Public Sector in the Digital Economy Era:A Study on the Public Sector Banking Network in Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran.

2 Prof., Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran.

3 Associate Prof., Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran.

Abstract

Objective: In organizations in which electoral mechanisms have little effect on senior management change and non-functional indicators play a prominent role in the retention of officials in power, they show a clear desire to continue in office. This has been explained by brain psychologists through the hubris phenomenon. Hubris is a personality change that is stimulated by an external factor - power - and through changes in brain chemistry, the dark side of managers' personalities is revealed. This phenomenon often leads to negative personal and organizational consequences. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to design a conceptual model of the Hubris phenomenon in senior managers of governmental organizations.
Methods: In this study, a sequential mixed method (qualitative-quantitative) research design was implemented in three steps. The grounded theory (GT) was performed in the first step to identify the effective factors on the Hubris phenomenon by interviewing 15 senior managers of governmental organizations. The Delphi method was then used in the second step to determine the importance and the third step, confirmatory factor analysis was performed by designing a questionnaire. At this step, 471 managers were surveyed.
Results: In this study, the core category was extracted through 3 dimensions (managerial basis, personality-neurotic and functional) along with 12 components and the final model was presented by causal conditions, context, intervening conditions, strategies and consequences. Factors affecting the Hubris phenomenon as well as their strategies and prioritization were investigated using the Delphi method and the results of the confirmatory factor analysis of the axial phenomenon are presented.
Conclusion: In this study, Awareness of the nature of the Hubris phenomenon helps to find the right roots for the implementation of strategies and mechanisms to overcome the negative consequences of this phenomenon and increase the general index of health and productivity. The present study in the field of leadership and the Hubris phenomenon brings theoretical innovations and helps employers and researchers to better understand the pattern of the Hubris phenomenon.

