Please rotate your device to landscape mode to view the charts.

Being aware of death: how and when mortality cues incite leader expediency versus servant leadership behaviour

Journal: Journal of Management Studies

Date: 2024

Author: Chidiebere Ogbonnaya, Mayowa T. Babalola, Moazzam Ali, Shuang Ren, Muhammed Usman, Zhining Wang

Abstract:
The COVID-19 crisis has been associated with existential concerns regarding mortality. These concerns, described as ‘mortality cues’, can influence people's emotions, behaviours, and the quality of leadership in organizations. Using the contingency model of death awareness (CMDA; Grant and Wade-Benzoni, 2009), we provide new evidence on how mortality cues can incite negative and positive leadership behaviours via two forms of death awareness: death anxiety and death reflection. Specifically, we theorize that mortality cues can increase leader death anxiety, giving rise to leader expediency (a leader's use of unethical practices to expedite work for self-serving purposes); however, mortality cues can also facilitate leader death reflection and, consequently, servant leadership behaviour. We further suggest that leaders’ responses to mortality cues depend on their psychological capital (PsyCap), such that leaders with high (vs. low) PsyCap respond to mortality cues with less expediency (via death anxiety) and more servant leader behaviours (via death reflection). We support our hypotheses through three separate studies using an experiment, time-lagged data from healthcare workers, and daily diary data from non-healthcare professionals. We conclude that mortality cues have a double-edged influence on leadership behaviour. We also discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the findings.

Link: Google Scholar

Background and Context

What are Mortality Cues?

Events that remind people about death, like the COVID-19 pandemic with its daily reports of infections and deaths, creating awareness of human mortality.

Research Gap

While previous research focused on how employees react to mortality cues, little is known about leaders' responses despite their crucial role in guiding organizations through crises.

Methodology

The authors conducted three studies: an experiment in the UK, a time-lagged study with healthcare workers in Pakistan, and a daily diary study in China.

Mortality Cues Create Two Distinct Psychological Responses in Leaders

Mortality Cues Death Anxiety Leader Expediency Death Reflection Servant Leadership
  • Mortality cues trigger two distinct psychological responses in leaders, creating a double-edged effect on leadership behaviors.
  • The emotional pathway (death anxiety) leads to self-protective behaviors like cutting corners for self-interest.
  • The cognitive pathway (death reflection) promotes servant leadership behaviors that prioritize followers' needs.

Psychological Capital Acts as a Protective Resource Against Negative Effects

PsyCap Hope Optimism Self-efficacy Resilience
  • Psychological capital (PsyCap) consists of four key resources: hope, optimism, self-efficacy, and resilience.
  • These resources help leaders better cope with mortality cues and moderate their psychological responses.
  • PsyCap acts as a critical protective buffer that helps leaders maintain ethical behavior during crises.

PsyCap Reduces Leader Expediency by Buffering Against Death Anxiety

Mortality Cues Death Anxiety High PsyCap Low PsyCap High PsyCap leaders experience less anxiety and expediency
  • Leaders with low PsyCap show a stronger relationship between mortality cues and death anxiety.
  • High PsyCap weakens the relationship between mortality cues and unethical, expedient behaviors.
  • When facing mortality cues, leaders with high PsyCap are less likely to cut corners.

PsyCap Enhances Servant Leadership by Amplifying Death Reflection

Mortality Cues Death Reflection High PsyCap Low PsyCap High PsyCap leaders show more reflection and servant leadership
  • Leaders with high PsyCap demonstrate a stronger relationship between mortality cues and death reflection.
  • High PsyCap strengthens the relationship between mortality cues and servant leadership behaviors.
  • Leaders with high PsyCap are more likely to prioritize followers' needs during crises.

Multi-Study Validation Confirms Findings Across Different Cultural Contexts

Study 1: UK Experimental Design 235 Leaders H1: Death anxiety leads to leader expediency H2: Mixed findings Study 2: Pakistan Healthcare Workers 195 Leader-Follower Dyads All hypotheses confirmed PsyCap moderates both pathways Internal mortality cues Study 3: China Daily Diary Method 120 Leaders, 1680 Observations All findings replicated Daily variations in mortality cues affect leadership behaviors
  • The research findings were validated through three different methodological approaches across multiple countries.
  • Healthcare workers experiencing internal mortality cues showed strong effects across all hypothesized relationships.
  • The daily diary study confirmed that even day-to-day variations in mortality cues affect leadership behaviors.

Contribution and Implications

  • Organizations should facilitate workplace conversations about mortality and its effects on leadership behaviors.
  • Training programs should be developed to enhance leaders' psychological capital to better cope with mortality cues.
  • Leaders should recognize that mortality cues have both negative and positive effects on behavior.
  • Elements of death reflection should be incorporated into leadership evaluations to promote servant leadership behaviors.
  • Organizations need strategies to mitigate leader expediency while enhancing servant leadership during crises.

Data Sources

  • Visualization 1 is based on the conceptual model in Figure 1 showing dual pathways of mortality cues.
  • Visualization 2 draws from the theoretical background on psychological capital components (Luthans et al., 2007).
  • Visualizations 3 and 4 are based on moderation results from Tables IV and VI showing interaction effects.
  • Visualization 5 summarizes study designs and key findings from all three empirical studies conducted.
  • All findings were validated across experimental, time-lagged, and daily diary methodologies in different cultural contexts.