Abstract
Humble leaders recognize their team’s efforts, encourage open communication, learn from mistakes, and motivate people to share ideas and concerns, all while striving for greater achievements. Humble leadership applies to both individual leaders and teams. This leadership style can lead to positive outcomes, including improved team performance. However, the extent to which humble leadership enhances team performance is not yet fully understood. Examining the impact of humble leadership on team performance can provide important insights into how various leadership styles influence overall team dynamics, particularly in high-stress settings such as hospitals and educational institutions. This research, which focused on faculty members, nurses, and students, highlighted the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration among different professional groups. The study aimed to investigate the predictors and differences in humble nursing leadership and team performance. The researchers recruited a sample of 252 faculty members, nurses, and students through a cross-sectional study conducted in 2022 in selected Jordanian public and private universities and hospitals. The study, using SPSS version 25, found that leaders and teams generally exhibited humble behavior, with an average rating of 3.67 (SD = 0.85). The highest two of the humble leaders were leaders’ receptivity to others’ views (M = 3.78, SD = 1.08) and appreciating others’ strengths (M = 3.76, SD = 1.12). Yet, the leader’s admission of not knowing something (M = 3.47, SD = 1.11) and recognition of others’ superior knowledge and skills (M = 3.59, SD = 1.11) were the lowest means. The highest two of a humble team were members’ willingness to learn from one another (M = 3.82, SD = 0.97) and their openness to new ideas (M = 3.71, SD = 1.04). However, the team had low means of acknowledging their lack of knowledge (M = 3.55, SD = 1.00) and recognizing when others possess greater knowledge and skills (M = 3.64, SD = 0.98). The team performed relatively well and effectively, with a mean of 3.51 (SD = 1.42). The highest two means of team performance were in team members expressing their diverse opinions (M = 3.60, SD = 1.55) and all team members actively participating in discussions (M = 3.59, SD = 1.67), contrary to the lowest two means observed when team members shared and received criticism without taking it personally (M = 3.29, SD = 1.62) and when conflicts were resolved through compromise, with each member making concessions (M = 3.36, SD = 1.59). A moderate positive correlation was found between humble leadership and team performance (r = .63, p = .001). The years of work experience for the faculty members or nurses, as well as the level of study for the students, were shared predictors of humble leadership and team performance (F = 5.20, df = 1, p = .02, R2 = .203, Adjusted R2 = .07). The non-nursing students showed higher levels of humble leadership than the nursing students (p = .01). The individuals involved in quality initiatives in academic and healthcare settings demonstrated higher levels of humble leadership (p = .01). The nursing faculty members had superior team performance compared to the nurses and nursing students (p = .02) and also had better team performance than the non-nursing faculty members (p = .04). On the other hand, the nurses had higher team performance than the nursing faculty members and the nursing students (p = .03). Humble leadership significantly influences the overall performance achieved by a team.
Plain language summary
This study measured the predictors and differences in humble nursing leadership and team performance. A convenience snowball sample of 252 faculty members, nurses, and students was recruited via a transverse study in 2022 in selected Jordanian public and private universities and hospitals. Using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS; the 25th version), the General Linear Model showed that faculty members’ or nurses’ years of work experience/students’ level of study was the shared predictor of humble leadership and team performance. Also, the T-tests or one-way Analysis of Variance showed that non-nursing students exhibited higher overall humble leadership levels than nursing students. Individuals involved in quality initiatives in academic and healthcare settings demonstrated higher levels of humble leadership. Nursing faculty members had higher team performance than non-nursing faculty members. Also, nurses outperformed nursing faculty members and students in team performance. Generally, leaders and teams were humble. The team functioned relatively well and effectively. Humble leadership has a positive impact on team performance.
Introduction
Traditional leadership styles prioritize authority and control, which may prove ineffective in collaborative settings such as healthcare and education (Zia Ud Din et al., 2024). In contrast, humble leadership, characterized by empathy, humility, and the empowerment of teams, can address this shortcoming by promoting a more inclusive and supportive workplace culture (Chintakananda et al., 2024). Humble leadership is gaining attention in the healthcare and nursing sectors due to the dynamic nature of the work environment.
Although not widely discussed, the humble leadership style holds significant importance because today’s leaders take on greater responsibilities (Flood-Stith, 2018); therefore, the significance of humble leadership becomes even more pronounced (Flood-Stith, 2018). Investigating the effects of humble leadership on team performance can yield valuable insights into the ways in which different leadership styles affect the overall team dynamics; this is especially pertinent in high-pressure environments like hospitals and educational institutions (Mrayyan, 2023). This study emphasized the faculty members, nurses, and students and underscored the significance of interdisciplinary collaboration. Gaining an understanding of how humble leadership can connect various professional groups may result in more cohesive and effective teams. Thus, this paper is needed as it contributes to the field of nursing leadership. That is, by exploring the concepts of interest among the three selected groups of faculty members, nurses, and students, the study not only validates its relevance but also highlights its potential to enhance leadership practices and team performance in such essential sectors.
Research about humble leadership and team performance is limited internationally and lacking in Jordan. These research gaps are not gaps per se; they are opportunities for more understanding of the concepts explored. Unlike other countries, the healthcare system in Jordan tends to be managed by managerial styles such as autocratic leadership rather than leadership styles such as humble leadership. So, it is timely for nursing leaders to be humble when managing their nursing teams. Therefore, the present study is part of a project aimed at investigating the influence of humble leadership on team performance in Jordanian healthcare and academic settings. Understanding the effect of humble leadership on team performance in Jordan will pave the road for more impactful nursing leadership.
Humble leadership is a trait that may go unrecognized but holds considerable sway (Mrayyan, 2023). As the healthcare system is intricate and affects employees’ lives, humble leadership becomes more crucial. Consequently, humble leadership will never be a drawback; it strengthens teams, fosters creativity, and, as a result, leads to enhanced performance (Mrayyan, 2023). So, cultivating humility can make a substantial impact.
Humble leadership entails recognizing and appreciating the efforts of others, fostering approachability, embracing mistakes, and inspiring employees to voice their thoughts and concerns while striving harder (Flood-Stith, 2018; Kelemen et al., 2023; Luo et al., 2022). Compared to other leadership styles, humble leadership stands out as a distinct construct (Luo et al., 2022). Humble leadership necessitates attributing credit to others, employing inclusive language when discussing work and achievements, and discerning when to seek assistance (Flood-Stith, 2018; Kelemen et al., 2023; Luo et al., 2022). Thus, humble leaders shift their attention away from themselves and embrace influence and power (Fabian, 2021; Reiland, 2022). Finally, humble leadership focuses on personal connections and involves making deliberate choices based on openness and trust in work environments (Reiland, 2022).
Humble leadership fosters favorable outcomes, including innovation, adaptability within the organization, active involvement of employees, collaboration (Luo et al., 2022; Reiland, 2022), and team performance (Rego et al., 2019). The latter is essential to organizational efficiency (Towler, 2020). Team performance is about team effectiveness as team members yield superior outputs, resulting in “performing well” teams (Chen et al., 2018; Thompson et al., 2009; Towler, 2020), which is one of the metrics of team effectiveness (Towler, 2020). The integration of humble leadership with team performance represents a complex process that can greatly improve both the dynamics and results of a team. Humble leaders increase team performance by prioritizing team goals over individual goals; they foster a team culture that, in turn, increases collaboration, communication, trust, job engagement, innovation, taking prudent risks, and job satisfaction (Mrayyan, 2023). More specifically, humble leaders emphasize the importance of team objectives over individual accolades, which motivates team members to collaborate more efficiently, share knowledge openly, and support one another’s growth (Chintakananda et al., 2024; Mrayyan, 2023). This leadership style results in a strong sense of unity and shared purpose while minimizing internal competition, both of which are vital for optimal team performance.
Furthermore, humble leadership cultivates an atmosphere where humility is embraced as a collective value, promoting a culture of emulation among team members (Chintakananda et al., 2024; Mrayyan, 2023). This leadership approach fosters a supportive and respectful environment, which is essential for achieving high performance (Reiland, 2022). Additionally, humble leadership encourages open lines of communication, facilitating the identification and resolution of issues more effectively, thereby enhancing overall team performance (Bennetts, 2024). Furthermore, humble leadership mitigates the influence of ego-driven decisions, contributing to a balanced work environment that is crucial for sustaining high morale and team cohesion (Zia Ud Din et al., 2024). Ultimately, humble leadership promotes the generation of new ideas, fostering creativity that significantly boosts team performance (Rego et al., 2019). Teams guided by humble leaders tend to be more adaptable and better prepared to confront challenges (Fabian, 2021).
There is a lack of research on the correlation between humble leadership and team performance in Jordan. This study was part of an extensive research endeavor that sought to investigate the influence of humble leadership on team performance in nursing in Jordan. Prior studies conducted using this dataset had pursued diverse objectives, such as analyzing data about individual concept scores. Internationally, while a growing body of research explores the impact of humble leadership on team performance, the degree to which humble leadership enhances team processes remains largely unknown (Rego et al., 2019; Ye et al., 2020). Thus, this study assessed predictors and variances in humble leadership and team performance in nursing, considering sample characteristics and the overall concept scores. The current study is essential for understanding humble leadership and team performance.
Purpose and Significance
Humble leadership is widely regarded as a positive concept within the contemporary work environment; it is a crucial factor in shaping work settings. The study of humble leadership has gained significant attention in recent years as it promotes the collective success of the group by offering a helpful teamwork atmosphere (Owens & Hekman, 2012, 2016). Nevertheless, some perceive humble leadership as a display of vulnerability; humble leaders are viewed as incompetent and indecisive (Owens & Hekman, 2016).
A few studies were conducted on the impact of humble leadership on team performance (S. Liu et al., 2022; Owens et al., 2013; Owens & Hekman, 2012, 2016; Rego et al., 2019; Ye et al., 2020). However, the few exploring this relationship had discovered a positive correlation, indicating favorable outcomes. Limited research focused on the effect of sample characteristics on humble leadership and team performance (Ye et al., 2020). Mrayyan (2023; Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024) were the sole researchers conducting a forecast and comparative analysis. The findings revealed that humble leadership positively impacted team performance, with variations in leader-team dynamics being influenced by factors such as full-time employment and quality efforts.
This study would fill the research gap in nursing leadership by examining the impact of humble leadership on nursing team performance, taking into account the healthcare landscape and cultural nuances in Jordan. The results of this study might facilitate the implementation of humble leadership practices that enhance team performance. In turn, interventions could be tailored based on the specific needs of each group of faculty members, nurses, and students. To help in tailoring these interventions, this study addressed several research questions: (1) What are the levels and dimensions of humble leadership exhibited by leaders? (2) What are the levels and dimensions of humble leadership demonstrated by teams? (3) How does humble leadership impact team performance? (4) How do the characteristics of the sample affect humble leadership and team performance? (5) Which sample characteristics serve as the predictors of humble leadership? (6) Which sample characteristics serve as the predictors of team performance? And (7) What are the differences in the sample’s humble leadership and team performance?
Theoretical Framework
In leadership research, there has been a growing emphasis on humble leadership in recent years (Walters & Diab, 2016). Humble leaders nurture their teams to thrive and excel. By fostering a supportive environment, facilitating team-building, and encouraging job engagement, these humble leaders may enhance their team performance (H. Liu et al., 2023, 2024). Past research highlighted the significance of humble leadership in organizational behavior, delving into its conceptual foundations and implications for workplace dynamics. Owens and Hekman (2012) introduced a theoretical framework that reframes leadership as a guiding process, emphasizing the interplay between leader humility and follower response. This model underscored the crucial roles of leader humility in cultivating a positive organizational climate, promoting team learning, and nurturing employee engagement.
Furthermore, Owens and Hekman (2016) proposed a theoretical framework that illuminated the contagious effects of humble leadership within teams. According to this model, humble leadership positively affected team performance by fostering a collective focus on growth and development, echoing the importance of charismatic leadership, as highlighted by Skakon et al. (2010). Those theoretical advancements contributed to a deeper of the transformative potential of humble leadership, including its relationship with charismatic leadership. The trustworthiness and genuineness of a leader could significantly impact the organization’s well-being. Many researchers explored this concept using established theories. For example, a recent study by H. Liu et al. (2023) built upon the works of Owens and Hekman (2012, 2016), suggesting that humble leadership fosters employee engagement and resilience, ultimately resulting in higher job satisfaction and creativity.
Nevertheless, this leadership style has been linked to psychological concepts. Schein and Schein (2018), the trailblazers of humble leadership, assert that the humble leadership model emphasizes the significance of examining the process of collaboration and humility. This collaborative environment often serves as the breeding ground for innovation to accomplish tasks. The upcoming age of leadership was predicated on the cultivation of trustful work environments and open relationships among colleagues (Schein & Schein, 2018). Thus, current leaders are required to embrace interpersonal connections within the workplace, adopt a people-centric approach, and actively pursue the growth and success of their teams.
Because of the dynamics of the rapidly changing healthcare environments, in our study, we utilized the emerging literature on humility leadership and social information processing theory to propose a connection between a leader’s humility and enhanced team performance (Rego et al., 2019). Social information processing theory, developed by Salancik and Pfeffer in 1978, is a psychological and sociological theory that explores how individuals make decisions and form attitudes within a social context, specifically focusing on the workplace (Cited from Rego et al., 2019). The theory suggests that people rely on the social information available to them in their environments, including input from peers, to shape their perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors (Rego et al., 2019). Linking social information processing theory to humble leadership in nursing can be discussed based on Zhang and Song (2020). That is, humble nursing leaders are critical sources of social information. These leader behaviors influence nurses’ perceive their work environment and peers. For example, when humble nursing leaders acknowledge their mistakes and value others’ contributions, they are providing positive cues for other nurses to do so. These leaders are creating work environments where making mistakes is seen as safe and learning opportunities. This belief is psychological safety per se, which is a key concept in social information processing theory, which is enhanced by humble leadership. As a result, team performance flourishes.
In the current study, we assumed that a leader’s humility fosters a culture of “shared leadership” by encouraging team members to actively participate in “leadership-claiming” and “leadership-granting” interactions (Siangchokyoo & Klinger, 2022). Stepping up and asserting their leadership roles, team members are “claiming” their place as leaders. On the other hand, humble leaders are more likely to validate and empower others to take the lead, creating an environment where everyone’s input is valued and everyone has the opportunity to contribute. This notion aligns with the findings of Chiu et al. (2016), who also emphasized the importance of “shared leadership” for team performance, particularly when team members possess high levels of “task-related competence” (Chiu et al., 2016).
Literature Review
General Overview of Leadership Styles
A wide range of leadership styles exist in nursing, such as transactional and transformational leadership, servant leadership, laissez-faire leadership, affiliative leadership, clinical leadership, situational leadership, and humble leadership (Specchia et al., 2021). The latter leadership style is the focus of the current study.
Humble Leadership
Humble leadership has garnered attention in the field of psychology (Al-mabhee, 2021). The author stated that this leadership style is characterized by the ability to allow one’s accomplishments to speak for themselves. Humble leadership encompasses qualities such as being open to feedback and recognizing the contributions and strengths of others (Zhou & Wu, 2018). This leadership approach fosters a sense of purpose and enthusiasm among employees, motivating them to perform at their best (Al-mabhee, 2021; Cable, 2018). Furthermore, according to Owens and Hekman (2012), humble leadership serves as a virtue that protects the work environment and employees from excessive behaviors.
