Examining the Influence of Self-Efficacy and Conscientiousness on the Freelancers' Self-Leadership: A Study in India

Keerti Shukla
Research Scholar, Department of HR, IBS Hyderabad (Under IFHE - A Deemed to be University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Hyderabad, Telangana, India; and is the corresponding author. E-mail: Keerti1231@rediffmail.com

Surajit Saha
Assistant Professor, Department of HR, IBS Hyderabad (Under IFHE - A Deemed to be University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Hyderabad, Telangana, India. E-mail: surajit@ibsindia.org

Musarat Shaheen
Assistant Professor, Department of HR, IBS Hyderabad (Under IFHE - A Deemed to be University u/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Hyderabad, Telangana, India. E-mail: musarrat.shaheen@ibsindia.org

Self-leadership strategies make employees agile in today's uncertain and ambiguous work environment. But there exists a debate whether self-leadership is an inborn or developable characteristic. Thus, the present study attempts to investigate whether an individual psychological resource (i.e., self-efficacy), which is malleable in nature, and individual personality trait (i.e., conscientiousness), which is relatively fixed over a period of time, can predict self-leadership. The influence of conscientiousness as a personality trait and self-efficacy as a personal resource on self-leadership were examined based on the data collected from 103 professionals working in different industries of India. Correlations and regression analysis was performed to investigate the impact. The findings indicated a significant effect of self-efficacy and conscientiousness on self-leadership. More interestingly, the data shows that self-efficacy is more critical for self-leadership compared to conscientiousness. The findings of the study suggest several avenues for the engendering of self-leaders at the workplace.

Introduction

Cost-effectiveness is one of the strategic tools for an organization's survival. A good amount of money is required for developing and retaining leaders of an organization. To perform in a Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous work environment (VUCA), organizations are developing their human resource as an agile workforce who can work independently and take crucial decisions like leadership development (Mack et al., 2015). Creating more self-leaders is a better cost-effective investment. Self-leaders are the ones who are good at self-analysis and can manage and lead themselves across all challenging situations. The conceptualization of self-leadership has its foundation in the self management studies (for instance, see Manz and Sims, 1980), which is based on the Theory of Self-Control of Cautela (1969) and has borrowed the notion of substitute leadership (Kerr and Jermier, 1978). It is defined as a process of self-influence which gives direction and self-induced motivation (Manz and Neck, 2004). Several factors contribute to the exploration of self-leadership that has gained momentum. One of the reasons is the dilution of international boundaries in terms of businesses that need employees who can work in diverse cultures. Concerning workforce diversity, self-leadership becomes an easy way to manage and gain advantage from diversity.

Self-leaders are found to be highly motivated performers (Manz and Sims, 1980). Selfleadership strategies allow one to gauge its performance and remain persistent with work goals as they create natural intrinsic rewards for their accomplishments (Manz and Neck, 2004). Looking at the increasing need and importance of self-leaders in the organizations, the present study proposes to identify the factors which can develop and enhance selfleadership among employees (Ross, 2014). Individual-level personal psychological resources, i.e., self-efficacy and personality traits, i.e., conscientiousness, are the two variables that are expected to predict self-leadership. Self-efficacy as a personal resource allows one to have faith and confidence in oneself, making one more responsible, selfmanaged, and self-motivated (Prussia et al., 1998). Similarly, high conscientious individuals are more accountable, dedicated, and committed to their roles (Stewart et al., 1996). Based on psychological resource and personality trait theories, the authors of this paper expect self-efficacy and conscientiousness to be helpful in promoting and predicting self-leadership among employees.

Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
The Variable - Conscientiousness
According to the Big Five Trait Theory, personality traits are classified into five major traits (Ashton et al., 2004), viz., extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience and conscientiousness. Barrick and Mount (1993) suggested that out of the five big personality traits, conscientiousness garners the most attention as conscientiousness pertains to being trustworthy, goal-oriented and well-organized. Hence, conscientiousness has a close fit with the self-leadership. In a leadership development training, Stewart et al. (1996) found that individuals who are highly conscientiousness are more self-directed and regulated in their approach at the workplace. Further, conscientiousness as a personality trait can also be treated as a metaskill, which suggests that those who possess such metaskill are capable of managing themselves and are accountable to their work (Williams, 1997).

