Hendijani, Rosa; Sohrabi, Babak
Article
The effect of humility on emotional and social
competencies: The mediating role of judgment
Cogent Business & Management
Provided in Cooperation with:
Taylor & Francis Group
Suggested Citation: Hendijani, Rosa; Sohrabi, Babak (2019) : The effect of humility on emotional
and social competencies: The mediating role of judgment, Cogent Business & Management, ISSN
2331-1975, Taylor & Francis, Abingdon, Vol. 6, pp. 1-16,
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
This Version is available at:
https://hdl.handle.net/10419/206207
Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen
Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.
Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle
Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich
machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.
Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen
(insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten,
gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort
genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.
Terms of use:
Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal
and scholarly purposes.
You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to
exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the
internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public.
If the documents have been made available under an Open Content
Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise
further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
MANAGEMENT | RESEARCH ARTICLE
The effect of humility on emotional and social
competencies: The mediating role of judgment
Rosa Hendijani
1
* and Babak Sohrabi
1
Abstract: Leadership competencies are important contributing factors of successful
performance among leaders. As theory suggests, humility can have a significant
effect on building emotional and social competencies. In this study, we examine the
effect of humility on competencies both directly and indirectly, through its effect on
judgment. We designed and conducted a self-reported survey to measure humility,
judgment, and emotional and social competencies among 165 management stu-
dents. The results of our study showed that humility had a significant positive effect
on emotional and social competencies, including self-awareness, self-management,
social awareness, and relationship management. In addition, judgment had a sig-
nificant mediating role on the relationship between humility and competencies.
These results provide support for the important role of humility on personal learning
and development as was previously discussed in the literature. Considering its
important role, strategies have been recommended in the discussion section to
improve humility both at personal and organizational levels.
Subjects: Personality; Developmental Psychology; Cognitive Development; Emotional
Development; Educational Psychology; Educational Research
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Dr. Rosa Hendijani is a professor in management
area. Her research focuses on behavioral opera-
tions management, judgment and decision
making, motivation, and performance. She has
done research and teaching for the past ten
years in several business schools around the
world. One of her key areas of research is to
examine and better understand the underlying
factors influencing performance of individuals in
the business world. Research in personal devel-
opment and performance highlights character
as an underlying factor that contributes to the
development of competencies. In this line, she
works on a series of studies that examine the
effect of character dimensions on the develop-
ment of emotional and social competencies. This
can help in finding more effective ways of
developing competencies that result in success-
ful performance. This study focuses on humility
as one of the key dimensions of character and
its role in the development of emotional and
social competencies.
PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
• Humility has long been considered as a virtue
with positive effect on personal development
and success among individuals.
• From a historical, monotheistic, or modern view,
humility is considered to play a significant role in
human excellence.
• In this study, we examine the role of humility on
building emotional and social competencies as
two important ingredients of successful perfor-
mance.
• Previous studies suggest that humility can have
a significant role in building emotional and social
competencies, by encouraging the individual to
view his/her past actions in a realistic way, free
from overconfident and overly optimistic judg-
ments.
• Our result suggest that humility has a significant
positive effect on the development of emotional
and social competencies. In addition, this effect
is through better judgment. In other words,
humility improves judgment, which in turn
improves emotional and social competencies.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
© 2019 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons
Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
Received: 11 April 2019
Accepted: 03 July 2019
First Published: 10 July 2019
*Corresponding author: Rosa Hendijani,
Faculty of Management, University of
Tehran, Jalal-e-Al-e-Ahmad Hwy &
Chamran Hwy، Al-e-Ahmad, Tehran,
Iran
E-mail: rosa.hen[email protected]
Reviewing editor:
Sandy Nunn, Foreign Affairs Council,
USA
Additional information is available at
the end of the article
Page 2 of 16
Keywords: humility; character; emotional competencies; social competencies; effective
leadership; personal development; overconfidence bias
1. Introduction
Leadership education has been one of the main goals of business schools’ program. Every year,
a lot of mon ey and effort i s spent on improving competencies amo ng university students in
business school programs (Boyatzis & Saatcioglu, 2008). Competencies are defined as a set of
knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) that can help in realizing one’s goals (Boyatzis &
Saatci oglu, 2008; Gandz, Crossan, Seijts, Sapp, & Vandenbo sch, 2010; Gupta & Srivast ava,
2019). It is relat ed to one’s ability to use knowledge a nd skills to achieve r equired outcomes
(Pop & Khampi rat, 2019;Trinder,2008). Identifying and thriving competencies have become
highly important in recent years (Gupta & Srivastava, 2019). With the emp hasis on compe-
tency-based human resource management, several studies have attempted to find the type of
competencies required for workers in differ ent job positions and industries in today’sdigital
wor ld (Periáñez-Cañadillas, Charterina, & Pando-García, 2019; Shaheen, Azam, Soma, & Kumar,
2019;Silva,Costa,&Kniess,2019).
In addition, humility has proved to have a significant effect on individuals’ effort for learning and
personal improvement. Without humility, individuals are unable to understand and learn from their
own mistakes and the mistakes of others and use that understanding to improve themselves
(Seijts, Gandz, Crossan, & Reno, 2015). Humility results in better self-awareness which is the first
step in continual learning and personal development (Crossan, Mazutis, Seijts, & Gandz, 2013a;
Crossan, Vera, & Nanjad, 2008).
Humility is one of the dimensions of character, a mix of virtues, values, and personality traits
that influence behavior (Seijts et al., 2015). It has received significant attention by researchers in
several areas of knowledge including philosophy, psychology, and more recently in management.
As previous studies have suggested, humility has numerous advantages. It encourages individuals
to act in an other-enhancing compared to a self-enhancing way. It helps the individual to look
beyond the praise and attention of others and be able to focus on learning and personal improve-
ment through realistic and unexaggerated views of the self and the situation.
Historically, humility has been considered a virtue (currently, referred to as character). In Greek
philosophy, for example, humility was considered a starting point of a virtuous life rather than a
goal in itself (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). Recent studies on character categorize humility as one
of the main dimensions of character (Crossan et al., 2017). In this study, we examine the effect of
humility on building emotional and social competencies. In addition, we examine the mediating
role of judgment, the central dimension of character (Seijts et al., 2015), on this relationship.