Humble leadership is associated with strength, while insecurity is linked to fear and weakness (Reiland, 2022). Despite grappling with insecurities, humble leaders derive their insecurities from a position of strength, not weakness (Fabian, 2021; Reiland, 2022). Being humble shall not be confused with insecurity; instead, it should be recognized as a commendable virtue, unlike insecurity. Developing humble leadership can be a challenging task to implement, yet its explanation is relatively straightforward. The first step involves acknowledging and valuing one’s strengths and abilities (Fabian, 2021). Additionally, humble leadership necessitates learning from humbling experiences (Fabian, 2021).
Leading with humility empowers the community (Fabian, 2021). The author stressed that this approach does not diminish the power of leaders; rather, it enhances their authority. Humble leaders are exemplary, focusing on the collective goal above personal gains. They are leaders whom people willingly follow, even in the face of risk (Fabian, 2021).
Humble Leadership Behaviors and Characteristics
Humble leaders exhibit numerous leadership behaviors, including a transparent approach in their work (Mavrommatidou et al., 2022), demonstrating personal excellence in social settings that acknowledge the abilities and contributions of others, humility, and an authentic portrayal of oneself (Wang et al., 2018b).
Humble leadership involves both leaders and their teams embracing a humble mindset. Leaders who display humble behavior are more likely to recognize the strengths of their team members and view them as valuable sources of knowledge and growth (Owens & Hekman, 2012; J. Yang et al., 2019). That is, when leaders have high expectations of the positive outcomes that can arise from humble leadership, they are more inclined to adopt a humble approach consciously. By exhibiting humble leadership, leaders can cultivate a more supportive and collaborative team environment, dating the development and progress of their followers (J. Yang et al., 2019) and fostering increased employee engagement and performance (Owens et al., 2013). As the team recognizes the benefits of the leader’s humble approach, they, in turn, become more humble and trust their leader more (J. Yang et al., 2019).
The characteristics of humble leaders include acknowledging their limited expertise, admitting errors, and taking responsibility for failures (Debara, 2022; Kelemen et al., 2023). However, some researchers and team members may view humble leadership as vulnerable, especially when leaders lack experience and determination. Humble leaders recognize their team’s strengths and ensure their efforts are appreciated by others (Kelemen et al., 2023; Wang et al., Zhu, 2018a, 2018b). Humble leaders demonstrate a willingness to learn (Kelemen et al., 2023), which involves actively listening, being open to new knowledge, seeking feedback, and guiding followers (Kelemen et al., 2023). These leaders are not bothered by the absence of acclaim (Reiland, 2022). Humble leadership is a mindset that focuses on serving others.
Humble Leadership Outcomes
As mentioned, humble leadership has been linked to various significant outcomes, including employee engagement, retention, job performance, and team performance (Al-mabhee, 2021; Owens et al., 2013). Recent research on humble leadership has shown that it guides employee learning and fosters a supportive organizational climate; in turn, it enhances job satisfaction (Afshan et al., 2021; Al-mabhee, 2021; Wang et al., 2018a, 2018b). Humble leadership improves employees’ retention rates and promotes employees’ career advancement.
Humble Leadership and Team Performance
The humble leadership of the leader positively influences team performance (Al-mabhee, 2021). Humble leadership plays a crucial role in enhancing performance at the individual and team levels. At the individual level, it emphasizes the importance of personal and team growth, appreciates the strengths of others, acknowledges personal weaknesses, and fosters a teachable attitude for personal development. At the team level, humble leadership behaviors improve team performance by promoting a collective focus on prioritizing collective goals over personal goals and striving for maximal promotion. The contagious effect of humble leadership leads the team to adopt a humble approach, resulting in a strong collective promotion focus that serves as a reference point for the team’s behavior. This “collective promotion focus” motivates the team to monitor and reinforce their actions continuously, improving team performance.
Humble Leadership and Team Performance and Sample Characteristics
Sample characteristics tend to influence humble leadership and team performance. For example, recent research by Ye et al. (2020) studied the relationships between leaders’ humble leadership, teams’ humble leadership, and employees’ creative performance. The researchers reported that large team sizes and senior tenures are humbler and more creative than their counterparts. Female leaders exhibit higher levels of humble leadership than male leaders (Owens et al., 2013; Peng et al., 2020), and older leaders are humbler than younger ones (Owens et al., 2013). “Higher organizational rank” facilitates different leadership behaviors (Peng et al., 2020), assuming the same trend in team performance.
Although it offers significant advantages, humble leadership has not received the same level of academic attention as other leadership styles. Researchers need to further investigate the impact of humble leadership on team performance, with a particular focus on identifying the specific contexts in which this leadership approach proves to be most effective. Longitudinal investigations across diverse organizational settings, including different cultures and team sizes, are crucial to unravel the nuances and limitations of leadership. Additionally, understanding whether humble leadership is particularly advantageous during times of organizational turmoil, team discord, or rapid transformation, as opposed to more stable periods, merits careful examination.
Methods
Design
To answer the research questions, data were collected through a cross-sectional or transverse research design, which examined various outcomes and attributes in a specific group within a defined timeframe (Polit & Beck, 2019). Data were collected through this design without manipulation; thus, no ethical dilemma arose. However, cross-sectional designs usually had high recall bias, and they couldn’t prove cause and effect; thus, the results were non-generalizable (Polit & Beck, 2019).
Sample
The general population was nursing faculty members, nurses, and students in different academic settings and clinical settings in Jordan. The target population was faculty members, nurses, and students in university and hospital settings, and the accessible population was faculty members, nurses, and students in the selected universities and hospitals. A total of 252 faculty members, nurses, and students were enlisted from public and private universities and hospitals.
Data were collected through non-probability convenience snowball sampling. The process begins with a small group of initial seeds. Using the snowball sample aimed that the initial respondents refer the researchers to other potential respondents they know within the target population (Polit & Beck, 2019). Although personal and section bias was high, this sampling was cost-effective and efficient.
Humble leadership and team performance were the main two variables studied, along with 16 demographics. To ascertain the appropriate sample size, the g*power formula was utilized (Cohen, 1992). The calculations performed using this software revealed that a sample size of 204 was necessary for the general linear model to achieve a statistical power of 0.95, a medium effect size (F2 = 0.15), and an alpha level of 0.05, considering up to 16 predictors. Ultimately, 252 participants were recruited from a potential pool of 400, reflecting a response rate of 63%. This approach ensured a robust study design, as 95% statistical power enhances the research’s ability to detect effects, thereby reducing the likelihood of missing significant findings.
Furthermore, the effect size provided insight into the strength of the relationships between variables or the differences among groups, highlighting the practical significance of the research results. According to Cohen’s (1992) criteria, medium and large effects were distinguished based on the specific measure of effect size used. A large effect size indicated that the research findings had considerable practical implications, whereas a small effect size suggested more limited practical relevance.
The criteria for participation in this study required individuals to possess the capability to engage with technological platforms and to be faculty members, nurses, or students currently enrolled in public or private universities or hospitals. Those affiliated with military-related universities, hospitals, or educational institutions were not considered, as humble leadership might not be applicable in that context.
Ethics
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Hashemite University (Ethics Code: 5/5/2021/2022) on February 28, 2022. This research was conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. This research was conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
All participants provided written informed consent prior to enrollment in the study by stating in the invitation letter that “Answering this survey is your consent form to participate in the current study.” The privacy rights of human subjects were always observed. It was highlighted that participation in the survey was entirely voluntary, allowing participants the option to skip questions or refrain from submitting the online survey altogether. To ensure privacy and confidentiality, the researcher stored the coded responses of participants securely in a password-protected Google Drive. The compiled results were subsequently shared for dissemination purposes. Throughout the data collection process, no ethical issues arose.
The study design incorporated several safeguards to minimize the risk of harm to participants. This was achieved through the approval of the study by the Institutional Review Board (IRB), the acquisition of informed consent from participants, the assurance of confidentiality, and the provision of monitoring and support throughout the study to address any emerging issues. Those precautions offered various potential benefits for participants, the research community, and society at large. Firstly, participants might experience direct benefits, such as access to innovative technologies that could enhance their health outcomes. Secondly, the research contributed to scientific progress by providing valuable insights to the scientific community and society. Lastly, the findings might have a long-term impact, potentially leading to advancements in public health and influencing policy changes. By carefully balancing those considerations, researchers would strive to conduct studies that were ethically responsible and advantageous for both participants and society.
Data Collection Procedures
Over August 1 to 14th, 2022, following a pilot study, data were collected through a Google Form survey for online self-reporting. The first researcher promoted the study to convenience samples, allowing participants to choose whether or not to participate. Additionally, snowball recruiting was employed to encourage individuals to suggest other potential subjects to participate in the study.
Data were gathered using an online survey using Facebook and WhatsApp. The questionnaire was conducted in English, as this is the language utilized for nursing instruction in both undergraduate and postgraduate programs within Jordan. The researchers disseminated the survey link through their personal and professional Facebook accounts, as well as the official Faculty of Nursing pages, to broaden the potential pool of participants. Respondents were also prompted to share the survey with their contacts. The survey was accessible for 2 weeks, and a follow-up reminder was sent after 5 days to clarify that participants only needed to complete the survey once. The online survey was carefully structured to accommodate this specific requirement.
Instruments
This research investigated the concept of humble leadership, which was assessed as a continuous variable using a five-point Likert scale. Consequently, a rating of 3 to 5 was classified as high, 3 was perceived as edgy or borderline, and any rating below 3 was regarded as low.
Leader’s Humble Leadership
The Humble Leadership Scale, created by Owens and Hekman (2012) and later modified by Owens et al. (2013), was utilized in this research to assess humble leadership. Participants were asked to rate their agreement on nine items using a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A humble leader demonstrates a willingness to seek input, particularly critical feedback actively, and values the distinct contributions of others. Leaders with higher scores in humble leadership were considered more humble.
Humble leadership was measured based on three key aspects. Firstly, it involved a leader’s ability to perceive oneself, known as WSSA, accurately. Secondly, it encompassed their humble self-awareness of their strengths and weaknesses, referred to as AOSC. This self-awareness enabled leaders to establish connections with their followers and effectively manage their vulnerabilities. Furthermore, leaders who scored high in those dimensions demonstrated generosity and valued the abilities and efforts of others. Lastly, teaching aptitude (TA) played a crucial role in humble leadership, as leaders who excelled in this dimension were open to new ideas, feedback, and continuous learning. Such leaders exhibited open-mindedness and a strong desire to acquire knowledge.
The original researchers established the validity and the reliability of the scale. Qualitatively, Owens and Hekman (2012) used inductive analysis of interviews with leaders to conceptualize leader humility. The Humble Leadership Scale had criterion-related and incremental validity, and it is reliable and has predictive value (Chintakananda et al., 2024). In this study, the scale score was calculated by averaging the ratings of the nine items. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for those nine items was found to be .94 in the current study, slightly lower than the coefficient of .95 reported by Owens et al. (2013). This high level of dependability indicated that participants generally agreed on the assessment of a leader’s humble leadership, which was supported by the findings of Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b).
Team’s Humble Leadership
Owens et al. (2013) revised their peer-report scale of eight items to evaluate a team’s humble leadership. Participants were asked to rate those eight items on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The team members demonstrated their willingness to acknowledge uncertainties, appreciated the contributions of their peers, and remained receptive to learning from one another.
The scale’s latest iteration demonstrated an alpha reliability coefficient of .95 for the eight items, showcasing an enhancement compared to the .92 previously reported by Owens et al. (2013). The alpha reliability coefficient of the 17-item Humble Leadership Scale, which comprised nine items related to leaders’ humble leadership and eight items related to team’s humble leadership, was found to be .96 in the current study. This high coefficient indicated a strong internal consistency. Those results demonstrated a consensus among team members regarding the presence of humble leadership, which aligned with the findings of Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b).
Team Performance
Thompson et al.’s (2009) Team Performance Scale was utilized to evaluate team performance. This scale, consisting of 18 items, assessed team performance on a scale of 0 (never) to 6 (always). In this study, team performance was treated as a continuous variable. The scoring system for this scale was as follows: A score of 0 to 2.99 indicated that the team needed improvement in team building; a score of 3 to 4.99 indicated that the team was functioning well but should continue working on teamwork, with the leader reflecting on both successful and unsuccessful aspects; and a score of 5 or higher indicated excellent team performance, and that the leader should discuss effective teamwork and communication. The original scale demonstrated discriminate validity as it accurately differentiated between teams, and it was highly reliable, as demonstrated by factor analysis. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the initial study was .97, while for the current study, it was .98.
Data Analyses
Before analysis, data underwent cleansing and assessment by creating histograms. Those procedures did not uncover any noteworthy deviations (Polit & Beck, 2019). The assumptions underlying the parametric tests were evaluated through various statistical techniques. The Q-Q plot was used to assess the normality of the data. The larger sample variance was determined to be less than four times the smaller sample variance, signifying that the variance was homogeneous. However, the independence assumption was violated because the sample was non-probability in nature. Finally, a visual inspection did not reveal any outliers (Polit & Beck, 2019). It was essential to evaluate multicollinearity in models with multiple predictors to verify that the predictors were not highly correlated with each other, as this could lead to inaccurate regression coefficient estimates. The analysis showed no evidence of very high standard errors for the regression coefficients, and no substantial changes in the coefficients were found when adding predictors (Polit & Beck, 2019).
The survey questions were carefully designed to ensure comprehensive responses, resulting in little missing data for this study, with no missing data replacement. In this study, the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS; IBM, 2017, version 25) was employed at a significance level of 0.05 to produce descriptive statistics such as the means, standard deviations, frequencies, and percentages.
The characteristics of the sample were described and operationally defined in Table 1, including (1) title, (2) academician specialization, (3) students’ major, (4) nurses’ area of work, (5) the type of the sector of work/study, (6) accredited organizations, (7) quality initiatives in organizations, (8) gender, (9) marital status, (10) time commitment, (11) level of education, (12) age, (13) years of work experience of employees, (14) years of leadership experience of employees, (15) organizational decision-making styles, and (16) participants’ roles.
Sample Characteristics (N = 252).
Some totals do not = 252 because of missing data.
To answer the first and second research questions, humble leadership and team performance were analyzed by reporting the means, standard deviations, and overall mean scores. The total scores for humble leadership and team performance were calculated and examined for correlations to answer the third and fourth research questions. To answer the fifth and sixth research questions, the General Linear Model (GLM) was used to investigate whether the characteristics of the sample (16 independent variables) predicted humble leadership and team performance (two dependent variables; Polit & Beck, 2019). Before data analysis, the four assumptions associated with a linear regression model were assessed for normality, linearity, sphericity, and independence (Polit & Beck, 2019), and no critical violations were found.
To answer the seventh research question, t-tests (when having continuous dependent variables and two groups) or one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA; when having continuous dependent variables and three groups) were conducted using the total scores of the sample’s humble leadership and team performance. After conducting ANOVA, the post hoc tests were carried out using Scheffé’s method to identify the origins of discrepancies.
Results
The sample consists of 252 full-time participants distributed as 66 faculty members (26.20%), 93 nurses (36.80%), and 93 students (36.80%). Most of the participants were married females with varied educational degrees; they were experienced faculty members and nurses. There were 136 participants from public organizations (n = 136; 54.00%) and others from private ones (n = 116; 46.00%). Most faculty members and nurses were under 35 years old. Nurses were working in units (n = 96, 60.00%) in hospitals that were accredited or had quality initiatives and mixed decision-making styles, which also applied to faculty members and students; most universities were accredited or had quality initiatives. Other characteristics are listed in Table 1.
