leadership and courage - cscollege.gov.sg€¦ · leadership and courage by khoo ee wan ... as well...

© 2017 Civil Service College

Research Review

Leadership and Courage By Khoo Ee Wan January 2017

RESTRICTED Leadership and Courage | 2

© 2017, Civil Service College RESTRICTED

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Khoo Ee Wan is a senior researcher with the Institute of Leadership and Organisation Development, and conducts research in a range of talent assessment and leadership development issues.

ABOUT THE INSTITUTE Institute of Leadership and Organisation Development (ILOD) promotes and supports the development of leadership and organisational development capabilities in the public service, so as to build a pool of leaders, managers and practitioners to lead, support and sustain change and transformation in their organisations. We do so by providing research, assessments and diagnostics; learning and development programmes; and consultancy and advisory services to public agencies with the aim of developing effective leaders, engaged employees, high performing teams and excellent organisations. ABSTRACT Singapore public service leaders are expected to lead with courage, but in a context that may discourage courage, not all leaders are observed to do so. Thus, more needs to be done to build courage. This paper examines the meaning of courage, how it applies to a leadership context, the impact of courage, and what can be done at the individual level and at the organisational level to develop courage.

In summary, the research literature describes courage as a voluntary, intentional action undertaken for a worthy goal when external circumstances are perceived to pose a threat or entail personal risks. Courage is required in everyday acts in the workplace and is particularly important in leaders as they have to deal with difficult issues and to innovate, exercise their voice and act on their convictions despite social/organisational conflicts and pressures, and to develop and be resilient in the face of challenges and adversity. A leader is more likely to display courage when there is a compelling reason for him to do so, when he believes he is capable of implementing the proposed course of action and his action will bring about the desired outcome, and when he believes he is or should be a courageous person. External factors such as the salient social norms and the organisational culture, as well as the situational or task context, also influence the display of courage. Courage leads to a virtuous cycle with positive impact on the individual, on other people who witnessed the act of courage, and on the organisation. On the other hand, a lack of courage could lead to a vicious cycle. Leaders can develop courage by clarifying their values and identity, undergoing training/practice or experiences that build their competence and self-confidence, encouraging themselves, and learning from and through others. At the organisational level, efforts can be made to provide compelling reasons for leaders to be courageous, and to develop social norms and an organisational culture that support and prime courage.



What is Courage

Courage is a concept with a long history. It has been studied since ancient times by both

Western philosophers, such as Aristotle, and Eastern philosophers, such as Confucius. There

is no easy way to define courage, and part of the difficulty lies in its subjectivity — different

people have different perspectives and values, which affect what they consider to be courage.

Furthermore, it is difficult to study courage because it is not a tangible reality but can only be

inferred from observable actions.

There are many different conceptualisations of courage. It has been variously studied as a

personality trait, an attitude or mindset, a single behavioural act, an accolade (a label

attributed by observers to someone), a process (where the emphasis is on a person’s

subjective experience), or any combination of these.

Despite the diversity in the definitions that have been offered for “courage”, there are some

common elements. These are:

a voluntary, intentional action

external circumstances that are perceived to pose a threat or entail personal

risks

an important, usually worthy, goal or outcome

Fear is not widely regarded as a key component; the role of fear is complex — while it may be

true that most situations requiring courage involve a sense of fear, the perceived threats and

personal risks may produce varying degrees of fear in different situations and in different

people.

Courage is usually classified based on the type of threat(s) faced: (i) physical (risking death or

physical harm for the sake of a noble or socially valued goal, (ii) moral (risking disapproval,

opposition or condemnation to stand up for what is right or ethical, (iii) psychological (battling

personal doubts, inner fears and struggles for personal growth). However, some studies

suggest that people classify courage based on the contexts and meaningful roles in one’s life

rather than solely on the type of threat. Specifically, courage is categorised as (i)

work/employment courage, (ii) patriotic, religion, or belief-based physical courage, (iii) social-

moral courage, (iv) independent, or alternatively, family-based courage.



