David Hekman_CV – Research
Creative Leadership Incubator website
Stratsim Hall of Fame Job interview tips and questions OB PhD Seminar Syllabus
Profitshare, Inc.About Me:
In response to this widespread leadership problem, I wanted to study how the small minority of humble leaders behaved, and how those humble leaders affected their followers and organizations. My paper with Brad Owens on leader humility used qualitative data to understand whether and how leader humility influenced followers (Owens & Hekman, 2012). Although a growing number of leadership writers argue leader humility is important to organizational effectiveness, little is known about the construct, why some leaders behave more humbly than others, what these behaviors lead to, or what factors moderate the effectiveness of these behaviors. Drawing from 55 in-depth interviews with leaders from a wide variety of contexts, we developed a model of the behaviors, outcomes, and contingencies of humble leadership. We uncovered that leader humility involves leaders modeling to followers how to grow and produces positive organizational outcomes by leading followers to believe that their own developmental journeys and feelings of uncertainty are legitimate in the workplace. We discussed how the emergent humility in leadership model informed a broad range of leadership issues, including organizational development and change, the evolution of leader-follower relationships, new pathways for engaging followers, and integrating top-down and ground-up organizing. A key insight from this paper was identifying the specific behaviors leaders could perform if they desired to behave more humbly in the workplace.
I also published a paper regarding courageous leadership. The recent string of high-profile and highly-preventable corporate failures (e.g., Enron, Worldcom, Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae), inspired my co-authors and me to try to understand what might motivate leaders to courageously detect and deflect organizational problems before they harm the entire organization (Schilpzand, Hekman & Mitchell, 2014). Using a biological metaphor of “organization as organism,” we viewed leader courageous actions as a type of organizational immune response that promotes organizational health and protects organizations from harm. Based on 94 interviews we conducted with a wide variety of business executives and military officers who witnessed or undertook courageous actions, we inductively developed a model using leaders’ accounts of the unfolding sequence of events. We learned that leaders report engaging in courageous workplace actions when they feel responsible for dealing with a challenging situation such as a workplace error, an abuse of power, an ambiguous situation, or someone in need. We interpreted the courage stories as suggesting that workplace courage is a two-stage process where actors first determine their level of personal responsibility to respond to the challenging situation, and then determine the potential social costs of acting. Our model of the courageous workplace action process challenges the conventional wisdom of courage as being attributed to a person’s disposition, enriches theories of intrinsic motivation, and helps clarify the role of cognition in courageous action. Our findings also help to resolve some of the contradictory evidence regarding the antecedents of the many organizational constructs related to courage including whistleblowing, voice, speaking up, taking charge, positive deviance, and organizational dissent.
o The Washington Post, June 1, 2009
o The Chicago Tribune, June 2, 2009
o The NY Times, June 23, 2009
o The Boston Globe, July 6, 2009
On a personal note, I love random facts/quotes. Here are a few that I find interesting: