Volume 35, Issue 2 (summer 2022)
JMDP 2022, 35(2): 83-106 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Shariatnejad Asl A. A Model for the Emergence of Leaders’ Hubris Based on Interpretive Structural Modeling; Case Study: Government Organizations. JMDP 2022; 35 (2) :83-106
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4359-en.html
URL: http://jmdp.ir/article-1-4359-en.html
Department of Business Administration, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran. , shariat.al@lu.ac.ir
Abstract: (905 Views)
Purpose: This study was conducted to present a model for the emergence of leadership hubris and how this syndrome is formed.
Methodology: In terms of purpose, the research was applied and to collect data, survey method was used. The statistical population consisted of experts who were selected through snowball sampling method and the sample was based on the principle of theoretical adequacy. The present study combined both qualitative and quantitative approaches. In the qualitative part, the data collection tool was semi-structured interview. Coding method, together with Atlas.ti software, was used to analyze the data. Besides, in the quantitative part, questionnaires were administered and interpretive structural modeling was applied for data analysis.
Findings: Results indicate that the formation of hubris model involving leaders includes four factors and stages as follow: predisposing factors, behavioral factors, the occurrence of hubris syndrome and the consequences arising from hubristic leaders. At the first level are the underlying factors that cause the shaping of hubristic behaviors which later emerge at the second level. Then, in the third level, they form the main characteristics of hubristic leaders. Eventually, at the final level of the model, the consequences of hubris in leaders occur. They include focus on decision-making, arrogant leadership, authoritarian management, irrational dominance, and weakening of their intellectual capacity.
Originality: This research studies a recent organizational phenomenon called hubristic leadership and provides a model showing how it is formed. Thus, it gives some insight to managers as to the nature and function syndrome.
Implications: the model of hubristic leadership, as described in the present study, provides suggestions for state organizations to try to prevent its formation as well as the complication and the harmful effects that this phenomenon may bring about.
Methodology: In terms of purpose, the research was applied and to collect data, survey method was used. The statistical population consisted of experts who were selected through snowball sampling method and the sample was based on the principle of theoretical adequacy. The present study combined both qualitative and quantitative approaches. In the qualitative part, the data collection tool was semi-structured interview. Coding method, together with Atlas.ti software, was used to analyze the data. Besides, in the quantitative part, questionnaires were administered and interpretive structural modeling was applied for data analysis.
Findings: Results indicate that the formation of hubris model involving leaders includes four factors and stages as follow: predisposing factors, behavioral factors, the occurrence of hubris syndrome and the consequences arising from hubristic leaders. At the first level are the underlying factors that cause the shaping of hubristic behaviors which later emerge at the second level. Then, in the third level, they form the main characteristics of hubristic leaders. Eventually, at the final level of the model, the consequences of hubris in leaders occur. They include focus on decision-making, arrogant leadership, authoritarian management, irrational dominance, and weakening of their intellectual capacity.
Originality: This research studies a recent organizational phenomenon called hubristic leadership and provides a model showing how it is formed. Thus, it gives some insight to managers as to the nature and function syndrome.
Implications: the model of hubristic leadership, as described in the present study, provides suggestions for state organizations to try to prevent its formation as well as the complication and the harmful effects that this phenomenon may bring about.
Keywords: Hubris in Leaders, Narcissistic Leadership, Neurological Factors, Biological Factors, Psychological Factors, Government Organizations.
Type of Study: Research |
Received: Nov 23 2021 | Accepted: Jul 19 2022 | ePublished: Jan 02 2023
Received: Nov 23 2021 | Accepted: Jul 19 2022 | ePublished: Jan 02 2023
References
1. Amini, A., Alimohammadlou, M., & Jafari, A. (2020). A Combined Model for Effective Leadership in Technology Acceptance. Management and Development Process, 32(4), 153-188. [http://jmdp.ir/article-1-3763-fa.html] [DOI:10.29252/jmdp.32.4.153]
2. Asad, S., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2020). Differentiating Leader Hubris and Narcissism on the Basis of Power. Leadership, 16(1), 39-61. [DOI:10.1177/1742715019885763]
3. Brennan, N. M., & Conroy, J. P. (2013). Executive Hubris: The Case of a Bank CEO. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 26(2), 172-195. [DOI:10.1108/09513571311303701]
4. Button, M. E. (2012). "Hubris Breeds the Tyrant": The Anti-Politics of Hubris from Thebes to Abu Ghraib. Law, Culture and the Humanities, 8(2), 305-332. [DOI:10.1177/1743872110383106]
5. By, R. T. (2020). Organizational Change and Leadership: Out of the Quagmire. In (Vol. 20, pp. 1-6): Taylor & Francis. [DOI:10.1080/14697017.2020.1716459]
6. Campbell, W. K., Hoffman, B. J., Campbell, S. M., & Marchisio, G. (2011). Narcissism in Organizational Contexts. Human Resource Management Review, 21(4), 268-284. [DOI:10.1016/j.hrmr.2010.10.007]
7. Çiftci, D. Ö. (2020). Hubris Syndrome in Managers: A Conceptual Evaluation. Management Studies, 31(2), 176-194.