Courage is Important to Leadership

Courage in a work context is often associated with specific jobs requiring physical courage in

life-and-death situations (e.g., firefighting) or moral courage in ethical situations (e.g.,

nursing). More recently, there is greater recognition that courage is required more generally

in the workplace, even in office-based jobs. In these jobs, courage is required in everyday acts

such as exercising employee voice, standing up for one’s convictions, taking on leadership

responsibilities when one is not in a formal leadership position, and highlighting problems or

wrongdoings in the organisation.

Courage is similarly needed at higher hierarchical levels, and there is some recent focus on

managerial courage, which is defined as: “the willingness to do what is right in the face of …

a real or perceived danger to oneself or one’s reputation or career” (Van Eynde, 1998). Voyer

(2011) goes so far as to claim that “courage is an essential and necessary ingredient for

effective leadership. Contexts and times can change, but the main characteristics of

leadership (of which courage is central) endure… It is hard to argue that other traits such as

integrity, honesty, altruism, communications skill and decisiveness are not qualities of a good

leader. But leaders could not display these traits if they didn't have courage.” Some note that

there is a very fine line between managerial and moral courage or psychological courage, as

many instances of managerial courage deal with moral or psychological issues.

Leaders’ Acts of Courage

Leaders need courage in a variety of situations. Some key ones are discussed below.

Leaders need courage to deal with difficult issues and to innovate

Leaders have to make many decisions each day, and these decisions often involve difficult

and risky situations, such as when there are high stakes and heavy odds, when the challenges

are uncertain and volatile, when there are competing demands, when the problems are

complex and have no clear and easy solution (i.e., wicked problems), when there is ambiguous

or incomplete information, when the short-term outcomes are at odds with the long-term

outcomes, when they have to challenge conventional wisdom or the status quo, or when

problems are resistant to traditional solutions. It is easy to be paralysed in such situations and

avoid making decisions. Courageous leaders initiate and carry through their decisions. Some

even seize the opportunity to innovate, transform their organisations, or pursue new

enterprises in order to be more effective. At times, courage could entail being willing to admit



to others that one does not have all the expertise needed to solve the problem, and to listen

to and collaborate with others to determine the optimal solution.

Leaders need courage to exercise their voice and act on their convictions despite

social/organisational conflicts and pressures

Peer pressure, power struggles, social norms, and expectations from the organisation or those

in authority often add complexity to the decision making process. Indeed, a study on courage

in the work place by Koerner (2014) found that more than half of the incidents mentioned are

about overcoming social opposition: the individual takes the initiative to confront powerful

others in the organisation in order to remedy a problematic situation.

Leaders may perceive that unpopular views or decisions could have dire social consequences

such as social ostracism, loss of status and peer allegiance, and strained relationships. When

views or decisions are unpopular with bosses, there may be economic consequences such as

threats to job security and career progression, loss of job, retaliation by former employers

(e.g., making it hard to find another job in the industry). As the workplace is often a place

where people meet their social needs and a job typically provides both income and a sense

of identity, courage is needed for leaders to express views and make decisions that are aligned

with their personal convictions.

Leaders may show courage through taking action and/or using their voice for the greater

good. Considering the stewardship role that leaders play, what is for the greater good could

be what is best for the organisation in the long term, the employees, and/or the larger

community as a whole — taking into account not only economic rationalisation but also

ethical reasoning. They typically demonstrate courage by (i) resisting conformity that is not

constructive, (ii) taking responsibility regardless of role or expectations, or (iii) challenging

authority because of disagreements on matters of principle. For example, they may stand up

for what they feel is right for the organisation regardless of the majority view of their peers,

confront the status quo, embrace change in the face of resistance, take responsibility for an

error, take responsibility for an important collective issue over which they have no formal

authority, or speak up against their boss or senior management in situations that are

incongruent with their personal values and beliefs.

Managing social conflicts is particularly relevant to middle managers because, caught in

between the upper management and their subordinates, they need to find ways to link the

vision of the upper management with the oftentimes conflicting realities of their peers and

subordinates.



