Authentic Leadership, Authentic Followership, Basic Need Satisfaction, and Work Role Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Authentic leadership occurs when individuals enact their true selves in their role as a leader. This article examines the role of authentic followership in the previously established relationship between authentic leadership and follower in-role and extrarole performance behaviors. Consideration of followers who enact their true selves is important to understand how authentic leadership fosters follower self-determined work motivation and thus work role performance. Using self-determination theory (SDT) as a guiding framework, the authors propose that authentic leadership, authentic followership, and their interplay are positively related to the satisfaction of followers’ basic needs, which, in turn, are positively related to follower work role performance. The authors conducted a survey study of 30 leaders and 252 followers in 25 Belgian service companies. The results provide evidence of positive relationship for both authentic leadership and authentic followership with follower basic need satisfaction in a cross-level model where authentic leadership was aggregated to the group level of analysis. Cross-level interaction results indicated that authentic leadership strengthened the relationship between authentic followership and follower basic need satisfaction. Follower basic need satisfaction was shown to mediate the relationship of authentic leadership and authentic followership with follower work role performance. A test of mediated moderation further demonstrated that basic need satisfaction mediates the interaction of authentic leadership and authentic followership on follower work role performance. The implications for leadership research and practice are explored.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".