Who Wears The Crown : The Link Between Guilt Proneness And Leadership

FEHR, R., KAI CHI (SAM), Y., & DANG, C. (2015). MORALIZED LEADERSHIP: THE CONSTRUCTION AND CONSEQUENCES OF ETHICAL LEADER PERCEPTIONS. Academy Of Management Review, 40(2), 182-209. doi:10.5465/amr.2013.0358

FEHR, R., KAI CHI (SAM), Y., & DANG, C. (2015). MORALIZED LEADERSHIP: THE CONSTRUCTION AND CONSEQUENCES OF ETHICAL LEADER PERCEPTIONS. Academy Of Management Review, 40(2), 182-209. doi:10.5465/amr.2013.0358

I recently read a book called “Leadership & Self Deception” by the Arbinger Institute. It explains how self-deception is the most pervasive problem in organizations today. It gave some of the following examples of types of people who suffer from self-deception:

The article focuses on how various styles of parental control affect a child's behaviour in regard to the emotions of guilt and shame. The article Guilt, Shame, and Family Socialization: A Retrospective Study states that emotions that involve and focus on consequences of an individual's actions and role-taking, help shape and socialize the individual. Guilt and shame are negative emotions that come as a response to the lack of understanding and dedication to social standards. In this article, the authors examined how parental control influences how an individual may experience guilt and shame , and how this affects their social relations. The article concluded that a lack of parental guidance and control, may lead to a disoriented mentality towards situations where the expected emotions would be guilt and/or shame. In contrast, a child whose parents are very controlling, will experience extreme levels of these emotions and will be cautious not to jeopardize their relations with their peer and

In an experiment to test for the susceptibility to guilt and shame, participants were given a list of theoretical situations where the subject might feel guilt or shame upon acting out in that situation. For the scale of guilt they were asked how they would feel in five different scenarios. These scenarios were “Not being honest with myself, acting in areas before deciding for myself whether they are right or wrong, buying something I cannot really afford, not living up to my own expectations,, and lying to people, even though they won't ever find out about it” (Johnson & Hogan, 1981). In the shame test participants were asked about another five situations. This time they were asked about changing plans which involve someone else at the last

We are a country of the people--all people. Our color, religion, sex, sexual orientation should not matter...but unfortunately, it does. Today, more than ever, we must band together for the rights of our brothers and sisters of the world--not because we agree with what they stand for or how they choose to live, but because we are a country built on the fundamental rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If we allow these rights to be sacrificed for feigned security, then we are no longer free to make our own decisions--and worse, we are giving up these freedoms. Complacency is worse than choosing a side.

This study seeks to determine whether a relationship exists between leadership behaviors and level of cognitive moral development in educational leaders. The study proposes a description of leadership behaviors that uses the hybrid understanding of these behaviors proposed by Vann, Coleman, and Simpson (2014). In describing moral cognitive development, the study uses a schema theory heavily influenced by Lawrence Kohlberg (1971) but primarily developed by James Rest (Rest, Narvaez, Bebeau & Thoma, 1999). The study further proposes that a correlation between measures of leadership behaviors and of cognitive moral reasoning may reveal that levels of cognitive moral reasoning result in particular leadership behaviors.

There were two studies conducted by researchers that were intended to recognize the relationship between shame and the motivation for self-change. These studies examined the correlation between negative scenarios and motivation to change oneself. Exploration of the feelings of guilt, regret, embarrassment, and shame and how they relate to the motivation for self-change is the focus problem of the researchers for the two studies conducted. Emotions like fear, sadness, and loss are likely to cause someone to be more motivated to encounter a desire to undergo some form of self-change.

The benefits to profiling a leader’s personality from a distance are analyzing their motives and accomplishments. Motives encourage the way a leader accepts a leadership role; analyze future opportunities and threats of danger; and learning their satisfactions, stresses, frustrations, and vulnerabilities (Post 2006, 153). Assessing a leader’s motives is an important part of profiling a leader’s motives because they are subjected to distortion, deception, to include self-deception and rationalization. For these reasons, motives are often measured indirectly, through content analysis of people’s imaginative verbal behavior (Post 2006, 153). People that are driven by their accomplishments can control themselves and postpone rewards, for they

Guilt can cause you to doubt your relationship with God, keep from growing as a Christian and from sharing the Gospel with others. If you have accepted Jesus as your Savior, but are struggling with the guilt of sin, it is time for you to claim the promise of complete forgiveness. In Psalm 103:12, David describes the great distance between you and your sin: “As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.” God has removed your transgressions as far as the east is from the west. That is a great distance! The sins you committed prior to your new life in Christ are far from you – and God will never bring them up again. Do not let Satan have his way by keeping you in guilt about the sin that has been removed

It is more difficult to forgive yourself if the person you have hurt doesn't forgive you. If you hurt a person you care about, you most likely will feel guilty. If the person doesn't forgive you for what you did, it shows a sign that you have really hurt the persons emotions. It might even be harder to forgive yourself if the person is ignoring you.

The most significant major leadership behavior in leading others is task motivated. Fred Fiedler uses the least-preferred coworker (LPG) scale to determine what motivates the leader. The task that comes easier to me is relationship-motivated (high LPC). This is the motivation that is a distraction from doing the task at hand. This naturally, would be the choice that is preferred because it presents opposition to meeting the company objectives. The high (LPC) has many reasons that relationship-motivated people find most appealing.

The first main hypothesis in my research design stipulates that well-adjusted leaders, individuals with a lot of psychological resources and social capital, are most likely to confront perpetrators of uncivil or immoral behavior.

Tangney, Stuewig, and Mashek (2007) noted that high shame-prone individuals were more vulnerable to practical and significant experiences of shame as compared to their less shame-prone counterparts. These characters were more likely to experience shame as a result of the disappointments they have encountered in the past. The study further argued that those who experienced a lesser amount of shame were less likely to engage in direct, indirect, or displaced aggression when angered. While those who encountered a higher level of shame were more likely to be involved in hostile behavior. And at such, high shame-prone individuals became more vulnerable to peer influences than those who were less exposed to the shame stigma.

Shame is a powerful emotion which has great influence on social behaviour (Mcdougall, 2001). Brief synopsis of relevant literature confirms that shame handling and management, also emphasizes the importance of this particular social emotion as it is able to alter interpersonal bonds, it can be destructive and may to lead to farther violent behaviour (Baumeister & Bushman 2014). Additional important reason of managing shame is that it may develop to pathological consequence of major depression or suicide due to the absence of a single concept as a solution of repairing the entire self which is damaged by experiencing shame on a long term (Tangney, Burggraf & Wagner, 1995). This particular feeling might trigger violent outbreak or complete withdrawal or cause anger as a defensive reaction, which aims to neutralise the negative evaluation (Weiner, Tennen & Suls, 2012; Baumeister, Smart & Boden 1996). Relating shame to social conflict theories, Scheff (1999) hypothesized if the shame is recognised, a bond of cohesion and trust can be formed, although shame is frequently unacknowledged. An important aspect of shame management theory developed by Ahmed, Harris, Braithwaite and Braithwaite (2001) suggests who accepts and takes personal responsibility, will be able to avoid delinquency as they have considered the damaging affect of consequences. On the contrary, managing shame through blaming others will enhance misconduct due to personal action and consequences being disconnected