Leaders need courage to develop and be resilient

Courage is at the heart of personal development. Leaders grow when they confront their

personal limitations and take the risk to change old beliefs or habits and develop new

competencies that will help them be more effective, especially as they take on greater

leadership responsibilities and more challenging assignments. These transitions call for

courage as leaders have to face their inner fears, reconsider their identity, move out of their

comfort zone, and experiment with new and unfamiliar skills rather than rely on tried and

tested approaches. This is risky because failure could lead to self-doubt, guilt, embarrassment

or loss of professional reputation. In addition, when mistakes are made, leaders need courage

to acknowledge their mistakes (especially when the mistakes are public and the

consequences are severe) and to learn from these mistakes.

Leaders also need courage to remain resilient in the face of adversity. Adversity may take the

form of crises or unexpected problems that call for an urgent response from the leader,

significant hardship that is beyond the control of the leader, or harsh feedback and public

criticism. In such adverse situations, leaders need courage to endure the situation, keep their

negative emotional responses under control, and persevere as they carry out their work.

Factors that Influence the Display of Courage

Some leaders may know what is the right decision to make or the right course of action to

take, but not do it because of the risks involved. Yet, other leaders have the courage to choose

to do the right thing despite these risks. Different theoretical models have been proposed to

explain this process of courage. What is clear is that a mix of external circumstances and

personal factors affect the display of courage.

Personal factors

People are more likely to act courageously when…

(i) there is a compelling reason for them to do so

They may believe the goal of the decision/action is important and meaningful, or the

action will have a great positive or non-negative impact on others. This is influenced

by one’s values and convictions, moral beliefs, empathy for others. Leaders who value

serving others and stewarding the organisation are more likely to act courageously for

the good of others or the organisation. Individuals with a strong sense of calling to



their job (whether the calling is inspired by religion, a sense of duty to the community

or a personal mission) are more likely to take personal risks to preserve high moral

standards. People who find meaning in their work or in humanity could also be more

likely to act courageously to make social-moral decisions in job-related situations.

(ii) they believe they are capable of implementing the proposed course of action, and their

action will bring about the desired outcome

This is influenced by one’s confidence or self-efficacy, one’s actual level of expertise,

whether one possesses the skills and scripts to voice and act upon one’s values.

Experiences of success when acting courageously could encourage further courage, as

could simply witnessing others acting courageously. On the other hand, people are

deterred from acting courageously if they perceive that nothing will be changed by

their action, and this perception may be influenced by their own prior experience or

the experience of the people around them.

This is also influenced by the organisational and social support. Organisations with

supportive structures that provide employees with a sense of safety and sense of

shared accountability in addressing the issue, are more likely to encourage courageous

behaviour.

(iii) they believe they are a courageous person or should be courageous

People who identify themselves as courageous and who perceive they have a role in

stewarding the well-being of the organisation and other people are more likely to act

in a courageous way for the greater good, so that their actions will be congruous with

their identity.

External factors

People are more likely to act courageously when…

(i) this is consistent with salient social norms and the organisational culture

Organisations create their own moral universe with their own standards of right and

wrong, and systemic pressure from others in in the same universe can influence one’s

personal conduct and standards. If courageous behaviour is the norm in the

organisation, individuals could be encouraged to act courageously. On the other hand,

organisations that are highly competitive may cause employees to experience great

pressure to do whatever they can to succeed, resulting in a focus on selfishness and

individual goals rather than the common good. Some organisations may prioritise

conformity and social harmony, which deters individuals from acting courageously to



go against the established norms or consensus. Nonetheless, those who have a lower

regard for conformity and obedience to authority, or a greater sense of independence

at work, may be less affected by the salient norms and culture.

(ii) this is primed by the situational or task context

Exposure to certain situations, such as those that support courage, may trigger

courage. Courage may also be triggered by the task or context. For instance, an

individual may have the courage to act in line with one’s values and against the group

norms but not to act against authorities.

Impact of Courage

Courage is contagious and leads to a virtuous cycle.

