings of this study revealed that the 12 technology employees all coped with the
IP in different ways. For example, the participant responses when asked how they cope with their
impostor feelings varied from journaling their experience to exercising. Therefore, the
recommendation derived from the results of this study is to provide organizational resources that
employees can utilize to cope with their impostor feelings. To promote healthy adaptive ways for
employees to cope with their feelings, RDOs should provide access to mental health resources
and employee assistance programs (Hutchins et al., 2018; Nunes et al., 2018; Richmond et al.,
2017). Organizations should provide reasonable ways to de-stress at work. For example,
businesses could provide access to a gym or quiet rooms for employees to exercise or practice
mindfulness. These benefits would allow employees to practice cognitive behavioral techniques
such as meditation and breathing exercises which the research suggests may help alleviate
impostor feelings at work (Bandura, 1997; Bravata et al., 2020).

139

It is also important for employees to identify and seek professional help for extreme
feelings of anxiety, depression, or worry. For those technology employees with other underlying
conditions such as anxiety disorders or depression, research recommended that employees
address their ancillary symptoms with mental health professionals (Bravata et al., 2020).
Therefore, this study’s secondary recommendation is for organizations to provide medical
benefits to employees that cover professional mental health therapy.
In summary, RDOs should provide both quiet spaces for technology employees to
practice mindfulness and mental health benefits including medical insurance for those that
experience intense impostor feelings. Both types of interventions have implications for mediating
impostor feelings for technology employees (Clance, 1985).
Train Supervisors on Ways to Improve Employee Productivity
The results of this study found that all 12 participants felt that their impostor feelings
decreased their work productivity. This finding is significant because the research showed,
increased self-efficacy can increase employee productivity and decrease impostor feelings
(Bandura, 1986; McDowell et al., 2015). Therefore, the recommendation for RDOs is to provide
supervisors with training and job aids to increase their employee’s self-efficacy and work
productivity.
Bandura (2001) stated that individual motivation and increased productivity comes from
self-reflection on past challenging experiences and completed tasks. To put this into practice,
supervisors could use their knowledge of their employee’s prior accomplishments to assess their
employee’s capabilities and then create ways to increase their productivity. For example,
supervisors could disambiguate and break-down projects into smaller parts and assign work to
their employees in a way that seems achievable to technology employees (Bandura, 1997). In

140

addition, educating supervisors on how to employ guided practice as a learning technique may
increase employee self-efficacy and motivation (Bandura, 1988). From a theoretical perspective,
providing supervisors with this type of training and information has implications for increasing
technology employee self-efficacy which in turn may increase employee productivity. However,
it is worth noting the RDOs should be aware that feelings of anxiety may act as a maladaptive
coping mechanism for employees to overwork (Mughal et al., 1996). Therefore supervisors must
understand the difference between improved employee motivation and maladaptive coping
behaviors like overworking.
Provide Information to Supervisors on How to Deliver Feedback to Employees
The findings revealed that six of the participants felt that their impostor feelings
decreased their motivation to work. However, the other six participants felt that their impostor
feelings actually increased their motivation to learn new skills and technologies, which they
believed would alleviate their impostor feelings. Of the participants that experienced reduced
motivation, they all stated that the lack of feedback, positive reinforcement, and expectations
from their supervisors decreased their motivation. In fact, one of the participants stated that their
supervisor “controls the level of impostor phenomenon” at work by not providing clear goals and
feedback.
To facilitate supervisor’s knowledge of how expectations and feedback affect their
employees, the recommendation is for organizations to create a training plan to teach technology
supervisors how to provide employee feedback. This study’s recommendation is to provide
training that highlights the importance of positive reinforcement and timely feedback to their
employees. Also, to increase the efficacy of the training, the curriculum should include data
about how IP may reduce employee motivation and highlight the negative effects of IP on

141

employee mental health. This type of procedural training coupled with supplemental job aids
supervisors could use after the training could help decrease their employee’s impostor feelings
and increase work motivation.
Bandura (1997) found that supervisors who provided feedback on employee’s
performance toward a goal increased employee motivation and task persistence. Providing
feedback on employee’s task progress is also important because it has implications for
expediting the learning process and gives supervisors the opportunity to correct potential issues
as employees go through the learning process (Bandura, 1997). For example, one of the
participants stated that their supervisor “simply doesn’t take the time to provide feedback” and
therefore, the participant lacked the motivation to persist in their work. To address this issue,
supervisors could provide positive feedback on their employee’s attempts to learn a new skill
such as a programming language. To support the goal of increasing employee motivation, the
recommendation is for supervisors to set clear goals with their employees and check-in at regular
intervals to provide positive feedback and reassurance. By setting clear expectations and
providing frequent positive feedback, supervisors may increase both their employee’s motivation
and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977).
Bandura (1997) stated that clear communication and feedback from supervisors could
increase an individual’s feelings of self-efficacy, which may positively affect motivation. To
implement this training recommendation, supervisors should guide employees through new job
responsibilities and utilize verbal persuasion to help increase employee learning and motivation
(Bandura, 1988). In other words, supervisors could periodically monitor progress on a task and
provide corrective feedback or encouragement for their employees. Since employees assess self-
efficacy relative to their prior accomplishments, this methodology could also build employee

142

motivation for future challenging projects while reducing impostor feelings (Bandura, 2001). In
other words, if supervisors can help guide employees through a single challenging project, the
employee may gain the motivation needed to take on future challenging projects on their own
without experiencing impostor symptoms.
Environmental Recommendations
The work environment directly influences the culture of an organization, which may
determine the success of learning goals for employees (Bandura, 1997). For technology
employees to learn new skills, the organizational culture must value learning, and the employees
must have access to the necessary resources to develop these new skills. Job training and
learning materials are examples of organizational resources that help facilitate learning.
Together, these organizational learning elements can help facilitate a culture of learning for
technology employees.
The environment can also be a predictor of IP for technology employees. Because RDOs
require employees to continuously learn new skills, employers should facilitate learning by
investing in environmental resources (Richmond et al., 2017). The recommendations in this
section highlight the types of environmental resources, documents, job aids, and support needed
for organizations to reduce IP for technology employees.
Create Individualized Job Descriptions That Match Position Requirements
The results of this study revealed that the 12 participants felt that their job descriptions
did not match their job responsibilities. Two of the participants also stated that they were never
given a job description that explained the expectations expected for their position. Consequently,
these participants had no way to assess their skills against the requirements of their job. Without

143

a way to appraise their skills relative to their jobs, individuals may experience reduced self-
expectations, which may reduce motivation and productivity (Bandura, 1997).
To alleviate this problem, this study’s recommendation is for RDOs to create
individualized and accurate job descriptions for employees and discuss the requirements of the
position with employees during the interview and hiring process. For employees transferring or
taking on new positions within the same organization, managers should also create and review
job descriptions with their employees. This process ensures that there is a clear understanding
between the supervisor and the employee regarding the requirements and expectations of the job.
The research indicated that job descriptions written by employers are often generalized
and contain requirements outside of the employer’s actual needs (Chopra & Golab, 2018).
Instead, job descriptions should be a document that continuously evolves with the needs of the
employer and the expectations of the job (Pató, 2017). Accurate job descriptions are also
important because they act as a formal reference for employees to understand the skills,
expectations, and requirements necessary for their position. In other words, if employees can
increase their understanding of the position and align their skills set with their job description, it
may increase self-efficacy and reduce impostor feelings.
Train Supervisors How to Set Expectations With Employees
The interview results showed that supervisors who did not set work expectations with
their employees negatively influenced the impostor feelings that employees experienced. For
example, the participants with supervisors that allowed their employees time to acclimate to their
positions and learn the environment experienced decreased impostor feelings. However,
participants that had supervisors who did not set expectations or provide guidance to their
employees experienced increased levels of IP. To mitigate this issue, the recommendation is for

144

organizations to educate and train technology employee supervisors on how they can reduce their
employee’s impostor symptoms and increase their perceived self-efficacy.
Bandura (1988) asserted that there are multiple ways to increase employee self-efficacy,
such as modeling behavior and guided practice. Supervisors must understand how to implement
these practices with their technology employees because self-efficacy has a mediating effect on
the IP and may contribute to an increased ability to learn (Tao & Gloria, 2019). To implement
this recommendation, organizations should focus on training supervisors to set expectations,
provide guidance, and feedback on their employee’s work. In addition, supervisors need to
understand when to deploy other tactics like verbal persuasion and vicarious learning to help
bolster their employee’s self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977). By combining guided practice with
feedback and encouragement, supervisors can help mitigate impostor feelings for their
employees and increase their job self-efficacy.
Create an Organizational Culture of Learning
The results of this study showed that RDOs need to promote a culture of learning and
experimentation to reduce the IP. The majority of participants felt the perceived pressure to
immediately deliver value to their organizations without taking the time to learn the culture and
technology requirements of their position. To summarize their experience, one participant stated
that when they joined their organization, they “needed time to assess the maturity level of the
organization before they knew how to execute (their work).” This finding is consistent with IP
literature which found that one of the primary predictors of IP occurs when starting a new job or
taking on new tasks (Clance and Imes, 1978).
Since technology employees are constantly required to learn new skills, building a
learning culture may further decrease impostor symptoms for technology employees. To address

