APPROACHING PANDEMIC LEADERSHIP WITH A HARDY OUTWARD MINDSET.

• Author: McClellan, Jeffrey L.

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected many aspects of human lives all over the world including but not limited to health, economics, politics, public policies, and business, as well as social and personal relations. It created a crisis with such deep impact that it has changed people's attitudes and approaches to day-to-day life. In a moment of crisis like this, people look to their leaders for appropriate responses and solutions. However, during the pandemic, "we are doing this because of the virus" became a common refrain among leaders. This anthropomorphic statement suggests that a virus is the actor, and we are the ones acted upon.

The truth is that a virus is an event to which we respond. Our leaders were the actors, and their actions had significant impacts. As Georgiades (2020, p. 906) maintained, the actions taken by leaders during times of crisis "can beget three outcomes: 1) aggravate the crisis; 2) merely manage it: or 3) lead the institution to emerge stronger." Sadly, our leaders' response, for the most part, merely aggravated the situation by causing significant social, political, economic, and educational ripple effects that we may continue to feel for some time. Nonetheless, while we could debate the merits of these leaders' responses, what is more valuable is to explore the leadership that is needed to facilitate success in such times of crisis.

While definitions of leadership are expansive and divergent (Hughes, Ginnett, & Curphy, 1995; Hunt, 2004), there is some consensus that leadership involves social influence to achieve goals (House & et al., 2004). Such influence happens in moments (Mintzberg, 1975) when leaders enact social influence processes in the leader-follower relationship within a specific situational context (Kellerman, 2016). These leadership moments consist of six essential elements the leader, the follower(s), the goal, the context, the process, and the relationship. The relationship between these elements determines the quality of influence within the moment and its outcomes. Leaders who use an influence process that they are skilled in using and which is well suited to the followers, relationships, and context are more likely to achieve success.

However, when one element changes, so too must the others in order to experience the same success. Thus, when the followers change, the relationship is altered, and the leadership process will need to change as well. Likewise, when the context changes, the other elements must change. This is particularly true when the context changes dramatically, especially in a time of crisis. The current crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic represents a dramatic shift in context that merits a significant change in the other elements of the leadership moment. If the right responses are not presented at the time of crisis, "even the best leadership can fail," (Georgiades, 2020, p. 906).

The purpose of this conceptual paper is to explore how leadership approaches to this crisis require responses that are different than those that have been enacted thus far based on an exploration of the leader's role within the leadership moment.

BACKGROUND OF THIS STUDY

The Leadership Moment

To any leadership moment, a leader brings his or her way of being, thinking, and acting (Offstein, 2006). In other words, his or her internal state of being and thinking shapes the way that he or she approaches the moment in terms of leadership thinking, styles and behaviors (Quinn, 1996, 2004). Whether or not these ways of thinking, style and approaches are effective depends on how well suited they are to the needs and desires of followers based on the relationship that exists at the time and how well they are aligned with the context. The leader's way of being encompasses his or her identity, worldview, mood, attitudes, values, and mindset. While each of these aspects is important and influential, a leader's mindset represents a point of significance because it is more flexible and consciously controlled, action oriented, and helps to shape the other elements.

The concept of mindsets, according to Klein (2016) refers to "a belief that orients the way we handle situations--the way we sort out what is going on and what we should do. Our mindsets help us spot opportunities, but they can also trap us in self-defeating cycles." (p. 1). Mindsets are thus more flexible than worldview beliefs, moods, motives, attitude, and values, which can be both conscious and subconscious, and tend to be harder to change. They also directly impact and orient our behavior, so they have a significant impact on how we think and act in leadership and thus impact our performance. Furthermore, mindsets are both influenced by and influence our moods, motives, beliefs, values, and attitudes. However, the fact that they can be consciously controlled gives them a significant role in determining the leadership behavior and outcomes.