Positive impact on the individual

Acting courageously builds one’s authenticity because one is acting in accordance with one’s

values and commitments, and this opens the possibility of becoming who one is and develops

meaning in one’s life. Indeed, some people describe their courageous acts as defining

moments that have shaped their identity — in terms of preserving, strengthening, repairing,

asserting, or revising it, or even creating a new identity. People who have acted courageously

frequently report positive feelings such as joy, pride and relief, because they have managed

to resolve tensions that occurred when their values or self and social identity came under

threat.

It is not surprising then that acting courageously also strengthens one’s sense of confidence,

builds a sense of accomplishment, and builds a sense of individual agency (the capacity to

make one’s own free choice and act independently), all of which encourage further courage.

In addition, people who act courageously are often viewed with admiration and respect. They

are also more likely to be viewed as effective performers who are capable of producing long-

term sustained success for the individual and organisation as a whole, and they receive

recognition and career advancement.

It has also been argued that acting ethically is its own reward. Empirical findings showed that

managerial courage was always viewed positively regardless of the outcome of the action.



Even individuals who suffered damaged relationships, career derailment or job loss felt good

about their actions because they were being true to themselves.

Positive impact on other people

An act of courage can inspire followers, peers, or other witnesses to display courage because

of the positive role model. Even if they witnessed a courageous act that did not have a

successful outcome, these observers have a broader sense of what is possible in the

organisation and feel more capable of taking similar courageous actions in future.

Positive impact on the organisation

An act of courage may trigger organisational changes, lead to more effective and moral

decisions, more organisational innovation, improved organisational performance, more

positive culture and norms, better reputation, and greater employee creativity. Leaders who

have the courage to facilitate their employees’ change-oriented suggestions shape the

climate for employees to speak up. Leaders at the middle management level are especially

key because they often need to promote their employees’ ideas towards their own boss, even

when their own boss may be more interested in maintaining the status quo.

Lack of courage could lead to a vicious cycle

On the other hand, when leaders show a lack of courage, there is a negative impact on

themselves. They feel ashamed, remorseful, regretful or frustrated, and may be less likely to

act courageously in the future. There is also a negative impact on other people, and the

broader organisation. People who witness a lack of courage feel resentment and frustration,

and may similarly hesitate from acting courageously. When a leader fails to stand up to

unethical behaviours, their lack of courage could foster a negative climate and further

wrongdoings in the organisation.

Developing Courage in Leaders

Empirical studies on physical courage, moral courage, and psychological courage have shown

that it is possible to build courage. Courage may be developed incidentally, when an individual

learns from his experiences of courage or imitates others who have displayed courage. It is

also possible to develop courage systematically through a structured approach, by focusing

on the factors that influence the display of courage. In other words, the interventions should

be centred around helping people (i) discover compelling reasons to be courageous, (ii) be



capable of acting courageously, and perceive that they are capable of doing so, (iii) develop

an identity of being a courageous person.

Clarify values and identity

People who act courageously have a clear moral compass. Thus, a first step to developing

courage is to help leaders clarify what their personal values and mission are, and how their

work is aligned to these. In addition, they need to be aware of how they have defined their

personal identity, as well as their identity in their various social/organisational roles of leader,

peer, subordinate, member of the organisation and broader community. These efforts can

help them to discover the reasons and circumstances that will compel them to act

courageously.

Training and practice

Training and practice builds competence (knowledge and skills) and self-confidence, which

makes it more likely for an individual to act courageously because he perceives that he has

the competence to carry out the desired action, and is indeed capable of bringing about the

desired outcome. Training and practice may involve building personal governance skills that

boost courage. These include learning how to use emotions as a cue to pay attention to

feelings about issues that require a courageous stance; how to take a reflective pause from

decision-making to collect their thoughts, generate options, gather additional information

and support, and so build momentum towards courageous action; and how to self-regulate

one’s behaviours and reactions in order to manage tough decisions.