Operationalization of the Humble Leadership
Answering the first research question using the overall scores of the variables showed that leaders and teams were humble. The average rating for a leader’s humble leadership on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) was 3.67 (SD = 0.91). Similarly, the average rating for a team’s humble leadership was 3.67 (SD = 0.86). The average rating for humble leadership encompassing leaders and teams was 3.67 (SD = 0.85).
Table 2 displayed the average scores of a humble leader, with the highest two scores being receptivity to others’ views (M = 3.78, SD = 1.08) and appreciating others’ strengths (M = 3.76, SD = 1.12). On the other hand, the leader’s admission of not knowing something (M = 3.47, SD = 1.11) and recognition of others’ superior knowledge and skills (M = 3.59, SD = 1.11) received the lowest average scores. Table 3 displayed the average scores of a humble team, which was most evident in the members’ willingness to learn from one another (M = 3.82, SD = 0.97) and their openness to new ideas (M = 3.71, SD = 1.04). However, the team scored lower in acknowledging their lack of knowledge (M = 3.55, SD = 1.00) and recognizing when others possess greater knowledge and skills (M = 3.64, SD = 0.98).
Operationalization of the Leader’s Humble Leadership (N = 252).
Note. The scale was rated as SA = strongly agree (5), A = agree (4), N = neutral (3), D = disagree (2), SD = strongly disagree (1). SD = standard deviation.
Operationalization of the Team Humble Leadership (N = 252).
Note. The scale was rated as SA = strongly agree (5), A = agree (4), N = neutral (3), D = disagree (2), SD = strongly disagree (1). SD = standard deviation.
Operationalization of the Team Performance
Answering the second research question, using the overall scores of the variable, showed that the average overall team performance score for the current sample was 3.51 (SD = 1.42), on a rating ranging from 0 (none of the time) to 6 (all of the time). This finding suggested that the team was operating satisfactorily, falling within the range of 3–4.9, which signified successful collaboration. Nevertheless, there was still potential for growth, and the team leader should actively participate in conversations and self-reflection to pinpoint strengths and areas that need improvement.
The team’s highest mean scores in terms of performance were associated with team members expressing their diverse opinions (M = 3.60, SD = 1.55) and all team members actively participating in discussions (M = 3.59, SD = 1.67). On the other hand, the team’s lowest mean scores were observed when team members shared and received criticism without taking it personally (M = 3.29, SD = 1.62) and when conflicts were resolved through compromise, with each member making concessions (M = 3.36, SD = 1.59; Table 4).
Operationalization of the Team Performance (N = 252).
Note. The scale was rated as 0 = none of the time; 3 = some of the time; 6 = all of the time. SD = standard deviation.
Humble Leadership and Team Performance
Answering the third and fourth research questions revealed a moderate correlation between humble leadership and team performance (r = .63, p = .001). At a .01 significance level (two-tail), correlations were performed based on the total scores of the concepts. Table 5 shows detailed correlations.
Correlation Matrix of the Overall Humble Leadership and Team Performance.
Correlation is significant at the .01 (two-tailed).
Correlation is significant at the .05 (two-tailed).
Predictors of the Overall Humble Leadership and Team Performance
The GLM was used to answer the fifth research question. It determined if the characteristics of the samples, which were the independent variables, could predict the overall humble leadership, which was the dependent variable. Those predictors were determined based on the researchers’ interests. Some of those predictors were commonly addressed in various studies, such as Chiu et al. (2016) and S. Liu et al. (2022).
All sample characteristics were entered into the analysis, and the model intercept was significant (F = 5.60, df = 1, p = .02; not reported in tables). Faculty members’ or nurses’ years of work experience or students’ level of study was the only significant predictors (F = 5.20, df = 1, P = .02, R2 = .203, Adjusted R2 = .07; not reported in tables). This result indicated that 7% of the variance in the overall humble leadership was attributed to faculty members’ or nurses’ years of work experience or students’ level of study.
The GLM was used to answer the sixth research question. It determined if the characteristics of the samples, which were the independent variables, could predict the overall team performance, which was the dependent variable. All sample characteristics were entered into the model, and the model intercept was insignificant (F = 1.44, df = 1, p = .23; not reported in tables). Faculty members’ or nurses’ education or students’ level of study was the only significant predictor (F = 9.33, df = 1, p = .003, R2 = .235, Adjusted R2 = .10; not reported in tables). This result indicated that 10% of the variance in team performance was attributed to faculty members’ or nurses’ education or students’ level of study. The low R-squared numbers did not necessarily mean the statistical model was inadequate. Even with a low R-squared, a small p value still showed a genuine connection between the important predictors and the response variable (Minitab Blog Editor, 2014). The low R-squared could mean the current data had a naturally higher level of unpredictable variation (Minitab Blog Editor, 2014). Many psychologists reported that R-squared values below 50% suggested that people were quite unpredictable, which might be the situation in our study (Minitab Blog Editor, 2014).
Significant Differences in the Overall Humble Leadership and Team Performance
Answering the seventh research question indicated that the non-nursing students exhibited more humble leadership than the nursing students (p = .01). Moreover, the faculty members, nurses, and students involved in quality initiatives at their respective organizations or universities demonstrated higher levels of humble leadership (p = .01). Additionally, the results of the ANOVA analysis revealed that the nursing faculty members displayed superior team performance compared to the nurses and nursing students (p = .02; Table 6). Scheffé’s post hoc identified the origins of discrepancies in humble leadership; as expected, the nursing faculty members were the most humble leaders, and the students were the less humble as they were still not exposed to the whole concept.
Significant Differences in the Overall Humble Leadership Using T-Test or F-Test.
Note. Data presented as M (mean) ± SD (Standard Deviation).
Scheffé’s post hoc test followed the Analysis of Variance Test (ANOVA) = faculty members > nurses > students.
The nursing faculty members exhibited superior team performance compared to the non-nursing faculty members (p = .04). The ANOVA analysis revealed that the nurses displayed higher team performance than the nursing faculty members and the nursing students (p = .03; Table 7). Scheffé’s post hoc identified the origins of discrepancies in team performance; the nurses had the highest performance, which was necessary for clinical practice, while the least was for the students as they were still passing the road to real experience.
Significant Differences in Team Performance Using T-Test or F-Test.
Note. Data presented as M (Mean) ± SD (standard deviation).
Scheffé’s post hoc test followed the Analysis of Variance Test (ANOVA) = nurses > faculty members > students.
Discussion
Leaders and teams exhibited a notable degree of humility. The team operated with a commendable level of efficiency and effectiveness. Humble leadership significantly enhanced team performance. A common factor influencing both humble leadership and team performance was the years of work experience or the students’ level of study. The nursing faculty members demonstrated superior team performance compared to their non-nursing counterparts.
Furthermore, the nurses surpassed both the nursing faculty members and the students in terms of team performance. The non-nursing students displayed greater overall levels of humble leadership than nursing students. Participants who were engaged in quality initiatives within academic and healthcare environments showed increased levels of humble leadership.
Based on the social information processing theory that informed this study, it could be inferred that our leaders did not implement shared leadership, potentially leading to a diminished sense of psychological safety. Nevertheless, task-related competence greatly influenced the team’s performance (Chiu et al., 2016; Rego et al., 2019). Therefore, leaders must adopt “shared leadership” by fostering interactions involving leadership-claiming and leadership-granting among team members (Chiu et al., 2016).
Humble Leadership and Team Performance
The first and second questions statistics indicated that leaders and teams are humble, supported by Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b). The findings of Wang and Zhu (2018) and Yao and Liu (2023) further confirm that the participants in the study agree on various aspects of humble leadership displayed by both leaders and teams, indicating a strong sense of affiliation with their respective organizations.