2. Literature review
In this section, the literature on humility, judgment, and competencies will be reviewed. Then,
hypotheses will be developed based on the relationship between study variables.
2.1. Humility
Humility has long been addressed from different perspectives. The humility literature shows different
perspectives, including historical, monotheistic, and modern ones (Morris, Brotheridge, & Urbanski,
2005). From a historical perspective, humility comes from the traditions of Greek Stoic, Buddhism, and
Taoism (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). In early Greek philosophy, humility was considered a virtue.
Virtue refers to one’s excellence in capacity, power, or behavior. Humility was not significantly men-
tioned in Greek philosophy due to the fact that well-educated individuals were rightly informed of their
own limitations as human beings and therefore, they were inclined to show high levels of humility.
Thus, the importance of humility was obvious in a way that it was considered as an underlying
requirement for pursuing a virtuous life.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 3 of 16
In Buddhist and Taoist traditions, humility has been considered to play a significant role in human
excellence. In contrast with Greek philosophers, these schools of thought do not view humility as a
result of human limitation, but instead they viewed it as a need to forgo one’s ego and connect with
the reality (Peterson & Seligman, 2004). In Buddhism, the cause of human suffering is craving (referred
to as Samudaya) which in turn, is the result of one’s misunderstanding or ignorance of the self (Mishra,
2004). In order to mitigate the suffering, individuals should follow an eighth fold path of enlight-
enment (referred to as Margo). Two main elements of this path are having the right view and intention.
Right view is to perceive things as they actually are and the right intention is to better understand
oneself and becoming free of selfishness. Humility can help in part, in improving the second element,
that is the better understanding of oneself (i.e., achieving right intention). Similarly, in Taoism tradition,
humility is referred to as losing of the self. In Taoist view, the effectiveness of the leader was largely
determined by the leader’s ability to forgo things to become in harmony with Tao (Morris et al., 2005).
Monotheistic traditions including, Judaism, Islam, and Christianity have their own perspective of
humility. In these traditions, humility is conceptualized as the submission to God (Murray, 2001).
Christianity has a paradoxical view to humility in the sense that humility is considered as the path to
glory (Spiegel, 2003). The central role of humility in Christianity and its texts has had a significant
impact on the development of Western culture (Comte-Sponville, 2002; Sandage & Watson Wiens,
2001; Spiegel, 2003). In one definition, humility is defined as “having or showing a low estimate of
one’s own importance” (Pearsall & Trumble, 1996, p. 689). In Christianity instructions, individuals are
advised not to consider themselves more highly than others and consider others higher than oneself
(Morris et al., 2005). According to these notions, in Christian tradition, humility results in loving others
and loving requires humbleness. Thus, humility has a central role in considering other people as
being worthy of love and compassion in Christianity (Comte-Sponville, 2002). In Islam, there are
similar views of humility. Muslims are recommended to consider God as “Kabir” and surrender to his
abilities and omnipotence. In fact, the word Islam has an Arabic origin “Aslama” which means to
accept or surrender and Muslim means a humble person who submits to God (Mir, 2010).
Studies in positive psychology and its related concepts of virtue and character have significantly
increased in recent years (Park & Peterson, 2009; Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005). These studies
have given rise to the development of a set of virtues and character strengths. Peterson and Seligman
(2004) identified a set of six virtues that are common to the cultural traditions of Buddhism and Taoism,
Greece, Christianity and Islam that were discussed above (McGrath, 2014). They decompose character
into six virtues of wisdom, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence. Each of these
dimensions consists of several character strengths. Humility and modesty are considered as one of the
character strengths that are related to the virtue of temperance (McGrath, 2014). Recent research on
character which is based on studies on organizational leadership extends Peterson and Seligman’s
framework and creates a new framework with eleven dimensions. These dimensions include courage,
humanity, justice, temperance, transcendence, accountability, drive, collaboration, humility, integrity,
and judgment (Crossan, Seijts, & Gandz, 2015;Seijtsetal.,2015). In Peterson and Seligman’s
classifica-
tion, humility was considered a sub-category of the virtue of temperance. The new classification
classifies humility as a separate dimension of character. This is due to the burgeoning research in the
leadership literature which highlights humility as one of the important virtues that influence leadership
(e.g., Ou et al., 2014; Owens, Johnson, & Mitchell, 2013). As Seijts et al. (2015) explains, humility is one of
the main qualities of an individual. It allows one to learn from his/her mistakes and from the mistakes of
others. It is related to one’s level of self-awareness, ability to reflect upon acts and behaviors, and
gratitude for the help and contribution of others in one’s personal success and achievement.
2.2. Judgment
Similar to humility, judgment is one of the main dimensions of character. In the eleven-dimension
framework of character, judgment plays a central role through which other dimensions of character
influence learning and personal improvement (Seijts et al., 2015). The central role of judgment is
consistent with the notion of “practical wisdom” delineated by Aristotle. This notion emphasizes that a
person with a good judgment can scrutinize a situation from different perspectives and make better
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 4 of 16
decisions, resulting in a more realistic understanding of self and the situation and creating better
performance outcomes (Crossan et al., 2017). In one empirical study, sound judgment proved to have
a significant effect on performance among executives (Sosik et al., 2012).
2.3. Humility and judgment
High levels of humility can have a significant positive effect on judgment and decision-making. Based on
the decision-making literature, personal biases can negatively affect judgment and decision-making.
Among different types of biases, overconfidence bias has been widely discussed as one of the most
dangerous ones (Moore & Healy, 2008). It is generally related to lack of humility. Humility results in a
realistic and proper estimation of one’s self, personal abilities, and knowledge. Overconfidence bias,
however, is an overestimation of one’s personal self, abilities, performance, or success probabilities
compared to others (Moore & Healy, 2008). Overconfidence bias has been proposed as one of the main
predictors of catastrophic phenomena such as wars, business failures, and stock market bubbles
(Camerer & Lovallo, 1999;Glaser&Weber,2007; Johnson, 2004; Moore & Healy, 2008). In fact, as one
of the scholars starkly states: “No problem in judgment and decision making is more prevalent and more
potentially catastrophic than overconfidence” (Plous, 1993,p.217).Thus,overconfidencebiascan
negatively impact judgment and decision-making. On the other hand, higher levels of humility can
control the level of personal confidence and prevent from falling into the trap of overconfidence bias
which results in hubris and arrogance (Vera & Rodriguez-Lopez, 2004). Therefore, it can be predicted that
humility can have a positive effect on judgment and decision-making.
