**5. Conclusion**

**Variables** **Control variables**

Industry 12 Industry 23 Employee4

Gender4 Marital status4

Educational background4

Individualism

collectivism Transformational leadership

Ethical leadership

**Independent variable**

Authentic leadership

**Moderating variable**

Relational cohesion

**Interaction**

Authentic leadership × relational cohesion

**R**2 **F-value** 1† p < 0.10, \* p < 0.05, \*\* p <

2Industry 1 =

3Industry 2 =

**Table 3.**

Result of hierarchical regression analysis (n

 = 950)1

.

manufacturer; others

public enterprise; others

4General employee, male, married, and college graduate

 =

0 dummy variables.

 =

1; others =

0 dummy variables.

 =

0 dummy variables.

0.01, and \*\*\* p <

0.001 (two-tailed).

0.210 24.428\*\*\*

21.311\*\*\*

25.970\*\*\*

24.239\*\*\*

29.074\*\*\*

26.755\*\*\*

30.432\*\*\*

29.900\*\*\*

0.211

0.262

0.264

0.248

0.251

0.294

0.907

**Hedonic well-being**

**Model 1**

−0.31†

0.04 −0.09

0.00 0.13 0.25\*

0.02 0.30\*\*\* 0.28\*\*\*

−0.01

0.00 −0.03

−0.07 0.25\*\*\*

0.03 0.04†

−0.30\*

0.10†

0.06 0.22\*\*\*

−0.29\*

0.10\*\*\*

−0.44\*\*\*

0.00

0.01

−0.01

−0.07

−0.07

−0.05

0.28\*\*\*

0.23\*\*\*

0.23\*\*\*

0.29\*\*\*

0.28\*\*\*

0.23\*\*\*

0.24\*\*\*

0.30\*\*\*

0.22\*\*\*

0.22\*\*\*

0.27\*\*\*

0.27\*\*\*

0.21\*\*\*

0.20\*\*\*

0.02

0.01

0.02

0.11\*\*\*

0.12\*\*\*

0.11\*\*\*

0.12\*\*\*

0.25\*

0.22\*

0.23\*

0.15

0.15

0.13

0.15†

0.13

0.13

0.13

0.00

0.01

0.00

0.00

0.00

−0.00

−0.00

0.08

0.08

0.08

0.07

−0.09

−0.09

−0.10

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.03

0.03

0.11

0.10

0.13†

0.14†

0.20\*

0.19\*

−0.31\*

−0.26\*

−0.24\*

−0.29\*\*

−0.28\*\*

−0.24\*

−0.21\*

**Model 2**

**Model 3**

**Model 4**

**Model 1**

**Model 2**

**Model 3**

**Model 4**

204 Leadership

**Eudaimonic well-being**

#### **5.1. Discussion and conclusions**

This study introduced the need for authentic leadership, which still has a short history and lacks empirical research, and identified the possibility of authentic leadership in Korean organizations through an empirical study. It verified the effects of authentic leadership, as an alternative to various leadership styles, on employees' well-being. It also considered the moderating effect of relational cohesion among team members, with the following theoretical implication.

First, this study determined the relationship between leadership and well-being by adopting well-being as a soft performance, beyond tangibly displayed employee behaviors and organizational performance [12], as an outcome variable. As a result, authentic leaders who are honest with themselves and express consistent behaviors through self-regulation have positive effects on employees' well-being. Authentic leaders themselves display leadership based on clear missions and values, through which they help employees to develop their utmost potential and strive for self-realization. The self-sacrifices of authentic leaders and their aspects as social leaders lead employees to identify themselves with a given mission, thereby helping them to seek true happiness [5]. In other words, authentic leaders have positive effects on psychological well-being that help employees to find out exactly who they are and set clearer goals and directions in life.

Second, this study determined the moderating effect of relational cohesion in the effects of team leaders' authentic leadership on employees' well-being. In particular, although there are no direct effects of authentic leadership on employees' hedonic well-being, whereby team members perceive that they are united, team-oriented, and highly cohesive, team leaders' authentic leadership may contribute to increasing the current satisfaction of employees. This finding indicates that the relationship among team members who perform tasks together is very important in addition to a team leader's authentic leadership in order for employees to feel hedonic well-being.

Third, this study has significance in that it determined the pure effects of authentic leadership after controlling for the effects of transformational leadership and ethical leadership, both of which are known to have positive effects on performance in prior leadership studies. This implies that the true pursuit of happiness for employees can be boosted by authentic leaders.

First, the effects of authentic leadership that can be the fundamental root of various leadership styles were verified; however, the components and measurement tools used in this study were directly adopted from those developed in the USA. Thus, it is necessary to develop authentic leadership questionnaires that can be applied to the unique circumstances of Korea, and that reflect cultural differences, by conducting in-depth interviews with members of Korean organizations and undertaking case studies of various industries and organizations. It is also necessary to repeat the validity testing of various constructs that are known to be the

The Effects of Authentic Leadership on Employees' Well-Being and the Role of Relational Cohesion

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76427

207

Second, it is necessary to accept the recently increasing criticism of authentic leadership, such as the issue that it is theory-oriented and lacks content in authenticity measurement. Moreover, authentic leadership is unclear in relation to, and in terms of differentiation from, existing leadership theories. Thus, studies must be conducted to help resolve such limitations,