With regards to leadership, research suggests that four mindsets are particularly important. The first three mindsets are commitment, control, and challenge, which are components of the resilience-oriented construct of hardiness (Maddi & Khoshaba, 2005; Stein & Bartone, 2020). The concept of hardiness is grounded in existential philosophy and contributes to resilience(Kobasa & Maddi, 1984; Maddi, 2004a). Research suggests these mindsets are a major factor in moderating how much strain people experience in stressful situations, as well as being a contributing factor to their performance (Kobasa, Maddi, & Kahn, 1982; Lambert & Lambert, 1999; Maddi, 1987; Maddi & Khoshaba, 2005; Westman, 1990). Obviously, these mindsets are valuable for leading in times of crisis. But, what is most important in contexts such as the crisis is that they have been found to have a tremendous impact on leadership emergence and success (Eid, Bartone, Johnsen, & Nissestad, 2009; Lloyd & Attella, 2000; Maddi & Khoshaba, 2003; Maddi & Kobasa, 1984; McClellan, 2013, 2020; Stein & Bartone, 2020).

According to Stein and Bartone (2020) the commitment mindset incorporates passionate engagement with persistence in the face of challenges based on the perception of "life as overall meaningful and worthwhile" (p. 11). Individuals who are high in commitment "find it easy to be interested in whatever they are doing and can involve themselves in it whole heartedly" (Maddi & Kobasa, 1984, p. 31). Which leads them to be both socially engaged and self-reflective. They also tend to have a strong sense of purpose (Kobasa et al., 1982). This purpose centered, commitment-oriented mindset underpins a leaders' ability to, assess and respond to threats, develop and communicate passion for a vision and foster meaningful engagement of oneself and others during challenging times by providing the hope that followers need from a leader (Kobasa, 1979; Rath & Conchie, 2008).

Control is the second min dset, which is characterized by a belief in one's ability to positively influence the stressful events and challenges of one's life (Khoshaba & Maddi, 2005; Maddi & Khoshaba, 2005; Maddi & Kobasa, 1984). It is closely related to the concepts of internal locus of control (Anderson, 1977; Kobasa, 1979; Lefcourt, Lefcourt, Martin, & Saleh, 1984; Rotter, 1998; Sullivan, 1993) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1994, 1997; Kobasa, 1979; Lightsey Jr & Christopher, 1997; Sutcliffe & Vogus, 2003). This mindset causes individuals to "strive to positively influence the outcomes of the changes going on around [them]" (Maddi & Khoshaba, 2005, p. 18). Consequently, "People strong in control reflect on how to turn situations to advantage and never take things at face value" (Maddi & Kobasa, , p. 31). This leads to a proactive attitude and approach to the world that is characteristic of successful individuals and leaders (Benard, 2004; Covey, 1989; Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2002; Luthans & Avolio, 2003; Northouse, 2004; Quinn, 2004; Peter M Senge, 1990; Sutcliffe & Vogus, 2003). It also responds to followers needs for trust and stability (Rath & Conchie, 2008).

The third mindset is referred to as challenge and is grounded in the belief that change is normal and beneficial and that one is able to learn from any situation, no matter how stressful, challenging, or negative its outcome (Khoshaba & Maddi, 2005; Kobasa, Maddi, & Courington, 1981; Maddi & Khoshaba, 2005; Maddi & Kobasa, 1984). Consequently, it refers to an individual's tendency to "see change and disruptions in life as interesting opportunities to learn and grow" (Stein & Bartone, 2020, p. 11). Individuals with a challenge mindset recognize "problems are a part of life, and they set out to solve them, rather than run away from them. For these people, taking on new challenges is an interesting way to learn about themselves and their own capabili ties, while also learning about the world" (p. 11). This concept is closely related to the growth mindset Dweck (2016) identified as a contributor to success and helps leaders to inspire hope and trust among followers (Rath & Conchie, 2008).

The combination of these three mindsets has been found to contribute to effective leadership in business, the military, and other settings (Bartone, Eid, Johnsen, Laberg, & Snook, 2006; Bartone, Kelly, & Matthews, 2013; Johnsen, Eid, Pallesen, Bartone, & Nissestad, 2009; Maddi & Khoshaba, 2005; Stein & Bartone, 2020). Based on their review of the research, Maddi and Khoshaba (2003) suggested that individuals high in commitment, control, and challenge "may be more effective leaders through helping their subordinates see meaning and purpose in team activities" (p. 54). In addition, they asserted such leaders would be more likely to "give assistance and encouragement to their subordinates" (p. 54). Bartone (2003) further suggested that leaders with strong mindsets in commitment, control, and challenge "will likely have a greater impact on their groups under high stress conditions," because they will...