by Dr. Laszlo A. Magyar, Shingo Alumni and Examiner
It is likely that all of us have gained some positive and negative experiences of how our supervisors' behavior has impacted our engagement at work. Intuitively, we presume that the way leaders act affects employee engagement. While evidence for the relationship between leadership behavior and organizational culture has been established by Grosyberg et al. (2018), there has been limited empirical research on specific observable leadership behavior that promotes high-level employee engagement.
Based on my first-hand observations working with leaders around the globe, my research interest revolved around the pursuit of what leadership behaviors promote a highly engaged workforce.
My journey has taken me from a small town in Hungary to an executive leadership role in the U.S. I have been fortunate to be mentored by great leaders through several meaningful professional challenges while coaching dozens of leaders myself. As a result, I have accumulated 22 years of international leadership, including ten years of senior leadership experience to date. I am on a quest to explore the relationship between leadership behavior and employee engagement. Following are the findings of my doctoral project completed at California Southern University, “Examining Leadership Behaviors on Employee Engagement: A Quantitative Study of Lead with Humility and Respect Every Individual.”
Disengagement at Work Is Disruptive and Costly
According to Gallup, two-thirds of Americans are not actively engaged at work and not living up to their full potential (Hartel, 2018). Employee engagement has improved gradually over the past 20 years; however, only 36% of employees are actively engaged at work in the U.S. Globally, that rate is only 20%. The low level of work engagement harms business outcomes and impacts the social lives of millions of employees. Sorenson and Gaman (2013) estimated the cost impact of disengagement for organizations between $450 and 550 billion dollars, which is close to 3% of the total GDP. Closing the engagement gap and unlocking employees' full potential is an economic and organizational imperative for practitioners and researchers (Gebauer, Lowman, & Gordon, 2008).
Research Objectives
I defined two objectives for my research. First, to examine employee perceptions of the impact, if any, of two fundamental leadership behavior: leading with humility and respecting every individual on employee engagement. Second, to explore the relative difference of impact leading with humility and respecting every individual behavior on employee engagement. I wanted to identify the critical characteristics of leadership behavior that help nourish employee engagement and foster an organizational culture to achieve high performance.
I studied the positive leadership models, including Servant Leadership, Truly Human Leadership, Level 5 Leadership, and Humble Leadership. While each model has distinct characteristics, there are also similarities. I found that all positive leadership models include humility and respect at their foundational level. Therefore, I focused my research on these essential leadership elements and their relationship to employee engagement. Based on my hypothesis, I built my conceptual model proposing that leading with humility (x1) and respecting every individual (x2) as direct supervisory behaviors impacts employee engagement (Y), which potentially impacts high-performance.
Research Method
I conducted a quantitative study following the causal-comparative (ex post facto) research method. I established the core construct of leading with humility and respecting every individual leadership behavior, and with the help of an expert panel, affirmed the validity of the purpose-built, hybrid instrument. My survey includes Schaufeli et al.'s (2006) well-established Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, capturing employee engagement as the dependent variable, supplemented by a custom-built add-on questionnaire that captures employees' feedback on direct supervisors' leading with humility and respecting every individual behavior as independent variables of the study. Two hundred thirty-three people participated in my online survey, resulting in 181 completed and 52 partially completed surveys. I analyzed the survey results with the help of IBM SPSS Statistics Software comparing Group 1 modestly engaged employees and Group 2 highly engaged employees.
Major Findings
Mann-Whitney U test results indicated a statistically significant difference comparing direct supervisors' leading with humility score and respecting every individual score between Group 1 modestly engaged and Group 2 highly engaged employees. Thus, findings suggest that immediate supervisors' leading with humility and respecting every individual leadership behavior likely positively impacts employee engagement. This conclusion is consistent with Sousa and Direndonck's (2017) finding that leaders' humility positively impacts followers' social interactions, learning, and adaptation in the organization, enhancing their level of work engagement. Also consistent with Porath et al.'s (2015) findings that respect is the most important leadership behavior. Finally, Cramer's V value results from the Chi-square test of independence suggest a strong association for both leading with humility and respecting every individual leadership behavior to employee engagement. The higher V value implies respecting every individual more strongly associated with employee engagement than leading with humility.
Limitations
The main limitation of this exploratory study is that it does not warrant causal conclusions. Confirmatory research is needed to examine the causal effects of leadership behaviors on employee engagement. The second limitation of the study has related to the use of self-reported data. According to Axon and Lee (2021), in the case of self-reported data, participants' ability to grasp questions and provide an appropriate response may vary across individuals. Furthermore, self-reported participants potentially cannot assess themselves accurately and possibly incur response or sampling bias. The third limitation was the lack of regular direct engagement with immediate supervisors for a small portion of participants, limiting their ability to observe leadership behaviors and form empirically based feedback on immediate supervisors' behaviors.
Application
I strive to arm business leaders with exemplary leadership behaviors that, put in practice intentionally and consistently, will likely foster a culture that nourishes employee engagement. Leaders should put leading with humility in practice by showcasing benchmark behaviors: (a) seeking out and valuing others' ideas, (b) admitting vulnerability, (c) empowering and inquiring, and (d) exhibiting self-confidence and empathy. Also, leaders can demonstrate respecting every individual purposely and routinely by (a) valuing every individual, (b) nourishing employees to their full potential, (c) ensuring a safe and healthy work environment, (d) listening actively, (e) appreciating others, (f) providing support to succeed, and (g) driving accountability. Organizational culture is the sum of values, collective beliefs, and behaviors. The way people bring those values to life—the closer the alignment between values and actions—the more stable and productive the culture becomes.
To accomplish that alignment, I suggest a simple, three-step approach. Step one is to articulate the essence of each desired and the undesired leadership behavior undoubtedly clear within the organization. Step two is the introduction of Key Behavioral Indicators (KBIs), simple observable, measurable indicators of the acts. Then, leaders can start modeling and coaching the desired behaviors. Step three is reinforcement. Measure and drive KBIs (how) alongside KPIs (what). This balanced leadership scorecard combines business outcomes (KPIs) and how leaders accomplish those outcomes (KBIs) for sustained superior organizational performance.
The way we lead matters.
References
Axon, D. R., & Le, D. (2021). Association of Self-Reported Functional Limitations among a National Community-Based Sample of Older United States Adults with Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 10(9), 1836. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10091836
Gebauer, J., Lowman, D., & Gordon, J. (2008). Closing the engagement gap: How great companies unlock employee potential for superior results. Penguin.
Groysberg, B., Lee, J., Price, J., & Cheng, J. (2018). The leader’s guide to corporate culture. Harvard Business Review, 96(1), 44-52.
Harter, J. (2018). Employee engagement on the rise in the U.S. GALLUP. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/241649/employee-engagement-rise.aspx
Porath, C. L., Gerbasi, A., & Schorch, S. L. (2015). The effects of civility on advice, leadership, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(5), 1527–1541. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000016
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A Cross-National Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701-716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
Sorenson, S., & Garman, K. (2013). How to tackle U.S. employees' stagnating management. Business Journal. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/businessjournal/162953/tackle-employees-stagnating-engagement.aspx
Sousa, M., & van Dierendonck, D. (2017). Servant leadership and the effect of the interaction between humility, action, and hierarchical power on follower engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2725-y
