Authentic leadership is a leadership style that is in the spotlight because it has many positive aspects. What do leaders mean when they talk about authentic leadership in organizations? Jolijn investigated this question in her master’s thesis.
Who is Jolijn?
Jolijn van Diesen is a junior strategy and leadership consultant at boutique consultancy firm Bolster. Her thesis was nominated for the 2023 David van Lennep Thesis Award. This award is presented annually by the Dutch Foundation for Psychotechnology (NSvP) to the three best master’s theses in the field of human, work, and organization.
Jolijn distinguished various aspects and behaviors of leaders, including:
- Being true to oneself
- Transparency
- Self-awareness
- Self-development
- Competencies and behavior
Her research revealed that the context, personal characteristics, and the lens through which leaders’ behavior is viewed determine whether authentic leadership is present. We asked Jolijn questions about her research and the relationship between the content of her thesis and her work at Bolster, where she has been employed since the beginning of this year.
Authentic leadership has many positive aspects to it. What aspects are most referred to?
“When one exhibits authenticity, such as in a conversation with an employee, it is often remembered as a positive experience. ‘Because I was authentic, my conversation partner found our collaboration pleasant or felt better equipped to tackle their work afterward.’ Throughout the interviews, scarcely any negative points surfaced in connection with authentic leadership. Whether this absence is due to their nonexistence or simply because they are not at the forefront of participants’ minds remains uncertain. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that the leaders themselves only cited positive outcomes.
Regarding the competencies of authentic leaders, flexibility, humor, reliability, and involvement were highlighted as key characteristics. Conversely, negative traits were conspicuously absent. In discussions about character, only positive personality traits or strengths were emphasized, with weaknesses notably absent. Therefore, one could argue that authentic leadership inherently carries a positive connotation.”
What sparked your initial interest in this matter?
“I heard the word ‘authentic’ in so many places, hence I started to wonder more and more what it actually entailed. You have the word ‘authentic’ and then there is the word ‘leadership,’. Authenticity is mainly about oneself, while leadership implies that it’s about you in relation to something or someone else. As a result, at first glance, the two concepts seem to contradict each other, but they are often linked together, as a certain form of leadership. We use the term and have a certain idea about it, but it’s not very precise. It’s unclear whether everyone understands the same thing by authentic leadership. This line of thinking was something I wanted to explore.
Additionally, I found it intriguing to engage with leaders from this particular perspective. They typically embody strong and captivating personalities. In the end, I conducted twenty enriching conversations with leaders on this topic.
What questions did you ask leaders?
“I conducted semi-structured interviews. There were five predetermined questions, and alongside those questions, I followed up on what was being said. Throughout the conversation, the fixed questions remained the guideline. This way, at the end of the interviews, I had answers to at least the fixed questions for comparison, enriched by the further input from the interviewed leader.”
Your research indicates that the traditional concept of authenticity comprises numerous components. Can you elaborate on this?
“In the literature, despite differing opinions, one particular definition is most commonly used. I also used this definition as the basis for my research. According to science, Authentic Leadership consists of four elements:
1. Self-awareness: knowing who you are and what drives you. Being open about this to others and continuing to work on/discover it.
2. Relational transparency: ensuring clear relationships, trusting the interaction between you as a leader and those being led.
3. Moral compass: your principles are visible, and you act consistently with them, saying what you do and doing what you say. Often focused on the long term and generally predictable.
4. Balanced decision-making: criticism sharpens the mind, questioning and challenging one’s own ideas. Being open to positive and negative feedback, objectively considering information, and encouraging others to express their (different) opinions.
In the interviews, I assumed that everyone had their own definition of authentic leadership, so we mainly discussed that. I did have a definition ready in case someone really had no idea.
In your research you state: “A combination of context, personal characteristics of the leader, and the lens through which leaders’ behavior is viewed determines whether there is authentic leadership.” Do tell.
“In the scientific literature, authentic leadership is commonly described as comprising four key concepts. However, my interviews with leaders revealed that these concepts were present, along with additional factors. Through synthesis, it became apparent that authentic leadership entails a form of behavior, particularly in message delivery. Within this framework, three crucial aspects emerged. Firstly, authenticity: the consistency with which one aligns actions with personal values, transparency, and self-awareness. Secondly, alignment with character and competencies: the ability to convey a message effectively, whether through calm discussion or assertiveness, tailored to individual strengths. Thirdly, context plays a pivotal role: the approach to conveying a message may vary significantly depending on the audience size or situation.
Furthermore, a notable observation was the attribution of authenticity to two distinct conversation styles in the same scenario. One leader deemed a conversation authentic due to its empathetic tone, akin to private interactions, while another labeled a stern warning delivered with intensity as authentic. These divergent behaviors were perceived as authentic because they aligned with each leader’s unique character. Thus, both context and character must be considered in assessing authenticity.”
Bringing together both authentic and leadership, is this something you see Bolster doing?
“Yes, I believe that CEOs, team leaders, or managers achieve more when they bring themselves as individuals into the workplace, when they dare to look at themselves sincerely. This also makes decisions more sustainable because you have felt that you fully stand behind them, you can connect to them. Bolster works in this way; it’s their goal, and they excel in it. The variability that I describe in my research on authentic leadership regarding the situation, Bolster deals with it daily as well. Because each client has a different goal, a different background, and context. So, my colleagues cannot come with a standard trick. They connect with the context and the leaders they are working with at that moment. In that sense, my research and my workplace definitely overlap.”
You indicate that the conclusion of your research is not yet definite. Can you explain?
“As I’ve said, there is an intriguing debate in the literature about what authentic leadership entails. Researchers exchange letters discussing what is correct and what is not, what one believes and what another thinks. I find that fascinating, such a lively subject. My goal was to give an alternative perspective, not a definite truth. Something for other researchers to consider and examine further. I attempted to summarize the conclusions of all those researchers and add a practical aspect to it. I hope that all those people will then read it and think: ‘Ah, this is another way to look at it.’ It’s more about stimulating, broadening horizons, and encouraging deeper thinking. With the upcoming publication, we aim to compile the paradoxes we encountered, send them out into the world for further examination. This is precisely to stimulate further research by other researchers. Authentic leadership is a much-discussed but relatively young concept. Especially because of the widely discussed positive outcomes, it arouses curiosity. I am curious by nature and like to stimulate curiosity and contribute to positivity. It’s also one of Bolster’s core values.”
Curious about Jolijn’s thesis? You can read it here. If you want to learn more about this topic or discuss it further, feel free to contact us or drop by and enjoy our delicious coffee.
