How authentic leadership and inclusion benefit organizations

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-05-2012-0041
• Pages: 275-292
• Published date: 11 March 2014
• Date: 11 March 2014
• Author: Kenna Cottrill,Patricia Denise Lopez,Calvin C. Hoffman

How authentic leadership and

inclusion benefit organizations

Kenna Cottrill and Patricia Denise Lopez

California School of Professional Psychology,

Alliant International University, Alhambra, California, USA, and

Calvin C. Hoffman

Los Angeles County Sheriff Department,

and California School of Professional Psychology,

Alliant International University, Alhambra, California, USA

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine perceptions of inclusion and related factors, to

understand how organizations can encourage and facilitate the full participation of employees. The

research explored authentic leadership (AL) as an antecedent of inclusion, and two outcomes,

organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).

Design/methodology/approach – Using an online survey, data were collected from 107 primary

and 219 peer participants in various industries throughout the USA. Primary participants provided

perceptual ratings on inclusion, AL, OBSE and OCB. Co-workers assessed primary participants’ OCB.

Findings – AL was positively related to inclusion (b¼0.58, po0.01) as well as self-rated OCB

(b¼0.36, po0.01). Inclusion was positively associated with OBSE (b¼0.48, po0.01) and self-rated

OCB (b¼0.63, po0.01). Inclusion mediated the relationship between AL and self-rated OCB. OBSE

mediated the relationship between inclusion and self-rated OCB. All analyses controlled for the effects

of race and gender.

Practical implications – Results suggest organizations can promote inclusive environments

through AL, and that inclusive environments promote employees’ work-related self-esteem and their

willingness to go above and beyond in their jobs.

Originality/value – This paper examines previously unstudied relationships, thus contributing to

organizational theory and practice.

Keywords Diversity, Authentic leadership, Citizenship behaviors, Organization-based self-esteem,

Organizational inclusion, Peer report data

Paper type Research p aper

Introduction

Diversity research has focussed on understanding both positive and negative outcomes

associated with difference (Shore et al., 2011). Following Cox’s (1991) typology of

monolithic, plural and multicultural organizations, researchers have been investigating

factors and processes that facilitate movement toward inclusive workplaces and the

associated individual and organizational outcomes (Mor Barak, 2011).

Concepts of diversity and inclusion are distinct but inter related. Definitions of

diversity focus on demographic make-up of groups and organizations, while definitions

of inclusion emphasize encouraging particip ation and moving beyond appreciating

diversitytoward leveraging and integratingdiversity into everyday work life(Roberson,

2006; Stevens et al., 2008). The concepts of diversity and inclusion are rooted in social

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.htm

Received 6 May 2012

Revised 15 March 2013

20 June 2013

12 November 2013

Accepted 12 December 2013

Equality, Diversityand Inclusion:

An International Journal

Vol.33 No.3, 2014

pp. 275-292

rEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/E DI-05-2012-0041

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr Kumea Shorter-Gooden for her contributions to the

first author’s dissertation, which served as the basis for this paper and the two anonymous

reviewers for their helpful comments.

275

AL and inclusion

benefit

organizations

justice, which seeks to eradicate oppression by creating systems in which all

people can participate equally and organizational resources are distributed equit ably

(Plummer, 2003).

Several authorsemphasize the importance of leadership in diversitymanagement and

inclusion (Cox, 2001; Podsiadlowski et al., 2013). Leaders of diverse and inclusive

organizations mustmodel comfort with diversity, alter rules for acceptable behaviors to

ensure wide application, create opportunities for dialogue about and across differences,

demonstrate an interest in learning and be authentic about their own challenges and

triumphs to encourage authenticity in others (Wasserman etal., 2007). However, there is

limited research on leader qualities linked with greater employee perceptions of

inclusion, and the accompanying psychological mechanisms (Shore et al.,2011).

Given the recent scholarly interest in authentic l eadership (AL) (Gardner

et al., 2011), this study explores the role of AL in enhancing perceptions of inclusion.

Authentic leaders possess positive psychological capacities and mo ral reasoning

(Avolio et al., 2004), which seem to align closely with multicultural competencies

emphasized by diversity experts. These cap acities, including self-awareness,

perspective-taking and open genuine communication abilities, support an inc lusive

environment (Chrobot-Mason and Ruderman, 2003; Sue, 2001). This study also

examines two outcomes potentially related to inclusion: organizational citizenship

behavior (OCB) and organization-based self-esteem (OBSE). OCB represents proactive

employee contributions to the work group o r organization. Leaders who are self-aware,

communicate openly and integrate others’ p erspectives at work are more likely to

motivate co-workers to support group and organizational effectiveness. OBSE is

a psychological variable that could potentially explain the relationship between

inclusion and OCB; some research has shown that feeling respected by one’s work

group is related with higher self-esteem (de Cremer and Tyler, 2005).

This study contributes to the literature by extending our theoretical understanding

about the interrelationships among AL, inclusion, OBSE and OCB, many of which have

not been investigated. The study also utilizes two relatively new measures, perceptions

of exclusion-inclusion (PEI; Mor Barak, 2005)and the authentic leadership questionnaire

(ALQ; Walumbwa et al., 2008). This research also offers practical implications for leaders

who need new ways of managing diverse workforces while enhancing employee

contributions in a global environment.

Review of the literature

Diversity and inclusion

Several authors have observed a movement in the language of diversity management

from “diversity” to “inclusion” (e.g. Linnehan and Konrad, 1999; Roberson, 2006).

Organizational literature has defined diversity in many ways, generally focussing on

the composition of work groups around facto rs that could significantly distinguish

one individual from others (Kreitz, 2008), in terms of observable characteristics such

as gender, race, ethnicity and age, or non-observable attributes such as education or

socioeconomic status (Milliken and Martins, 1996; Roberson, 2006). Thomas and Ely

(1996) describe diversity as “the varied perspectives and approaches to work that

members of different identity groups bring” (p. 80).

Diversity has implications on individual, group and organizational behavior and

performance. Theoretical paradigms such as similarity-attra ction theory (Newcomb,

1961) self-categorization (Turner, 1985), suggest negative implications for diverse

organizations, such as personnel issues and financial costs due to harassment and

276

EDI

33,3