Introduction
The criticism from corporate scandals and management crises in modern history and the wider societal challenges underscore the significance of moral and ethical behavior among leaders. The general view attributes leadership crises to the unethical behavior and nonnormative conduct of senior corporate leaders which contradicts established values and organizational interests (Alvesson & Einola, Reference Alvesson and Einola2019). The concept of authentic leadership (AL) is a form of positive leadership that involves authentic and genuine conduct guided by sound moral convictions in concordance with deeply held values (Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn & Wu, Reference Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn and Wu2018). AL is gaining growing attention from world leaders, scholars, and practitioners due to its critical role in the success of organizations (Durrah, Charbatji, Chaudhary & Alsubaey, Reference Durrah, Charbatji, Chaudhary and Alsubaey2024; Tijani & Okunbanjo, Reference Tijani and Okunbanjo2020). AL increases followers’ work engagement, their trust in leaders (Baquero, Reference Baquero2023) and in turn promotes their innovative work behavior and ethical behavior in the workplace (Akuffo & Kivipõld, Reference Akuffo and Kivipõld2019; Faheem, Ahmed, Ain & Iqbal, Reference Faheem, Ahmed, Ain and Iqbal2021). The leadership style contributes to followers’ discretionary actions that extend their formal job description and their altruistic behaviors and experiences for the benefit of the organization (Hannah, Sumanth, Lester & Cavarretta, Reference Hannah, Sumanth, Lester and Cavarretta2014).
Researchers have proposed distinct definitions of AL, but have yet to agree upon a unified conceptual definition (Northouse, Reference Northouse2018). Avolio and Gardner (Reference Avolio and Gardner2005) defined AL as a process drawing from positive psychological capacities and a developed organizational context, resulting in greater self-awareness and self-regulated positive behaviors. AL has been widely agreed to involve principles that emphasize honesty, transparency and integrity, and cultivate trust and optimism with followers through four fundamental dimensions: self-awareness (i.e., deep sense of strengths, weaknesses and values), balanced processing of information (i.e., objective analysis of facts and involving inputs from followers in decision-making), relational transparency (i.e., sharing thoughts and true feelings), and internalized moral perspective (i.e., self-regulation with high moral and ethical standards consistent with values) (Gardner, Karam, Alvesson & Einola, Reference Gardner, Karam, Alvesson and Einola2021; Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing & Peterson, Reference Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing and Peterson2008).
While there was consensus on the core dimensions like self-awareness and moral perspective, debates regarding the precise definition, measurement, conceptual, and practical issues of AL continue. Research debates whether AL should be considered as a higher-order construct involving its components or as a pattern of distinct dimensions (Avolio & Gardner, Reference Avolio and Gardner2005). For example, some scholars call for more rigorous and diverse methodologies (e.g., Avolio, Wernsing & Gardner, Reference Avolio, Wernsing and Gardner2018; Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Karam, Alvesson and Einola2021; Lux & Lowe, Reference Lux and Lowe2024) as others argue for refinement of AL dimensions (Banks, McCauley, Gardner & Guler, Reference Banks, McCauley, Gardner and Guler2016; Sidani & Rowe, Reference Sidani and Rowe2018). Researchers argue that it is highly implausible for a psychometric instrument with only four main domains to thoroughly capture the complexities of what constitutes AL (Iszatt-White & Kempster, Reference Iszatt-White and Kempster2019; Walumbwa et al., Reference Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing and Peterson2008). This is because the role of authenticity can only be constructed through a comprehensive evaluation of AL as a practice-based phenomenon (Iszatt-White & Kempster, Reference Iszatt-White and Kempster2019). Despite these debates and calls for the development and advancement of AL, gaps remain in the conceptual application of AL and in areas yet to be explored in various contexts.
Although previous studies, primarily originating in North America and Western Europe, are insightful (see Faheem et al., Reference Faheem, Ahmed, Ain and Iqbal2021), it is unclear whether AL principles can be usefully modeled in organizations in emerging economies (EEs). This research aims to enhance the cross-cultural understanding of AL through the lens of life stories in the emerging context of Ghana. Consequently, this research employs qualitative inquiry to gain a deeper understanding of AL from the perspectives of practicing leaders. Authentic behavior may vary depending on the context, hence authenticity may take on different values and interpretations in different societies (Alvesson & Einola, Reference Alvesson and Einola2019; Shamir & Eilam, Reference Shamir and Eilam2005). For example, in some cultures, followers may value self-expression or transparency from their leaders, while in others, such qualities may not be favored (Shamir & Eilam, Reference Shamir and Eilam2005). The conceptualization of AL remains in an early phase, highlighting the need to accumulate evidence of its validity across cultures worldwide (Bakari & Hunjra, Reference Bakari and Hunjra2017).
Therefore, the study contributes to extending AL theory and its cultural relevance in a non-Western, EE context by exploring how leaders interpret and make meaning of their leadership behaviors, values, and experiences in these settings. The findings also offer practical implications for leadership development on how AL strengthens governance and drives long-term success through its inclusive and trust-building processes among organizational members and stakeholders. Following the work of Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha (Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015), we use the ‘life-story’ approach (Shamir & Eilam, Reference Shamir and Eilam2005) which is particularly useful in collecting rich qualitative insights through semi-structured interviews (Cole & Knowles, Reference Cole and Knowles2001). This research thus provides valuable theoretical insights by validating and enriching the AL conceptualization. It also addresses the methodological gaps in the current literature and expands the empirical evidence that highlights the importance of AL studies in new contexts. The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 explores the relevant AL literature in EEs. Section 3 and Section 4 explain the methods and data analysis while Section 5 presents the findings. Section 6 provides a critical discussion of the findings, and Section 7 concludes with an examination of the research implications, limitations, and future directions.
Theoretical background
Authentic leadership
Following Walumbwa et al.’s (Reference Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing and Peterson2008, p. 94) definition of AL as ‘a pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development’, Lux and Lowe (Reference Lux and Lowe2024) further conceptualized AL by decoupling it from its traditional antecedents and outcomes through the lens of signaling theory and process dynamics. They redefined AL as ‘concordant, values-based leader signaling of self-awareness, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing, and relational transparency’ (p. 1636). Through this conceptualization, AL becomes conceptually clearer in terms of its dimensions, providing a dynamic framework for understanding how leaders convey authenticity to followers (Fischer & Sitkin, Reference Fischer and Sitkin2023; Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Karam, Noghani, Cogliser, Gullifor, Mhatre and Dahunsi2024). Self-awareness represents the familiarity of how an individual develops and makes sense of the world, and the manner in which one evaluates oneself and the impact on others over a period (Walumbwa et al., Reference Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing and Peterson2008). Relational transparency relates to one’s tendency to exhibit the true, authentic self while avoiding the display of a false and deceptive self. A leader’s accurate and objective analysis of relevant facts, considering differing opinions in decision-making, composes balanced processing of information (Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May & Walumbwa, Reference Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May and Walumbwa2005). Moral perspective refers to an individualized and integrated form of self-regulation driven by one’s ethical beliefs and standards consistent with the person’s internal moral values as the basis for decision-making and actions (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May and Walumbwa2005).