Keywords


Adame, E., Tracy, S., Town, S., Towels, M., Razzante, R., Tietsort, C., ... & Becker, K. (2021). Can we create the “Being” of leadership?: A mixed-methods study of two leadership pedagogies at a southwestern, US University. Journal of Applied Communication Research.
Akstinaite, V. (2018). Use of linguistic markers in the identification and analysis of chief executives’ hubris, (Doctoral dissertation, University of Surrey).
Asad, S., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2020). Differentiating leader hubris and narcissism on the basis of power. Leadership, 16(1), 39-61.
Berger, J., Osterloh, M., Rost, K., & Ehrmann, T. (2020). How to prevent leadership hubris? Comparing competitive selections, lotteries, and their combination. The Leadership Quarterly31(5), 101388.
Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2011). Neuroscience and leadership: The promise of insights. Ivey Business Journal75(1), 1-9.
Center for Presidential Strategic Studies. (2018). Corruption indicators. Report Code 121-97. Tehran. (in Persian)
Cho, M., & Keltner, D. (2020). Power, approach, and inhibition: Empirical advances of a theory. Current Opinion in Psychology33, 196-200.
Danaee Fard, H., Feizi, A., Ahmadi, H. (2016). Consequences of Managerial Stability in Iranian Public Organizations. Military Management Quarterly, 16(62), 1-22. (in Persian)
Danaee Fard, H., Kheirgoo, M., Azar, A., Fani, A. (2013). Apprehension Policy Transfer of Administrative Reforms in Iran: Grounded Theory’s Strategy-Based Research. Organizational Culture Management, 10(26), 28-5. (in Persian)
De Jong, J. P., Wilkin, C. L., & Rubino, C. (2019). The association between perceived personal power, team commitment and intrinsic motivation for permanent and temporary workers. Economic and Industrial Democracy40(2), 257-279.
Errante, A., & Fogassi, L. (2021). Functional Lateralization of the Mirror Neuron System in Monkey and Humans. Symmetry13(1), 1-20.
Forouharfar, A. (2020). The anatomy and ontology of organizational power as a fractal metaphor: A philosophical approach. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1728072.
Furnham, A., Hyde, G., & Trickey, G. (2014). Do your dark side traits fit? Dysfunctional personalities in different work sectors. Applied Psychology63(4), 589-606.
Galang, C. M., & Obhi, S. S. (2019). Social power and frontal alpha asymmetry. Cognitive Neuroscience10(1), 44-56.
Garrard, P., Garrard, & Barlow. (2018). Leadership Hubris Epidemic. Palgrave Macmillan.
Guinote, A. (2017). How power affects people: Activating, wanting, and goal seeking. Annual Review of Psychology68, 353-381.
Hayward, M. L., & Hambrick, D. C. (1997). Explaining the premiums paid for large acquisitions: Evidence of CEO hubris. Administrative science quarterly, 103-127.
Hoffarth, M. J. (2020). From achievement to power: David C. McClelland, McBer & Company, and the business of the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), 1962–1985. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences56(3), 153-168.
Keltner, D. (2016). The power paradox: How we gain and lose influence. Penguin.
Kraus, M. W., & Torrez, B. (2020). A psychology of power that is embedded in societal structures. Current opinion in psychology33, 86-90.
Laguda, E. (2020). Toxic Leadership: Managing Its Poisonous Effects on Employees and Organizational Outcomes. The Palgrave Handbook of Workplace Well-Being, 1-31.
Lammers, J., Stoker, J. I., & Stapel, D. A. (2009). Differentiating social and personal power: Opposite effects on stereotyping, but parallel effects on behavioral approach tendencies. Psychological Science20(12), 1543-1548.
Miller, B. I., Seeley, W. W., Mychack, P., Rosen, H. J., Mena, I., & Boone, K. (2001). Neuroanatomy of the self: Evidence from patients with frontotem- poral dementia. Neurology, 57, 817–821.
Moazen Jamshidi, M. (2019). Identifying and Ranking Key Competencies of Managers for Realization of Human Resources Excellence at Home Appliances Manufacturing Companies. Journal of Human Resource Management, 9(1), 1-24. (in Persian)
Oldham, J. M., & Morris, L. B. (1990). The personality self-portrait. New York: Bantam.
Owen, D. (2008). Hubris syndrome. Clinical Medicine, 8(4), 428-432.
Owen, D., & Davidson, J. (2009). Hubris syndrome: An acquired personality disorder? A study of US Presidents and UK Prime Ministers over the last 100 years. Brain, 132(5), 1396-1406.
Peng, Z., Chen, J., Jin, L., Han, H., Dong, C., Guo, Y., … Wei, Z. (2020). Social brain dysfunctionality in individuals with autism spectrum disorder and their first-degree relatives: an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 111063.1-25. doi:10.1016/j.pscychresns.2020.111063
Peretomode, V. F. Demystifying the Ivory tower syndrome in universities through the use of transformational leadership. International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies13(1), 1-9.
Picone, P. M., Dagnino, G. B., & Minà, A. (2014). The origin of failure: A multidisciplinary appraisal of the hubris hypothesis and proposed research agenda. Academy of Management Perspectives28(4), 447-468.
Robertson, I. (2013). How power affects the brain. Thepsychologist, 26(3), 186-189.
Robinson, G. M. (2016). Making sense of hubris. In The intoxication of power (pp. 1-16). Palgrave Macmillan, London
Russell, G. (2011). Psychiatry and politicians: the ‘hubris syndrome’. The Psychiatrist, 35(4), 140-145
Sadler-Smith, E., Akstinaite, V., Robinson, G., & Wray, T. (2017). Hubristic leadership: A review. Leadership, 13(5), 525-548.
Sułkowski, Ł., & Chmielecki, M. (2017). Application of neuroscience in management. In Neuroeconomic and Behavioral Aspects of Decision Making (pp. 49-62). Springer, Cham.
Transparency International (2020), Corruption Perceptions Index. [Online]. <https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl>.
Truss, C., Gratton, L., Hope‐Hailey, V., McGovern, P., & Stiles, P. (1997). Soft and hard models of human resource management: a reappraisal. Journal of management studies34(1), 53-73.
Useem, J. (2017). Power causes brain damage: How leaders lose mental capacities— the most notably for reading other people— that were essential to their rise. The Atlantic.
Van Kleef, G. A., & Lange, J. (2020). How hierarchy shapes our emotional lives: effects of power and status on emotional experience, expression, and responsiveness. Current opinion in psychology33, 148-153.
Winter, D. G. (1973). The Power Motive. New York: Free Press.
Wirth, M. M., Welsh, K. M., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2006). Salivary cortisol changes in humans after winning or losing a dominance contest depend on implicit power motivation. Hormones and Behavior, 49(3), 346–352.
Wisse, B., Rus, D., Keller, A. C., & Sleebos, E. (2019). “Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it”: the combined effects of leader fear of losing power and competitive climate on leader self-serving behavior. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology28(6), 742-755.
Yeung, E., & Shen, W. (2019). Can pride be a vice and virtue at work? Associations between authentic and hubristic pride and leadership behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(6), 605-624.
Zeitoun, H., Nordberg, D., & Homberg, F. (2019). The dark and bright sides of hubris: Conceptual implications for leadership and governance research. Leadership, 15(6), 647-672.