145

these organizational learning needs, this study’s recommendation is for senior leaders to align
technology employee goals and incentives with the learning process. Specifically, organizations
should encourage employees time to learn, promote experimentation, and reward the acquisition
of new skills through incentives such as being assigned to new projects, bonuses, and
promotions. To illustrate, if a technology employee needs to learn a new programming language,
organizations should allow specific time to learn and reward the employee for acquiring a new
skill. This recommendation aligns with the results of this study which found that technology
employees felt they did not have time to learn the new skills that their position required.
To facilitate a learning culture, organizations should provide access to documentation,
training courses, or information that allows employees to learn new skills. Bandura (1986) stated
that if employees have access to learning resources and an environment that facilitates learning,
they are more likely to succeed at learning new skills. The acquisition of these skills can help
foster feelings of self-efficacy, which may reduce impostor feelings (Clance, 1985). Creating a
learning culture is also important because impostor symptoms such as perceived lack of self-
efficacy can inhibit learning in the workplace (Bandura, 1997; Morrison & Owler, 2018). By
creating a learning culture, organizations can reduce the IP in addition to increase productivity,
motivation, and the mental well-being of their employees (Bandura, 1994). In other words,
organizations must provide a cultural setting for their employees to help facilitate their learning
goals. Without the cultural setting to support learning, employees may exhibit decreased job
productivity or motivation (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Self-Efficacy Recommendations
The second research question in this study sought to understand how self-efficacy affects
IP for technology employees. Exploring self-efficacy is important because it may mitigate

146

impostor feelings and increase an individual’s motivation and productivity (Bandura, 1997; Tao
& Gloria, 2019). Increased self-efficacy can also positively affect the learning, motivation, and
persistence of individuals to accomplish a difficult task. This section details the
recommendations to increase self-efficacy and reduce IP for technology employees based on the
findings in Chapter four.
Provide a Learning Plan for New Employees
The participant results in this study revealed that a gap exists in the participant’s self-
perceived skill set versus their employer’s expectations. By identifying the gap in employee
knowledge when employees start a new position, both the supervisor and the employee can
establish a learning plan with clear goals and expectations. Also, by formulating a learning plan,
employees are less likely to perceive their lack of knowledge as a lack of capability which may
be a predictor for the IP. Instead, the employee and supervisor can mutually discuss and
acknowledge the gap in employee skills and create a learning plan to address the specific needs
of the job.
Addressing a new employee’s perceived gap in skills is important because, as the
research demonstrated, taking on new positions and projects has the potential to increase
impostor symptoms (Clance, 1985). Also, from a theoretical perspective, by acknowledging an
employee’s skill gap and providing clear goals and expectations, supervisors can both reduce
impostor symptoms and increase job motivation for individuals (Clance, 1985, Vroom, 1964).
Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory stated that motivation derives from the expected outcomes
and behaviors an individual has for a task or project. In other words, if an employee believes that
they will be rewarded for accomplishing a difficult task, they will exhibit increased motivation to
complete it. This recommendation is important because acknowledging an employee’s skills gap

147

can motivate employees to learn, which subsequently may mitigate their impostor feelings by
promoting self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997; Zanchetta et al., 2020).
Provide Mentors for Employees
The results of this study revealed that there is a need for organizations to provide mentors
so employees can discuss their impostor feelings with others at work. In addition to mediating
impostor feelings, mentors can help technology employees by providing objective feedback on
their work (Armstrong & Shulman, 2019). Mentors also provide an informal communication
channel for technology employees to utilize when they are uncertain about their work (Cisco,
2020). This is particularly important for technology positions that are remote. Without a mentor,
employees may feel the need to schedule formal meetings with their supervisor or peers to
answer questions which may further increase impostor feelings.
Therefore, the recommendation is for organizations to create a mentorship program
where employees are assigned a tenured technology employee with whom they can discuss their
work or feelings. The research showed that mentorships may act as a mediating factor to the IP
(Barr-Walker et al., 2020). This recommendation aligns with other literature, which stated that
talking with trusted colleagues or mentors at work can help mediate impostor feelings (Chapman,
2017; Rakestraw, 2017; Sturges, 2018). By assigning a mentor to employees, organizations may
also be able to reduce impostor feelings while increasing levels of self-efficacy. In addition,
providing a mentor can help provide coaching, which may expedite the learning of skills that the
employee needs to learn to do their job (Zanchetta et al., 2020). This recommendation is
consistent with Bandura’s (1997) assertion that modeling and mastery experiences facilitated by
others, such as mentors, help increase learning and self-efficacy.

148

Create Impostor Phenomenon Employee Resource Groups
Employee resource groups (ERGs) are groups of employees with shared interests that
provide employees a way to share and bring awareness to certain topics or underrepresented
issues (Dutton, 2018; Green, 2018). In addition, ERGs are often where organizational learning
and social change originate in organizations (Welbourne et al., 2017). Gardner et al. (2019)
asserted that these types of groups provide social support to individuals which may help mediate
impostor feelings. Therefore, the recommendation is for organizations to create an ERG focused
on the IP. To mediate IP in RDOs, these groups could focus on highlighting the employee
impostor experience and create strategies to reduce its symptoms in the workplace.
The research also revealed that ERGs could help provide targeted access to information
and assistance for employees who experience the IP (Hutchins et al., 2018; Richmond et al.,
2017). Employee resource groups can function much like a mentor in that they provide group
social support for those who feel like impostors through feedback and positive reinforcement. In
addition, ERGs can provide employees a forum to assess their impostor feelings and job
capabilities relative to others in the organization. In other words, the group interactions may help
normalize employee impostor feelings. Overall, ERGs provide a safe environment for employees
to talk about their feelings and work with others to find ways to decrease the IP for technology
employees.
Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
To implement the recommendations in this study, employers must be able to measure the
effectiveness and outcomes of the proposed solutions for reducing IP for technology employees.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) New World Kirkpatrick Model (NWKM) provides a

149

theoretical framework to analyze and evaluate the recommendations presented in this
chapter. The NWKM can also help organizations operationalize and identify areas of focus to
increase the chance of success for organizational learning programs. To do this, the NWKM
explains four levels of evaluation for implementing learning and change management programs
which are, Level 1: Reaction, Level 2: Learning, Level 3: Behavior, and Level 4: Results.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) recommended organizational change management
practitioners formulate a strategy for each level individually to ensure organizations understand
the results they need to achieve in order to meet a specific business outcome.
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) suggested that organizations implement the four
levels of their program in reverse order, from Level 4 to Level 1. Therefore, this section focuses
on the four levels inversely according to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) recommendation.
For example, Level 4 represents the expected organizational results, outcomes, and metrics that
can be used to measure learning and training project success. Level 3 addresses the
organizational behaviors to drive change. Level 2 assesses the knowledge acquisition of
participants and their motivation to persist through the proposed change. Lastly, Level 1
measures the favorability and relevance of the change and training programs for participants.
Combined, these four levels provide a comprehensive framework for aligning business outcomes
with the motivation and abilities of the participants (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 13
describes the four different levels of the NWKM.

150

Table 13
Kirkpatrick New World Model Levels
New World Model
Level
Description
Level 4: Reaction The extent that business goals are met as a result of the training and
support initiatives
Level 3: Learning The measure of how much participants apply their newly acquired
knowledge
Level 2: Behavior The amount of knowledge that participants can exercise knowledge
gained from training initiatives
Level 1: Results The sentiment of participants and the overall relevance to their jobs

Organizational Purpose, Needs, and Expectations
The purpose of this training and implementation program is to provide organizations
recommended interventions to RDOs to reduce IP for technology employees. The program
recommendations in this section were constructed from the interview results of 12 technology
employees who had previous experience with the IP. Reducing IP for technology employees is
important to understanding because it can significantly affect employee productivity, motivation,
and mental health.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Metrics give organizations a way to validate whether their goals and initiatives are on
track (Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick, 2016). The internal and external outcomes also highlight the
methods and metrics by which organizations can measure the success of their proposed learning
program. Table 14 contains a set of internal and external metrics organizations can expect after
reducing IP for their technology employees.

151

Table 14
External and Internal Organizational Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Improved external
perception of company
culture.
Increased number of positive
mentions in blogs, business
reports, and articles.
Public Relations collects and
reports out on company
impressions and sentiment.
Increased external interest
in employment from
qualified candidates
Increased number of interested
and qualified job applicants.
Human Resource reports on
candidates that expressed their
interest.
Increased product
innovation
Increased patent applications. Legal team collects the number
of patents filed.
Increased stock price Stock price over time adjusted
for market externalities.
Finance compiles and tracks
yearly and quarterly stock price
trends.
Internal Outcomes
Increased employee
knowledge and
understanding of the
impostor phenomenon.
Average employee
understanding about the
impostor phenomenon.
Human Resources compiles
and averages the employee
rating on impostor
phenomenon employee survey
topic questions.
Increased employee job
satisfaction
Average job satisfaction rating
from employee survey
questions.
Human Resources compiles
and averages the employee
ratings on job satisfaction.
Improved employee
productivity
The comparative time it takes
to develop a new product,
feature, or capability with the
same relative project scope.
Program Management collects
data that shows the amount of
time the RDO takes to develop
products or features.
Increased employee
motivation
A self-rating of an employee’s
ability to persist through
challenging projects and tasks.
Human Resources collects
answers to job motivation
questions in the employee
survey.
Reduced employee
turnover and
absenteeism
Employee data on retention
rates, turnover, turnover
intention, and absenteeism.
Human Resources collects and
reports out on key employee
retention metrics.