AL research draws on applied research and contemporary social psychology (Algera & Lips-Wiersma, Reference Algera and Lips-Wiersma2012; Walumbwa et al., Reference Walumbwa, Avolio, Gardner, Wernsing and Peterson2008), with a leader-centered and organizational focus (Algera & Lips-Wiersma, Reference Algera and Lips-Wiersma2012). As a relatively new leadership model (Blake et al., Reference Blake, Luu, Petrenko, Gardner, Moergen and Ezerins2022), AL integrates states, behaviors, skills, and contexts to facilitate ethical and truthful behavior, leading to positive organizational outcomes (Covelli & Mason, Reference Covelli and Mason2017). AL is a precursor of what constitutes other domains of positive leadership and is generic in nature, hence integrates servant, ethical, charismatic, and transformational leadership theories (Avolio & Gardner, Reference Avolio and Gardner2005). With self-awareness and self-regulation as the fundamental components of authenticity (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May and Walumbwa2005), AL is recognized for positive mental strengths and a sense of regulation, distinguishing it from other positive forms of leadership and is viewed as a potential solution to address leadership failures, particularly in EEs (May, Chan, Hodges & Avolio, Reference May, Chan, Hodges and Avolio2003). AL is akin to a ‘moral compass’ that seeks to address ethical distress in corporations and help individuals derive meaning from their work (Ilies, Morgeson & Nahrgang, Reference Ilies, Morgeson and Nahrgang2005; May et al., Reference May, Chan, Hodges and Avolio2003). Authentic leaders energize their followers, influence their role-modeling behavior, and are devoted to developing followers into leaders (Avolio & Gardner, Reference Avolio and Gardner2005).
As AL theory is still in its infancy, there are concerns regarding its theoretical foundation, practical implications, and methodological application (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Karam, Alvesson and Einola2021). Research indicates the need to validate the AL conceptualization in non-Western contexts (Baron, Reference Baron2016; Blake et al., Reference Blake, Luu, Petrenko, Gardner, Moergen and Ezerins2022). Given the technological and socio-economic transformations occurring in EEs, new studies focusing on the applicability of AL in EEs can enhance its validation, improve cross-cultural understanding, and make significant contributions to the field of leadership theory. Considering ongoing geopolitical disruptions, many EEs are experiencing challenging periods, requiring genuine values and principles to steer organizational progress. Authentic leaders can achieve humane and economic goals and drive positive cultures that inspire others to embrace authentic values in a challenging world (George & Sims, Reference George and Sims2007; Wang & Hsieh, Reference Wang and Hsieh2013).
Authentic leadership in emerging economies
Research attempts have explored AL in various regions, including the United States (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May and Walumbwa2005), Europe, Australia, and Asia (Iszatt-White & Kempster, Reference Iszatt-White and Kempster2019). However, a notable gap remains in context-sensitive research on AL in EEs, particularly in Africa, which is currently sparse (Faheem et al., Reference Faheem, Ahmed, Ain and Iqbal2021; Iqbal, Farid, Ma, Khattak & Nurunnabi, Reference Iqbal, Farid, Ma, Khattak and Nurunnabi2018). Despite the economic advancements in developing countries (Walumbwa, Christensen & Hailey, Reference Walumbwa, Christensen and Hailey2011), leadership remains a significant challenge at both corporate and governmental levels. Many developing countries struggle with declining trust in financial markets alongside the ‘burden of corruption and unfinished work on basic fundamentals of competitiveness such as pro-growth institutions …’ (World Economic Forum, 2016, p. 31). In relatively hierarchical organizational structures, leaders often make decisions, while their followers may be hesitant to express their opinions or may refrain from sharing their views (Petan & Bocarnea, Reference Petan and Bocarnea2016). This dynamic can limit the opportunities for collaborative decision-making. In addition, the lack of transparency and accountability, characterized by high power distance in certain contexts, may complicate leaders’ efforts to maintain AL (Petan & Bocarnea, Reference Petan and Bocarnea2016).
In these circumstances, the principles of honesty and transparency that define authentic leaders become increasingly valuable (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, Reference Yagil and Medler-Liraz2014). These principles are particularly important in EEs, as authentic competencies help mitigate nefarious managerial behaviors such as nepotism, favoritism, and cronyism (Akuffo & Kivipõld, Reference Akuffo and Kivipõld2019). AL addresses the modern need for responsible, courageous, and transparent conduct in corporations through its emphasis on leaders’ own frankness and inner principles, especially in the face of ethically questionable business practices (Diddams & Chang, Reference Diddams and Chang2012; Faheem et al., Reference Faheem, Ahmed, Ain and Iqbal2021). While AL promotes constructive and desirable behaviors and fosters open communication between superiors and followers (Bakari, Hunjra, Jaros & Khoso, Reference Bakari, Hunjra, Jaros and Khoso2018), individuals in societies with excessive acts of fraud and corruption may remain skeptical about their leaders’ integrity and authentic conduct (Bakari & Hunjra, Reference Bakari and Hunjra2017). This presents significant challenges for the application of AL in EEs, calling for research in this area.
Methods
This research undertakes a narrative approach that emphasizes individuals’ understanding of their leadership behaviors relative to their own values and beliefs and conveyed through their life stories (Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015). Life stories help explore how individuals develop their self-concepts and worldviews (Flores, Reference Flores2012). They are useful for capturing contextual nuances relating to the role of culture and context (Wong-MingJi, Kessler, Khilji & Gopalakrishnan, Reference Wong-MingJi, Kessler, Khilji and Gopalakrishnan2014). George, Sims, McLean and Mayer (Reference George, Sims, McLean and Mayer2007) pointed out that the journey to AL begins with understanding one’s life stories. The narratives provide the context of an individual’s experiences and aspirations. AL is rooted in the personal values that the leader attached to their life experiences, and these values are reflected in the leader’s life stories (Shamir & Eilam, Reference Shamir and Eilam2005).
The research uses qualitative methods based on semi-structured interviews to investigate AL, an instrument previously used by other studies in the field (e.g., Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015). Sixteen (16) chief and senior executives of professional businesses from diverse sectors were carefully selected from a pool of leaders through purposeful sampling. The sample included male and female participants from diverse organizational and socioeconomic backgrounds, ranging in age from 45 to 77 years, with a minimum of two participants from each decade. Each leader has a minimum of three years in their role and at least five years of leadership experience overall. All the leaders possess global experience in their education, training and work experiences including international education, cross-cultural exposure, or experience in multinational leadership roles. They were also recruited with the criteria that they exhibited authentic behaviors and effective leadership practice in their respective organizations based on (1) the researchers’ personal knowledge of the leaders through their networks; (2) insights and recommendations from senior academics, other influential reference leaders, civil society organizations, and journalists with strong connections to industry who were contacted to make the recommendations for potential participants. These third parties were from business faculties, advocacy and consulting organizations and top media houses who are seen as industry watchers and are conversant with corporate leadership issues and managerial occurrences in the business environment. These referral-based insights contributed to a pool of leaders known to demonstrate integrity, transparency and effectiveness in their global leadership practice from which the final sample that met the inclusion criteria of minimum three years in their current role and no less than five years of overall leadership experience was drawn with the consideration of the diversity in gender, age, organizational and industrial background. Expert referral enhances credibility and provides contextual insights (Yagil & Medler-Liraz, Reference Yagil and Medler-Liraz2014), and this approach is similar to previous studies that also explored AL through a life-story perspective (e.g., George et al., Reference George, Sims, McLean and Mayer2007). The sample size of 16 participants was considered adequate for semi-structured interviews (Saunders et al., Reference Saunders, Sim, Kingstone, Baker, Waterfield, Bartlam and Jinks2018) and relevant studies used a similar sample size (e.g., 14 interviews) for their qualitative analysis (e.g., Jon, Burton, Wells & Chung, Reference Jon, Burton, Wells and Chung2018; Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015). In this research, data saturation was achieved after 12 interviews, particularly when data began to repeat and no new relevant insights or concepts emerged (Creswell & Poth, Reference Creswell and Poth2016). The interviewee profile is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Description of the participants
The research purpose, procedure and confirmation of eligibility were discussed with participants ahead of the interview via email or phone calls. Information sheets were shared with all participants a few days prior to the interview, allowing them to provide informed consent (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, Reference Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill2016). This helped emphasize confidentiality and anonymity, and provided sufficient time for them to decide whether to participate (Saunders et al., Reference Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill2016). Following the methodology of Khilji et al. (Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015), the interview included three (3) major areas, allowing leaders to focus on themselves, describe their views on leadership, and their personal leadership behaviors, philosophies, and practices. The interviews involved sharing only the range of topics or major areas of the interview instead of asking participants the exact questions. All interviews were conducted in English, lasting between 45 and 90 minutes. The interviews were recorded, along with written notes of relevant remarks with the respondents’ consent, and subsequently transcribed verbatim for qualitative analysis. The cross-examination of recordings and notes, and the comparison of narrative interpretations through participant validation and peer debriefing were used to ensure that the opinions and experiences were accurately captured as presented. The goal was to promote the ‘reality’ of the shared experiences and to add depth, rigor, and richness to the research data (Denzin, Reference Denzin2012; Flick, Reference Flick2018). Participant validation was conducted by providing interview transcripts and the preliminary findings to participants for their correction and confirmation (Saunders et al., Reference Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill2016), and for the researchers to capture emerging reactions, refine explanations and findings (Mays & Pope, Reference Mays and Pope2000). Participants in this study endorsed the transcripts as a reflection of their opinions and experiences, with minor corrections and interpretations. Next, peer debriefing was used to facilitate the researchers to critically challenge the themes for a consensus, allowing for cross-validation and group interpretations to promote intersubjective comprehension, analytical rigor, and trustworthiness of the findings (Creswell & Miller, Reference Creswell and Miller2000; Saunders et al., Reference Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill2016).