2.4. Competencies
Competencies consist of a set of knowledge, skills and abilities (KSAs) that can help in realizing
one’s goals (Gupta & Srivastava, 2019). They can lead to effective performance among individuals
(Boyatzis, 2008). Building competencies have become highly important in today’s rapidly changing
world (Gupta & Srivastava, 2019). Competency-based human resource management emphasizes
the need to find competencies required for workers in different job types (Daley, 2012; Periáñez-
Cañadillas et al., 2019; Shaheen et al., 2019; Silva et al., 2019).
The literature on competence lists important competencies that can help individuals in completing
their responsibilities and accomplish their goals (Conger, 2004;Seijtsetal.,2015). Previous research
(Boyatzis, 2008;Goleman,1998; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2013; Spencer & Spencer, 2008) categorize
human competencies into two main clusters of emotional and social competencies. The emotional
competencies consist of self-awareness and self-management. The self-awareness category is related
to recognizing and understanding one’s own emotions. Self-management category refers to effective
management of oneself and consists of one’s emotional self-control, achievement orientation, positive
outlook, and adaptability. Social competencies consist of social awareness and relationship manage-
ment. Social awareness is related to understanding the emotions of others and consists of two
competencies of empathy and organizational awareness. Relationship management is related to the
use of one’s emotional understanding in relationship with others and consists of one’sinfluence,ability
to coach and mentor, conflict management, inspirational leadership, and teamwork (Boyatzis, 2011).
3. Hypotheses development
3.1. The effect of humility on emotional and social competencies
Previous studies have predicted that humility can have a significant positive effect on building
competencies resulting in successful performance. High levels of humility can help individuals in the
development of their competencies. Humility encourages one to have a realistic self-assessment of
their own capabilities and contribution compared to others. This attribute results in a reflection on
abilities, strengths and weaknesses and a realistic and unexaggerated evaluation of own successes
and failures (Vera & Rodriguez-Lopez, 2004). The process of self-reflection leads them to acknowledge
strengths and weaknesses and look for ways to develop the competencies that they realize they are
lacking (Sturm, Vera, & Crossan, 2017). In another empirical study, Fredrickson (2003) found that
virtues (including humility) increased intellectual, emotional, and social competencies of employees
and organizations.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 5 of 16
Hypothesis 1a. Humility has a significant positive effect on the emotional competency of self-
awareness.
Hypothesis 1b. Humility has a significant positive effect on the emotional competency of self-
management.
Hypothesis 2a. Humility has a significant positive effect on the social competency of social
awareness.
Hypothesis 2b. Humility has a significant positive effect on the social competency of relationship
management.
3.2. The mediating role of judgment
Humility is defined as “a realistic assessment of one’s own contribution and the recogni tion of
the contribution of others, along with luck and good fortune that made one’sownsuccess
possible” (Solomon, 1999, p. 94). Such realistic assessment of own capabilities w hich is th e
characteristics of humble individuals can help them in having a more accurate judgment an d
decision- mak ing (Crossan, Mazut is, & Seijts, 2013b; Crossan et a l., 2013a). It can improve
individuals ’ judgment of their own strengths and weaknes ses and those of others. T hus, by
encouraging individuals to do a realistic reflection of sel f and situation, humility can help them
develop better judgment of o wn strengths and weak nesses which in turn can encourage them
to develop different types of competencies (Strum et al., 2017).
On the other hand, low levels of humility can result in arrogance and overly optimistic
estimates of personal abilities and strengths among individua ls. Su ch overestimation of a bi lities
is referred to as overconfidence bias in the decision-making li terature (Moore & Healy, 2008).
Overconfidence bias has proved to have a significant negative effect on performance in many
different arenas. Thus, it can be hypothesized that humility has a positive effect on judgme nt
which in turn, pos itivel y influences emoti onal and social competencies.
Hypothesis 3a. Judgment acts as a mediator in the relationship between humility and emotional
competency of self-awareness.
Hypothesis 3b. Judgment acts as a mediator in the relationship between humility and emotional
competency of self-management.
Hypothesis 4a. Judgment acts as a mediator in the relationship between humility and social
competency of social awareness.
Hypothesis 4b. Judgment acts as a mediator in the relationship between humility and social
competency of relationship management.
Figure 1 depicts the relationship between our study constructs.
Humility Judgement
Emotional
Competencies
Social
Competencies
(+)
(+)
(+)
Figure 1. The relationship
between study variables.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 6 of 16
4. Research methodology
We designed a survey to examine our research hypothesis. The survey method is one of the most
feasible approaches to test our research hypothesis. Our study team developed a survey ques-
tionnaire to ask individuals about their character and competencies from their own view point.
4.1. Survey questions
Our survey consisted o f two main sections with self-reported questions to measure character
dim ensions of humility and judgment and the three types of competencies. Humility and
judgment were meas ure d using th e character measure developed b y Seijts et al. (2015). This
measure of character had several advantages. First, it highlights the importance of humility as
one single dimension of character (Crossan et al., 2017) while previous measure d eveloped by
Peterson and Seligman (2004) consider humility as a sub-dimension of temperance. Second,
this model has been dev eloped, tested, and used among students. Thus, it is a reliable and
validated measure for students. As the schol ars recommended, this model can be used among
business students for identifying their strengths and weaknesses and for educational purposes
(Crossan et al., 2013b;Seijtsetal.,2015). We used the humility and judgment dimensions of
Leadership Character Insight Assessm ent (LCIA).
1
The L CIA questionnaires were translated into
Iranian language by the resear ch team. It was pilot tested with a sma ll group of 10 people and
modified for the main study.
We used the ESCI model to measure emotional, and social competencies. It has some advan-
tages compared to other measures. First, it measures three types of competencies, compared to
other models that mostly measure two competency types of emotional and social ones. Second,
its framework is primarily used and developed for measuring competencies among business
students. This model has been developed, tested, and validated in educational programs for
several years (Boyatzis & Saatcioglu, 2008) and across different contexts (Batista-Foguet,
Boyatzis, Guillen, & Serlavos, 2008). The multi-language questionnaire was obtained online from
Korn Ferry/Hay Group and was used in our research (http://www.haygroup.com/us/training/details.
aspx?id=21547&eventid=602).