The Variable - Self-Efficacy
Bandura (1986) in the Social Cognitive Theory stated that self-efficacy is the individuals' self-belief in their own ability about successfully performing a task. Self-efficacy allows one to analyze "what challenges to take on, how much effort to put into the undertaking, (and) how long to persevere in the face of adversity" (Bandura, 1989, p. 29). Shaheen and Krishnankutty (2018) also confirmed that a higher self-efficacy level makes individuals more confident and motivated to extend their best efforts. It is because they perceive that they have high capability to succeed even in challenging tasks.

The Variable - Self-Leadership
Self-leadership is the ability to influence oneself. Self-control and self-management are part of self-leadership. In the absence of external control mechanisms, the self-leader is expected to manage and regulate his/her actions. According to the literature on the subject, self-leaders are skilled at understanding themselves and managing and controlling their thoughts, activities, behavior, etc. Self-leadership is not a substitute for leadership, rather it complements leadership in organizations as the term "substitute for leadership" suggests.

The three strategies of self-leadership as discussed in the literature are-Constructive Thinking Pattern (CTP), Natural Reward Strategy (NRS) and Behavior-Focused Strategies (BFS) (Prussia et al., 1998; Manz and Sims, 2001; and Manz and Neck, 2004). BFS increases awareness about oneself which in turn allows one to make behavioral management easier (Manz and Neck, 2004). Some of the characteristics of BFS are selfobservation, self-goal setting, self-cueing, self-rewarding and self-punishment. NRS creates a situation where one is self-driven by the work or activity and found the work itself inherently delightful and enjoyable (Manz and Sims, 2001). CTP strategies create a constructive pattern of thoughts and certain habitual modes of thinking which allows one to perform effectively (Neck and Manz, 1992). Some of the examples of constructive patterns of thoughts are identifying and replacing beliefs which creates problems, certain types of mental imagery, and positive and motivating self talks.

To date, several factors as antecedents and consequences of self-leadership have been examined (for instance, the studies of Neck and Milliman, 1994; Roberts and Foti, 1998; Godwin et al., 1999; and Neck et al., 2003). In one of the issues of Administrative Science Quarterly Journal published in the year 1987, one of the first studies on self-leadership was empirically tested in an organizational setting. The paper explores the role of external leaders of self-managing work teams. According to this study, the most effective leaders in a self-managing team are those who display behaviors that use self-leadership tactics, for instance, self-goal setting, self-regulation and self-rewards (Manz and Sims, 1987).

Subsequent to it, several scholars started exploring self-leadership in different context (Neck and Houghton, 2006). For instance, influence of workplace spirituality (Neck and Milliman, 1994); appraisals (Neck et al., 1995); quality management (Neck and Manz, 1996); self-managed teams (Neck et al., 1996); diversity management (Neck et al., 1997); goal setting and performance (Neck et al., 2003); succession planning (Hardy, 2004); and work ethics (VanSandt and Neck, 2003) were explored. Self-leadership is a concept that has also expanded to include training managers to improve their performance and become great self-leaders. A slew of self-help books have been written and they have got a lot of attention from practicing executives (Neck and Manz, 2010). Further, in the past studies, several dependent variables of self-leadership are empirically tested and validated (Neck and Houghton, 2006). For instance, the two most common outcomes explored were work commitment and independence (Manz and Sims, 2001).

These studies have examined self-leadership because of its unique characteristics. Individuals who lead themselves show more outstanding dedication to their work, tasks, goals, teams, or organizations, compared to those who do not (Manz and Sims, 2001). Also, individuals who practice self-leadership feel more in control and have autonomy, leading to a degree of increased independence in work behavior and decision-making (Neck and Houghton, 2006). Also, an association between self-leadership, and creativity and innovation has been explored by Manz and Sims (2001).

But there are only limited studies that have examined the influence of self-efficacy as a psychological resource and conscientiousness as a personality trait on selfleadership. Self-efficacy is suggested as a key resource by Hobfoll (2002) which aids in the development of one's personal self and enhances the inner strength and confidence. In fact, it generates an agentic motivation among individuals and boosts one's self-belief towards any challenging task (Bandura, 1982). Self-leadership is a higher order variable of three self-management and regulated strategies. These strategies will be flowing in from the personal psychological resource (over here self-efficacy). Similarly, out of the five personalities of Big five theory, conscientious is considered as one of the cognitive level traits which may have spiral effect on the cognition and consciousness of individuals (Neck and Houghton, 2006). Such spiral effect makes one more accountable and responsible towards work. The constructive thought patterns of self-leadership are somewhere dependent on the cognition of individuals, and hence we may expect that conscientiousness may bring positive influence on self-leadership (Figure 1).

