Drivers or Drifters? The “Who” and “Why” of Leader Role Occupancy—A Mixed-Method Study

Abstract

This study investigated the reasons that leaders have given for their leader role occupancy. By using a mixed-method approach and large leader data, we aimed to provide a more nuanced picture of how leader positions are occupied in real life. We examined how individual leadership motivation may associate with other reasons for leader role occupancy. In addition, we aimed to integrate the different reasons behind leader role occupancy into the framework of sustainable leader careers and its two indicators: leader’s health (occupational well-being) and performance (measured indirectly as followers’ occupational well-being). The survey data consisted of 1,031 leaders from various sectors of working life. Qualitative analysis revealed that leaders mention various factors behind their leader role occupancy, resulting 26 themes. After inductive investigation of the data, theory-driven analysis focused on the sustainable career components (person, context, time) and agency vs. non-agency. Qualitative data was quantitized based on the theory-driven categories for statistical analysis. Based on the these analysis, we found out that only Affective-Identity MTL predicted all of the studied reasons behind leader role occupancy, whereas the other motivation types (Non-calculative MTL and Social-Normative MTL) did not. All of the reasons for leader role occupancy except non-agentic ones were related to both leaders’ own and their followers’ occupational well-being. Leaders with more person-related and agentic reasons for leader role occupancy experienced better occupational well-being. Person- and context-related and agentic reasons behind leader role occupancy associated also with followers’ occupational well-being, but the associations differed from those of leaders’ well-being: person-related and agentic reasons associated with followers’ exhaustion, but this association was not found among leaders. Our study provided important information for practitioners in the field of human resources and development, as it has shown that if the reasons for leader role occupancy mainly reflect circumstances or other non-person-related reasons, the experienced occupational well-being and person-career fit may remain weak. It is necessary to try to support the leadership motivation for those leaders, or to shape the job description in such a way that it can also offer the experiences of meaningfulness from aspects other than self-realization through a managerial role.

Do intensified job demands predict burnout? How motivation to lead and leadership status may have a moderating effect

“…Although AI-MTL marginally strengthened the association between intensified career-related demands and exhaustion, it still seems that AI-MTL (i.e., intrinsic motivation toward leadership) functions, to some extent, as a personal resource for leaders to fight exhaustion. This supports previous findings about AI-MTL as a resource for leaders ( Auvinen et al, 2020 , 2021 ). Leaders with high AI-MTL are more likely to experience leadership self-efficacy ( Chan and Drasgow, 2001 ; Badura et al, 2020 ) which may enhance the experience of controlling the overall picture.…”

“…This study has contributed to the literature on the motivation to lead, building on the previous research of AI-MTL in the context of sustainable careers and resources ( Auvinen et al, 2020 , 2021 ). We found that intensified learning demands at work may be associated with feelings of inadequacy 2 years later.…”

“…Compared to other types of MTL, AI-MTL has been linked to higher agentic orientation ( Badura et al, 2020 ; Auvinen et al, 2021 ) –implying the tendency to be, for example, assertive, confident, ambitious, and independent ( Eagly and Karau, 2002 ). One could suggest that people with these kinds of tendencies are also more daring to be in charge and pursue career-related responsibilities.…”

“…As formal leadership is typically awarded to highly educated professional for good work, it is possible that they occupy these positions for external motives ( Chan and Drasgow, 2001 ); for instance, they might take the role out of a sense of duty, or for the economic advantages it offers (e.g., Auvinen et al, 2021 ). If a leadership position is accepted when the motivational resources to lead are low or non-existent, occupational well-being and career sustainability may suffer, due to a poor person-career fit and a sense of meaninglessness ( Auvinen et al, 2020 ; De Vos et al, 2020 ).…”

“…People in the modern workplace are adapting to change and proactively shaping their career as agents ( De Vos et al, 2020 ). For example, not all professionals “drive” toward leader positions –some “drift” toward them ( Auvinen et al, 2021 ). Career choices that fit one’s own personal values are more likely to provide a sustainable career ( De Vos et al, 2020 ).…”