Freedom in the Execution of the Task 53

Humble leadership is associated with providing freedom to the employees:

P_8: “To me, humility means giving employees the greatest possible space.”

This involves providing the employees the greatest possible freedom and just letting them get on with their work without intervening. Freedom in the execution of the task is about providing the greatest possible space to the employees in the execution of their tasks. As a first step, the leader or the leader and the employees jointly define priorities, aims and the framework of the work. How this work is then executed in terms of

defining targets, division of time and way of working lies solely in the employees’ responsibility.

P_16: “[…] for the composition of any kind of text, I granted her complete freedom. I stated some criteria, which had to be met, but she was very self- responsible for the final results […]. Therefore, I gave her very, very much space.”

The leaders tend to hold themselves back in these situations and do not intervene in the employees’ freedom in the execution of the task. As a consequence, employees have greater freedom to act and they only approach the leader on their own will if they need an opinion or a decision for further direction.

4.2.2.1 Outcome of Freedom in the Execution of the Task

Providing freedom to the employees, in general in the execution of their task, and not constraining them by the leader’s behavior is essential for employees approaching their work more independently and more creatively.

4.2.2.1.1 Beneficial for Creativity

Freedom in the execution of the task was explained as giving more freedom and space to the employees. In particular, the fewer employees are controlled by the leaders behavior, the more creative the employees become and the more creatively they work. This space leads to employees who are less restricted or limited by requirements and could therefore act more creatively and incorporate their own ideas.

P_16: “[…] thus, she was able to react more creative, and she was able to bring in her own ideas.”

Leader seven described that employees also become partially more innovative.

Providing freedom in the execution of the task creates less hierarchy between the leader and the employee and the employee can therefore unfold its full creative potential that causes better end results.

4.2.2.1.2 Independent & Engaged Followers

Besides positive accounts for creativity it was stated that the space in their work allows employees to develop and handle their work more independently:

P_6: “[…] freedom leads to employees who can work more creative and they create work more independent.”

The freedom to act allows employees to freely decide how and in which way they fulfill their work and are therefore described as working more independently. Due to this high autonomy, leaders described that the work contains more of the employees’ personality and they show higher commitment and they show greater ownership of their work. Having this space means that mistakes stronger reflect upon the employee and the employees were described as showing higher engagement, they try to avoid mistakes, they work more hours as necessary in order to try new things or they have fun to do so. In particular the higher engagement of the employees was described as contributing to their creativity and innovation.

4.2.2.1.3 Contingency: Personality of the Employee

Whether or not freedom in the execution of the task plays a role for the creativity and innovation of employees is partially described as being dependent on the personality of the employee. Participant fifteen described that providing freedom to the employees in the execution of their tasks as being dependent on the personality of the employees because:

P_15: “Freedom can be granted, if one is sure that things are going in the right direction […].“

He described that employees who are creative receive much more freedom, can execute tasks on their own and receive what they need to fulfill their work. Individuals, who are less creative and who are described as being “less able”, and need much more support and control from the leader and receive therefore, less freedom. Participant sixteen described that the personality should be suitable for the leadership style. He described two examples where showing humble leadership by providing freedom in the execution was used in one case in a beneficial way while it resulted in the other case in the termination of a project. He explained that in the first case the employee used the provided freedom as a chance because the personality of this employee is curious and entrepreneurial. In the latter case, he described that he showed the same leader behavior with an employee, who had far more working and leadership experience but he had to terminate the project because the employee could not handle the provided space. He

described that, in a final meeting, they found out that the employee could not cope with the freedom in the execution of the task. He furthermore described the employee as a non-creative personality and as a more executing person that needs to be instructed to do things.