4.2. Study design and measurement
We used an online sur vey to conduct this study. Prior to the main study, we did a pilot test
using a group of 60 students in MBA programs in participating universities. In this pi lot test, we
ask ed participants to ide ntify and indicate any part of the survey or its questions that created
misunderstanding. We used this feedback to improve the survey for the main study. The main
study was conducted online. The surv ey link was sent to all the studen ts in the management
programs in several universities. We sent the survey online to students four times during the
years of 2017 and 2018.
First, participants read a description with information related to the purpose and content of the
survey and the approximate time it took them to complete the survey. The purpose of the study as
mentioned to students was to improve the master’s degree program in management by better
identifying students’ strengths and weaknesses.
The survey had three sections. In the first section, participants answered questions related
to their competencies (ESCI questionnaire). These questions were asked on a 5-point Likert
scale from 1 (Never) to 5 (Consistently). The second section consisted of questions related to
humility and judgment, selected from LCIA questionnaire. The questions in this section were
asked on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (Extremely Unlikely) to 5 (Extremely Likely). In the
third section, participants answered several questions relat ed to their program as well as
their demographic data (e.g., age and gender). Finally, participants were asked to provide
any comments they had regarding the survey in total.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 7 of 16
5. Statistical analysis and results
5.1. Participants and descriptive statistics
In total, we contacted a random sample of 500 students in master’s degree programs in
business and m anagement in two large-sized universities in Iran. Random sampling helps
with selecting a representative group of the larger population (Campbell & Stanley, 2015). It
increases the independence of observations and generalizability of results to the larger
population (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2014; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). Among these,
200 people participated and 165 of them completedthesurvey.Theresponseratewas33%.
There were 36 cases of missing data. These cases were removed from the final dataset. Our
sample consisted of individuals who were participating in several master’sdegreeprograms
in MBA and management, including regular MBA and executive MBA programs. In general, a
large percentage of participants in these MBA programs are employed. They mainly come to
the program to increase their knowledge in bu siness and management in order to help them
improve their career. Among the participants, 135 out of 165 (around 8 2%) had at least one
year of wo rk experience, with s everal participants (around 21%) having experienced man-
agerial and leadership positions. The number of years of work experien ce ranged betwee n 0
and 10 years with an average of 2.8 years and a standard deviation of 3.18 years. Out of the
total number of participant s (165 people), 1 35 (82%) of them had at least one year of work
experience and 54% were working at the time of data collection. Thus, our sample included
participants with different levels of work experience and a variety of organizational positions.
Regarding gender mix, 34% of the participants were f emale and 66% were male. The
participants’ average age was 27.3 years and its standard deviation was 6.05. T he average
number of year in MBA program was 1.76 years. Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for the
main study variables, including independent, mediating and dependent v ariables. Our indepen-
dent variable was humility (Huml) and the mediating variable was judgment (Judg). Dependent
variables include (1) emotion al competencies of self- awa reness (SelfAw) and self-management
(SelfMan), and (2) social competencies of social awareness (SocialAw) and relationship man-
agement (RelMan). Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for dependent, mediating, and
independent varia bles.
5.2. Regression analysis
In order to test the first set of our hypot heses, regarding the effect of humility on emotional
and s ocial competencies, we ran two regression models with hum ility as the independent
variable and emotional and social competencies as the dependent variables (Cohen, Cohen,
Table 1. Descriptive statistics for study variables
Variable
Dependent Mean (%) Std Dev. (%) N
SelfAw 79.25 10.83 165
SelfMan 72.70 8.62 165
SocialAw 76.75 9.38 165
RelMan 72.80 8.71 165
Mediating
Judg 78.54 10.12 165
Independent
Huml 83.70 8.44 165
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 8 of 16
West, & Aiken, 2014). The results of regression analysis of humility on emotional compe-
tencies of self-awareness (β =0.04,p < 0 .001) and self-management (β =0.04,p <0.001)
were both significant. Thus, hypotheses H1a and H1b were supported. The results of regres-
sion analysis of humility on social competencies of social awareness (β =0.04,p <0.001)
and relationship management (β =0.04,p < 0.001) were both significant. Thus, Hypotheses
H2a and H2b were supported. T able 2 pres ents these resu lts.
5.3. Mediation analysis
To explore our second set of hypotheses regarding the mediating effect of judgment, we
conducted a bias-corrected bootstrap mediation t est with 95% confidence interval (5,000
bootstrap samples) using PROCESS software on SPSS (Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007). This
modelhasseveraladvantagescomparedtoother methods used for t esting mediation in the
literature. First, we are able to conduct both direct effect and indirect effect simultaneously,
using a unified statistical test (Hayes, 2017). Second, the purpose of our study is to examine
the indirect effect of humility on emotional and social competencies through the mediating
role of judgment. PROCESS is based on regression analysis which is the method often used to
examine causal relationships between study variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). Previous
studies have used regression analysis for testing the causal relationship between character
dimensions and competencies. In one study, Cheung and Lee (2010) examined the effect of
character education on the development of social com petencies usi ng regression analy sis.
Third, the metho d uses bootstrapping. Bootstrap confidence interval methods have higher
power and are able to detect indirect effects even in small sample sizes (Fritz & MacKinnon,
2007;Shrout&Bolger,2002). Fourth, other methods used for testing mediation such as the
Sobel test are based on the assumption o f the normality of the sampling distribution for the
indirect effect. This assumption is violated most of the time (Hayes, 20 17).
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was not used for testing the hypotheses due to several
reasons. First, SEM requires a large sample size, especially in conditions where there is a high
number of interconnected and correlated ind icator variables. Some studies recommend a
minimum sample size of 200 to provide an acceptable basis for estimation (Tabachnick &
Fidell, 2013 ; Tanaka, 1993). In this study, there are several latent and measured variables
including, judgment, humility, and categories of emotional and social competencies.