Conscientiousness and Self-Leadership
In a study done by Stewart et al. (1996), personality and self-leadership interventions were examined. The study threw light on the fact that conscientiousness had an impact of self-leadership interventions and affected trainees' self-directed behavior. Conscientiousness can influence self-leadership in two ways-the first way is through affecting direct processes of self-regulation and self-management process, and another is through a direct association with metaskills level (Williams, 1997). The direct association with metaskills implies that employees with certain specific personality traits (such as conscientiousness) have had already developed the metaskills taught in the training of self-leadership (Williams, 1997). Thus, drawing from these references, the first hypothesis is proposed as follows:

H₁: Conscientiousness has a positive relationship with self-leadership.

Self-Efficacy and Self-Leadership
Self-efficacy being a psychological resource generates an agentic influence on the cognitive process of individuals (Prussia et al., 1998; and Hobfoll, 2002). It triggers selfbelief in one's ability and leads to a confidence level where one performs and excels (Redmond et al., 1993). Past studies have noticed that empowerment, a process where one acts according to one's own will, has significant association with self-perception and confidence (Conger and Kanungo, 1988). Thus, based on the theoretical foundation of self-efficacy, that is Social cognitive theory, the second hypothesis is proposed as:

H₂: Self-efficacy has a positive association with self-leadership. Data and Methodology
A survey questionnaire (see Appendix) was developed using the standardized scales for the variables. The survey questionnaire was sent to 150 people working in different organizations (all across India) through social media platforms such as Facebook. Linkedin, etc. 103 questionnaires were received with a response rate of 68.67%. The sample had 73.8% males and 26.2% females. The mean age was 34.9 years (ranging from 22 years to 59 years), and the average years of experience was 11.05 years (ranging from 4 months to 33 years).

Measures
Standardized and validated scales were used to measure the variables under investigation. The scale items of self-leadership and conscientiousness were anchored on a 5-point Likert type scale, where 1 being 'totally disagree' and 5 being 'totally agree'. The scale items of self-efficacy were anchored on 4-point Likert type scale, where 4 means 'exactly true' and 1 being the lowest point meaning 'not at all true'.

An abbreviated version of self-leadership questionnaire of Houghton et al. (2012) was used to measure self-leadership. It has 9 items. For conscientiousness, it was measured by using John and Srivastava's (1999) scale. It has 4 items. Self-efficacy was examined by the generalized self-efficacy scale of Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1995). It has 4 items.

Results
The data was analyzed using correlation and regression method in SPSS. Firstly, descriptive analysis was done to check mean and standard deviation. The correlation matrix helped understand the strength of relationships of different constructs involved in the study. Regression analysis was done to study the effect of independent variables on dependent variables. Descriptive data (Table 1) shows the various constructs of mean and standard deviation. The average age of the sample was 34.9 years, average experience being 11.05 years. On conscientiousness, the sample average was 3.96. For self-leadership, the sample had an average of 4.04. The self-efficacy average of the sample was found to be 3.93. As the study used well-established scales, the authors have considered averages of the constructs for the study, instead of doing factor analysis. Based on the assumption that all scales are well used and validated, the study went ahead with the analysis with the average values of all the constructs.

Correlation analysis helps to identify the association or co-relationship between two variables. Correlation values are tabulated in Table 2. All the constructs were found to be well correlated. Conscientiousness and self-leadership have a correlation of 0.286. Selfefficacy and self-leadership have a correlation of 0.341. Also, other correlation values, as can be seen in Table 2, are significant. All these values being significant, provided a basis for further analysis of the constructs.

The study used regression analysis to justify the hypotheses. The findings obtained from the multiple regression analysis are shown in Table 3. Before performing multiple regression, the study performed the Durbin-Watson statistics to identify whether there is any autocorrelation between independent variables or not. The Durbin-Watson value of this study is 1.875, indicating no autocorrelation between self-efficacy and conscientiousness. VIF value is 1.143, which indicates that multicollinearity is not present among the variables. Residual plots of the model indicates that the variance of the residuals is constant. The P-P plot of this model suggests that the values of the residuals are normally distributed. For regression analysis, in the first step, the study inserted conscientiousness as an independent variable and self-leadership as a dependent variable. The results indicate a significant impact of conscientiousness on self-leadership (adj. R2 = 0.073, SE = 0.36, F-value = 9.03), implying that conscientiousness has a significant influence on self-leadership, thus supporting H1. In the second case, selfefficacy was taken as an independent variable and self-leadership as a dependent variable. Deriving from the results (adj. R2 = 0.108, SE = 0.36, F-value = 13.32), it shows that self-efficacy has a significant influence on self-leadership, thus the results support H₂.