152

Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) state that Level 3 behavior is the most critical of the
four levels for organizations because this level enables and reinforces Level 4 results. In
addition, behavior can facilitate change by increasing an individual’s motivation to persist and
learning new ways to accomplish tasks (Bandura, 1986). Within this study’s recommendations,
there are many different critical behaviors that organizational leaders and employees need to
exhibit for change management programs to achieve their expected organizational outcomes.
First, supervisors need to establish clear expectations for their employees and regularly review
progress toward those expectations. It is recommended that these sessions should be done on a
monthly basis. This is important because supervisors need to assess progress toward the assigned
goal, and employees need to receive feedback on their performance to help alleviate their
impostor feelings. Second, technology employees must feel comfortable utilizing their assigned
mentors to discuss their fraudulent feelings and gain objective feedback on their capabilities. If
employees do not utilize their mentor relationship, then their impostor symptoms may persist or
increase. Third, technology employees must actively participate in employee resource groups
focused on the IP. Without actively participating in the resource groups, employees may not
experience decreased impostor feelings. Finally, the fourth critical behavior specifies that
employees must use their work-sponsored benefits to de-stress or individually cope in adaptive
ways to their impostor feelings. To illustrate, employees should schedule time during the work
day to take advantage of benefits like an on-site gym access or quiet rooms to de-stress. Table 15
defines in detail the metrics, methods, and timing for each of these critical behaviors.

153

Table 15
Critical Behaviors for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s)
Timing
Supervisors set
clear expectations
with their
employees and
provide regular
feedback on their
progress.
The number of
meetings that
supervisor’s setup
with their
employees to go
over expectations
and provide
feedback.
Employee survey that asks about
how often employees meet with their
supervisors and whether they receive
regular feedback on their
performance.
Monthly
Technology
employees that
experience the
impostor
phenomenon
engage with their
mentors.
The number of
sessions that the
mentors had with
their mentee to
discuss impostor
feelings.
Engagement survey sent to all
mentors that asks how often they
discuss impostor phenomenon related
topics with their mentees.
Quarterly
Technology
employees utilize
employee
resource groups
focused on the
impostor
phenomenon.
The number of
employees in
attendance from
group sessions and
the number of web
page hits for online
self-help materials.
Group facilitators record the number
of employees in attendance for each
meeting and compile usage numbers
for all web-based job-aids and
materials.
Monthly
Technology
employees
engage in coping
activities to
alleviate
fraudulent
feelings.
The number of
employees that
utilize the on-site
gym or relaxation
rooms to cope with
impostor feelings.
Report on the number of monthly
users for the gym or relaxation
rooms.

Employee survey questions that ask
about coping mechanisms and
utilization of on-site benefits to
mediate their impostor feelings.
Monthly

Quarterly

154

Required Drivers
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) stated that the Level 3 critical organizational
behaviors must be reinforced by formal processes that encourage and support organizational
change. In addition, these organizational drivers help support and provide accountability for
organizations to meet their goals (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The NWKM describes four
different areas of required drivers to support Level 3 behaviors: reinforce, encourage, reward,
and monitor (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). For organizations to decrease the impostor
feelings experienced by their employees, they must utilize all four of the drivers to increase the
desired behaviors to create lasting change. These drivers also represent a way for RDOs to
highlight the desired behaviors and increase the likelihood of organizational success. Table 16
explains the required drivers to support critical behaviors, along with the recommended cadence
for reviewing each reinforcing behavioral method.

155

Table 16
Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
Produce information and job aids for technology employees that
highlight ways to cope with the impostor phenomenon and
mitigate perfectionist tendencies.
Ongoing 4
Create self-directed learning modules for managers that clearly
articulate the value and employee outcomes of setting
expectations and providing employees feedback on their
performance.
Ongoing 1
Design a learning plan and timeline for employees based on a
skills gap analysis of the specific abilities or technologies
needed for an employee to be successful in their position
Quarterly 1
Generate bespoke job descriptions for employees and review
them as part of the onboarding process.
Ongoing 1
Provide access to a gym or quiet space where employees can
practice coping mechanisms such as physical exercise,
meditation, or breathing techniques.
Ongoing 4
Establish an employee resource group focused on the impostor
phenomenon where employees can share their impostor
experience along with coping strategies and ways to reduce
perfectionist tendencies.
Ongoing 3, 4
Encouraging
Create a mentorship program that allows new employees an
informal way to talk about their impostor feelings and gain
objective feedback on their work.
Ongoing 2
Recruit executives to participate, facilitate, and encourage
participation in the impostor phenomenon employee resource
group meet-ups.
Quarterly 3, 4

156

Table 16 Continued
Rewarding
Provide awards and recognition for employees that participate in
the mentorship and employee resource group programs.
Bi-annually 2, 3
Encourage professional networking within the employee resource
group cohort and host external events offsite.
Quarterly 3
Monitoring
Survey the organization to assess the efficacy, performance, and
sentiment of the program.
Annually 1, 2, 3, 4
Create a dashboard of key impostor phenomenon program metrics
including class attendance, sentiment analysis, and on-site
benefit usage metrics
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4

Organizational Support
To help ensure sustained program success, organizations must provide ongoing support
for employee learning and training programs (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In addition,
organizations must invest in and hold themselves accountable for the proposed program
recommendations and solutions. For example, there must be budgetary funds allocated for
continuous training, mentoring, and employee access to environments that mitigate the IP. In
addition, there must be executive support and participation from executives to show support for
the organizational changes. For example, executives must allocate time to actively participate in
employee resource groups to discuss their IP experience with others. Finally, organizations must
create ways to track the success of their program by investing internal resources and time to
develop mechanisms such as metric dashboards and other measurement tools that provide
transparency to the program and its outcomes. In other words, organizations should compile data

157

on class and ERG attendance in addition to the usage statistics of on-site benefits such as gyms
and quiet rooms. Together, these organizational commitments help ensure the programs are able
to provide the desired organizational outcomes.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
After the implementation of the recommendations in this study, the technology employee
participants will be able to exhibit the following learning competencies:
• Describe the impostor phenomenon in detail and recognize its symptoms.
• Apply coping strategies to reduce impostor feelings.
• Understand the effect that supervisor expectations and feedback have on the impostor
phenomenon for employees.
• Understand ways to reduce perfectionist tendencies and to take credit for personal
achievements.
• Develop a personalized action plan for decreasing impostor feelings.
• Interact and engage with mentors.
• Articulate the formal benefits that are available to employees to cope with the impostor
phenomenon.
• Align expectations with supervisors and gain feedback on progress at regular intervals.
• Exhibit the self-confidence to mitigate the impostor phenomenon
Program Implementation
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) state that learning programs rely on the effectiveness
of the program’s implementation and training professionals. The learning plan in this section
provides a framework for the recommended organizational IP curriculum. To mitigate IP for

158

technology employees, the recommendation is to create multiple different learning sessions and
training workshops focused on reducing the symptoms for technology employees.
For example, before a new technology employee joins their respective organization, the
individual must attend an orientation class that includes group discussions and information on IP,
its symptoms, and guidance on how to counteract the effects. To demonstrate the importance of
the program, a rotating executive team member who has experience with IP may introduce
themselves and provide a narrative of their impostor experience to the group. It is imperative for
executives to participate in the program to reinforce the importance of the training to the
employees, and to normalize the experience for others. During the class, the executive will also
reiterate the importance of employee motivation, productivity, and mental health. A trained
facilitator will then coordinate the rest of the session, including answering questions and perform
knowledge checks with the participants. The supplemental training assets organizations will need
to create for this session include an online video about IP and internet links to job aids which
serve as future reference material employees can utilize after the training to help mediate their
impostor symptoms. At the end of the training session, the training development professional
will lead the group through a summative knowledge check before providing access to all of the
materials discussed in the session to the training cohort of technology employees.
In addition to training on IP, new employees should also attend a training session on
expectation setting with their supervisors and how to receive feedback on their work. The
training session will consist of participant role-playing exercises and videos of employee-
supervisor feedback scenarios. Supervisors from around the company will be asked to teach-back
some of their experiences on expectation setting and allow employees to ask questions. For
example, a supervisor could explain some of the scenarios they encounter with their team and

159

some of the best practices they learned in their position. As an outcome of this meeting,
employees will create a personal action plan to help align expectations and gain feedback on
their performance from their supervisor. For example, the action plan would include ways to
approach the topic with their managers and facilitate productive discussions around performance
and job expectations. To reinforce the learnings, recurring meeting invites for feedback sessions
between the employee and their supervisors will be automatically created by supervisors in the
calendaring system after the employee finishes the training session. This process will ensure the
employees have dedicated time with their supervisor to set expectations and the supervisor has
the opportunity to provide feedback to the new employee. Also, Human Resources will follow-
up by holding focus groups one quarter after the training with a subset of attendees to ensure the
efficacy of the program. These focus groups will center on the interactions between employees
and supervisors after the initial training session.
Lastly, to facilitate ways for employees to gain objective feedback and help from others
outside of their team, organizations should provide a mentorship program. To ensure there are
enough senior-level mentors available for new employees, organizations must incentivize
participation through monetary rewards such as bonuses or require participation as a part of
senior-level job expectations. New employees will be assigned mentors and participate in a small
class with other mentors and mentees (no more than eight employees total). The purpose of the
class is to establish initial trust between the employee and their new mentor in addition to help
facilitate an informal dialogue around expectations. A training development professional will
lead the group through introductions and highlight the purpose and importance of mentorships to
both the mentor and mentee. The group will then go through mock mentor feedback sessions and
facilitate break-out groups to answer any questions new employees may have for their mentors.

