Search results

The purpose of this empirical investigation was to explore the interrelationship between psychological capital (PsyCaP) and impostor phenomenon (IP) experienced by entrepreneurs.

The researchers performed exploratory data analysis, using a correlation matrix that included the composite score of all PsyCap dimensions (psychological capital questionnaire [PCQ-24]) and the factor scores of hope, self-efficacy, resilience and optimism. The data analysis was conducted in relation to participants’ IP scores.

The study results demonstrated that a negative relationship was present between entrepreneurs’ Clance impostor phenomenon scale (CIPS) factor scores (consisting of hope, self-efficacy, resilience and optimism) and PsyCap dimensions (PCQ-24) composite subscales. This indicated that higher levels of PsyCaP were associated with lower levels of IP experience by entrepreneurs.

Theoretically, it must be noted that, based upon these study results, both “impostor phenomenon” and entrepreneurial identity formation occurred among entrepreneurs. It was known to be associated with external environmental, situational and societal factors. The researchers established the relationship between entrepreneurs’ “impostor phenomenon” and “psychological capital (PsyCap)”.

Entrepreneurs and executives associated with business accelerators and incubators should comprehend the link between IP and PsyCap in entrepreneurs. This would enhance the well-being of entrepreneurs in their challenging context. Entrepreneurs and executives associated with business accelerators and incubators might explore the effectiveness of PsyCap-based interventions, along with IP-related considerations.

This was one of the first empirical studies investigating and establishing the relationship between entrepreneurs’ “impostor phenomenon” and “psychological capital (PsyCap)”.

This study aims to break through the limitations of previous studies that have focused too much on the individual-level effects of humble leadership. Based on the affective events theory (AET), this study provides to construct an individual-team multilevel model of humble leadership focusing on the followers’ affective reaction and attribution of intentionality.

On the basis of subordinates’ attribution of humble leadership, it is believed that there are actually two motivations for humble leadership: true intention (serve the organizational collective interest) and pseudo intention (serve the leader’s self-interest), to which subordinates have different affective reactions, causing different leadership effectiveness. Thus, this study conducted an extensive review based on the qualitative method and proposed an integrated multilevel model of leader humility on individual and team outputs.

Followers’ attribution of intentionality moderates the relationship between humble leadership and followers’ affective reaction, which also determines followers’ performance (task performance, interpersonal deviant behavior and leader–member exchange); the interaction between team leaders’ humble leadership and collective attribution of intentionality influences team outputs (team outputs, organizational deviant behavior and team–member exchange) through team affective reaction; team humble leadership affects individual outputs through affective reaction and team affective climate plays a moderating role between affective reaction and individual outputs.

This study explores the individual-team multilevel outputs of humble leadership based on the AET theory, which is relatively rare in the current field. This study attempts to incorporate leaders’ motivation (such as attributions of intentionality) into the humble leadership research, by confirming that humble leadership affects affective reaction, which further influences individual-team multilevel outputs.