Conclusion
The purpose of creating self-leaders is to create a conducive situation where they can achieve organizational goals, depending on the environment and specific circumstances, take on new challenges and plan for themselves, and assess and achieve. A few insights into the study of self-leadership combined with the learnings from past literature with inputs are suggested by this study. The study verifies the effect of the personality construct conscientiousness on self-leadership. Organizations can confidently anticipate that high conscientious individuals can be better groomed as self-leaders based on empirical evidence. Conscientiousness is a personality trait that describes someone as meticulous, cautious, or alert. It also connotes a desire to complete a task successfully. Past studies have confirmed that instead of being disorganized, conscientious individuals are more efficient and organized (Ashton et al., 2004). They act responsibly, are more disciplined and strive for success. The findings of the study validate these prepositions. The study found a positive impact of conscientiousness on self-leadership. The qualities of being a conscientious individual are found closely related to self-leadership behavior and thus suggest a complementary way of developing self-leaders in the organization (Barrick and Mount, 1993; Stewart et al., 1996; and Williams, 1997).

With respect to the association between self-efficacy and self-leadership, the study found that self-efficacy does predict self-leadership. The findings validate previous studies' results. When the employees' self-efficacy is strong, they feel confident in their ability to take on specific duties and do them successfully (Shaheen and Krishnankutty, 2018). These characteristics are linked, at the theoretical level, to the concept of self-leadership as well (Hobfoll, 2002). But in the past studies, association between self-efficacy and self-leadership was examined in a different way compared to the present study. For instance, Prussia et al. (1998) found self-leadership predicting self-efficacy, but as per psychological resource theory of personal key resources, self-efficacy is a personal key psychological resource (Hobfoll, 2002). Hence, the study found that self-efficacy as a key personal prediction allows one to self-regulate and motivate oneself for various work activities. The purpose of creating self-leaders is for people to assist in achieving organizational goals, and depending on the environment and specific circumstances, take on new challenges and plan for themselves, and assess and achieve.

Future Scope, Limitations, and Implications: In this study, the authors considered only one factor of the Big-five factors. So, future researchers can consider other factors of the Big-five factors to enhance the quality of the study. The study also considered only two antecedents of self-leadership. So, there is scope to view a model where a more significant number of antecedents and consequences of self-leadership will be present.

If we consider the limitation of the study, the first limitation of the study is the sample size. The second limitation is that the authors did not consider any control variable like age, gender, or work experience. The third limitation is that the study did not consider the organization size in this model.

The study's outcome will help the recruitment team identify people who have selfleadership attributes, and will help identify person-job matching in an organization.