160

At the end of the session, the mentor and mentee will leave with a detailed action plan including
how to communicate with each other and agree on a regularly scheduled cadence to meet. For
new employees that were paired with a mentor that was not the right personality fit, the
employee can follow up with the training development professional to be reassigned and
introduced to a new mentor.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
For technology employees to be able to understand, identify, and remediate their
impostor feelings, they must be able to demonstrate and apply the procedural knowledge gained
from the learning program. For example, employees need to actively participate in the training
discussions and utilize the self-help materials to mitigate their impostor feelings. Also, these
same employees will need to work with their supervisors and mentors to set expectations and
gain valuable feedback on their performance. Both of these methodologies have implications for
reducing how technology employees experience IP. Table 17 describes the methods, activities,
and timing needed to reinforce the program’s learning components.

161

Table 17
Components of Learning Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Knowledge checks during group discussions. Intermittently during training
sessions.
Knowledge simulation exercises. During training workshops.
Presentations and job aids. During training workshops.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Knowledge check of the impostor phenomenon
resources available to employees.
During training workshops and
employee surveys.
Training session summative assessments. Immediately after each workshop
session.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Mentor sentiment assessment survey. At regular intervals during the
mentorship program.
Participant sentiment survey. Immediately after each workshop
session.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Mentor focus groups feedback sessions. At regular intervals during the
mentorship program.
Attendee teach-back of the techniques learned to
address the impostor phenomenon.
During training workshops.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Personal action planning. During training workshops.
Mentor assessment on their mentee’s progress and
continued commitment.
At regular intervals during the
mentorship program.

162

Level 1: Reaction
Measuring an organization’s reaction to change is important because it can inform
organizations about the corrections or improvements that need to be made to the learning
program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In addition, participant reactions are also a leading
indicator of whether or not the other four levels of the NWKM will be successful. Therefore,
measuring employee reactions can act as a powerful diagnostic tool that can help provide
training professionals with feedback on the organizational learning plan (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 18 provides the recommended methods, tools, and timing for
measuring organizational reactions.

163

Table 18
Components to Measure Reactions
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Active participation in workshops. During the workshop sessions.
Attendance. Beginning of the workshop sessions.
Post-workshop online survey
response rates.
After the workshop sessions.
External observer feedback. During the workshop sessions.
Relevance
Summative online survey. Immediately following the workshop
sessions.
Post-workshop pulse checks. At the end of the workshop sessions.
Customer Satisfaction
Summative online survey. Immediately following the workshop
sessions.
Post-workshop pulse checks. At the end of the workshop sessions.

Program Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation
To help aggregate data from across all four levels of the NWKM for analysis,
organizations must implement a learning management system (LMS). An LMS system is the
central data repository where all program data can be analyzed and tracked over time by
administrators of the program. Training professionals can also use this system to input their
formative and summative training data across the four Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016)

164

levels of implementation. In addition to storing metrics data, the LMS system can hold training
notes on the sessions and identities of the attendees for follow-up surveys. This is important
because the training facilitators can input thoughts on group pulse checks during the workshops
and enter their summative notes immediately after each session.
Before the conclusion of the session, the facilitator will complete a summative discussion
with the participants to check the overall reaction to the sessions, answer questions, or receive
feedback on ways to improve the sessions. Immediately after the sessions conclude, the
facilitator will send out summative reaction surveys to attendees. The surveys should be
composed of a combination of Likert-style psychometric questions that measure participants
perceived usefulness of the workshops and satisfaction levels. In addition, the survey should
include open-ended questions with free-form text boxes for attendees to report on areas of
improvement for further training sessions. An example survey that could be used to accomplish
this can be found in the appendices.
Delayed for a period of time after the program implementation
Three months after the first employee participants complete the program, the facilitators
will reach out via email to follow-up on the personal action plans developed in the workshop
sessions. To do this, an additional short survey will be emailed to employees to help assess the
progress of the individuals and understand if the employees utilized the self-help resources. In
addition, the follow-up email will contain links to any new course materials, readings, employee
resource groups, or advanced classes that have since become available to employees.
Aside from the survey, employee mentors will utilize a guided three-month checklist to
gain insight with their mentees on their progress and reaction to the mentor relationship. This
checklist includes questions about the perceived usefulness of the mentor relationships and the

165

mentee’s overall reaction to the mentor program. Once complete, the mentors will add their data
into the LMS system to help track the efficacy of the Level 2 learnings. In addition to the survey
feedback, training facilitators will hold small in-person or video conference focus groups of no
more than five technology employees to gain a better understanding of how the program has
affected their impostor feelings and other ways to improve the learning program. The data from
both of these sessions will be used to further evolve the structure of the program.
Data Analysis and Reporting
For data and feedback to be useful, it must be relevant to the goals and outcomes of the
change management program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Also, to increase the relevancy
of the data collected across all four levels of NWKM, the information must be collected not only
after the workshops but during them as well. By creating a centralized repository in a LMS, there
will be a decrease in the time spent by organizations and training professionals to find relevant
insights through data. As the data set grows, program facilitators will need to create specific data
queries that highlight the most valuable insights for the learning program (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). For example, the data can be used to build queries that highlight the progress
of the program compared to the stated business goals and outcomes.
The learning and change management program should also analyze and report out on data
from all four levels of the NWKM. This is important because each level is intrinsically linked
and the data may point to individual levels or areas that need improvement. To report out on
progress, organizations must invest in different ways to access the results through the LMS
metrics and dashboards. For example, Level 4 results may focus on the number of employees
who have knowledge about IP and know how to get help for their symptoms. For Level 3, data
analysts should focus on the number of active users for online self-help materials and other

166

ancillary benefits such as the company quiet room. To assess the amount of Level 2 learning,
program facilitators could use and record knowledge checks through quarterly employee surveys.
The post-training summative surveys help measure the Level 1 reactions from employees,
including their sentiment about the program and their customer satisfaction levels. These basic
recommendations can help analyze, report, and evolve the change management program.
However, each organization will need to create metrics that align with their specific goals,
desired outcomes, and culture.
Implementation and Evaluation Plan Summary
This study applied the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) NWKM combined with the
recommended interventions in Chapter five to provide IP interventions. Through the
implementation and alignment of the four levels, RDOs can increase the success of their learning
and change management programs for employees. In addition, the NWKM provides a way to
discover issues early in the implementation process so organizations can take corrective actions
and further evolve by analyzing feedback and data. This learning program suggested in this study
also provides insights into the business value of change through reporting and metrics such as
job satisfaction and productivity rates. Together, the NWKM aligns the learning objectives with
the expected business outcomes, behaviors, and perceptions to increase the chances of
implementation success (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Implications for Practice
The results of this study indicated multiple different implications for practice. For
example, Human Resource professionals may increase their understanding of the implications of
IP for technology employees and increase their understanding of providing employees resources
to cope with their symptoms. The results of this study also suggested that creating programs

167

which highlight IP may normalize employee impostor feelings. By providing employees on-site
benefits such as gym access or other quiet spaces, technology employees have the ability
exercise or practice mindfulness which may help alleviate their impostor feelings.
Supervisors of technology employees can also aid in reducing their employee’s IP
experience. The results of this study indicated that if supervisors are able to identify their
employee’s knowledge gaps and provide a learning plan, that the effort may significantly reduce
employee impostor feelings. As an example, supervisors could meet with their employees to
discuss job requirements that the employee may feel inadequate about and create a learning plan
with a timeline to address these specific areas. In addition, supervisors could set expectations
with their technology employees and provide feedback on progress at least once a month. The
results of this study suggested that this process may reduce the frequency of IP and increase
employee motivation.
Finally, business executives can use the results of this study to better understand the
return on investment for organizational programs that address IP. The results of this study
suggested that IP may negatively and significantly affect employee productivity, motivation, and
self-efficacy. This problem is important for organizations to address because it has implications
for reducing the work output of technology employees. In other words, executives need to invest
in the necessary resources to reduce IP to keep their technology workforce motivated and
productive.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study examined IP through SCT and how its determinants affected the experience
for technology employees. During the research process, this study revealed multiple areas that
could contribute to future IP research. For example, the participants that self-identified as women