Emotional and social competencies include four main categories of self-awareness, self-
management, social awareness, and relationship management. Each of these four categories
has several measured variables that are multi-dimensional and interconnected in nature. As
the model becomes more complex with several indicator or measured variables, higher
sample sizes are required to be able to use SEM. In particular, when there are several
constructs in the model (seven constructs or more), a minimum sample of 300–500 is
Table 2. Regression analysis of humility on emotional, and social competencies
Dependent Variable
Emotional Social
SelfAw SelfMan SocialAw RelMan
(Constant) 1.96 1.46 1.55 1.33
Huml 0.04*** 0.04*** 0.04*** 0.04***
R Squared (%) 13.40 23.40 23.30 28.00
Adjusted R Squared 12.80 23.00 22.80 27.60
F statistic 25.11 49.92 49.49 63.41
P value 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
N 165 165 165 165
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 9 of 16
generally recommended (Hair et al., 2014). Since o ur study had a sample of 165 (<200), SEM
is not considered a good method for hypot heses testing.
Second, structural equation modeling is a combination of exploratory factor analysis and
regression analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). Many hypotheses can be either tested in a
simpler way with the use of regression-based models or tested with the use of more complex
techniques such as SEM (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). Compared with regression analysis, SEM
is more complex and has several assumptions such as the assumption of normality. SEM is
also highly sensitive to the violations of these assumptions. As the sample size decreases, the
model becomes more sensitive to the violations of its assumptions (Tabachnick & Fidell,
2013). Considering these factors and our sample size, we used PROCESS analysis for testing
our mediation hypotheses. In the next section, the results of our analysis are reported.
5.4. Results for emotional competencies
Emotional competencies fall into two main categories of self-awareness and self-manage-
ment. Table 3 shows the results of the mediation test of judgment on self-awareness. The
results of the mediation test for self-awareness showed that humility had a significant
positive effect on judgment (Effect = 0.42, 95% CI [0.31, 0.5 3]), and judgment had a
significant positive effect on self-awareness (Effect = 0.04, 9 5% CI [0.02, 0 .06]). The dire ct
effect of humility on self-awareness was significant (Effect = 0.02, 95% CI [0.00, 0.04]). In
addition, the indirect effect of humility on self-awareness through j udgment was significant
(Effect = 0.02, 95% CI [0.01, 0.03]). This is the proof that judgment partially mediates the
relationship between humilit y and self-awareness. Based on these results, hypotheses H3a
was supported.
The results of the mediation test for self-management showed that humility had a
significant positive effect on judgment (Effect = 0.42, 95% CI [0.31, 0.53]), and judgment
had a significant positive effect on self-management (Effect = 0.03, 95% CI [0.02, 0.05]). The
direct effect of humility on self-management was significant (Effect = 0.02, 95% CI [0.01,
0.03]). In addition, the indirect effect of humility on self-management through judgment was
significant (Effect = 0.01, 95% CI [0.01, 0.02]). This is the proof that judgment partially
mediates the relationship between humility and self-management. Based on these results,
hypotheses H3b was supported. Table 4 shows the results of mediation t est of judgment on
self-management.
Table 3. OLS regression bias-corrected analysis of humility on judgment and self-awareness
Conf. Interval
Judgment regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 12.25 3.07 6.19 18.31
Humility*** 0.42 0.06 0.31 0.53
R
2
= 26.07 (p < 0.001).
Conf. Interval
Self-awareness regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 1.51 0.41 0.71 2.31
Humility 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.04
Judgment*** 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.06
R
2
= 20.24 (p < 0.001).
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 10 of 16
5.5. Results for social competencies
Social competencies consist of social awareness and relationship management. The results of the
mediation test for social awareness showed that humility had a significant positive effect on
judgment (Effect = 0.42, 95% CI [0.31, 0.53]), and judgment had a significant positive effect on
social awareness (Effect = 0.03, 95% CI [0.02, 0.05]). The direct effect of humility on social
awareness was significant (Effect = 0.03, 95% CI [0.02, 0.04]). In addition, the indirect effect of
humility on social awareness through judgment was significant (Effect = 0.01, 95% CI [0.01, 0.02]).
This is the proof that judgment partially mediates the relationship between humility and social
awareness. Thus, hypotheses H4a was supported. Table 5 shows the results of the mediation test
of judgment on social awareness.
The results of the mediation test for relationship management showed that humility had a
significant positive effect on judgment (Effect = 0.42, 95% CI [0.31, 0.53]), and judgment had a
significant positive effect on relationship management (Effect = 0.04, 95% CI [0.02, 0.05]). The
direct effect of humility on relationship management was significant (Effect = 0.42, 95% CI [0.31,
0.53]). In addition, the indirect effect of humility on relationship management through judgment
was significant (Effect = 0.01, 95% CI [0.01, 0.02]). This is the proof that judgment partially
mediates the relationship between humility and relationship management. Based on these results,
hypotheses H4b was supported. Table 6 shows the results of the mediation test of judgment on
relationship management.
Table 4. OLS regression bias-corrected analysis of humility on judgment and self-management
Conf. Interval
Judgment regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 12.25 3.07 6.19 18.31
Humility*** 0.42 0.06 0.31 0.53
R
2
= 26.07 (p < 0.001).
Conf. Interval
Self-management regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 1.05 0.28 0.49 1.60
Humility 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03
Judgment*** 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.05
R
2
= 33.53 (p < 0.001).
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Table 5. OLS regression bias-corrected analysis of humility on judgment and social awareness
Conf. Interval
Judgment regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 12.25 3.07 6.19 18.31
Humility*** 0.42 0.06 0.31 0.53
R
2
= 26.07 (p < 0.001).
Conf. Interval
Social awareness regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 1.19 0.33 0.54 1.85
Humility 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.04
Judgment*** 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.04
R
2
= 28.98 (p < 0.001).
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 11 of 16
6. Discussion
6.1. Theoretical contributions
In recent years, humility has been widely considered by scholars in different disciplines as one of
the important virtues of individuals. The role of humility on judgment, decision-making, and
performance has been addressed in several disciplines, including philosophy, psychology, and
more recently in management and leadership. In management and leadership literature, a new
line of research has burgeoned that focuses on character dimensions (i.e., virtues) and their
relationship with competencies and successful performance. Humility has been considered as
one of the main dimensions of character. Previous studies have shown that it can have a
significant impact on individual learning and development (Sturm et al., 2017). In addition,
based on this research, stream judgment is a central dimension of character through which
other dimensions of character direct thought and action.