Data analysis
The research followed the data analysis process outlined by Creswell (Reference Creswell2007), which consists of data management, reading and memoing, describing, classifying, interpreting, and representing. This approach integrates a top–down data-driven procedure with a bottom-up process, informing the inclusion of additional themes (see Saunders et al., Reference Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill2016). The analysis involved a recursive and iterative process of extracting meanings from concrete descriptive to abstract interpretative analysis. The analysis process involved constant interaction between theories and empirical findings, promoting a deeper understanding of the leader’s AL experience and facilitating the emerging insights from the qualitative data. This systematic combining process allowed ongoing dialogue between AL constructs and empirical observations. The data were analyzed, and findings were developed using NVivo 12 software. The interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach was used to understand the experiential meanings derived from individuals’ life worlds and leadership experiences following the steps suggested in previous studies (Smith, Flowers & Larkin, Reference Smith, Flowers and Larkin2009), as outlined below.
First, we read the transcripts multiple times to familiarize ourselves with them and the associated field notes. Second, we identified notable statements related to concrete experiential events and comparative reflections, such as life influences and critical experiences involving core values, using NVivo’s coding facility. Third, we identified patterns by comparing, revising, and connecting initial codes and subcodes from provisional exploratory notes, which led to the development of initial and emerging themes. Fourth, we aligned initial themes with superordinate themes. For example, self-awareness attributes were reflected in the codes and descriptions, which were composed of four sub-themes: self-knowledge and reflection, learning, humility, and sense of fairness, to reflect this theoretical dimension. Finally, we examined the themes for analytical connection with the macro theoretical domains of AL: self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and moral perspective. This integration allowed for a more grounded and conceptually structured organization of findings. In addition to these pre-defined categories, we also identified emerging theme(s) from the analysis (Creswell, Reference Creswell2007). The findings were organized to reflect the four theoretical domains of AL, with a fifth emergent theme representing collective orientation, which were discussed as follows.
Findings
Following the data analysis, Table 2 outlines the themes and coding structure for the AL dimensions, which are elaborated with the illustrative quotes in this section. These central concepts were observed: Self-awareness – reflection on personal values, self-knowledge, and leadership experiences; relational transparency – authentic aspirations and reciprocal exchange with followers; balanced information processing – harmonizing fundamental needs and follower views in decision-making; moral perspective – aligning self-expression with external realities; and collective orientation – reinforcing team building and shared goals.
Table 2. Related themes for AL dimensions
Reflections on personal values, self-knowledge, and leadership experiences were revealed through narratives, which reflected a sense of identity and purpose, describing self-awareness. Leaders who exhibit self-awareness demonstrate a strong understanding of their own personalities and leadership behavior. Self-awareness further encompasses the sub-themes of self-knowledge and reflection, learning, leader humility, and sense of fairness.
Self-knowledge and self-reflection emerged through a reflective interaction with the self. This self-view is guided and reflected in the leaders’ core values, ethical actions, and moral choices. For example, L12 and L15 emphasized self-knowledge as a product of one’s value system, highlighting its influence on one’s intentions and aspirations. Enhancement of self-awareness improves the understanding of leaders’ capabilities and limitations (e.g., Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015; Shannon, Buford, Winston & Wood, Reference Shannon, Buford, Winston and Wood2020). These leaders reflect on their positions on critical issues and the impact of their actions on their interactions with others. The narratives suggest that AL qualities are deeply embedded in social, cultural, and historical contexts, and leaders who engage in personal introspection have a deeper understanding of their purpose and direction.
L12: You must know yourself as a person and as a leader. You must know your strengths and weaknesses and know the strengths and limitations of your followers. Knowing yourself comes from your value system: home, society, and your social circles. All this interacts to influence your leadership role.
L15: You need to have a sense of your value system, the awareness of norms that shaped your growth and professional life and ultimately brought you this far as a leader. The most valuable societal norms and preferences, and your reference groups, shape your experiences. Leadership provides you with the platform to characterize these values, and a genuine leader reflects upon these values and executes their role following their value system.
Learning was recognized as a valuable resource for effective AL. A learning leader appeals to higher inspirational ideals and values through which meaningful goals and organizational priorities are attained. Some leaders asserted that acquiring new knowledge and growing from their own experiences enhances their capacity to lead others (Delić, Slåtten, Milić, Marjanović & Vulanović, Reference Delić, Slåtten, Milić, Marjanović and Vulanović2017). As illustrated by L6, the process of accumulating experiences was compared to ‘wine’; the leader noted that capabilities improved with time spent in the role. He explained that these learning experiences require constant reflection to adapt their future behavior and avoid potential regrets. L14 tied learning to the leader’s ability to ‘appeal’ and ‘energize’, suggesting that learning is a relational process. Thus, learning provides a tool for adaptation and engagement with followers.
L6: Yes, the more experienced you are in the field, the better you become – like wine; ‘the older, the better’. We have learned lessons in the past, and when you reflect over the occurrences … given the opportunity again, you would do things differently. […] This drives me very well. … Can you rewrite history? …. With the lessons … I think through my actions carefully […].
L14: Learning is crucial for your success as a leader. Yes, formal and informal learning are equally important. Learning makes you appealing to your followers and helps you to energize them toward meaningful organizational priorities.
Leader humility facilitates openness to new ideas and prepares leaders for effective leadership roles. The findings suggested that leader humility is a virtue. Such leaders appreciate the capabilities of their followers and refrain from elevating themselves above others. For these leaders, being a person of character and demonstrating humility in understanding and managing expectations are crucial for their success and integrity. For L4 and L16 below, this attribute improved leader-follower interactions and influenced other responses toward the leader. Clearly, authentic leader humility increases credibility and reduces vulnerability among followers (e.g., Oc, Daniels, Diefendorff, Bashshur & Greguras, Reference Oc, Daniels, Diefendorff, Bashshur and Greguras2020), thus nurturing integrity and honesty in followers (Bauman, Reference Bauman2013).