168

in this study described during their interviews that they felt gender bias in the workplace which
they felt interacted with their impostor feelings to intensify their worry and anxiety. Since RDOs
consist of predominantly male employees, future research could focus on the specific impostor
experience of women in technology. By further examining how women experience IP in RDOs,
researchers may be able to devise interventions that are specific to gender identities. This type of
research may have implications for reducing IP and may suggest ways to increase gender
diversity in RDOs.
In addition, this study assessed impostor feelings in technology employees with tenure of
less than one year in their position. The results of this study indicated that there is an opportunity
for future longitudinal research to understand the impostor experience at various stages in a
person’s career. This research is important because it would identify how IP symptoms evolve
over an individual’s career and what some of the major IP predictors are at the various job
stages.
Lastly, this study sought to understand how technology employees self-assessed their
skills relative to their job descriptions. The 12 participants in this study unanimously agreed that
they felt underqualified in at least one area in their formal job description. Given this data, there
is an opportunity for future research to identify how technical job description wording affects IP.
Specifically, future research could seek to determine whether qualified candidates do not apply
to positions because they may not believe they can perform the duties in the posted job
description. Additional research into how the format and wording of a job description affect
impostor feelings may help complement the findings in this study by identifying ways to attract
qualified candidates that may feel like they are otherwise unqualified for a position. This type of
research is important because the language in the job descriptions may preclude qualified

169

individuals from applying for jobs. In addition, this research may have implications for
increasing the hiring pipeline for underrepresented candidates in RDOs who may feel like
impostors.
Conclusions
The impostor phenomenon in RDOs is an increasingly important topic due to the adverse
effects it has on employees. Although the phenomenon is not recognized as a diagnosable mental
disorder, it has a significant negative impact on employee motivation, productivity, and mental
wellbeing. This study examined Bandura's (1986) SCT determinant factors and their influence on
RDO employee's impostor feelings. Also, this study provided specific organizational
recommendations and an evaluation plan for RDOs to implement. These recommendations were
grounded in the literature and suggested ways to mitigate the effects of IP for technology
employees. By extending the body of knowledge on IP, this research is expected to form a
foundation for future studies focused on reducing the IP and improving employee mental
wellbeing.

170

References
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(5
th
ed.). American Psychiatric Pub.
Arkin, R. M., Appelman, A. J., & Burger, J. M. (1980). Social anxiety, self-presentation, and the
self-serving bias in causal attribution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
38(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.23
Arleo, E. K., Wagner-Schulman, M., McGinty, G., Salazar, G., & Mayr, N. A. (2021). Tackling
impostor syndrome: A multidisciplinary approach. Clinical Imaging.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.12.035
Armstrong, M. J., & Shulman, L. M. (2019). Tackling the imposter phenomenon to advance
women in neurology. Neurology: Clinical Practice, 9(2), 155–159.
https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000000607
Atkin, K. (2020). Recognising and managing the impostor phenomenon. In Practice, 42(4), 243–
244. https://doi.org/10.1136/inp.m1576
Aubeeluck, A., Stacey, G., & Stupple, E. J. N. (2016). Do graduate entry nursing student’s
experience “Imposter Phenomenon”?: An issue for debate. Nurse Education in Practice,
19, 104–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2016.06.003
Badawy, R. L., Gazdag, B. A., Bentley, J. R., & Brouer, R. L. (2018). Are all impostors created
equal? Exploring gender differences in the impostor phenomenon-performance link.
Personality and Individual Differences, 131, 156–163.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.044
Bandelow, B., Michaelis, S., & Wedekind, D. (2017). Treatment of anxiety disorders. Dialogues
in Clinical Neuroscience, 19(2), 93–107.

171

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1978). Reflections on self-efficacy. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy,
1(4), 237–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/0146-6402(78)90012-7
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2),
122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1988). Organisational applications of social cognitive theory. Australian Journal of
Management, 13(2), 275–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/031289628801300210
Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy.
Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 729–735. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.5.729
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior. New York. Academic
Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology. 52(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1986). Differential engagement of self-reactive influences in
cognitive motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38(1),
92–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90028-2

172

Barrow, J. M. (2019). Impostorism: An evolutionary concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 54(2),
127–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12305
Barr-Walker, J., Werner, D. A., Kellermeyer, L., & Bass, M. B. (2020). Coping with impostor
feelings: Evidence based recommendations from a mixed methods study. Evidence Based
Library and Information Practice, 15(2), 24–41. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29706
Bernard, D., & Neblett, E. (2018). A culturally informed model of the development of the
impostor phenomenon among African American youth. Adolescent Research Review,
3(3), 279–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-017-0073-0
Bernard, N. S., Dollinger, S. J., & Ramaniah, N. V. (2002). Applying the big five personality
factors to the impostor phenomenon. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78(2), 321–333.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7802_07
Blondeau, L. A., & Awad, G. H. (2018). The relation of the impostor phenomenon to future
intentions of mathematics-related school and work. Journal of Career Development,
45(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845316680769
Boese, E. (2016). Just-in-time learning for the just google it era. Proceedings of the 47th ACM
Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, 341–345.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844583
Booz, M. (2018, March 15). These 3 industries have the highest talent turnover rates.
https://business.linkedin.com/talent-solutions/blog/trends-and-research/2018/the-3-
industries-with-the-highest-turnover-rates
Brauer, K., & Proyer, R. T. (2019). The ridiculed Impostor: Testing the associations between
dispositions toward ridicule and being laughed at and the impostor phenomenon. Current
Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00262-5

173

Bravata, D. M., Watts, S. A., Keefer, A. L., Madhusudhan, D. K., Taylor, K. T., Clark, D. M.,
Nelson, R. S., Cokley, K. O., & Hagg, H. K. (2020). Prevalence, predictors, and
treatment of impostor syndrome: A systematic review. Journal of General Internal
Medicine, 35(4), 1252–1275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05364-1
Breeze, M. (2018). Imposter syndrome as a public feeling. Feeling academic in the Neoliberal
University (pp. 191-219). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
64224-6_9
Brown, J. (2019, November 15). Re:Work—Worried you’re an impostor? You’re not alone!
https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/worried-youre-an-impostor-youre-not-alone/
Buhrman, M., Gelberg, O., Jovicic, F., Molin, K., Forsström, D., Andersson, G., Carlbring, P.,
Shafran, R., & Rozental, A. (2020). Treating perfectionism using internet-based cognitive
behavior therapy: A study protocol for a randomized controlled trial comparing two types
of treatment. Internet Interventions, 21, 100338.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2020.100338
Burkholder, G. J., Cox, K. A., Crawford, L. M., & Hitchcock, J. H. (2019). Research design and
methods: An applied guide for the scholar-practitioner. SAGE Publications Incorporated.
Caselman, T. D., Self, P. A., & Self, A. L. (2006). Adolescent attributes contributing to the
imposter phenomenon. Journal of Adolescence, 29(3), 395–405. Social Science Premium
Collection. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.07.003
Chakraverty, D. (2020). PhD student experiences with the impostor phenomenon in STEM.
International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 15, 159–179. https://doi.org/10.28945/4513

174

Chapman, A. (2017). Using the assessment process to overcome imposter syndrome in mature
students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 41(2), 112–119.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2015.1062851
Chemers, M. M., Hu, L. T., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-year college
student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55–64.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.93.1.55
Chopra, S., & Golab, L. (2018). Job description mining to understand work-integrated learning.
International Educational Data Mining Society.
https://www.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-
85084015151&partnerID=40&md5=d357bec371002543ee735c39e106c088
Chrousos, G., & Mentis, A. F. (2020). Imposter syndrome threatens diversity. Science,
367(6479), 749–750. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba8039
Chrousos, G., Mentis, A. F., & Dardiotis, E. (2020). Focusing on the neuro-psycho-biological
and evolutionary underpinnings of the imposter syndrome. Frontiers in Psychology, 11,
1553. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01553
Cisco, J. (2020). Using academic skill set interventions to reduce impostor phenomenon feelings
in postgraduate students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(3), 423–437.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2018.1564023
Clance, P. R. (1985). The imposter phenomenon: Overcoming the fear that haunts your success.
Peachtree Publishers.
Clance, P. R., Dingman, D., Reviere, S. L., & Stober, D. R. (1995). Impostor phenomenon in an
interpersonal/social context: Origins and treatment. Women and Therapy, 16(4), 79–96.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J015v16n04_07

175

Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women:
Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy, 15(3), 241–247.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0086006
Clance, P. R., & O’Toole, M. A. (1987). The imposter phenomenon: An internal barrier to
empowerment and achievement. Women & Therapy, 6(3), 51–64.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J015V06N03_05
Clark, M., Vardeman, K., & Barba, S. (2014). Perceived inadequacy: A study of the imposter
phenomenon among college and research librarians. College & Research Libraries,
75(3), 255–271. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl12-423
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. IAP.
Cokley, K., McClain, S., Enciso, A., & Martinez, M. (2013). An examination of the impact of
minority status stress and impostor feelings on the mental health of diverse ethnic
minority college students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 41(2),
82–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-1912.2013.00029.x
Cokley, Kevin, Awad, G., Smith, L., Jackson, S., Awosogba, O., Hurst, A., Stone, S., Blondeau,
L., & Roberts, D. (2015). The roles of gender stigma consciousness, impostor
phenomenon and academic self-concept in the academic outcomes of women and men.
Sex Roles, 73(9–10), 414–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0516-7
Craig, L. (2018, September). Are you suffering from imposter syndrome?
https://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2018/09/imposter-syndrome
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.