Our study contributes to the recent literature by shedding light on the effect of humility on the
development of emotional and social competencies through the mediating effect of judgment.
While previous studies had highlighted the important role of humility on personal learning and
self-development, none of the previous studies had examined the relationship between humility,
judgment, and emotional and social competencies. In this study, we examined the effect of
humility on emotional and social competencies, both directly and indirectly through the mediating
role of judgment. These results are consistent with the previous studies that had highlighted the
important role of humility as one of the main dimensions of character (Crossan et al., 2017; Owens
& Hekman, 2012; Owens et al., 2013). Humility had a significant effect on emotional and social
competencies. In addition, judgment mediated this relationship. Thus, humility had a positive
influence on judgment. Better judgment positively influenced the development of emotional and
social competencies.
6.2. Managerial implications
Our study has several managerial implications. Considering the role of humility on improving
judgment and personal development, managers should encourage their employees to increase
their level of humility. Like other dimensions of character, humility can be learned and developed
through setting goals, purposeful practicing, and self-reflection (Seijts et al., 2015). Practicing in life
situations is one method of improving humility. This can be done by reflecting upon ways that one
can act as a humble person under different life circumstances. One useful exercise is to practice
having a realistic judgment of own contribution and the contributions of others under conditions of
Table 6. OLS regression bias-corrected analysis of humility on judgment and relationship
management
Conf. Interval
Judgment regressed on: BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 12.25 3.07 6.19 18.31
Humility*** 0.42 0.06 0.31 0.53
R
2
= 26.07 (p < 0.001).
Conf. Interval
Relationship management
regressed on:
BSEBLower 95% Upper 95%
Constant 0.89 0.29 0.32 1.47
Humility 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.04
Judgment*** 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.05
R
2
= 37.83 (p < 0.001).
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 12 of 16
success and failure. As another way, humble leaders and mentors can act as great examples.
Reflecting upon their acts and trying to imitate their behavior under similar conditions can
significantly improve one’s level of humbleness. Managers should consider humbleness as one of
the important characteristics of organizational mentors, especially when they are assigned to new
organizational entrants. This can help in instilling the culture of humbleness among organizational
members. In addition to these strategies, providing feedback to employees regarding their level of
humility and recommending ways for improvement is also another way of improving humility.
Beyond its importance in the development of individuals, humility is one of the important factors
that can increase competitive advantage of the firms (Vera & Rodriguez-Lopez, 2004). The impor-
tant role of humble leadership in organizational success has been highlighted in both academic
research and in practical journals such as Harvard Business Review (Taylor, 2018 ) and The Wall
Street Journal (Shellenbarger, 2018). In order to improve the level of humility in organizations, Vera
and Rodriguez-Lopez (2004) recommend several mechanisms. Exemplary humble leadership prac-
tices as well as motivation, hiring, and promotion practices that foster humbleness, incorporation
of humility in the firm’s culture and strategy, and the explicit refutation of arrogant behaviors are
some of the mechanisms that companies can use in order to increase humbleness among their
members. The use of group versus individual decision-making has also been suggested as another
strategy that can safeguard against overconfidence bias and foster humble decision-making in
organizations (Bendoly, Donohue, & Schultz, 2006; Schmidt, Montoya-Weiss, & Massey, 2001).
6.3. Limitations and direction for future research
This study has some limitations that need to be addressed in future research. One important
limitation of this study is that common method variance of measurement by one person creates
some degrees of bias on the relationship between the study constructs (Kline, Sulsky, & Rever-
Moriyama, 2000; Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). Future studies using multi-method
assessments or the use of measures from multiple sources would help reduce this bias. The second
limitation is that this study has been conducted in one country, so cultural factors might influence
the results. Future studies in other cultures can shed light on whether cultural factors might
influence the relationship between humility, judgment, and competencies. The third limitation
would be that individuals may not have a complete understanding of their personal characteristics.
Therefore, the level of individuals’ self-awareness might influence assessment of their own perso-
nal characteristics. It would be worthwhile to examine the moderating role of self-awareness on
the relationship between humility, judgment, and competencies.
Finally, this study was conducted in a university setting. Although a large percentage of parti-
cipants were employed or had work experience, it would be beneficial to conduct this study in an
organizational setting as well. Humility, judgment, and competencies are important attributes of
professionals, managers, and leaders. In future studies, we would like to repeat this study with
business professionals, and people in managerial and leadership roles and compare the results
with the results of the current study.
7. Conclusion
Recent studies in psychology and management have highlighted the role of humility as a rich and
multidimensional virtue of individuals. Based on this view, humility can provide an accurate
evaluation of individuals’ strengths and limitations and give them the ability to forget the self
which results in other-enhancing instead of self-enhancing behavior (Morris et al., 2005; Tengney,
2000). Humility is now considered as one of the main dimensions of character that significantly
contributes to both personal development and organizational performance (Crossan et al., 2017).
Among organizational leaders, humility can act as an indicator of their “intrinsic desire to serve”
(Collins, 2016, 2006; Smith, Montagno, & Kuzmenko, 2004; Morris et al., 2005, p. 1324). This
perspective is in contrast with the traditional view to humility as a sense of low self-esteem and
personal weakness (Exline & Geyer, 2004; Tangney, 2000).
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 13 of 16
Our study provides support for the importance of humility by finding a strong relationship
between this element and emotional and social competencies. The results show that not only
is there a st rong re lationship between humil ity and emotional and social competencies, but
also this relationship occurs through th e mediati ng role of judgment. Thus, humility improves
personal judgment which in turn contributes to the development of emotional and soci al
competencies.
Funding
This work was supported by the Iran’s National Elites
Foundation [No Number].
Author details
Rosa Hendijani
1
E-mail: [email protected]
Babak Sohrabi
1
E-mail: [email protected]
1
Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Jalal-e-Al-
e-Ahmad Hwy & Chamran Hwy، Al-e-Ahmad, Tehran,
Iran.
Citation information
Cite this article as: The effect of humility on emotional and
social competencies: The mediating role of judgment,
Rosa Hendijani & Babak Sohrabi, Cogent Business &
Management (2019), 6: 1641257.