The highest ratings were given to a humble leader’s openness to others’ ideas and recognition of their strengths. Leadership plays a role in empowering followers’ creativity, which applies to humble leadership and a leader’s creativity. Creative leaders foster an environment where team members can freely share new ideas, have confidence in their abilities, and grow (K. Yang et al., 2019; Ye et al., 2020). In line with Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b), we assert that humble leaders establish a psychologically safe space where team members view interpersonal risks in a positive light. Specifically, Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b) found that psychological safety acts as a mediator between humble leadership and follower innovation, ultimately enhancing team performance. We firmly believe that humble leaders should embrace their team’s ideas and strengths through open communication, leading to strong team performance, as supported by Yao and Liu (2023).
On the other hand, the lowest level of a leader’s humble leadership was observed when they openly admitted their lack of knowledge and acknowledged the superior expertise and talents of others. This result contradicts the findings of Debara (2022) and Hu et al. (2018), who argued that humble leaders are characterized by their honesty, avoidance of exaggerating their strengths, and willingness to admit their faults and limitations. The current leaders must be courageous to acknowledge their shortcomings and recognize team members with greater expertise. By doing so, humble leaders can enhance team innovation and performance by expressing gratitude and appreciation toward their followers, as supported by Kelemen et al. (2023). This approach aligns with the “shared leadership” concept proposed in the social information processing theory (Chiu et al., 2016; Rego et al., 2019). The present leaders must actively promote interactions that involve both “leadership-claiming” and “leadership-granting” among their team members (Chiu et al., 2016). “Shared leadership” may contribute to a better understanding of how humble leadership influences team performance.
The team’s humble leadership was most clearly demonstrated by the members’ enthusiasm for learning from each other and their openness to new ideas. Moreover, Zhu et al. (2019) suggested that possessing an insider identity and feeling a sense of belonging within the organization further strengthens this dynamic. According to K. Yang et al. (2019) and Ye et al. (2020), the team was likely to cultivate innovative ideas through their collaborative interactions and shared learning experiences. The outstanding performance of the team can serve as evidence of their humble leadership.
The humble leadership of the team faced criticism for two primary reasons: the reluctance of members to recognize their limitations in executing specific tasks and their inability to appreciate the expertise of others. This situation presents a considerable challenge for our teams. A leader’s humble leadership style influences team members (Zhong et al., 2020). Therefore, the current authors are concerned that the leaders’ inability to admit their lack of knowledge and failure to recognize others’ expertise may spread to other team members. Team members would likely follow the example of a humble leader and openly acknowledge their shortcomings, as Hu et al. (2018) and Kelemen et al. (2023) report. To promote innovation, our leaders must learn to appreciate team members’ skills, contributions, and achievements. This notion aligns with the findings of Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b) that humble leadership enhances teamwork and facilitates growth.
The team exhibited a commendable level of collaboration, though there remains potential for enhancement. This result is consistent with the observations made by Thompson et al. (2009), who highlighted the significance of effective communication within a unified team. The current performance of the team was recognized as a constructive advancement toward attaining an exemplary rating, achieved through their cooperative efforts and the application of evidence-based leadership principles, as supported by Ye et al. (2020) and Zajac et al. (2021). To ensure the delivery of effective and safe patient care, it is essential for multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, including faculty members, nurses, and students, to emphasize both robust teamwork and the implementation of evidence-based practices.
The optimal performance of a team was observed when individuals with diverse perspectives expressed their opinions and all team members actively engaged in discussions. According to Yao and Liu (2023), humble leaders prioritized interactions with their teams and individuals’ well-being. Additionally, they recognized the value of diversity and its positive impact on team innovation (Al-mabhee, 2021; Kelemen et al., 2023). Humble leaders also demonstrated fairness, which could encourage active participation in conversations (Mavrommatidou et al., 2022). Consequently, the humble leadership of a leader might contribute to creating a high-performing team.
On the other hand, the team encountered difficulties discerning between criticism and personal attacks, but they could resolve conflicts through compromise. This finding contradicts the research of Yao and Liu (2023), who argued that humble leaders promote a culture of open and constructive communication to enhance team productivity. Humble leadership encouraged team members to accept criticism by maintaining impartiality and effectively managing conflicts (Ilac & Presbitero, 2022). Teamwork, humble leadership, and good communication in nursing teams are needed for optimal team performance and safe and effective patient care.
Concerning the correlations of the two concepts in the third and fourth research questions, nursing humble leadership correlated significantly with team performance, supported by S. Liu et al. (2022) and Ye et al. (2020). Humble leadership impacts a team’s performance by influencing their team potency, which refers to the members’ belief in their group’s capability to accomplish goals. This finding is similar to that of S. Liu et al. (2022), Rego et al. (2019), and Towler (2020). Similarly, Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b) found that leaders and teams were in agreement regarding the importance of humble leadership. Cooperation initiatives were encouraged by Thompson et al. (2009) due to the team’s effective collaboration. The current study also observed a strong sense of team potency within the present team, which inspired them to perform well and exert great effort.
The correlation between academic specialty, humble leadership, and team performance was negative. Nursing often adopts forceful and authoritarian leadership styles to enhance team performance in healthcare, where the stakes are high. However, humble leadership may not be as effective in labor-intensive work environments. These groundbreaking discoveries contribute valuable insights to the existing body of knowledge. As highlighted by D. Wang et al. (2022), there was a positive correlation between education, humble leadership, and team performance. With time and experience, individuals with higher education tend to develop greater wisdom and humility in their leadership approach.
Predictors of Humble Leadership and Team Performance
The investigation analyzed the demographic factors that predict humble leadership in the fifth research question. Solely, the seniority foretold participants’ views on humble leadership. Senior leaders and humble students were perceived as more trustworthy and humbler, as Cho et al. (2021) mentioned. Humble leaders fostered team autonomy (Cho et al., 2021), potentially enhancing team performance. Teoh and Kriwangko (2022) stated that students with more experience or seniority are expected to possess greater humble leadership.
In relation to the team’s performance regarding the sixth research question, the only notable predictor identified was the educational level of faculty members or nurses, similar to the influence of humble leadership. The relationship between self-efficacy and educational achievement could explain this noteworthy finding. Self-efficacy, a cognitive factor that influences both performance and emotional states, was associated with enhanced learning and cognitive abilities (Black et al., 2019). Consequently, individuals exhibiting higher self-efficacy, which is likely more prevalent among those with advanced education, are expected to show improved team performance as a result of increased team cohesion.
It should be emphasized that the current investigation revealed a correlation between humble leadership and a team’s performance. A study conducted by Asghar et al. (2021) demonstrated that a leader’s humble leadership approach could forecast the self-efficacy of their followers. Rego et al. (2019) also proposed that humble leadership fosters employee creativity, enhancing team efficiency and achieving superior performance.
Interestingly, contrary to our presumptions, the field of work or study, along with accreditation and quality programs, did not contribute to cultivating humble leadership and improved team performance, which could be attributed to the fact that the accreditation and quality measures been implemented across various sectors were perceived as psychosocial risks within the workplace (Alshamsi et al., 2020). These risks might potentially have a detrimental on the psychological safety of the team members. Referencing the work of Zhang and Song (2020), which linked social information processing theory to humble leadership, the psychological safety of the team members is a crucial element in social information processing theory. This psychological safety is typically enhanced by humble leadership, leading to improved team performance. However, the presence of accreditation and quality initiatives appears to negate this relationship.
Differences in Humble Leadership and Team Performance
The seventh research question of the study focused on analyzing the differences in humble leadership and team performance. The findings indicated that the non-nursing students exhibited greater levels of humble leadership compared to their nursing counterparts. This finding is noteworthy, particularly given that nursing education often prioritizes assertiveness and authenticity, reflecting the challenging and essential nature of the profession.
Moreover, individuals engaged in quality initiatives within academic and healthcare environments exhibited elevated levels of humble leadership. Given that the majority of organizations across the globe prioritize quality and accreditation, these endeavors guarantee secure and top-notch patient care. This investigation proposed that well-established quality and accreditation schemes were linked to cultivating humble leadership qualities in leaders. Consequently, humble leaders had the potential to augment the creative output of their employees (K. Yang et al., 2019; Ye et al., 2020) and made valuable contributions to the advancement of quality initiatives and accreditation procedures, which were the central focus of the present study.