176

Cromwell, B., Brown, N., Sanchez-Huceles, & Adair, F. L. (1990). The impostor phenomenon
and personality characteristics of high school honor students. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 5(6), 563.
Cusack, C. E., Hughes, J. L., & Nuhu, N. (2013). Connecting gender and mental health to
imposter phenomenon feelings. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 18(2), 74–81.
https://doi.org/10.24839/2164-8204.JN18.2.74
Dancy, T. E., II, & Brown, M. C., II. (2011). The mentoring and induction of educators of color:
Addressing the impostor syndrome in academe. Journal of School Leadership, 21(4),
607.
Day, R., & Allen, T. D. (2004). The relationship between career motivation and self-efficacy
with protégé career success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 72–91.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00036-8
Dutton, K. (2018). Increasing diversity, awareness, and inclusion in corporate culture:
Investigating communities of practice and resource groups among employees.
Development and Learning in Organizations, 32(6), 19–21.
https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-11-2018-132
Erickson, S. R., Guthrie, S., VanEtten-Lee, M., Himle, J., Hoffman, J., Santos, S. F., Janeck, A.
S., Zivin, K., & Abelson, J. L. (2009). Severity of anxiety and work-related outcomes of
patients with anxiety disorders. Depression and Anxiety, 26(12), 1165–1171.
https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20624
Fatemi, F. (2017). 4 steps to kill imposter syndrome before it kills your career. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/falonfatemi/2017/06/22/4-steps-to-kill-imposter-syndrome-
before-it-kills-your-career/

177

Feenstra, S., Begeny, C. T., Ryan, M. K., Rink, F. A., Stoker, J. I., & Jordan, J. (2020).
Contextualizing the impostor “syndrome.” Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 575042.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.575024
Fraenza, C. B. (2016). The role of social influence in anxiety and the imposter phenomenon.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network. 20(2) 230-243.
https://www.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-
84975282725&partnerID=40&md5=ee0f429913f70cd867e47660ec12ba07
Fried-Buchalter, S. (1997). Fear of success, fear of failure, and the imposter phenomenon among
male and female marketing managers. Sex Roles, 37(11–12), 847–859.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02936343
Gallagher, S. R. (2019). Professional identity and imposter syndrome. Clinical Teacher, 16(4),
426–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13042
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3601_5
Gardner, R. G., Bednar, J. S., Stewart, B. W., Oldroyd, J. B., & Moore, J. (2019). “I must have
slipped through the cracks somehow”: An examination of coping with perceived
impostorism and the role of social support. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 115, 17.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2019.103337
Gibson-Beverly, G., & Schwartz, J. P. (2008). Attachment, entitlement, and the impostor
phenomenon in female graduate students. Journal of College Counseling, 11(2), 119–
132.

178

Gluckman, N. (2017). How a dean got over impostor syndrome–and thinks you can, too.
Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www-chronicle-
com.libproxy1.usc.edu/article/how-a-dean-got-over-impostor-syndrome-and-thinks-you-
can-too/.
Gravois, J. (2007). You’re not fooling anyone. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(11), A.1-.
Green, W. M. (2018). Employee resource groups as learning communities. Equality, Diversity
and Inclusion, 37(7), 634–648. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-11-2016-0085
Hampton, C., & Feller, E. (2019). Impostor syndrome and medicine: Talented people believing
“I am a fraud”. Rhode Island Medical Journal, 102(3), 7–8.
Haney, T. S., Birkholz, L., & Rutledge, C. (2018). A workshop for addressing the Impact of the
imposter syndrome on clinical nurse specialists. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 32(4), 189–
194. https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000386
Harvey, J. C., & Katz, Cynthia. (1985). If I’m so successful, why do I feel like a fake?: The
impostor phenomenon. St. Martin’s Press.
Hawley, K. (2019). What Is impostor syndrome? Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume,
93(1), 203–226. https://doi.org/10.1093/arisup/akz003
Hunt, V., Layton, D., & Prince, S. (2015). Diversity matters. McKinsey & Company, 1(1), 15–
29.
Hutchins, H.M., Penney, L. M., & Sublett, L. W. (2018). What imposters risk at work: Exploring
imposter phenomenon, stress coping, and job outcomes. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 29(1), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21304

179

Hutchins, Holly M. (2015). Outing the imposter: A study exploring imposter phenomenon
among higher education faculty. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource
Development, 27(2), 3–12.
Hutchins, H., & Rainbolt, H. (2017). What triggers imposter phenomenon among academic
faculty? A critical incident study exploring antecedents, coping, and development
opportunities. Human Resource Development International, 20(3), 194–214.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2016.1248205
Johnson, D., Stempel, J., Pelster, B., & van der Vyver, B. (2017, February 28). Careers and
learning: Real time, all the time 2017 global human capital trends.
https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/focus/human-capital-trends/2017/learning-in-
the-digital-age.html
Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of
Psychology, 31(1), 457–501. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.31.020180.002325
KH, A., & Menon, P. (2020). Impostor syndrome: An integrative framework of its antecedents,
consequences and moderating factors on sustainable leader behaviors. European Journal
of Training and Development, Volume ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-07-
2019-0138
Kim. (2018, September 5). 58 percent of tech workers feel like impostors.
https://www.teamblind.com/blog/index.php/2018/09/05/58-percent-of-tech-workers-feel-
like-impostors/
Kim, H., & Lee, S. Y. (2009). Supervisory Communication, Burnout, and Turnover Intention
Among Social Workers in Health Care Settings. Social Work in Health Care, 48(4), 364–
385. https://doi.org/10.1080/00981380802598499

180

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Kuna, S. (2019). All by myself? Executives’ impostor phenomenon and loneliness as catalysts
for executive coaching with management consultants. Journal of Applied Behavioral
Science, 55(3), 306–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886319832009
Ladge, J., Eddleston, K. A., & Sugiyama, K. (2019). Am I an entrepreneur? How imposter fears
hinder women entrepreneurs’ business growth. Business Horizons, 62(5), 615–624.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2019.05.001
Ladonna, K. A., Ginsburg, S., & Watling, C. (2018). “Rising to the level of your incompetence”:
What physicians’ self-assessment of their performance reveals about the imposter
syndrome in medicine. Academic Medicine, 93(5), 763–768.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002046
LaFreniere, L. S., & Newman, M. G. (2020). Exposing worry’s deceit: Percentage of untrue
worries in generalized anxiety disorder treatment. Behavior Therapy, 51(3), 413–423.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2019.07.003
Langford, J., & Clance, P. R. (1993). The imposter phenomenon: Recent research findings
regarding dynamics, personality and family patterns and their implications for treatment.
Psychotherapy, 30(3), 495–501. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.30.3.495
Lawton, A. J., Lawton, C. W., Dietz, S. S. B., Stevens, E. E., & Weis, J. M. (2020). Exploring
and managing the impostor phenomenon in palliative care: A case series. Journal of
Palliative Medicine, 23(4), 586–590. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2019.0094

181

Lee, E., & Morfitt, P. (2020). Imposter syndrome, women in technical services, and minority
librarians: The shared experience of two librarians of color. Technical Services
Quarterly, 37(2), 136–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2020.1728125
Levant, B., Villwock, J. A., & Manzardo, A. M. (2020). Impostorism in American medical
students during early clinical training: Gender differences and intercorrelating factors.
International Journal of Medical Education, 11, 90–96.
https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5e99.7aa2
Levi, D., & Slem, C. (1995). Team work in research and development organizations: The
characteristics of successful teams. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics,
16(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8141(94)00076-F
Ling, F. Y. Y., Zhang, Z., & Tay, S. Y. L. (2020). Imposter syndrome and gender stereotypes:
Female facility managers’ work outcomes and job situations. Journal of Management in
Engineering, 36(5). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000831
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current Directions
in Psychological Science, 15(5), 265–268.
Macinnis, C. C., Nguyen, P., Buliga, E., & Boyce, M. A. (2019). Cross-socioeconomic class
friendships can exacerbate imposturous feelings among lower-ses students. Journal of
College Student Development, 60(5), 595–611. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2019.0056
Majority of surveyed tech employees say they are interested in changing jobs or companies.
(2018, March 14). Medium. https://medium.com/@teamblind/majority-of-surveyed-tech-
employees-say-they-are-interested-in-changing-jobs-or-companies-1d8f2fd0ae9