Note
1. We obtained LCIA by contacting SIGMA Assessment
Systems Inc. in Canada (http://www.sigmaassess
mentsystems.com/assessments/leadership-character-
insight-assessment/).
References
Batista-Foguet, J. M., Boyatzis, R., Guillen, L., & Serlavos, R.
(2008). Assessing emotional intelligence competen-
cies in two global contexts. In R. J. Emmerling, V. K.
Shanwal, & M. K. Mandal (Eds.), Emotional
Intelligence: Theoretical and Cultural Perspectives (pp.
89–114). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Bendoly, E., Donohue, K., & Schultz, K. L. (2006). Behavior
in operations management: Assessing recent find-
ings and revisiting old assumptions. Journal of
Operations Management, 24(6), 737–752.
doi:10.1016/j.jom.2005.10.001
Boyatzis, R. E. (2008). Competencies in the 21st century.
Journal of Management Development, 25(7), 5–12.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2011). Managerial and leadership compe-
tencies: A behavioral approach to emotional, social
and cognitive intelligence. Vision, 15(2), 91–100.
doi:10.1177/097226291101500202
Boyatzis, R. E., & Saatcioglu, A. (2008). A 20-year view of
trying to develop emotional, social and cognitive
intelligence competencies in graduate management
education. Journal of Management Development, 27
(1), 92–108. doi:10.1108/02621710810840785
Camerer, C., & Lovallo, D. (1999). Overconfidence and
excess entry: An experimental approach. American
Economic Review, 89(1), 306–318. doi:10.1257/
aer.89.1.306
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (2015). Experimental and
quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston, MA:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Cheung, C. K., & Lee, T. Y. (2010). Improving social com-
petence through character education. Evaluation and
Program Planning, 33(3),
255–263. doi:10.1016/j.
evalprogplan.2009.08.006
Cohen,J.,Cohen,P.,West,S.G.,&Aiken,L.S.(2014). Applied
multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral
sciences.NewYork,NY:PsychologyPress.
Collins, J. (2006). Level 5 leadership: The triumph of
humility and fierce resolve. In D. Mayle (Ed.),
Managing Innovation and Change (pp. 234–248).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Collins, J. (2016). Good to great – (Why Some Companies
Make the Leap and Others Don’t). New York, NY:
Harper Business.
Comte-Sponville, A. (2002). A small treatise on the great
virtues: The uses of philosophy in everyday life. New
York, NY: Henry Holt & Company.
Conger, J. A. (2004). Developing leadership capability:
What’s inside the black box? The Academy of
Management Executive, 18(3), 136–139.
Crossan, M., Mazutis, D., & Seijts, G. (2013b). In search of
virtue: The role of virtues, values and character
strengths in ethical decision making. Journal of
Business Ethics, 113(4), 567–581. doi:10.1007/
s10551-013-1680-8
Crossan, M., Mazutis, D., Seijts, G., & Gandz, J. (2013a).
Developing leadership character in business pro-
grams. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 12(2), 285–305. doi:10.5465/
amle.2011.0024a
Crossan, M., Seijts, G., & Gandz, J. (2015). Developing
leadership character. New York, NY: Routledge.
Crossan, M., Vera, D., & Nanjad, L. (2008). Transcendent
leadership: Strategic leadership in dynamic environ-
ments. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(5), 569–581.
doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.008
Crossan, M. M., Byrne, A., Seijts, G. H., Reno, M., Monzani,
L., & Gandz, J. (2017).
Toward a framework of leader
character in organizations. Journal of Management
Studies, 54(7), 986–1018. doi:10.1111/joms.2017.54.
issue-7
Daley, D. M. ( 2012). Strategic huma n resources man-
agement . In N. M. Riccucci (Ed.), Public personnel
management (pp. 120–125). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Exline, J. J., & Geyer, A. L. (2004). Perceptions of humility:
A preliminary study. Self and Identity, 3(2), 95–114.
doi:10.1080/13576500342000077
Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). The value of positive emotions.
American Scientist, 91(4), 330–335. doi:10.1511/
2003.4.330
Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample
size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological
Science, 18(3), 233–239. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
9280.2007.01882.x
Gandz, J., Crossan, M., Seijts, G., & Stephenson, C. (2010).
Leadership on trial: A manifesto for leadership
development. London: Richard Ivey School of
Business.
Glaser, M., & Weber, M. (2007). Overconfidence and trad-
ing volume. The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review,
32(1), 1–36. doi:10.1007/s10713-007-0003-3
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional
intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2013). Primal
leadership: Unleashing the power of emotional intel-
ligence. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Gupta, M., & Srivastava, P. (2019). Competence assess-
ment and development in India. Industrial and
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 14 of 16
Commercial Training, 51(3), 137–138. doi:10.1108/
ICT-03-2019-108
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E.
(2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New
Jersey, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, modera-
tion, and conditional process analysis: A regression-
based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
Johnson, D. D. P. (2004). Overconfidence and war: The
havoc and glory of positive illusions. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Kline, T. J., Sulsky, L. M., & Rever-Moriyama, S. D. (2000).
Common method variance and specification errors: A
practical approach to detection. The Journal of
Psychology, 134(4), 401–421. doi:10.1080/
00223980009598225
McGrath, R. E. (2014). Scale-and item-level factor ana-
lyses of the VIA inventory of strengths. Assessment,
21(1), 4–14. doi:10.1177/1073191112450612
Mir, A. M. (2010). Leadership in Islam. Journal of
Leadership Studies, 4(3), 69–72. doi:10.1002/jls.v4.3
Mishra, P. (2004). An end to suffering: The Buddha in the
world. New York, NY: Straus and Giroux.
Moore, D. A., & Healy, P. J. (2008). The trouble with over-
confidence. Psychological Review, 115(2), 502.
doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.502
Morris, J. A., Brotheridge, C. M., & Urbanski, J. C. (2005).
Bringing humility to leadership: Antecedents and
consequences of leader humility. Human Relations,
58(10), 1323–1350. doi:10.1177/0018726705059929
Murray, A. (2001). Humility: The journey toward holiness.
Bloomington, MN: Bethany House.