The Study Examined the Differences in Team Performance
The nursing faculty members exhibited superior team performance to the non-nursing faculty members, which was quite intriguing. The nursing faculty members are crucial as they play a significant role in assisting aspiring nurses, thus making this finding highly relevant. These faculty members equip students with the skills to handle critical life-and-death situations and navigate ethical challenges in clinical settings. Remarkably, the ANOVA analysis revealed that the nurses surpassed the nursing faculty members and the students regarding team performance, marking a new insight. This result is particularly encouraging, considering that nurses directly engage with patients, their families, and other healthcare teams. As faculty members, our primary objective is cultivating a proficient and efficient nursing workforce that excels in collaborative teamwork. Similar to the study conducted by Markaki et al. (2021), all nursing programs strive to foster a supportive learning community for their students.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
The research reveals several significant findings; however, it is essential to acknowledge certain limitations. The 252 participants are generally a small sample in comparison to the respective population. The sample size is not equally distributed; faculty members: 66 (26.20% of the sample); nurses: 93 (36.90% of the sample), and students: 93 (36.9% of the sample), which may influence the reliability and generalizability of the findings. Also, demographic factors such as age, gender, years of experience, and specific roles within each group may not be equally distributed, compromising the comprehensive understanding of the dynamics of humble leadership on team performance.
The use of convenience snowball sampling to recruit faculty members, nurses, and students for evaluating the relationship between team leaders’ humble leadership and team performance restricted the applicability of the results. More specifically, convenience snowball sampling presents several limitations regarding its generalizability (Polit & Beck, 2019): 1-selection bias: this sampling results in a biased sample that does not accurately represent the larger population; 2-volunteer bias: People who are inclined to recruit others may possess specific traits that distinguish them from individuals who do not participate, resulting in further bias into the results; 3-homogeneity of sample: the sample may lack diversity and exhibit greater homogeneity, restricting the variability within the sample; 4-limited external validity: The derived findings may not be applicable to the entire population; 5-dependence on initial participants: The quality and diversity of the sample are heavily reliant on the initial participants; 6-geographic and social limitations: conducting this study in Jordan restricted the findings to this geographical location, social networks, and culture, which further constrains its generalizability. Thus, integrating convenience snowball with other sampling strategies or conducting supplementary studies to validate findings can help alleviate some of these limitations (Polit & Beck, 2019).
Furthermore, the cross-sectional design utilized in this research did not allow for the establishment of causality, leaving uncertainty regarding whether team performance is a direct result of leaders’ humble leadership. Thus, it is important to examine several significant implications (Polit & Beck, 2019): 1-temporal ambiguity: cross-sectional design provided a “snapshot” of data at a single moment in time. This lack of longitudinal observation makes it difficult to ascertain the direction of causality; 2-the absence of change evidence: this design does not monitor changes over time, which means it cannot offer insights into how the relationships between variables may develop, hindering the understanding of causal mechanisms that involve change; 3-sampling bias: given that cross-sectional studies often depend on a single sample, they may encounter selection biases that can distort the perceived relationships between variables, affecting the generalizability of the results; 4-confounding variables: this design is prone to confounding variables, thereby creating a misleading impression of a causal link; 5-reverse causation: it is ambiguous whether variable A causes variable B or the other way around. Although cross-sectional designs are valuable for identifying associations and formulating hypotheses, researchers generally require longitudinal studies or experimental designs to more confidently establish causal relationships.
The research instruments employed in this study were only subjected to a pilot test. To more effectively address these limitations in future investigations, it is advisable to formulate hypotheses instead of research questions, given the quantitative nature of the study. Additionally, employing probability sampling, utilizing a variety of data collection methods, adopting a longitudinal design, and conducting Confirmatory Factor Analysis to validate the research instruments, specifically the Humble Leadership Scale (Owens et al., 2013; Owens & Hekman, 2012), Team’s Humble Leadership (Owens et al., 2013), and Team Performance Scale (Thompson et al., 2009) within the Jordanian context, is recommended. Moreover, implementing a split-sample approach or cross-validation may enhance the credibility of the predictive models developed from the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) findings.
Another limitation of the current study was the use of self-reported data collection techniques. These methods may introduce various potential response biases (Polit & Beck, 2019): 1-recall bias: individuals may struggle to accurately remember past events or experiences, which can lead to inaccuracies in their responses. 2-acquiescence bias: some individuals may tend to agree with statements or respond positively, irrespective of the actual content. 3-extreme response bias: certain individuals may consistently select extreme options on a Likert scale. 4-cultural bias: cultural norms and values can shape how respondents interpret questions and influence their responses. 5-social desirability bias can indeed affect leadership self-assessments, as individuals may present themselves in a favorable light to align with societal or organizational expectations. To mitigate these biases, researchers can implement strategies such as ensuring anonymity, utilizing clear language in questions, offering balanced response options, and employing mixed-method approaches (Polit & Beck, 2019).
The influence of leaders outside formal roles, such as team mentors and coordinators, was not considered. However, these leaders significantly impacted important team functions, including team building, performance evaluations, and shared goals. These factors have implications for the development of team performance. Drawing from the social information processing theory, our leaders could adopt shared leadership practices to foster the growth and progress of their teams while considering the task-related competencies of team members (Rego et al., 2019). Humble leaders could easily engage in practices such as leadership claiming and leadership granting among team members (Chiu et al., 2016)—such concepts warrant further exploration in future research studies.
The final limitation of the present study lies in the assessment of humble leadership within hierarchical healthcare environments, which presents several challenges (Mrayyan, 2023; Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024): 1-power dynamics that may affect the perception and reporting of humble leadership. Participants might feel compelled to give positive evaluations of their leaders, resulting in skewed outcomes; 2-the complexity of humility, as it encompasses various dimensions such as self-awareness, receptiveness to feedback, and recognition of others. Effectively capturing all these aspects within a single measurement instrument can prove difficult; 3-cultural variations: Different cultural norms and values can shape the understanding of humility. What is deemed humble in one culture may not be interpreted similarly in another, complicating the creation of a universally applicable measurement tool; 4-the absence of standardized instruments specifically tailored to assess humble leadership in healthcare and academic contexts, leading to inconsistencies in measurement methods and results; 5-contextual elements in which leadership occurs can influence perceptions of humility. To address these limitations, it is essential to employ a blend of qualitative and quantitative methodologies, develop culturally sensitive measurement tools, and utilize multiple data sources to validate findings.
Implications
This research highlights the importance of adopting a humble leadership approach in nursing teams to enhance performance. The study findings have various implications, as follows:
Theoretical Implications
Owens and Hekman (2012) established a theoretical framework for humble leadership, which highlights behaviors such as recognizing personal limitations, valuing the strengths of others, and being receptive to feedback. In 2016, they further developed this framework by investigating the impact of leader humility on team performance. The authors suggested that humble leadership generates a “contagion effect,” whereby team members replicate humble behaviors, resulting in a collective sense of humility and a unified commitment to achieving team objectives (Skakon et al., 2010). This dynamic ultimately contributes to improved team performance. When applied to faculty, nurses, and students, humble leadership can yield significant benefits, such as fostering collaboration, trust, and innovation within teams. In environments like healthcare and education, where teamwork is essential, humble leadership has the potential to enhance outcomes by creating a supportive and inclusive atmosphere.
Additionally, humble leadership can boost team performance by promoting job engagement, resilience, job satisfaction, and creativity among team members (H. Liu et al., 2023, based on Owens & Hekman, 2016), especially in a collaborative setting (Schein & Schein, 2018). According to social information processing theory, humble nursing leaders play a crucial role as sources of social information, contributing to friendly work environments and psychological safety, which are key components of this theory (Rego et al., 2019; Zhang & Song, 2020). Our leaders may also implement shared leadership practices to advance their teams while taking into account the task-related competencies of team members (Rego et al., 2019).