182

Mak, K. K. L., Kleitman, S., & Abbott, M. J. (2019). Impostor phenomenon measurement scales:
A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 671.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00671
Marsden, T. (2016). What is the true cost of attrition? Strategic HR Review, 15(4), 189–190.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-05-2016-0039
Martinez, J., & Forrey, M. (2019). Overcoming imposter syndrome: The adventures of two new
instruction librarians. Reference Services Review, 47(3), 331–342.
https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-03-2019-0021
Matthews, G., & Clance, P. R. (1985). Treatment of the impostor phenomenon in psychotherapy
clients. Psychotherapy in Private Practice, 3(1), 71–81.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J294v03n01_09
McClurg, C., & Jones, R. (2018). Imposter phenomenon and the MLIS: Perspectives on the
future of library and information science education. Emerald Publishing Limited.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S0065-28302018000044A002
McDowell, W. C., Grubb III, W. L., & Geho, P. R. (2015). The impact of self-efficacy and
perceived organizational support on the imposter phenomenon. American Journal of
Management, 15(3), 23.
McGregor, L. N., Gee, D. E., & Posey, K. E. (2008). I feel like a fraud and it depresses me: The
relation between the imposter phenomenon and depression. Social Behavior and
Personality, 36(1), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2008.36.1.43
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. John Wiley & Sons.

183

Metz, C. J., Ballard, E., & Metz, M. J. (2020). The stress of success: An online module to help
first-year dental students cope with the Impostor Phenomenon. Journal of Dental
Education, 84(9), 1016–1024. https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.12181
Mir, I., & Kamal, A. (2018). Role of workaholism and self-concept in predicting impostor
feelings among employees. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 33(2), 413–427.
Morrison, R., & Owler, K. (2018). Relishing competence or avoiding the stretch assignment?
Gender differences in what makes employees “love” work. New Zealand Journal of
Human Resource Management, 8(1), 3-24.
Mortensen, R. (2014). Anxiety, work, and coping. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 17(3),
178–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/mgr0000020
Mughal, S., Walsh, J., & Wilding, J. (1996). Stress and work performance: The role of trait
anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 20(6), 685–691.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(96)00025-6
Mullangi, S., & Jagsi, R. (2019). Imposter syndrome: Treat the cause, not the symptom. Journal
of the American Medical Association, 322(5), 403–404.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.9788
Neureiter, M., & Traut-Mattausch, E. (2016). An inner barrier to career development:
Preconditions of the impostor phenomenon and consequences for career development.
Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 15.
http://dx.doi.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00048
Nunes, A. P., Richmond, M. K., Pampel, F. C., & Wood, R. C. (2018). The effect of employee
assistance services on reductions in employee absenteeism. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 33(6), 699–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9518-5

184

Padma, V., Anand, N. N., Gurukul, S. M. G. S., Javid, S. M. A. S. M., Prasad, A., & Arun, S.
(2015). Health problems and stress in information technology and business process
outsourcing employees. Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences, 7, S9-S13.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-7406.155764
Pannhausen, S., Klug, K., & Rohrmann, S. (2020). Never good enough: The relation between the
impostor phenomenon and multidimensional perfectionism. Current Psychology: A
Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00613-7
Parkman, A. (2016). The imposter phenomenon in higher education: Incidence and impact.
Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 16(1), 10.
Pató, B. S. G. (2017). Formal options for job descriptions: Theory meets practice. Journal of
Management Development, 36(8), 1008–1028. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-01-2016-
0019
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice. Sage publications.
Peteet, B. J., Montgomery, L., & Weekes, J. C. (2015). Predictors of imposter phenomenon
among talented ethnic minority undergraduate students. Journal of Negro Education,
84(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.84.2.0175
Pyc, L. S., Meltzer, D. P., & Liu, C. (2017). Ineffective leadership and employees’ negative
outcomes: The mediating effect of anxiety and depression. International Journal of Stress
Management, 24(2), 196–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000030

185

Rakestraw, L. (2017). How to stop feeling like a phony in your library: Recognizing the causes
of the imposter syndrome, and how to put a stop to the cycle. Law Library Journal,
109(3), 465–476.
Ramsey, J. L., & Spencer, A. L. (2019). Interns and imposter syndrome: Proactively addressing
resilience. Medical Education, 53(5), 504–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13852
Rassaby, M., Cassiello-Robbins, C., & Sauer-Zavala, S. (2021). When perfect is never good
enough: The predictive role of discrepancy on anxiety, time spent on academic tasks, and
psychological well-being in university students. Personality and Individual Differences,
168, 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110305
Ravindran, S. (2016, November 15). Feeling like a fraud: The impostor phenomenon in science
writing. The Open Notebook. https://www.theopennotebook.com/2016/11/15/feeling-
like-a-fraud-the-impostor-phenomenon-in-science-writing/
Richmond, M. K., Pampel, F. C., Wood, R. C., & Nunes, A. P. (2017). The impact of employee
assistance services on workplace outcomes: Results of a prospective, quasi-experimental
study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(2), 170–179.
https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000018
Rigoni, B., & Nelson, B. (2016, August 9). Many millennials are job-hoppers—But not all.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/236294/millennials-job-hoppers-not.aspx
Robichaud, M., Koerner, N., & Dugas, M. J. (2019). Cognitive behavioral treatment for
generalized anxiety disorder: From science to practice. Routledge.
Rohrmann, S., Bechtoldt, M. N., & Leonhardt, M. (2016). Validation of the impostor
phenomenon among managers. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00821

186

Ross, S. R., Stewart, J., Mugge, M., & Fultz, B. (2001). The imposter phenomenon, achievement
dispositions, and the five factor model. Personailty and Individual Differences, 31(8), 9.
Rozental, A., Kothari, R., Wade, T., Egan, S., Andersson, G., Carlbring, P., & Shafran, R.
(2020). Reconsidering perfect: A qualitative study of the experiences of internet-based
cognitive behaviour therapy for perfectionism. Behavioural and Cognitive
Psychotherapy, 48(4), 432–441. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465820000090
Sakulku, J. (2011). The impostor phenomenon. The Journal of Behavioral Science, 6(1), 75-97.
Schroeder, R. (2018). Social theory after the Internet: Media, technology and globalization.
UCL Press.
Schubert, N., & Bowker, A. (2019). Examining the impostor phenomenon in relation to self-
esteem level and self-esteem instability. Current Psychology, 38(3), 749–755.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9650-4
Slank, S. (2019). Rethinking the imposter phenomenon. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice,
22(1), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-019-09984-8
Spagnoli, P., Kovalchuk, L. S., Aiello, M. S., & Rice, K. G. (2021). The predictive role of
perfectionism on heavy work investment: A two-waves cross-lagged panel study.
Personality and Individual Differences, 173, 110632.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110632
Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, assessment, causes, and consequences (Vol.
3). SAGE Publications.
Sturges, D. (2018). Imposter phenomenon and underrepresented minorities: What physician
assistant educators need to know. Journal of Physician Assistant Education, 29(2), 126–
128. https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000194

187

Tao, K. W., & Gloria, A. M. (2019). Should I stay or should I go? The role of impostorism in
STEM persistence. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(2), 151–164.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318802333
Terborg, J. R., & Ilgen, D. R. (1975). A theoretical approach to sex discrimination in
traditionally masculine occupations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,
13(3), 352–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(75)90056-2
Theofanidis, D., & Fountouki, A. (2019). Limitations and delimitations in the research process.
Perioperative Nursing, 7(3), 155-163 https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.2552022
Thomas, M., & Bigatti, S. (2020). Perfectionism, impostor phenomenon, and mental health in
medicine: A literature review. International Journal of Medical Education, 11, 201–213.
https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5f54.c8f8
Tiefenthaler, I. (2018). Conquering imposter syndrome. University of Montana Journal of Early
Childhood Scholarship and Innovative Practice, 2(1), 4.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0086006
Tigranyan, S., Byington, D. R., Liupakorn, D., Hicks, A., Lombardi, S., Mathis, M., & Rodolfa,
E. (2020). Factors related to the impostor phenomenon in psychology doctoral students.
Training and Education in Professional Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000321
Tobin, R., & Dunkley, D. M. (2021). Self-critical perfectionism and lower mindfulness and self-
compassion predict anxious and depressive symptoms over two years. Behaviour
Research and Therapy, 136, 12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2020.103780
Tosi, H. L., Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1991). A theory of goal setting and task
performance. The Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 480.
https://doi.org/10.2307/258875