8. Claxton, G., Owen, D., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2015). Hubris in Leadership: A Peril of Unbridled Intuition? Leadership, 11(1), 57-78. [DOI:10.1177/1742715013511482]
9. Cormier, D., Lapointe-Antunes, P., & Magnan, M. (2016). CEO Power and CEO Hubris: A Prelude to Financial Misreporting? Management Decision, 54(2), 522-554. [DOI:10.1108/MD-04-2015-0122]
10. Diamandis, E. P., & Bouras, N. (2018). Hubris and Sciences. F1000 Research, 7(1), 133. [DOI:10.12688/f1000research.13848.1] [PMID] [PMCID]
11. Garrard, P. (2018). The Leadership Hubris Epidemic: Biological Roots and Strategies for Prevention: Palgrave Macmillan. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-57255-0]
12. Hayward, M. L., Shepherd, D. A., & Griffin, D. (2006). A Hubris Theory of Entrepreneurship. Management Science, 52(2), 160-172. [DOI:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0483]
13. Hendy, J., & Tucker, D. (2017). Beyond Leadership: A Study of Organizational Hubris (Withdrawn). Paper Presented at the Academy of Management Proceedings. [DOI:10.5465/AMBPP.2017.10567abstract]
14. Hiller, N. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (2005). Conceptualizing Executive Hubris: The Role of (Hyper‐) Core Self‐Evaluations in Strategic Decision‐Making. Strategic Management Journal, 26(4), 297-319. [DOI:10.1002/smj.455]
15. Khan, U., Ajaz, F., Khan, A., Khan, S., & Fatima, S. (2016). The Role of Leadership on Organizational Change. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, 5(11), 88-95.
16. Kroll, M. J., Toombs, L. A., & Wright, P. (2000). Napoleon's Tragic March Home from Moscow: Lessons in Hubris. Academy of Management Perspectives, 14(1), 117-128. [DOI:10.5465/ame.2000.2909844]
17. Li, J., & Tang, Y. (2010). CEO Hubris and Firm Risk Taking in China: The Moderating Role of Managerial Discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 45-68. [DOI:10.5465/amj.2010.48036912]
18. Mohammadi, S., Rahimi, F., & Bagheri, M. A.-S. (2019). Structural Effects of Transformational and Servant Leadership Styles on Employees' Behavior toward Change. Management and Development Process, 32(2), 135-162. [http://jmdp.ir/article-1-3070-fa.html] [DOI:10.29252/jmdp.32.2.135]
19. Owen, D. (2007). The Hubris Syndrome: Bush, Blair and the Intoxication of Power: Politico's Publishing.
20. Owen, D. (2008). Hubris Syndrome. Clinical Medicine, 8(4), 428. [DOI:10.7861/clinmedicine.8-4-428] [PMID] [PMCID]
21. Park, J.-H., Kim, C., Chang, Y. K., Lee, D.-H., & Sung, Y.-D. (2018). CEO Hubris and Firm Performance: Exploring the Moderating Roles of CEO Power and Board Vigilance. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(4), 919-933. [DOI:10.1007/s10551-015-2997-2]
22. Picone, P. M., Dagnino, G. B., & Minà, A. (2014). The Origin of Failure: A Multidisciplinary Appraisal of the Hubris Hypothesis and Proposed Research Agenda. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 447-468. [DOI:10.5465/amp.2012.0177]
23. Pincus, A. L., & Lukowitsky, M. R. (2010). Pathological Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6(1), 421-446. [DOI:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.121208.131215] [PMID]
24. Rizka, N. A., & Handoko, T. H. (2020). The Influence of CEOs' Hubris on Firms' Performance in Indonesia: The Moderating Effects of CEOs' Power and Board Vigilance. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 22(2), 131-149. [DOI:10.22146/gamaijb.55239]
25. Robbins, P. (2016). Organization Theory: Organizational Structure and Design. Trans. Alvani SM & Danaeifard, H.). Tehran: Saffar Publications (in Persian).
26. Robinson, G. M. (2016). Making Sense of Hubris. In P. Garrard & G. Robinson (Eds.), The Intoxication of Power (pp. 1-16): Palgrave Macmillan. [DOI:10.1057/9781137439666_1]
27. Sadler-Smith, E., Akstinaite, V., Robinson, G., & Wray, T. (2017). Hubristic Leadership: A Review. Leadership, 13(5), 525-548. [DOI:10.1177/1742715016680666]
28. Tang, Y., Mack, D. Z., & Chen, G. (2018). The Differential Effects of CEO Narcissism and Hubris on Corporate Social Responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 39(5), 1370-1387. [DOI:10.1002/smj.2761]
29. Van der Kam, N. A., Van der Vegt, G. S., Janssen, O., & Stoker, J. I. (2015). Heroic or Hubristic? A Componential Approach to the Relationship between Perceived Transformational Leadership and Leader-Member Exchanges. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(4), 611-626. [DOI:10.1080/1359432X.2014.958149]
30. Zeidan, R., & Müllner, J. (2015). Firm, Market and Top Management Antecedents of Speculation: Lessons for Corporate Governance. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 32(1), 42-58. [DOI:10.1016/j.mulfin.2015.08.001]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