References

1. Ashton M C, Lee K, Perugini M, Szarota P, de Vries R E, Di Blas L, Boies K and De Raad B (2004), "A Six-Factor Structure of Personality-Descriptive Adjectives: Solutions from Psycholexical Studies in Seven Languages", J Pers Soc Psychol. Vol. 86, No. 2, pp. 356-366.
2. Bandura A (1982), "Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency", American Psychologist, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp.122-147.
3. Bandura A (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
4. Bandura A (1989), "Human Agency in Social Cognitive Theory", American Psychologist, Vol. 44, No. 9, p. 1175.
5. Barrick M R and Mount M K (1993), "Autonomy as a Moderator of the Relationships Between the Big Five Personality Dimensions and Job Performance", Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, No. 1, p. 111.
6. Cautela J R (1969), "Behavior Therapy and Self-Control: Techniques and Applications", in C M Franks (Ed.), Behavioral Therapy: Appraisal and Status, pp. 323-40, McGraw-Hill, New York.
7. Conger J and Kanungo R (1988), "The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory and Practice", The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 13, pp. 639-652.
8. Godwin J L, Neck C P and Houghton J D (1999), "The Impact of Thought Self- Leadership on Individual Goal Performance: A Cognitive Perspective", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 153-169.
9. Hardy K (2004), "Self-Leadership as a Tool in Management Succession Planning", Public Manager, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 41-44.
10. Hobfoll S E (2002), "Social and Psychological Resources and Adaptation", Review of General Psychology, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 307-324.
11. Houghton J D, Dawley D and DiLiello T C (2012), "The Abbreviated Self-Leadership Questionnaire (ASLQ): A More Concise Measure of Self-Leadership", International Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 216-232.
12. John O P and Srivastava S (1999), "The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement and Theoretical Perspectives", in L A Pervin and O P John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, Vol. 2, pp. 102-138, Guilford Press, New York.
13. Kerr S and Jermier J M (1978), "Substitutes for Leadership: Their Meaning and Measurement", Organization Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 375-403.
14. Mack O, Khare A, Kramer A and Burgartz T (Eds.) (2015), Managing in a VUCA World, Springer.
15. Manz C C and Neck C P (2004), Mastering Self-Leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence, 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
16. Manz C C and Sims H P Jr. (1980), "Self-Management as a Substitute for Leadership: A Social Learning Perspective", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 361-367.
17. Manz C C and Sims H P Jr. (1987), "Leading Workers to Lead Themselves: The External Leadership of Self-Managing Work Teams", Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 106-128.
18. Manz C C and Sims H P Jr. (2001), The New Super Leadership: Leading Others to Lead Themselves, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco.
19. Neck C P and Houghton J D (2006), "Two Decades of Self-Leadership Theory and Research: Past Developments, Present Trends and Future Possibilities", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 270-295.
20. Neck C P and Manz C C (1992), "Thought Self-Leadership: The Impact of Self-talk and Mental Imagery on Performance", Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 681-699.
21. Neck C P and Manz C C (1996), "Thought Self-Leadership: The Impact of Mental Strategies Training on Employee Cognition Behavior, and Affect", Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 445-467.
22. Neck C P and Manz C C (2010), Mastering Self-Leadership: Empowering Yourself for Personal Excellence, Pearson.
23. Neck C P and Milliman J F (1994), "Thought Self-Leadership: Finding Spiritual Fulfillment in Organizational Life", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 9-16.
24. Neck C P, Stewart G and Manz C C (1995), "Thought Self-Leadership as a Framework for Enhancing the Performance of Performance Appraisers", Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 278-302.
25. Neck C P, Stewart G L and Manz C C (1996), "Self-Leaders within Self-Leading Teams: Toward an Optimal Equilibrium", in M Beyerlein (Ed.), Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 43-65, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
26. Neck C P, Smith W and Godwin J (1997), "Thought Self-Leadership: A Self-Regulatory Approach to Diversity Management", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 190-203.
27. Neck C P, Nouri H, Houghton J D and Godwin J L (2003), "How Self-Leadership Affects the Goal Setting Process", Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 691-707.
28. Prussia G E, Anderson J S and Manz C C (1998), "Self-Leadership and Performance Outcomes: The Mediating Influence of Self-Efficacy", Journal of OrganizationalBehavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 523-538.
29. Redmond M R, Mumford M D and Teach R (1993), "Putting Creativity to Work: Effects of Leader Behavior on Subordinate Creativity", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 120-151.
30. Roberts H E and Foti R J (1998), "Evaluating the Interaction Between Self-Leadership and Work Structure in Predicting Job Satisfaction", Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 257-267.
31. Ross S (2014), "A Conceptual Model for Understanding the Process of Self- Leadership Development and Action-Steps to Promote Personal Leadership Development", Journal of Management Development, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 299-323.
32. Schwarzer R and Jerusalem M (1995), "Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale" in J Weionman, S Wright and M Johston (Eds.) Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio, Causal and Control Beliefs, pp. 35-37, NFER-NELSON, Windsor, UK.
33. Shaheen M and Krishnankutty R (2018), "The Mediation of Psychological Capital in the Relationship of Perceived Organizational Support, Engagement and Extra-Role Performance", International Journal of Knowledge Management (IJKM), Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 30-45.
34. Stewart G L, Carson K P and Cardy R L (1996), "The Joint Effects of Conscientiousness and Self-Leadership Training on Self-Directed Behavior in a Service Setting", Personnel Psychology, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 143-164.
35. VanSandt C V and Neck C P (2003), "Bridging Ethics and Self-Leadership: Overcoming Ethical Discrepancies Between Employee and Organizational Standards", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 363-387.
36. Williams S (1997), "Personality and Self-Leadership", Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 139-155.