L4: You must be humble as a leader. It helps you to genuinely assess your strengths and weaknesses, seek feedback for your mistakes, and value others’ efforts. You’re working with people… your subordinates and many stakeholders. […] Humility and gratitude are key in shaping people’s reactions to you as a leader.
L16: Genuine leadership is driven by factors, including humility and honesty, being a person of character, and a person doing what is right regardless of the consequences.
Sense of fairness was reflected in leaders’ ability to listen to followers with an open mind and promote equitable behavior toward others. A leader’s sense of fairness reflects the thoughtful and selfless impact of their actions on others. For example, L2 and L13 emphasized fairness, equity, and justice in their responsibilities and decision-making. The unique emphasis of fairness in interpersonal exchange suggests a leader’s appreciation of followers’ concerns in reaching decision outcomes. Recent research (i.e., Shahzad, Raja & Hashmi, Reference Shahzad, Raja and Hashmi2021) show leader’s self-awareness enhances fairness and authentic characteristics, which in turn prompt followers to adopt the leader’s positive values through social learning processes (Wang, Sui, Luthans, Wang & Wu, Reference Wang, Sui, Luthans, Wang and Wu2014).
L2: […] Because of the human rights work I do when I get myself into a specific functional or positional role as a leader, I’m guided to ensure fairness, justice, and equity. […]. This is what drives me, otherwise, my pursuit is based on truth.
L13: […] Yes, making profit is a worthy goal but it must not come at the expense of personal and professional integrity. In our collaborations and interactions here, we remind ourselves to be just, fair, and equitable in fulfilling our responsibilities, and that determines the degree of our genuine success.
Authentic aspirations and reciprocal exchange with followers emerged as central to building positive and truthful relationships, reflecting relational transparency. Leaders in the sample demonstrated knowledge-sharing inspirations by expressing their feelings and thoughts with followers both openly and responsively, and reliably and thoughtfully. Relational transparency is represented in three interconnected sub-themes: transparency, trust-building and fidelity, and people-focused orientation.
Transparency was reflected in leaders’ emphasis on the clarity of goals and the importance of clear communication of their aspirations to their followers without ambiguities. For some leaders, transparency involves self-disclosure and sharing personal vulnerabilities, while trusting their followers with their own shortcomings. These leaders demonstrate openness and a willingness to be accountable for the consequences that arise from trusting their followers with their vulnerabilities. This reinforces the notion that authentic leaders promote open and truthful relationships with their followers through transparent conduct, honest communication, and availability (Saxe-Braithwaite & Gautreau, Reference Saxe-Braithwaite and Gautreau2020; Shrivastava, Reference Shrivastava2018). Authentic leaders must signal effectively to influence their followers not only by behaving in congruence with their values but also by communicating these values in ways that resonate with their audience (Lux & Lowe, Reference Lux and Lowe2024). For L8, expressing one’s vulnerabilities enhanced the connection between a leader’s integrity and followers’ sense of commitment. Similar research equates AL with personal vulnerability and suggests that being vulnerable alleviates the pressure on the leader when exercising their responsibilities to followers (Alvesson & Einola, Reference Alvesson and Einola2019).
L8: Many people see through leaders quietly. Leaders who are not being true to themselves are doing a disservice to their followers. […] The followers will see and will know, they know what and who a true leader is. If you’re able to be vulnerable, which is to be honest and transparent to your followers, they learn much more from you and appreciate you more […].
Trust building and fidelity emerged as essential themes from the leadership life stories. This finding highlighted the importance of honest disclosure and the ability to demonstrate genuine motives in building relationships. Some of the leaders attributed the growth and survival of their businesses to a culture of trust. The narratives portrayed ‘trust’ as a fundamental principle that guides the relationship between leaders and followers. Trust is a defining cord for social exchanges (Fulmer & Gelfand, Reference Fulmer and Gelfand2012) and reinforces leader authenticity (Lux & Lowe, Reference Lux and Lowe2024). The finding suggests AL is especially vital in EEs where trust in businesses and leaders is generally low (World Economic Forum, 2016). For example, L2 disclosed that trust drives their business success.
L2: We do many things, but we don’t struggle because people trust what we do. We get referrals not because you’re the best in your work but just because people can trust you… which comes out of certain experiences through their encounter with you.
People-focus orientation is manifested in the commitment of the leaders to make a difference in the lives of others, to have a positive influence, and to ultimately transform followers into authentic individuals. The leaders prioritize building close and reciprocal ties with their followers to inspire initiatives among them. By valuing follower needs and leading through these needs, leaders endeavor to create an inclusive, interactive, and supportive work environment where individuals can share their concerns and aspirations. This finding aligns with the positive behavioral modeling principle, which posits that effective leaders create leadership opportunities for others and prepare mentees by developing them into authentic people (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May and Walumbwa2005). In relation to the findings, L16 sought to engage with followers to address organizational issues. The leader believed that emotional investments are valued by followers, fostering a sense of reciprocal obligation to meet organizational needs.
L16: There is a decaying moral standard and a considerable decline in our social values, manners, and customs in personal and professional life. We need to correct those; we need to engage and work together to strengthen our social institutions. That way, we can transform people and bring out honest, genuine, and authentic leaders and followers who aspire to our collective interests.
The form of cohesion expressed in the excerpts fosters an open and desirable work atmosphere, promoting positive states for both leaders and followers, and shaping authentic and productive organizational cultures. Some leaders viewed their followers as equals and were willing to cede and ‘subordinate’ leadership roles under experiential circumstances. Previous research illustrates that leader-follower roles are fluid, with both parties assuming leader and follower identities across situations (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Karam, Alvesson and Einola2021). In support of the findings, L2 and L13 recognized the importance of bi-directional leadership and interpersonal influence within leadership roles.
L2: As a leader, you influence people, but others also influence you – you give instructions, but you also take instructions. […] You keep an open mind to direct energies and emotions in productive ways […] and […] to advance the course and interest of the people and organization […].
L13: […] you have a fiduciary responsibility to work for the interest of the people who trust you. It is important to prioritize the needs of the people you lead, given that you are there in trust. You need to guard that goodwill and have them influence your decisions and lead you in return.
Balanced processing is characterized by harmonizing fundamental needs and follower views as well as considering multiple perspectives and the interaction between data-driven choices and interpersonal and situational influences. An authentic leader who promotes consultative and reciprocal exchange empowers followers in their abilities beyond the leader’s own values and beliefs. Balanced processing is composed of sub-themes involving consideration for multiple perspectives, data-driven discussions, and interpersonal and situational dynamics.
Consideration for multiple perspectives was reflected in the narratives through consulting followers in decision-making. Some leaders implemented enabling mechanisms and empowering strategies. In contrast, others pointed out that follower views sometimes conflict with leader convictions, leading to challenges in integrating ideas hence discouraging consultations. Munyon, Houghton, Simarasl, Dawley and Howe (Reference Munyon, Houghton, Simarasl, Dawley and Howe2021) argued that authentic leaders’ openness and consideration for multiple perspectives could expose them to undue follower interference, ironically weakening followers’ influence capabilities. Our findings suggest that most leaders appeared inclusive and were willing to modify their decisions and reflect on the implications of their actions. For example, L11 noted that leaders must provide directions for consensus to enhance institutional capabilities rather than attempting to exert their influence. Interestingly, L9 highlighted the absence of consultation as a leadership shortcoming in his own experience.