Training and practice can take the form of mastery experiences that are purposively created,

with guidance and feedback; repeated practice; role plays and discussions. Training may also

take the form of cognitive modelling, where the individual mentally rehearses being in likely

scenarios that require courage, and practising how to act appropriately, possibly using pre-

scripted responses.

Self-encouragement

Encouragement from others can spur one to display courage. Similarly, self-encouragement

can spur courage when one focuses on the desired goal and think about its nobility and

meaningfulness, and avoids negative thoughts. Leaders can also be taught to assess the

actual, rather than the perceived, risks of a situation, so that they are not deterred from acting

courageously by an exaggerated sense of the risks involved.



Learn from/through others

Leaders can learn vicariously through the experiences of relevant role models. These role

models could also influence leaders with their personal values and how they perceive group

norms. Leaders could also be assigned mentors, who can help them to build courage by

teaching and training them, suggesting where and how to show courage, encouraging risk

taking, clarifying performance and role/identity expectations, highlighting professional

values, providing support and affirmation, and delivering feedback.

Developing an Organisational Environment that encourage Courage

At the organisational level, efforts to influence the display of courage should be centred

around (i) providing compelling reasons for employees to be courageous, (ii) developing social

norms and an organisational culture that supports courage, (iii) developing a context that

primes courageous behaviours.

Provide compelling reasons for leaders to be courageous

Commitment to the organisation or profession drives courageous behaviours that are in the

best interests of the organisational mission or profession. To build loyalty to the vision and

mission of the organisation, the organisation must first ensure that everyone has a clear

understanding of the organisational mission, vision and values. Importantly, what is espoused

needs to be consistent with what is experienced daily by the employees. For leaders, a clear

understanding of the leadership philosophy and values of the organisation may help to

highlight the importance of leadership courage and encourage adherence to these values.

Commitment to the organisation may also be built by delegating appropriate authority to

employees (and providing them with adequate resources and support) so that they feel more

empowered. Collaborative decision-making additionally helps employees to have a greater

sense of personal ownership over issues and concerns, which would encourage them to act

with courage when necessary.

Develop social norms and an organisational culture that support and prime courageous

behaviours

When people act courageously, it is often because the benefits of doing the right thing

outweigh the costs of not doing so, even when the risks are taken into account. There is much

that an organisation could do to develop a supportive social and organisational environment

that boosts the benefits and reduces the costs associated with acting courageously.



A culture of openness and constructive dissent encourages courageous behaviours.

Management needs to continuously solicit fresh ideas and challenge the status quo, and be

seen to welcome alternative solutions and divergent opinions. Employees are more likely to

act courageously, such as speaking up to raise concerns, when there is a sense of

psychological safety which makes them feel that the risks or potential negative outcomes

associated with speaking up are negligible.

Courage can also be encouraged when an organisation provides praise or other rewards and

recognition systems for courageous actions, and do not reward people for decisions and

performance that lack moral strength. Importantly, when employees display courage to raise

their suggestions, concerns and opinions, their supervisors must be seen to respond

adequately to these input, as this will build employees’ sense of efficacy and encourage them

to speak up in future. Otherwise, people’s sense of the possibility for change in the

organisation will be narrowed.

At the same time, the organisation could make courage more salient to all in the organisation

by providing narratives about courageous role models, encouraging sharing of personal

experiences of situations that require courage, and encouraging dialogues about what

constitutes courage. Such initiatives could help the organisation establish norms for what

behaviours are considered courageous in the organisational context, and also prime

courageous behaviour in the organisation. The sharing circles could further be a means for

peers to provide and receive personal and professional support to/from one another as they

develop courage.

Implications for the Singapore Public Service

The importance of courage in the Singapore public service

Courage is arguably even more important in Singapore public service leaders, whose role is

to serve the nation and improve people’s lives by being good stewards of Singapore’s

resources, holding responsibility for the future yet careful to build on the past, and enabling

the achievement of quality outcome. Singapore public service leaders are also operating in a

context where the public is increasingly demanding, vocal and critical. According to a periodic

service-wide survey conducted by the Civil Service College in 2015, more than 90 per cent of

the respondents believe that leaders should lead with courage to rise above difficult

circumstances, to do the right thing in the right way. Yet, only 52.2 per cent of respondents

indicated that they observed courage in up to half of the leaders that they come in contact

with. This suggests more needs to be done to build courage in the Singapore public service.



