Leader self-regulation

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Alternative Title(s)

Disentangling concepts, measurement issues, and the consequences of deficits in emotion regulation and self-leadership

Abstract

In this dissertation, I discuss leader self-regulation from several perspectives, with a specific focus on leader emotion regulation and leader self-leadership. Firstly, I develop a theoretical framework, which is based on both control theory (Carver & Scheier, 1998) and the four levels of self-regulation described by Lord et al. (2010). This framework serves to disentangle the four related concepts of self-regulation, emotion regulation, self-control, and self-leadership. Secondly, I use the framework to provide a clear definition of successful self-leadership, which is based on the concept of successful emotion regulation (e.g., Aldao et al., 2015; Bonanno & Burton, 2013). Thirdly, I describe a new rationale for operationalizing successful self-regulation, which I then apply to successful emotion regulation and successful self-leadership within the work context. Both new scales showed mostly satisfactory psychometric properties, test-retest reliabilities, as well as convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity. Fourthly, I report the results of a mixed-source study in which the two new scales were used to assess the consequences of leaders’ emotion regulation and self-leadership skills. Using a sample of N = 315 leader–follower dyads, I found that both leader emotion regulation and self-leadership had significant positive associations with the constructive leadership style of instrumental leadership, as well as having significant negative associations with active destructive leadership. Additionally, self-leadership had a significant negative association with passive destructive leadership (i.e., laissez-faire leadership). Furthermore, both types of leader self-regulation were indirectly associated with follower job satisfaction via instrumental leadership. Finally, I examined the potential relationships between three heart rate variability measures, including cardiac coherence, and self-reported emotion regulation in a sample of N = 37 students. However, even though the model of neurovisceral integration predicts a positive association between heart rate variability measures and the capacity for emotion regulation (Thayer & Lane, 2000, 2009), I could not detect any associations between emotion regulation and the three heart rate variability measures used in this study.

Description

Table of contents

Keywords

Emotion regulation, Self-leadership, Self-regulation, Control theory, Leadership, Instrumental leadership, Destructive leadership, Job satisfaction, Scale development, Scale validation, Heart rate variability

Subjects based on RSWK

Emotionales Verhalten, Selbstregulation, Selbstkontrolle, Führung

Citation

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By