Humor in Workplace Leadership: A Systematic Search Scoping Review

Abstract

Humor studies are increasingly prevalent in workplace and leadership domains, it has shown significant development in the last 40 years. The multifaceted nature of humor means varied definitions and diverse measurement approaches have been approved. As a result, research methodologies and findings are not easily clarified, and have not been synthesized. The aim of this scoping review was to review the existing body of literature relevant to humor in workplace leadership to identify key research areas, methodologies used, guiding theoretical frameworks, and gaps that are persisting over the last 40 years. Using qualitative review methods, four key themes in the research emerged relating to: (1) humor styles and outcomes; (2) humor as communication and discursive resource; (3) variables in the humor and leadership relationship; and (4) cultural context. This review demonstrates significant research progress on the topic of humor in workplace leadership. Research progress and gaps are discussed based on five key questions. Future research directions are outlined and discussed.

As above, so below? The influence of leader humor on bootleg innovation: The mechanism of psychological empowerment and affective trust in leaders

“…Moreover, impact refers to the degree to which an individual can influence organizational strategy, organizational management, or organizational performance at work. Many researches have focused on the key mediating role that psychological empowerment plays a role between leadership style and employee attitudes, emotions, and behaviors (Chen et al, 2019;Jing and Zhou, 2019;Rosenberg et al, 2021). Existing research has confirmed that leader humor is a successful empowerment management practice that effectively stimulates employees' perceptions of empowerment, influencing their work attitudes and behaviors (Gkorezis et al, 2011;Ali et al, 2021).…”

“…Although no scholars have directly studied the moderating role of leadership emotional trust in leader humor and employee behavior. But there are some studies using trust in leader as a moderator of leaders' humor and employees' behaviors (Rosenberg et al, 2021;Masih et al, 2022). Kim et al (2016) believed that subordinates' trust in their direct superiors is a key situation for employees' behavioral responses after cognitive evaluation of leader humor, particularly the dimension of leadership emotional trust.…”

“…Whether this sense transforms into bootlegging depends on the employees' risk assessment behind deviant innovation. Compared with employees with low emotional trust, those with high leadership emotional trust are more likely to deal with the empowerment signal of leader humor (Shockley-Zalabak et al, 2000;Gkorezis and Bellou, 2016;Rosenberg et al, 2021). They are more likely to believe that their leaders are on their side.…”

“…As an effective tool of management practice (Malone, 1980;Mao et al, 2017), leader humor plays an important role in leadership effectiveness (Kong et al, 2019). Leader humor significantly predicts outcomes such as employee performance (Jing and Zhou, 2019;Wu et al, 2020), organizational citizenship behavior (Cooper et al, 2018;Rosenberg et al, 2021), and work engagement (Yam et al, 2018;Peng et al, 2019). Thus, many successful leaders apply humor to practical social communication and business activities.…”

Humour and belonging

“…Humour and the sense of belonging at workplace has been a particularly rich area of research (e.g. Plester & Sayers 2007;Romero & Cruthirds 2007;Plester 2015), in terms of the relationship of managers and subordinates (Holmes 2000;Holmes & Stubbe 2003;Rosenberg et al 2021), facilitating group processes (Romero & Pescosolido 2008), and how humour can unmask power relations (Dwyer 1991). Wise (2016) studied the role and effect of humour in multi-ethnic blue-collar workplaces and argues that humour delineates boundaries of group membership, establishes insiders and outsiders, and offers a ritual solution to ambiguity and liminality, tension and social unease.…”