L11: […] But you must listen – what other people think should be an input into your decision-making as a leader […]. You push and let everybody, including the professionals, have input over your decisions […].
L9: […] Consultation … creates a sense of inclusivity and brings everyone to the same destination. Lack of consultation sometimes represents leadership failure, which I’m still working on […].
Data-driven discussions illustrate reliable and evidence-based decision-making processes in solving organizational problems. The leaders argued that despite its time-consuming nature, the evidence-based analysis provides more verifiable and sustainable outcomes than subjective processing. For some leaders, balanced processing means measuring and quantifying their choices for lasting outcomes. Studies (e.g., Shrivastava, Reference Shrivastava2018; Sveningsson & Alvesson, Reference Sveningsson and Alvesson2016) show that improved objective analysis, seeking alternative opinions in decision-making, and leaders’ admission to mistakes are evidence of balanced processing. From the life stories shared, L5 relied heavily on quantitative measures to verify organizational success. However, others emphasized the influence of situational factors in decision-making, suggesting that a blend of objective and subjective factors is more desirable in information processing. For example, L6 suggested that harmonizing all facts leads to a more reliable and empirical basis for decision-making.
L5: […] measuring and quantifying our progress is important. We set targets, we set standards, and we measure to know…
L6: […] objective data has merits and demerits, so we consider other factors sometimes in interrogating the figures. Anytime you add, we are heading toward averaging […] and there is a standard deviation […]. But it provides us with empirical evidence of past occurrences, except that you need to consider all relevant facts.
Interpersonal and situational dynamics emerged as a key theme for information processing. The leaders drew attention to the relational factors that influence the work context in various ways. The leaders acknowledged the challenge of satisfying competing interests but observed the need for fairness. Being authentic requires leaders to proactively anticipate complex institutional demands and integrate relevant perspectives, work contexts, or situational factors into their decision-making processes regarding moral concerns. These leaders argued that undue institutional pressures promote egocentric decisions, prioritizing self-interest over seeking input and feedback. The finding resonates with previous observations that although most leaders endure pressure to thrive, excessive demands may compel leaders to overlook follower inputs, affecting their balanced processing (Petersen & Youssef-Morgan, Reference Petersen and Youssef-Morgan2018). In addressing complex issues within social and power-value contexts, L9 advocated for neutrality in their managerial strategies, which facilitated a degree of fair-mindedness and objectivity among affected or involved parties.
L9: A lot of things are interpersonal … you will variably know the beneficiaries and persons who suffer liabilities […]. But we try to be objective, we use blind management strategies […] in the allocation of entitlements and liabilities… a certain blind approach helps you and saves you from criticisms or favoritism and opportunism […].
The leaders observed that some interpersonal and contextual factors are beneficial, but others can impede effectiveness in situations involving core or formal authority structures. This awareness shapes decision capabilities and control, and facilitates leaders’ behavior toward followers in the exchange process. Like many EEs, interpersonal and social variables are an integral part of Ghanaian society; hence, leaders integrate social values into interactions with followers and other external stakeholders, which carry varying moral implications (Akuffo & Kivipõld, Reference Akuffo and Kivipõld2019). Authentic leaders realize their potential in work-specific situations requiring extensive interactions, but leaders in EEs rarely involve their followers in crucial decision-making (i.e., Weiss, Razinskas, Backmann & Hoegl, Reference Weiss, Razinskas, Backmann and Hoegl2018). The conundrum suggests that leaders striving to achieve authenticity in their organizations are more suitable for work contexts that demand fewer interactions with followers or other audiences. As is the case with all societies, not all leaders in EEs execute AL. This is reflected in the following excerpts, where some leaders highlighted interpersonal and situational challenges that affect the execution of their leadership roles and capabilities. For instance, L8 noted that leadership encompasses managerial functions along with personal and competing interests and other external factors that influence their roles.
L8: […] Your story of leadership extends your scope of reference and day-to-day managerial responsibilities. … understanding personal and competing interest groups and dealing with other external factors and families. … situational dynamics you must deal with […] some of the interests are helpful while others are difficult to determine. […] All this shapes your experience and journey as a leader.
The finding suggests that leaders in EEs often struggle to handle situational pressures that conflict with their values. Petersen and Youssef-Morgan (Reference Petersen and Youssef-Morgan2018) show that organizational pressures and political dynamics compel leaders to withdraw or conceal failures and inadequacies, ultimately at the expense of self-awareness and relational transparency. As exemplified in these findings, the work environments in EEs are generally characterized by complex political, social, and interpersonal considerations, making it challenging to communicate unfavorable outcomes and engage in balanced processing as well (Alvesson & Einola, Reference Alvesson and Einola2019). For instance, L7 expressed concerns about exploitative demands that contradict their values in their leadership roles. The leaders described instances of being forced into compromises, insider deals, and other political complexities that starkly contrasted their espoused values, which can impede authenticity.
L7: Oh yes, you are faced with all manner of pressures in living your true self. Some are pure politics … others are usual but sometimes complex interpersonal issues. For example, compromises, insider deals, and conflicts of interest are some intricacies you deal with as a leader. Some are beyond you, mainly where politics is involved, but you are in the center and direct the process. It’s endless […]. Leaders are pushed to resign elsewhere as they can’t take the demands. Some exploit those situations for their gains, and others compromise their values […].
Internalized moral perspective can be decoded with three sub-themes: inherent moral-ethical actions, self-regulation, and positive psychological states. Some leaders believed that ethical values are critical for effective leadership and held themselves accountable for organizational failures. The leaders associated moral awareness as rooted in their self-concept, which was shaped by societal values as well as childhood influences, school life, and other personal experiences. African socio-cultural environment emphasizes patriarchy, respect for elders, and established hierarchies, as well as religious traditions and practices. However, the structural and institutional complexities related to class, gender, cultural, and economic challenges necessitate an additional moral layer to confront the hostilities and inequities faced, particularly for women who are aware of societal expectations for their moral behavior or who wish to embrace their genuine identity in their work and leadership roles (e.g., Maposa & Mugabe, Reference Maposa and Mugabe2013). Sims and Carter (Reference Sims and Carter2019) observed that such powerful awareness informs women’s expression of leadership in different ways. For example, the first female Vice President of the Republic of Ghana was sworn into office on January 7, 2025, transcending societal barriers and confronting associated anxieties while preparing for her role. She vowed to guide other women toward genuine self-expression, noting that having gone through the door herself, she would hold it open for others and for future generations to pass through.
Inherent moral and ethical actions suggest that becoming an authentic leader is reliant on core values and ethical convictions derived from one’s upbringing, experiences, and socialization. The leaders referenced their value systems, arguing that such an ethical frame is internalized. This reflects a key feature of AL theory, which posits that the congruence between leader values and behavior determines critical outcomes in leaders and followers (Banks et al., Reference Banks, McCauley, Gardner and Guler2016). For example, two leaders, L12 and L13, observed that ethical beliefs are ingrained, and people must value such beliefs, stressing that a departure from these values can lead to leadership or societal failure. When discussing values, the leaders’ use of strong words like ‘guilt’ and ‘deterioration’ suggests that societal values strongly permeate aspects of Ghanaian life, such as issues related to land rights and communal structures.
L12: […] Package of ethical beliefs, everything you are part of the framework; yes, the totality. …You won’t win if they are artificial to you. Because a value system is imbibed, it’s inside of yourself as you have been taught as a child […], so you develop a sense of guilt that stops you from moving away from your principles.