Third, the potential of authentic leadership can be expanded by testing whether authentic leaders can increase people's well-being in other social sectors, such as public, military, political, and religious groups, based on the effects of authentic leadership in this study. This testing is necessary because the lack of authenticity may not be an issue limited only to firms. The find-

Finally, the unethical and greedy behaviors of senior management that have been recently encountered may be due to the environment because we cannot distinguish authentic leaders from pseudo leaders, rather than because of the lack of leadership in Korea. Thus, there is a specific emphasis needed on authenticity through which leaders obtain character improvements by means of selfawareness and self-regulation. Such an emphasis can also help leaders to turn their assumptions about visions, missions, and identities into action, which should be more than the style, skills, and oratory displayed when they demonstrate their influence over subordinates. Accordingly, beyond the direct effects of authentic leadership on employees' well-being, the important task is to find

new process factors by verifying various processes and mechanisms to connect the two.

[1] Raelin J. The myth of charismatic leaders. Training and Development. 2003;**57**:46-54

Handbook of Organizational Studies. London: Sage; 1996. pp. 276-292

[2] Bryman A. Leadership in organizations. In: Clegg SR, Hardy C, Nord WR, editors.

ings may then contribute to the generalization of the study's results.

Address all correspondence to: kimmoonjoo@ewha.ac.kr

Ewha School of Business, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea

key components of authentic leadership.

differences, and criticisms [48, 49].

**Author details**

Moonjoo Kim

**References**

Fourth, individualism and collectivism, which were added to control for individual dispositions, show positive effects on employees' well-being. It is true that individualism and collectivism are regarded as two conflicting concepts at opposite ends of the spectrum; however, this finding implies that the arguments claiming to regard these concepts on two different axes [46] can also be persuasive. In the sense that both individualism and collectivism can be high, it seems that individualism, which is shown in a situation where autonomy and independence are emphasized, and collectivism, regarding collective norms and the achievement of harmony, both increase psychological well-being.

Based on the results, managers in organizations must think once again about leadership training that has focused on behavioral approaches for the purpose of short-term performance [47]. In this regard, they must reconsider the issue of authenticity instead. In other words, because authentic leadership deals with the fundamental issues of other leadership styles, it seems important to turn leadership training that has focused on leadership skills and short-term performance into training programs that nurture individual authenticity and constantly develop the qualities that leaders need through self-awareness. A leader's authenticity not only boosts employees' understanding of the meaning of life; it also serves as a crucial factor that generates positive emotions in this mentally vulnerable era. In addition, it is important to create an environment where team members are not divided but are united and team-oriented when performing their tasks, especially in the real world where a team's performance indicates an organization's performance. This relational cohesion can increase hedonic well-being in a way that cannot be achieved solely by authentic leadership.

#### **5.2. Limitations and future research**

This study has the following limitations in terms of empirical research.

First, this study conducted a survey of employees working in manufacturing businesses, financial firms, and public enterprises that are typical of Korea; however, additional research must be conducted on a greater number of employees from more diverse industries in order to generalize the results.

Second, this study considered the time interval required for a display of leadership by conducting a survey on relational cohesion and well-being variables from the same employees 2 weeks after measuring authentic leadership. The aim was to reduce common method bias, which is recently emerging as a significant methodological issue. However, this approach was limited because the analysis was conducted only on the employees' responses. It seems necessary to conduct a multilevel analysis by also asking the team leaders about the outcome variables or moderating variables when analyzing the team leaders' leadership effects.

Finally, the following suggestions can be made in order to overcome the foregoing limitations and determine the possibility of authentic leadership in Korean organizations.

First, the effects of authentic leadership that can be the fundamental root of various leadership styles were verified; however, the components and measurement tools used in this study were directly adopted from those developed in the USA. Thus, it is necessary to develop authentic leadership questionnaires that can be applied to the unique circumstances of Korea, and that reflect cultural differences, by conducting in-depth interviews with members of Korean organizations and undertaking case studies of various industries and organizations. It is also necessary to repeat the validity testing of various constructs that are known to be the key components of authentic leadership.

Second, it is necessary to accept the recently increasing criticism of authentic leadership, such as the issue that it is theory-oriented and lacks content in authenticity measurement. Moreover, authentic leadership is unclear in relation to, and in terms of differentiation from, existing leadership theories. Thus, studies must be conducted to help resolve such limitations, differences, and criticisms [48, 49].

Third, the potential of authentic leadership can be expanded by testing whether authentic leaders can increase people's well-being in other social sectors, such as public, military, political, and religious groups, based on the effects of authentic leadership in this study. This testing is necessary because the lack of authenticity may not be an issue limited only to firms. The findings may then contribute to the generalization of the study's results.

Finally, the unethical and greedy behaviors of senior management that have been recently encountered may be due to the environment because we cannot distinguish authentic leaders from pseudo leaders, rather than because of the lack of leadership in Korea. Thus, there is a specific emphasis needed on authenticity through which leaders obtain character improvements by means of selfawareness and self-regulation. Such an emphasis can also help leaders to turn their assumptions about visions, missions, and identities into action, which should be more than the style, skills, and oratory displayed when they demonstrate their influence over subordinates. Accordingly, beyond the direct effects of authentic leadership on employees' well-being, the important task is to find new process factors by verifying various processes and mechanisms to connect the two.