At the individual level

Individual leaders need to recognise that many everyday actions require courage, and that

their daily actions and decisions matter, as there are consequences for themselves, for the

people around them, for the organisation, and for the people served by the organisation.

Leaders also need to recognise that their actions and the organisational systems that they

create can encourage or inhibit courage in the people around them. Leaders play the dual

role of being courageous individuals as well as facilitators of courageous behaviours by their

followers and peers.

At the organisational level

The context of the Singapore public service may discourage courage. Davidson (2016) pointed

out that the Singapore public service has been repeatedly described by public service officers

themselves as a high-stakes, competitive, and tight environment with limited promotion

opportunities. This means there is limited room for mistakes, and managers tend to conduct

themselves in what is considered the appropriate way. Moreover, the power distance is

strong in the Singaporean cultural context, and the views of those higher-up in the hierarchy

tend to be accepted by those lower down in the hierarchy. This may discourage leaders from

behaving courageously if their action is perceived to go against the established norms, or to

go against those in higher authority. Thus, more effort must be made to build an

organisational culture that supports courage.

Furthermore, policy work often deals with complex issues that have social,

economic/financial and political dimensions. There is typically no clear right or wrong answer,

and public service officers report a lot of uncertainty as to what the leadership values and

supports, and which trade-offs are acceptable. Thus, there needs to be an open discussion on

what is valued by the organisation, so there can be a common understanding of policy

intentions and objectives, as well as the larger context within which a courageous response

will have the greatest impact.

Conclusion

The studies on courage have tended to be theoretical, and even in empirical studies, the select

sampling means that the findings many not generalise to all managerial situations. Cultural

differences in the perceptions of the dimensions of courage, and in the interaction between

personal and situational factors, may similarly mean that not all the findings can be applied

to the Singapore public service. Nonetheless, the data thus far indicates the importance of



courage in leadership, and possibilities for building courage in leaders as well as in the

organisation at large.



References

Amos, B. and Klimoski, R J. (2014) “Courage: making teamwork work well,” Group &

Organisation Management. Vol. 39(1), pp. 110–128.

Becker, G.K. (2007) “The competitive edge of moral leadership,” Management Review. Vol.

3(1), pp. 50–71.

Callahan, D. and Comer, D.R. (2011) “’But everybody’s doing it’: Implications of the cheating

culture for moral courage in organisations,” in Moral Courage in Organisations: Doing the

Right Thing at Work, D.R. Comer and G. Vega (eds.). Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 13–24.

Comer, D.R., and Vega, G. (2011) “The personal ethical threshold,” in Moral Courage in

Organisations: Doing the Right Thing at Work, (eds.) D.R. Comer and G. Vega. Armonk:

M.E. Sharpe, pp. 25–44.

Soon, S. and Goh, H.T. (2016) ILOD Leadership Survey 2015. Singapore: Civil Service College.

Davidson, T. (2016) Speaking up in the Singapore Public Service: Towards Engagement,

Ethics and Excellence. Singapore: Civil Service College.

Gentile, M.C. (2011). “Giving voice to values: Building moral competence,” in Moral Courage

in Organisations: Doing the Right Thing at Work, (eds.) D.R. Comer and G. Vega. Armonk:


Gini, A. (2011) “A short primer on moral courage,” in Moral Courage in Organisations: Doing

the Right Thing at Work, (eds.) D.R. Comer and G. Vega. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 3–12.

Yasin, M.M., Green, R.F. and Zimmerer, T. (1992) “Executive courage across cultures: an

organisational perspective,” International Journal of Commerce and Management. Vol.

2(1/2), pp. 75–87.