L13: We need to revive our fundamental values as a society. Our societal values are beginning to deteriorate or are collapsing; what I will call the erosion of our ethical values. Citizens are abetting and conniving with foreign nationals to engage in illegal activities, particularly gold mining, in destroying our land and water resources in an indiscriminate manner…What’s wrong with us? We need leaders of conscience, leaders of moral conviction, and leaders of our collective pride [..].
Self-regulation emerged as a significant sub-theme from life stories, contributing to a moral perspective. It was evident that the leaders in our sample exhibited a reflective and inward-driven desire to maintain behavioral integrity in the face of emotive demands. The leaders demonstrated authentic role modeling and effective emotion regulation. For example, L5 emphasized the need to control one’s thoughts and feelings, highlighting the importance of mindfulness. Similarly, L4 considered compassion and care as essential AL qualities. Prior research shows that authentic leaders are exemplary in their ability to regulate their negative emotions and reactions (Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015). Leaders who regulate their behavior elicit positive emotional reactions from organizational members (Agote, Aramburu & Lines, Reference Agote, Aramburu and Lines2016).
L5: As a leader, you’re a leader of your own thoughts, your own emotions, your own psychology, your own personal philosophy.
L4: […] I have learned to be more respectful and compassionate over the period. […] As a leader, you need to regulate your intellect and emotions and help others do likewise because emotional intelligence is important in how you engage […].
Positive psychological states were illustrated in the life stories, reflecting a sense of protection and hope in the capabilities of followers. The leaders aimed to radiate confidence and inspire ownership and autonomy in their followers rather than merely enforcing their will. This finding aligns with previous studies (e.g., Dust, Resick, Margolis, Mawritz & Greenbaum, Reference Dust, Resick, Margolis, Mawritz and Greenbaum2018) that authentic leaders engender confidence, meaning, and control over their followers’ abilities, which contributes to organizational effectiveness. In the excerpts below, L6 and L14 emphasized the importance of reassuring followers in their roles while ensuring corrective measures prevent recurring errors. This forward-thinking approach fosters a positive work environment where people feel inspired and protected. Drawing from their life stories, the leaders recounted their personal experiences of effective leadership and sound governance practices to encourage behavioral change. Their narratives reflect a stark contrast of followers moving past fear to experience courage, for example, L6 spoke of laughing through the threats. These leaders are shown to evoke optimism and hope, and nurture positive emotional states in followers.
L6: […] I give my people hope and confidence to work happily. […] Things going wrong is not a problem in life, but leaving things that have gone wrong uncorrected is my problem…
L6: Our staff are rediscovering themselves and having confidence in their work. […] in the past, when you chance on an infraction in the field […], you get a phone call to return to the office suddenly … you persist, and you are transferred. But today, we are confident and laugh through the threats because of our trust in the man up there [our leader].
L14: We need to encourage and inspire people who promote positive values and ethical choices. We need to inspire confidence to make a difference for good. The success of a business or a nation depends on the intentional change you inspire, and we need genuine and supportive leaders to steer such a sense of purpose.
In addition to the findings elaborated above, reinforcing team building and shared goals emerged from the narratives indicating that AL aligns with common organizational interests and authentic cultures, which reflects an emerging dimension – collective orientation. Life stories in this study revealed a sense of selflessness and a common purpose, suggesting the importance of living for others and positively influencing those around us. Following Steffens, Mols, Haslam and Okimoto (Reference Steffens, Mols, Haslam and Okimoto2016), we define collective orientation as being true to a group’s collective identity in leading and furthering societal values. Two sub-themes: collective group interest and collective societal purpose reflect this central theme.
Collective group interest was reflected in the leaders’ emphasis on harnessing individual and team strengths toward shared goals. Nearly all the leaders in this study cultivated work conditions where people could contribute and feel part of success. This often involved team-building initiatives and participatory processes to nurture a collective identity. Consistent with prior studies, leaders who champion collective goals and inspire followership are perceived to be more authentic than those who advance their personal interests (Nichols & Erakovich, Reference Nichols and Erakovich2013; Steffens et al., Reference Steffens, Mols, Haslam and Okimoto2016). For example, leaders L11 and L9 focused on mobilizing their followers for collective purposes. For these leaders, it is critical for their team members to feel connected to the collective and the business goals. The leaders explained that the resulting value-congruence would help shape their identities, thereby translating into institutional effectiveness. The narratives highlighted a strong sense of camaraderie, solidarity, and togetherness in AL.
L11: […] Whether in political or corporate space, your goal as a leader should be to enhance your company’s value […]. You attain success with an all-inclusive intent, ensuring everyone is involved, with their role feeding into the collective. You need to carry everyone along and not leave them behind […].
L9: […] It’s a common ship we sail together; we sink together. Authentic leaders must be seen to promote group interest. […] create structures for people to identify with and feel a part of those structures … As a leader, you take others along with you as you can’t fail together […].
A purposeful and authentic leader prioritizes the needs of others over self-serving motives, promoting service and capacity building to drive change and enhance organizational values. The leaders in our study understood their roles as stewards, inspiring followers toward collective advancement. This aligns with the findings of De Hoogh and Den Hartog (Reference De Hoogh and Den Hartog2008), which outline that people-focused leaders are inspired by shared interests rather than self-centered power intentions. In this regard, L6 and L16 criticized self-directed goals and pervasive greed and dishonesty in public service while advocating for inclusive leadership that creates opportunities for others. This is inherent in L16’s use of ‘create room for all’, suggesting the need for inclusivity and shared aspirations. The findings indicate that authentic leaders are able to inspire followers while advocating for the collective good and contribute to mutual gains (Lemoine, Hartnell & Leroy, Reference Lemoine, Hartnell and Leroy2019). This is inextricably linked to the African cultural humanism of collectivism (Nqumba & Scheepers, Reference Nqumba and Scheepers2023), where collective choices and participative decision-making enhance leader credibility and promote positive perceptions.
L6: […] leading and making a difference in our institutions. […] and change the mindset that public service is for accumulating wealth, greed, etc. […] make public service a service to the people… promote a sense of inclusivity and work in the collective interest of our institutions […]. I may not change everybody, but a few people may model their leadership alongside […] to work together to transform our institutions […].
L16: We are travelling the path of disaster as people are prioritizing personal interest over greater cause. You need authentic leaders with integrity, courage, and devotion to our collective aspirations to create room for all.
Collective societal purpose manifested in the leaders’ aspirations to promote change and uphold societal values that extend beyond business objectives. Some of these leaders were catalysts for change, aiming to cultivate positive behavior and foster healthy workplace cultures. Authentic leaders act as change agents, championing exemplary leadership and innovative and positive mindsets among organizational members (Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015; Misati & Walumbwa, Reference Misati and Walumbwa2018). For example, L10 and L15 resolved to transform the attitudes of clients and stakeholders of the firm while fighting unethical and unacceptable practices among workers. It suggests that these leaders are aware that the deteriorating values in the local society are infiltrating corporate and public institutions, leading to a lack of integrity among leaders. The leaders reflected on their collective accountability to uphold societal norms and the integrity of the system.
L10: My staff knows my values. I hope the ethical culture I am building does not vanish … when I leave. I remain resolute to see this process become part of them [staff] … to change the negative mindsets [thievery, extortions, etc.]. It is good for our collective interest, the organization and our larger society […].
L15: We hear of bribery, organized crime, and egregious and infamous scandals in distant places of the world, but they strengthen their control systems, and impose increasing fines and penalties… We need to transform our behaviors and societal values here in Ghana and Africa as a whole.