Ou, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., Kinicki, A. J., Waldman, D. A., Xiao, Z.,
& Song, L. J. (2014
). Humble chief executive officers’
connections
to top management team integration
and middle managers’ responses. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 59(1), 34–72. doi:10.1177/
0001839213520131
Owens, B. P., & Hekman, D. R. (2012). Enacting humble
leadership: An inductive examination of humble lea-
der behaviors, outcomes, and contingencies.
Academy of Management Journal, 55(4), 787–818.
doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0441
Owens, B. P., Johnson, M. D., & Mitchell, T. R. (2013).
Expressed humility in organizations: Implications for
performance, teams, and leadership. Organization
Science, 24(5), 1517–1538. doi:10.1287/
orsc.1120.0795
Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2009). Character strengths:
Research and practice. Journal of College and
Character, 10(4), 1–10. doi:10.2202/1940-1639.1042
Pearsall, J., & Trumble, B. (Eds.). (1996). The Oxford eng-
lish reference dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Periáñez-Cañadillas, I., Charterina, J., & Pando-García, J.
(2019). Assessing the relevance of digital compe-
tences on business graduates’ suitability for a job.
Industrial and Commercial Training, 51, 139–151.
doi:10.1108/ICT-09-2018-0076
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. (2004). Character strengths
and virtues: A handbook and classification (Vol. 1).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Plous, S. (1993). The psychology of judgment and decision
making. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff,
N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral
research: A critical review of the literature and
recommended remedies. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-
9010.88.5.879
Pop,
C., & Khampirat, B. (2019). Self-assessment instru-
ment to measure the competencies of Namibian
graduates: Testing of validity and reliability. Studies
in Educational Evaluation, 60, 130–139. doi:10.1016/j.
stueduc.2018.12.004
Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007).
Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses:
Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate
Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227. doi:10.1080/
00273170701341316
Sandage, S. J., & Watson Wiens, T. (2001 ). Contextualizing
models of humility and forgiveness: A reply to Gassin.
Journal of Psychology and Theology, 29(3), 201–211.
doi:10.1177/009164710102900302
Schmidt, J. B., Montoya-Weiss, M. M., & Massey, A. P.
(2001). New product development decision-making
effectiveness: Comparing individuals, face-to-face
teams, and virtual teams. Decision Sciences, 32(4),
575–600. doi:10.1111/deci.2001.32.issue-4
Seijts, G., Gandz, J., Crossan, M., & Reno, M. (2015).
Character matters: Character dimensions’ impact on
leader performance and outcomes. Organizational
Dynamics, 44(1), 65–74. doi:10.1016/j.
orgdyn.2014.11.008
Seligman, M. E., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C.
(2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical vali-
dation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60(5),
874–884. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.5.410
Shaheen, M., Azam, M. S., Soma, M. K., & Kumar, T. J. M.
(2019). A competency framework for contractual
workers of manufacturing sector. Industrial and
Commercial Training, 51(3), 152–164. doi:10.1108/
ICT-10-2018-0080
Shellenbarger, S. (2018). The best bosses are humble
bosses. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/
the-best-bosses-are-humble-bosses-1539092123
Shrout,
P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experi-
mental and nonexperimental studies: New proce-
dures and recommendations. Psychological Methods,
7(4), 422–445.
Silva, M. A. B. D., Costa, P. R. D., & Kniess, C. T. (2019).
Environmental training and developing individual
environmental sustainability competences in
Brazilian chemical sector companies. Industrial and
Commercial Training, 51(1), 40–51. doi:10.1108/ICT-
12-2017-0105
Smith, B. N., Montagno, R. V., & Kuzmenko, T. N. (2004).
Transformational and servant leadership: Content
and contextual comparisons. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 10(4), 80–91. doi:10.1177/
107179190401000406
Solomon, R. (1999). A better way to think about business:
How values become virtues. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Sosik, J. J., Gentry, W. A., & Chun, J. U. (2012). The value of
virtue in the upper echelons: A multisource exami-
nation of executive character strengths and perfor-
mance. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 367–382.
Spencer, L. M., & Spencer, P. S. M. (2008). Competence at
work models for superior performance. New York, NY:
John Wiley & Sons.
Spiegel, J. S. (2003). The moral irony of humility. Logos: A
Journal of Catholic Thought and Culture, 6(1), 131–
150. doi:10.1353/log.2003.0015
Strum, R. E., Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2017). The entan-
glement of leader character and leader competence
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 15 of 16
and its impact on performance. The Leadership
Quarterly, 28(3), 349–366.
Sturm, R. E., Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2017). The entan-
glement of leader character and leader competence
and its impact on performance. The Leadership
Quarterly, 28(3), 349–366. doi:10.1016/j.
leaqua.2016.11.007
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate
statistics (6th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Education.
Tanaka,J.S.(1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in struc-
tural equation models. Sage Focus Editions, 154, 10.
Tangney, J. P. (2000). Humility: Theoretical perspectives,
empirical findings and directions for future research.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19(1), 70–
82.
Taylor, B. (2018). If humility is so important, why are
leaders so arrogant? Retrieved from https://hbr.org/
2018/10/if-humility-is-so-important-why-are-lea
ders-so-arrogant
Trinder, J. C. (2008). Competency standards-a measure of
the quality of a workforce. Интерэкспо Гео-Сибирь,
2(S2), 9–14.
Vera, D., & Rodriguez-Lopez, A. (2004). Strategic virtues:
Humility as a source of competitive advantage.
Organizational Dynamics, 33(4), 393–408.
doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2004.09.006
© 2019 The Author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made.
You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions
You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Cogent Business & Management (ISSN: 2331-1975) is published by Cogent OA, part of Taylor & Francis Group.
Publishing with Cogent OA ensures:
• Immediate, universal access to your article on publication
• High visibility and discoverability via the Cogent OA website as well as Taylor & Francis Online
• Download and citation statistics for your article
• Rapid online publication
• Input from, and dialog with, expert editors and editorial boards
• Retention of full copyright of your article
• Guaranteed legacy preservation of your article
• Discounts and waivers for authors in developing regions
Submit your manuscript to a Cogent OA journal at www.CogentOA.com
Hendijani & Sohrabi, Cogent Business & Management (2019), 6: 1641257
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2019.1641257
Page 16 of 16