Hannah, S.T. and Avolio, B.J. (2010) Moral potency: building the capacity for character-

based leadership. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. Vol. 62(4), pp.

291–310.

Hannah, S.T., Sweeney, P.J. and Lester, P.B. (2010) “The courageous mind-set: a dynamic

personality system approach to courage,” in The Psychology of Courage: Modern

Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J. Lopez. Washington, D.C.:

American Psychological Association, pp. 125–148.



Harbour, M. and Kisfalvi, V. (2012) “Looking desperately for courage or how to study a

polysemic concept,” Qualitative Research in Organisations and Management: An

International Journal. Vol. 7(2), pp. 166–188.

Harbour, M. and Kisfalvi, V. (2014) “In the eye of the beholder: an exploration of managerial

courage,” Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 119, pp. 493–515.

Harris, H. (1999) “Courage as a management virtue,” Business and Professional Ethics

Journal. Vol. 18(3/4), pp. 27–46.

Harris, H. (2001) “Content analysis of secondary data: a study of courage in managerial

decision making,” Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 34(3/4), pp. 191–208.

Hutchinson, M., Jackson, D., Daly, J. and Usher, K. (2015) “Distilling the antecedents and

enabling dynamics of leader moral courage: a framework to guide action,” Issues in

Mental Health Nursing. Vol. 36(5), pp. 326–335.

Hutchinson, M., Daly, J., Usher, K. and Jackson, D. (2015) “Editorial: Leadership when there

are no easy answers: applying leader moral courage to wicked problems,” Journal of

Clinical Nursing. Vol. 24, pp. 3021–3023.

Khoo, E.W. (2015) Stewardship in the Context of Public Sector Leadership. Singapore: Civil

Service College.

Khoo, E.W. (2012) “Managing transitions,” Ethos. Vol. 11. Retrieved: 15 December 2016,

https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Ethos/Issue%2011%20August%202012/Pages/

Managing%20Transitions.aspx

Koerner, M.M. (2014). “Courage as identity work: accounts of workplace courage,” Academy

of Management Journal. Vol. 57, pp. 63–93.

Kruglanski, A.W., Shah, J.Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun, W.Y. and Sleeth-Keppler, D.

(2002) “A theory of goal systems,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, (ed.)

M.P. Zanna. Vol. 34, pp. 331–378.

LaSala, C.A. and Bjarnarson, D. (2010)

“Creating workplace environments that support moral courage,”

Online Journal of Issues in Nursing. Vol. 15(3), p. 1.

https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Ethos/Issue%2011%20August%202012/Pages/Managing%20Transitions.aspx

https://www.cscollege.gov.sg/Knowledge/Ethos/Issue%2011%20August%202012/Pages/Managing%20Transitions.aspx



Le Cornu, R. (2009) “Building resilience in pre-service teachers,” Teaching and Teacher

Education. Vol. 25, pp. 717–723.

Lester, P.B., Vogelgesang, G.R., Hannah, S.T. and Kimmey, T. Jr. (2010) “Developing courage

in followers: theoretical and applied perspective,” in The Psychology of Courage: Modern

Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J. Lopez. Washington, D.C.:

American Psychological Association, pp. 187–207.

Lopez, S.J., Rasmussen, H.N., Skorupski, W.P., Koetting, K., Petersen, S. and Yang, Y.T.

(2010), in The Psychology of Courage: Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S.

Pury and S.J. Lopez. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 23–45.

MacDonald, G.J. (2011) “Faith and moral courage: why a sense of calling matters,” in Moral

Courage in Organisations: Doing the Right Thing at Work, (eds.) D.R. Comer and G. Vega.

Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 75–87.

Matt, B.F. and Shahinpoor, N. (2011) “Speaking truth to power: the courageous

organisational dissenter,” in Moral Courage in Organisations: Doing the Right Thing at

Work, (eds.) R. Comer and G. Vega. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 157–170.

McGurk, D. and Castro, C.A. (2010) “Courage in combat,” in The Psychology of Courage:

Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J. Lopez, Washington,

D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 167–185.