Practice and Education Implications
Humble leadership is contagious if the leaders promote a culture of “shared leadership” by encouraging team members to actively participate in “leadership-claiming” and “leadership-granting” (similar to Siangchokyoo & Klinger, 2022). Team members are active in “claiming” their place as leaders, pending the presence of “task-related competence” (consistent with Chiu et al., 2016). The study found that work experience and education were the only significant predictors of humble leadership and team performance. Therefore, leadership must provide support, allocate resources, facilitate effective communication, empower individuals, invest in knowledge, and prioritize education among faculty members and nurses. By doing so, humble leadership can be cultivated, leading to strong team performance. Humble leadership is a competitive advantage in organizations as it increases workers’ job engagement, job satisfaction, and, in turn, job retention in the long run, supported by Chandler et al.’s (2023) meta-analysis of humble leadership and Kelemen et al.’s review and synthesis of leaders expressed humility (2023). Shedding light on theoretical frameworks may increase our understanding of the effect of humble leadership on team performance. More research utilizing those theoretical frameworks is recommended to expand the body of knowledge on humble nursing leadership and team performance.
Here are several effective strategies for cultivating humble leadership within healthcare environments (Mrayyan, 2023; Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024): 1. exemplify humility: the leaders openly recognize their errors and demonstrate a readiness to learn from others; 2. encourage transparent communication: consistently organize team meetings that allow every member to share their insights; 3. empower staff: commit to professional development initiatives that facilitate the growth of team members; 4. nurture a collaborative culture: dismantle hierarchical structures to foster an inclusive atmosphere, promoting interdisciplinary collaboration to harness varied viewpoints; 5. emphasize psychological safety: establish a setting where team members feel secure in taking risks and admitting errors, addressing conflicts constructively while ensuring mutual respect; 6. acknowledge and value contributions: frequently recognize the hard work and accomplishments of team members, expressing gratitude for their dedication; 7. deliver constructive feedback: provide feedback that is specific, actionable, and aimed at fostering growth rather than merely criticizing, while also being receptive to feedback from team members.
Humble leadership should integrated into cross-cultural leadership development. This approach significantly impacts team performance in several ways: 1-establishing trust and inclusivity: humility in leadership promotes transparency and empathy, which is vital for cultivating trust among team members from diverse cultural backgrounds. Inclusive practices contribute to enhanced collaboration and overall morale; 2-enhancing cultural intelligence: humble leaders exhibit a willingness to learn and adapt, which is particularly important in cross-cultural contexts. They proactively strive to comprehend various cultural norms and values, thereby enhancing cultural intelligence. This adaptability is instrumental in bridging cultural divides and fostering a unified team atmosphere.
For education, incorporating nursing courses focusing on humble leadership, team building, performance, and effectiveness into the curriculum to train future nurses effectively is crucial. The incorporation of humble leadership and team performance into the development of nursing education curricula holds considerable importance for cultivating the next generation of healthcare leaders. The following are key considerations (Al-Rjoub & Mrayyan, 2024; Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024): 1. Aligning with competency-based education to ensure that nursing programs meet the competencies associated with leadership and teamwork. This strategy can be achieved by utilizing frameworks such as the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses (AACN) essentials to inform curriculum design; 2. Embedding reflective practices to promote student introspection regarding their leadership approaches and team interactions. This strategy can be facilitated through the inclusion of journaling, peer evaluations, and mentorship initiatives within the curriculum; 3. Incorporating leadership training: Nursing programs should feature modules dedicated to humble leadership, focusing on self-awareness, active listening, and the appreciation of team contributions. This strategy can be implemented through the use of case studies, role-playing exercises, and simulations to instruct students on leading with humility and encouraging collaboration; 4. evaluating outcomes by consistently assessing the effects of leadership training on student performance and patient care. This strategy can be accomplished through surveys, focus groups, and performance metrics to gauge the curriculum’s effectiveness.
Additionally, nurse managers can benefit from training and development programs emphasizing humble leadership skills, which are highly desirable. Faculty members and nurses must receive staff development and action-learning training to foster humble leadership. More specifically, training programs aimed at enhancing teamwork and communication are essential for improving team performance (Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024). The concept of teamwork is closely aligned with the tenets of humble leadership, which emphasizes the importance of collaboration and collective achievement. In the context of healthcare, effective teamwork is crucial; therefore, promoting humble leadership can lead to improved patient outcomes, such as increased patient safety. There is a need for courses that concentrate on values-based leadership, change management, and the cultivation of an engaging organizational culture. Such programs would foster humility by emphasizing personal development and nurturing a culture of trust and collaboration. Establishing trust and collaboration within teams is vital, as these elements are fundamental to the practice of humble leadership (Mrayyan, 2023; Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024).
Policy Implications
The implications for the development of organizational policies aimed at fostering humble leadership and improving team performance are as follows (Al-Rjoub & Mrayyan, 2024; Mrayyan & Algunmeeyn, 2024; Rego et al., 2019: 1. leadership development initiatives: organizations should prioritize training programs that focus on humility, self-awareness, and collaborative abilities. This strategy can be achieved by implementing mandatory workshops that promote open communication and cultivate a culture of mutual respect; 2. recruitment and selection processes: hiring practices should aim to identify candidates who exhibit humility and a team-oriented approach. This strategy can be accomplished by integrating behavioral interview questions and psychometric evaluations to assess humility and interpersonal competencies; 3. performance assessment criteria: conventional performance metrics may fail to recognize the importance of humility and team-centric behaviors. This strategy can be addressed by revising evaluation frameworks to incorporate metrics such as team collaboration, employee engagement, and psychological safety; 4. recognition and reward mechanisms: focusing solely on individual accomplishments may undermine team-oriented behaviors. This strategy can be remedied by establishing recognition programs that honor team achievements and collaborative efforts; 5. diversity and inclusion initiatives: humble leadership promotes an inclusive atmosphere where diverse viewpoints are appreciated. This strategy can be facilitated by formulating policies that enhance diversity in leadership positions and support inclusive decision-making practices.
Conclusion
This research has significantly enhanced our understanding of the relationship between humble leadership and team performance. Humble leadership has a contagious effect, promoting improved team performance through the concept of “shared leadership.” It encourages team members to engage in “leadership-claiming,” “leadership-granting,” and a collective emphasis on growth and development, as well as fostering social information exchange, supportive work environments, and psychological safety. The findings of this study are particularly relevant for nursing leadership, as they unveil new and important insights. These findings will stimulate further empirical and qualitative research into the effects of humble leadership on team performance, utilizing various theoretical frameworks. It indicates that humble leaders cultivate an environment that is favorable for improved team performance, enabling team members to self-manage toward innovative results. Consequently, it is vital to establish leadership protocols that endorse humble leadership to enhance team performance.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
Everyone who participated in this study has the authors’ undying appreciation.
Author Note
The authors listed meet the authorship criteria according to the latest guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. They agree with the manuscript and have approved its content before submission or resubmission.
Ethical Consideration
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Hashemite University (Ethics Code: 5/5/2021/2022) on February 28, 2022. This research was conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
Consent to Participate
All participants provided written informed consent prior to enrollment in the study by stating on the front page of the survey, “Answering this survey is your consent form to participate in the current study.” The privacy rights of human subjects were always observed.
Author Contributions
Professor Mrayyan developed the study’s conception, abstract, introduction, purpose, significance, literature review, and methodology; analyzed the data and wrote the results; wrote discussion, implications, limitations, summary, and conclusion; did critical revisions; proofread the final paper, supervised the whole work, and worked as the corresponding author. Dr. Algunmeeyn did critical revisions, proofread the final draft of the paper.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data are available for researchers upon request from the corresponding author.