The gaslighting of authentic leadership 2.0

M. Alvesson, Katja Einola
{"title":"The gaslighting of authentic leadership 2.0","authors":"M. Alvesson, Katja Einola","doi":"10.1177/17427150221125271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article is a response to Bill Gardner and Kelly McCauley’s ‘gaslighting’ critique of our text on the perils of authentic leadership. Against gaslighting 1.0 (evilly trying to convince people to doubt their perceptions), we propose gaslighting 2.0 (enlightenment). We argue that organizations face severe problems and challenges that cannot be solved by motivating managers to engage in introspection and being overly preoccupied by their own authenticity. A search for one’s true self is a personal journey of inner growth and heightened self-awareness that individuals, leaders and non-leaders may engage in and find highly beneficial, but outside any notion of exercising influence or power on others to reach career objectives or corporate goals. The broad use of simple recipes with claims of overwhelming positive effects is problematic. Leadership research is often based on highly problematic measures, making most efforts to capture the core phenomenon unreliable. That many people are attracted by simplistic, positive-sounding and ego-enhancing formulas is not the same as evidence for theoretical value and relevance of a truth claim. Taking aspiration as a critical element would call for the development and study of Aspirational Authentic Leadership Theory, which would be something quite different from the static study of how managers score in terms of being true to their values, a core self, and so on. In-depth process studies of managers trying to be authentic navigating dilemmas at work could be an alternative to focus further research on.","PeriodicalId":92094,"journal":{"name":"Leadership (London)","volume":"78 1","pages":"814 - 831"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership (London)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17427150221125271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

This article is a response to Bill Gardner and Kelly McCauley’s ‘gaslighting’ critique of our text on the perils of authentic leadership. Against gaslighting 1.0 (evilly trying to convince people to doubt their perceptions), we propose gaslighting 2.0 (enlightenment). We argue that organizations face severe problems and challenges that cannot be solved by motivating managers to engage in introspection and being overly preoccupied by their own authenticity. A search for one’s true self is a personal journey of inner growth and heightened self-awareness that individuals, leaders and non-leaders may engage in and find highly beneficial, but outside any notion of exercising influence or power on others to reach career objectives or corporate goals. The broad use of simple recipes with claims of overwhelming positive effects is problematic. Leadership research is often based on highly problematic measures, making most efforts to capture the core phenomenon unreliable. That many people are attracted by simplistic, positive-sounding and ego-enhancing formulas is not the same as evidence for theoretical value and relevance of a truth claim. Taking aspiration as a critical element would call for the development and study of Aspirational Authentic Leadership Theory, which would be something quite different from the static study of how managers score in terms of being true to their values, a core self, and so on. In-depth process studies of managers trying to be authentic navigating dilemmas at work could be an alternative to focus further research on.
真正领导力2.0的燃气灯
这篇文章是对Bill Gardner和Kelly McCauley对我们关于真实领导的危险的文章的“煤气灯”批评的回应。针对煤气灯1.0(邪恶地试图说服人们怀疑他们的看法),我们提出煤气灯2.0(启蒙)。我们认为,组织面临着严重的问题和挑战,这些问题和挑战无法通过激励管理者进行内省和过度关注自己的真实性来解决。寻找真实的自我是一种个人的内在成长和提高自我意识的旅程,个人、领导者和非领导者都可能参与其中,并从中受益匪浅,但不包括任何通过对他人施加影响或权力来实现职业目标或公司目标的概念。广泛使用声称具有压倒性积极效果的简单食谱是有问题的。领导力研究通常基于非常有问题的衡量标准,使得大多数捕捉核心现象的努力都不可靠。许多人被简单的、听起来积极的和自我增强的公式所吸引,这与理论价值和真理主张的相关性的证据是不一样的。将抱负作为一个关键因素,需要发展和研究抱负真实领导理论,这与静态研究管理者在忠于自己的价值观、核心自我等方面的得分有很大不同。深入研究管理者在工作中试图真实地应对困境的过程,可能是进一步研究的另一种选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信