Moberg, D.J. (2011) “The organisational context of moral courage: creating environments

that account for dual-processing models of courageous behaviour,” in Moral Courage in

Organisations: Doing the Right Thing at Work, (eds.) D.R. Comer and G. Vega. Armonk:


Osswald, S., Greitmeyer, T., Fischer, P. and Frey, D. (2010) “What is moral courage?

Definition, explication, and classification of a complex construct,” in The Psychology of

Courage: Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J. Lopez.

Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 149–164.

Palanski, M.E., Cullen, K.L., Gentry, W.A. and Nichols, C.M. (2015) “Virtuous leadership:

exploring the effects of leader courage and behavioural integrity on leader performance

and image,” Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 132, pp. 297–310.

Pury, C.L.S. and Starkey, C.B. (2010) “Is courage an accolade or a process? A fundamental

question for courage research,” in The Psychology of Courage: Modern Research on an



Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J. Lopez. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological

Association, pp. 67–87.

Pury, C.L.S., Lopez, S.J. and Key-Roberts, M. (2010) “The future of courage research,” in The

Psychology of Courage: Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J.

Lopez. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 229–235.

Pury, C.L.S., Starkey, C.B., Breeden, C.R., Kelley, C.L., Murphy, H.J. and Lowndes, A.Y. (2014)

“Courage interventions: future directions and cautions,” in The Wiley Blackwell

Handbook of Positive Psychological Interventions, (eds.) A.C. Parks and S.M. Schueller.

Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, pp. 168–178.

Putnam, D. (2010) “Philosophical roots of the concept of courage,” in The Psychology of


Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 9-22.

Quick, P.M. and Normore, A.H. (2004) “Moral leadership in the 21st century: everyone is

watching — especially the students,” The Educational Forum. Vol. 68(4), pp. 336–347.

Rachman, S.J. (2010) “Courage: a psychological perspective,” in The Psychology of Courage:

Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury and S.J. Lopez. Washington,

D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 91–107.

Rate, C.R. (2010) “Defining the features of courage: a search for meaning,” in The


Lopez. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 47–66.

Reed, D. and Patterson, J. (2007) “Voices of resilience from successful female

superintendents,” Journal of Women in Educational Leadership. Paper 44.

Sekerka, L.E., McCarthy, J.D. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2011) “Developing professional moral

courage: leadership lessons from everyday ethical challenges in today’s military,” in The


Lopez. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, pp. 130–141.

Sosik, J.J., Gentry, W.A. and Chun, J.U. (2012). “The value of virtue in the upper echelons: a

multisource examination of executive character strengths and performance,” The

Leadership Quarterly. Vol. 23(3), pp. 367–382.



Thompson, T.A., Purdy, J. and Summers, D.B. (2008) “A five factor framework for coaching

middle managers,” Organisation Development Journal, Vol. 26(3), pp. 63–71.

Van Eynde, D.F. (1998) “A case for courage in organisations,” Management Review. Vol.

87(2), p. 62.

Voyer, P. (2011) “Courage in leadership: from the battlefield to the boardroom,” Ivey

Business Journal Online. November/December.

Woodard, C.R. and Pury, C.L. (2007) “The construct of courage categorisation and

measurement,” Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, Vol. 59(2), pp.

135–147.

Woodard, C.R. (2010) “The courage to be authentic: empirical and existential perspectives,”

in The Psychology of Courage: Modern Research on an Ancient Virtue, (eds.) C.L.S. Pury

and S.J. Lopez. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 109–123.

Worline, M.C. (2010) “Understanding the role of courage in social life,” in The Psychology of


Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association, pp. 209–226.



Civil Service College, Singapore

31 North Buona Vista Road Singapore 275983

www.cscollege.gov.sg

www.facebook.com/CivilServiceCollegeSingapore

© 2017 Civil Service College, Singapore. All rights reserved. No part of this paper may be reproduced, modified,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,

recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the

Civil Service College, Singapore.

leadership and courage - cscollege.gov.sg€¦ · leadership and courage by khoo ee wan ... as well...

Documents