Some of the leaders highlighted leadership challenges in contemporary society and called for the need to prepare future leaders. The leaders emphasized the importance of educating these individuals on positive leadership concepts, including integrity and the deterrence of corruption, to instill a sense of responsibility and positive values. The leaders expressed concerns over the declining level of integrity and moral standards in society and advocated for school reforms to cultivate and nurture authentic leaders from an early age. For example, L9 focused on promoting societal values, while L3 advocated for curriculum reforms that specifically target leadership and ethics. The narratives reinforced that the decline of authenticity and accountability can erode the social legitimacy of the organization. This aligns with Anderson (Reference Anderson2009) observation of the declining authentic behavior in society and calls for school reforms. This issue is critical in Africa, given its unique sociocultural context of influence from the adverse, ingrained effects of the slave trade and colonialism. These ingrained effects include tendencies toward connivance and condoning of misconduct, reluctance to criticize elders for their shortcomings (Ibrahim, Abdulai, Iddrisu & Konlan, Reference Ibrahim, Abdulai, Iddrisu and Konlan2024), and general moral and trust deficits in the social systems (Arogbofa, Reference Arogbofa2022; Okeke, Reference Okeke2019).
L9: […] Leadership is delivering on social responsibility … and to … to ensure ultimately societal good.
L3: […] Moral and ethical standards have fallen. Young people engaging in ‘419’ scams [advance free-fraud and confidence tricks], […] malpractices and so on […]. It’s essential we train people to be authentic leaders so the youth can look up to role models […], so we can have future leaders who are genuine, ethical, and trustworthy – the only way to change our society […].
Discussion
To answer the central question on how AL manifests in the contexts of EEs, particularly the Ghanaian context, this research reveals four macro-level themes and fifteen sub-themes aligning with the AL dimensions of self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and moral perspective, with an emerging theme described as collective orientation. The dimensions reflect five central elements: reflection on personal values, self-knowledge and leadership experiences; authentic aspirations and reciprocal exchange with followers; harmonizing fundamental needs and follower views in decision-making; aligning self-expression with external realities; and reinforcing team building and shared goals.
Reflection on personal values, self-knowledge, and leadership experiences
Our research found that leaders’ self-knowledge and awareness are derived from their values and beliefs. This process facilitates their authenticity and approval in asserting influence, as reported in findings of other studies (Sergeeva & Kortantamer, Reference Sergeeva and Kortantamer2021). The emphasis on their influence and integrity is credited to life-long learning, humility, and fairness, which corresponds with recent evidence (e.g., Nielsen & Marrone, Reference Nielsen and Marrone2018; Oc et al., Reference Oc, Daniels, Diefendorff, Bashshur and Greguras2020) that authentic leaders tend to be humble, with reflective, open-minded learning, and collaborative capabilities. AL embodies self-awareness, fundamental to the leadership process.
Authentic aspirations and reciprocal exchange with followers
The authentic aspiration of the leaders emphasizes transparent, trusted, and reciprocal exchange with followers. The leaders foster an authentic and enduring culture, prioritizing the progress of their followers over their own personal desires. The findings support the existing literature that genuine practices of catering to the preferences of others prevent anxiety and influence performance outcomes (Gino, Sezer & Huang, Reference Gino, Sezer and Huang2020). This suggests the importance of a favorable climate for thriving or productive interactions between leaders and followers. The findings also suggest that being authentic with one’s opinions and moral convictions is rarely valued, leading to incompatible wishes with stakeholders and a sense of vulnerability (Alvesson & Einola, Reference Alvesson and Einola2019; Liu, Chu, Guo & Liu, Reference Liu, Chu, Guo and Liu2021). We found that authentic leaders are identified and perceived as having high levels of moral integrity given their genuine exposure of vulnerabilities resonates with followers who share similar fundamental needs (Nienaber, Hofeditz & Romeike, Reference Nienaber, Hofeditz and Romeike2015).
Harmonizing fundamental needs and follower views in decision-making
The findings suggest that authentic leaders intentionally shape their followers’ perspectives to align with their personal standards, thereby reinforcing their followers’ psychological needs and worldviews. Authentic leaders’ decision-making processes are hinged on available facts and contextual factors. Previous studies involving life-story interviews of authentic leaders suggest that the AL concept involves situational nuances and self-identity struggles as well as the experience of anxiety in practice (Sergeeva & Kortantamer, Reference Sergeeva and Kortantamer2021; Shannon et al., Reference Shannon, Buford, Winston and Wood2020). The life experiences of the leaders enable them to combine data-driven insights with interpersonal and contextual factors in their decision-making. However, real-world experiences often challenge the moral and ethical foundations of AL, as difficult situations require leaders to present their symbolic selves to navigate relationships and complex situations (Nyberg & Sveningsson, Reference Nyberg and Sveningsson2014), reiterating cultural values and institutional views in the leadership process (Covelli & Mason, Reference Covelli and Mason2017; Sergeeva & Kortantamer, Reference Sergeeva and Kortantamer2021). However, in practice, the symbolic elements with which leaders may need to present themselves and accomplish their tasks can strain the ethics of AL, as leaders may be compelled to manage relationships with others and position themselves in challenging situations (Nyberg & Sveningsson, Reference Nyberg and Sveningsson2014). This also fortifies the cultural norms and institutional beliefs in the leadership process (Covelli & Mason, Reference Covelli and Mason2017; Sergeeva & Kortantamer, Reference Sergeeva and Kortantamer2021).
Aligning self-expression with external realities
The leaders’ regulated moral and ethical actions reflect their awareness of moral limitations and their efforts to act in congruence with their values and principles in response to external demands. Leaders’ roles are becoming increasingly bureaucratic and administrative, as they experience pressure from powerful external parties. This clash between compromise and conviction often leads to frustration in performing their jobs and maintaining fruitful relationships with partners. Gino et al. (Reference Gino, Sezer and Huang2020) argue that while the AL concept is valued in EEs, organizational leaders often struggle to act in accordance with their authentic selves due to situational demands and anxiety. We observe that the leaders develop awareness from their self-concept and value system, which are fundamental in shaping their aspirations. This supports prior studies (Steffens, Wolyniec, Okimoto, Mols, Haslam & Kay, Reference Steffens, Wolyniec, Okimoto, Mols, Haslam and Kay2021) indicating that leaders’ personal and collective self-awareness influences their authenticity. African socio-cultural characteristics emphasize patriarchy, respect for age and hierarchy, as well as religious practices (Sims & Carter, Reference Sims and Carter2019), which together inform AL in Ghana. These contextual pressures can create a conflict between one’s personal authenticity and social pressures, yet this conflict can also foster the qualities that lead to AL (Lux & Lowe, Reference Lux and Lowe2024).
Reinforcing team building and shared goals
Collective orientation was exemplified across two sub-themes: collective group interest and societal purpose. Leaders express their shared purposes and change-oriented goals, which describe their identity and belonging in their pursuit of group, organizational, or societal interests. This theme is consistent with the notion that leadership can be shared and collective in practice (Saxe-Braithwaite & Gautreau, Reference Saxe-Braithwaite and Gautreau2020). Authentic leaders express their shared and change-oriented goals flexibly and dynamically, which encourages team building and participation. Their collective actions and shared decisions with the group may increase their legitimacy as leaders and the community-based cultural dimension. This idea aligns with the African cultural humanism’s emphasis on collectivism and social responsibility (Nqumba & Scheepers, Reference Nqumba and Scheepers2023).