188

Towards a reskilling revolution: Industry-led action for the future of work. (2019, January).
World Economic Forum.
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Towards_a_Reskilling_Revolution.pdf
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley &
Sons.
United States Census Bureau. (2016, August 16). Number of IT workers has increased tenfold
since 1970. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-139.html
Urwin, J. (2018). Imposter phenomena and experience levels in social work: An initial
investigation. The British Journal of Social Work, 48(5), 1432–1446.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcx109
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2014). Diversity in high tech | U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission. https://www.eeoc.gov/special-report/diversity-
high-tech
Vaughn, A. R., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Johnson, M. L. (2020). Impostor phenomenon and
motivation: Women in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 45(4), 780–795.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1568976
Volini, E., Schwartz, J., Roy, I., Hauptmann, M., Van Durme, Y., Denny, B., & Bersin, J.
(2019). Leading the social enterprise: Reinvent with a human focus.
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/ro/Documents/HC_Trends_2019_C_TT-
FFF-
06291_ro_2019_General_Document_en.pdf?nc=1&utm_campaign=HC_Trends_2019_C
_TT-FFF-

189

06291_ro_2019_General_Email_en&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua&_ga=2.
225271518.557028372.1590434766-523295011.1590434766
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Jossey-Bass.
Welbourne, T. M., Rolf, S., & Schlachter, S. (2017). The case for employee resource groups: A
review and social identity theory-based research agenda. Personnel Review, 46(8), 1816–
1834. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-01-2016-0004
Wilkinson, C. (2020). Imposter syndrome and the accidental academic: An autoethnographic
account. International Journal for Academic Development, 25(4), 363-374.
Wolf, M., & Roberts, B. (2018, May). High-tech industries: An analysis of employment, wages,
and output : Beyond the numbers. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-7/high-tech-industries-an-analysis-of-employment-
wages-and-output.htm
Wright, A., Fisher, P. L., Baker, N., O’Rourke, L., & Cherry, M. G. (2021). Perfectionism,
depression and anxiety in chronic fatigue syndrome: A systematic review. Journal of
Psychosomatic Research, 140, 110322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.110322
Yaffe, Y. (2020). Does self-esteem mediate the association between parenting styles and
imposter feelings among female education students? Personality and Individual
Differences, 156, 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109789
Yaffe, Y. (2021). Students’ recollections of parenting styles and impostor phenomenon: The
mediating role of social anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 172, 110598.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110598
Zanchetta, M., Junker, S., Wolf, A. M., & Traut-Mattausch, E. (2020). “Overcoming the fear that
haunts your success” - The effectiveness of interventions for reducing the impostor

190

phenomenon. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 405.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00405

191

Appendix A: Theoretical Framework Alignment Matrix
Research Question Theoretical Framework Interview Questions
Employment and
demographic questions

Not applicable Questions 1-6
Impostor phenomenon
experience
Imposter Phenomenon
(Clance & Imes, 1978)
Questions 7-9
How do social cognitive
determinants affect the
impostor phenomenon
experience for technology
employees?

Social Cognitive Theory
(Bandura, 1986)

Attribution Theory
(Kelley & Michela, 1980)

Expectancy Theory
(Vroom, 1964)

Questions: 10-18

How does the impostor
phenomenon affect the
self-efficacy of technology
employees?
Social Cognitive Theory
(Bandura, 1986)

Questions 19-21

192

Appendix B: Interview Protocol Introduction
Thank you for your participation in this research study. Your answers will be video recorded and
transcribed as part of the data analysis procedure. Upon completing the transcription of the
interview, I will permanently delete all video recordings from my Zoom account and any local
copies on my computer. During the interview please refrain from using your name or any other
language that may personally identify you for confidentiality reasons. With your permission, the
researcher may ask to use specific quotes from your interview to help highlight your individual
experience in your own words. Also, please note that you can leave this study at any point in
time without repercussions and ask for your data to be deleted even after the interview is over.

Do you agree to proceed and be recorded for this study?

This study seeks to understand how personality traits, behaviors, and the work environment
affect the impostor phenomenon experience for technology employees. Impostor phenomenon is
defined as the psychological doubt an individual feels about their success which is accompanied
by the worry of being exposed by others as a fraud. As an example, imagine a famous and
successful mathematician that spends years of hard work utilizing their skills to find an answer to
a theorem. If this individual was experiencing the impostor phenomenon, they might believe that
they found the answer through luck and that a “real” mathematician would not have taken so
long to find the answer.

For this study, I am conducting 12 interviews to gain a better understanding of the impostor
phenomenon from technology employees that have experienced its symptoms. Specifically, this

193

study seeks to understand the linkages between personality traits, behaviors, the work
environment on the impostor phenomenon experience, and the effect on perceived self-efficacy.
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary and you can leave the interview at any
point in time. The target timeframe for this interview is 60 minutes and the researcher may
follow-up with any clarifying questions after the interview.

Do you understand the purpose of this study and how your insights will be used?

Do you have any questions for me about this study before we begin?

194

Appendix C: Interview Protocol Questions
Employment and Personal Demographics
1. Part of this study groups participants by gender identity to reveal any difference in the
impostor phenomenon experience. If you are comfortable doing so, can you please share
the gender identify with me?
2. Would you mind sharing your age?
3. What is your highest level of education?
a. Were you the first to go to college in your family?
4. How many years have you worked in a research and development organization?
a. Are you the first person in your family to work in a research and development
organization?
5. What is the title of your position?
6. How long have you been in your position?
Impostor Phenomenon
7. What does the impostor phenomenon mean to you?
8. Can you describe the last experience you had with the impostor phenomenon?
9. How often do you feel like an impostor at work?
Personal Traits
10. What do you think are the main reasons you have been successful in your career?
11. Growing up how would you describe your family’s expectations for your success?
12. There are various levels of preparation methods for projects at work. Can you give me an
example of how you prepare for big projects?
a. How perfect would you consider your work?

195

Behavior
13. When you experience the impostor phenomenon, what are some of the ways you cope
with your feelings?
14. Can you describe what happens to your productivity at work when you experience the
impostor phenomenon?
15. Can you describe what happens to your motivation at work when you experience the
impostor phenomenon?
Environment
16. How do you think you work environment affects the impostor phenomenon?
a. What would you change your work environment to reduce the impostor
phenomenon?
17. Some people say their supervisors contribute to the impostor phenomenon, what would
you say?
18. What would you change in the work environment to reduce the impostor phenomenon?
Self-Efficacy
19. How would you describe your ability to meet the expectations of your position?
20. What are the areas, if any, do you feel underqualified in your job?
21. How would you compare your performance to your peers at work?
Exit Question
22. Thank you for participating in this study. Given your professional network in technology,
do you know anyone else that might be a good fit for this study?

196

Appendix D: Study Eligibility Questions
This study seeks to understand the impostor phenomenon in research and development
organizations. Impostor phenomenon is defined as the psychological doubt an individual feels
about their success which is accompanied by the worry of being exposed by others as a fraud. To
qualify for this study, certain criteria must be met to verify your eligibility. Please answer the
questions below truthfully:
1. Are you employed as an engineer, engineering leader, or technical program manager
within a research and development organization?
2. Have you been in your position for less than a year?
If yes, how many months have you been in your position?
3. Have you ever experienced impostor phenomenon feelings at work?

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Organizational agility and agile development methods: an evaluation study

PDF

Gender inequity in executive leadership of midsize and large organizations in Los Angeles County: overcoming barriers & building leaders

PDF

Impact of participation in STEM organizations and authentic learning experiences on women of color engineering students

PDF

Maximizing leadership development in the U.S. Army: an evaluation study

PDF

Middle-management's influence on employee engagement in the ambulatory practices

PDF

Developing a computer science education program: an innovation study

PDF

Examining donor engagement strategies: an exploratory study of the impact of performance gaps on donor retention and cultivation within higher education development offices

PDF

Creating changemakers: integrating social innovation and service-learning to empower student voice and bolster college, career, and civic readiness

PDF

Leadership education and development that incorporates e-leadership: the “e” factor in leading in an electronic (virtual) work environment

PDF

Leadership and the impact on organizational citizenship behaviors: an evaluation study

PDF

Fundraising in small health and human service nonprofit organizations: an evaluation study

PDF

Competency in a blended workforce: an evaluation study of contracted labor development challenges

PDF

Understanding burnout in non-denominational clergy: a social cognitive approach

PDF

First-generation student retention and completion at a California community college: evaluation study

PDF

Nonprofit donor retention: a case study of Church of the West

PDF

Faculty experiences: sense of belonging for sexual and gender minority college students

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

PDF

Sustaining faith-based organizations through leadership pipelines and programs: an evaluation study

PDF

Ethical leadership: the case for building a fraud-resistant organization

PDF

Emotional intelligence self-perceptions in non-clinical leaders: an examination into a healthcare organization

Asset Metadata

Creator Schow, Kenneth Michael (author)

Core Title Impostor phenomenon determinants in research and development organizations

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 04/19/2021

Defense Date 03/25/2021

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

Tag imposter phenomenon,imposter syndrome,OAI-PMH Harvest,research and development organizations,social cognitive theory

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Deer, Michael (committee member), Maddox, Anthony (committee member)

Creator Email ken.schow@gmail.com,kschow@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-448880

Unique identifier UC11668651

Identifier etd-SchowKenne-9491.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-448880 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-SchowKenne-9491.pdf

Dmrecord 448880

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Schow, Kenneth Michael

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