Contributions and implications
Theoretical contributions
This research makes several valuable theoretical contributions. First, this research contributes to the growing need for qualitative empirical evidence on AL from various contexts (e.g., Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Karam, Alvesson and Einola2021; Lux & Lowe, Reference Lux and Lowe2024). By exploring the nature and expression of AL, we advance its theoretical nature amidst growing calls to refine its components (Gardner et al., Reference Gardner, Karam, Noghani, Cogliser, Gullifor, Mhatre and Dahunsi2024). We undertake an in-depth qualitative investigation based on leaders’ life stories to expand the empirical evidence that validates AL conceptualization and further enriches the AL dimensions with sub-themes. The life experiences of the leaders enable them to integrate interpersonal and contextual factors with relevant data in decision-making. In doing so, leaders harmonize differing views with their personal standards to reinforce their fundamental needs and worldviews. This approach enables us to gain a rich understanding of the concept of AL, providing a more nuanced perspective that reflects the contemporary organizational leadership landscape in the EE context.
More importantly, this research contributes to filling the void of context-specific research on AL in EEs, particularly in Ghana (Bakari & Hunjra, Reference Bakari and Hunjra2017; Iqbal et al., Reference Iqbal, Farid, Ma, Khattak and Nurunnabi2018). While studies involving life-story interviews of authentic leaders have been undertaken in Europe (Sergeeva & Kortantamer, Reference Sergeeva and Kortantamer2021), the United States (Shannon et al., Reference Shannon, Buford, Winston and Wood2020), and Asia (Khilji et al., Reference Khilji, Keilson, Shakir and Shrestha2015), recent research (e.g., Covelli & Mason, Reference Covelli and Mason2017; Sergeeva & Kortantamer, Reference Sergeeva and Kortantamer2021) emphasizes that cultural values, institutional views, and societal contexts shape leadership processes. This research confirms the concepts of AL and its main characteristics, while proposing a new macro conceptual dimension of collective orientation as a positive leadership approach, and reinforces evidence of its relevance in EEs, like Ghana. Consequently, this finding represents a significant contribution to the field of leadership development in these unique cultures (Petan & Bocarnea, Reference Petan and Bocarnea2016). The finding emphasizes the significance of leaders prioritizing collective goals over personal success in their social identities and work roles (Steffens et al., Reference Steffens, Mols, Haslam and Okimoto2016). Leadership occurs within the context of a shared group identity between leaders and their followers (van Knippenberg, Reference van Knippenberg2020). This identity influences followers’ perceptions and their reactions to the leader with whom they identify (Hogg, Reference Hogg2001; van Knippenberg & Hogg, Reference van Knippenberg and Hogg2003), which impacts leadership effectiveness.
Practical implications
This research also yields several important practical implications. First, the findings highlight the complex conditions that leaders face in EEs, particularly in Ghana, when working in environments marked by unethical practices, historical barriers, and challenging market conditions. The findings emphasize the importance of organizations operating in Ghana and other countries with similar cultural orientation to foster an ethical culture that encourages leaders to act ethically even in challenging situations. This reinforces the signaling theory, i.e., behavioral signaling, which requires authentic leaders to intentionally elicit their authenticity to influence followers in the leadership process (Lux & Lowe, Reference Lux and Lowe2024). Ethics remains a crucial backbone of leadership; hence, it is imperative to develop future leaders capable of standing up to increasingly powerful individuals in EEs. Such a commitment may involve implementing decision frameworks or policies to empower leaders at all levels to engage in ethical behaviors. Additionally, the unique work conditions in EEs suggest that organizations should tailor their performance and development metrics for AL, such as using qualitative measures to recognize the social impact of better leaders within the community or assessing authenticity through feedback from other employees or stakeholders.
Second, the findings suggest that AL in Ghana is influenced by its distinctive cultural, economic, and social characteristics. The findings indicate that in the Ghanaian context and other countries with similar cultural orientations, organizations attempting to foster AL need to identify and nurture local leaders with potential. The findings demonstrate that AL in those contexts emphasizes community development and social impact beyond organizational needs, with leaders closely linked to creating positive social changes. This highlights the importance of supporting leaders who adopt this approach through avenues such as committing resources and boosting the morale of AL through recognition. Furthermore, AL’s intense focus on community well-being may inspire grassroots and public support. This can be achieved by increasing public town halls and consultations for collective engagement. By doing so, authentic leaders would gain community backing, enabling them to resist political pressures that interfere with their leadership practices in similar emerging contexts.
Limitations and future research directions
Despite its contributions, this research has some limitations that present opportunities for future research. First, this study is an exploratory investigation, the data was obtained from a single country which is characterized by high-power distance and other unique cultural characteristics. The geographic constraints may limit the generalizability of the findings. Future research could explore alternative contexts and extend the geographical and cultural scope to examine AL (e.g., Eastern Europe and Latin America). Second, participants were mainly identified and considered to be authentic leaders through referral networks which may produce potential selection bias. Future studies could pre-select participants based on self-evaluative AL questionnaire scores (Shannon et al., Reference Shannon, Buford, Winston and Wood2020). Finally, the limitation of generalizability in qualitative inquiries provides theoretical inferences for future studies to incorporate quantitative data to further validate the findings.
Conclusion
This research explores the concept of AL through the lens of the life stories of leaders in Ghana, with significant implications for academics and practitioners. Our findings confirm the macro characteristics of AL, identify the sub-themes of AL dimensions, and discover an emerging dimension described as collective orientation. The individual, organizational, and socio-cultural factors that nurture authentic leader behavior and influence its effectiveness in an EE context were explored as well. Our findings suggest that AL, as a positive form of leadership, could be a potential solution to address challenges in similar cultural contexts. Managers aiming to promote AL in their organizations need to recognize contextual values and cultivate appropriate environments to achieve positive outcomes. This research enhances the understanding of AL in leadership theory, provides empirical evidence to support and enrich its conceptualization, and offers practical guidance to promote AL in similar emerging contexts.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge all interviewees who worked through their busy schedules to participate in this research. The authors also thank Dr Carol Moreen Osborne and Emeritus Professor Leland Entrekin for their review and feedback on this research.
Funding statement
The authors received no funding support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Competing interests
The authors declare none.
Ethical approval
The Human Research Ethics approval at Murdoch University was obtained before data collection (approval number: 2019/118). The research was undertaken in full compliance with the ethics approval.
Dr Believe Dedzo is a scholar in the fields of organizational behavior, research methods, data analytics, and international business. His research interest intersects positive psychology, positive leadership, and organizational outcomes. He also has professional interests in governance, global business and related management issues. He serves as a reviewer for a few international peer-reviewed conferences. He has a few conference and workshop presentations at prestigious international conferences including Academy of Management (AoM). Believe has published in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioral Science and African Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance.
Dr Cheryl Leo is a Senior Lecturer at Murdoch Business School. Her research is at the intersection of services marketing and social marketing. Cheryl is passionate about investigating the intricate interface between frontline employees and users in digital and physical interactions, across commercial and social services. She has a track record in publications such as the European Journal of Marketing, Health Communication, Journal of Business Research, and Journal of Service Management. Her expertise and leadership are exemplified during her tenure as the President of the National Australia Association of Social Marketing AASM (2020–2023), where she played a pivotal role in shaping the discourse and practices of social marketing in the region.
Dr Amy Huang is an active researcher in the fields of open innovation, absorptive capacity, and knowledge management. She also has a particular research interest relating to the contemporary social, economic, and business issues in China; CSR and sustainability in EEs. She has published articles in such journals as Journal of Business Ethics, Technovation, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Human Resource Management Review, Journal of Management and Organization, etc. She has also presented her research at prestigious international conferences such as Academy of Management (AoM) annual meetings and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM) annual meetings multiple times.
Open access
