Abstract
Investment in leadership development programs (LDPs) does not reliably increase leaders’ competence in core socioemotional skills related to self-management, self-awareness, and relationship-building with employees. Training programs focused on self-leadership, in combination with mindfulness practices, have the potential to address this gap. However, robust research that assesses the suitability and efficacy of such programs is lacking. In this article, the results of a systematic review of the literature on self-leadership and mindfulness in the context of LDPs are reported. A total of 52 articles were selected from an initial pool of 284 articles, subjected to textual analysis, and coded in terms of the reported impact levels for all of the examined training programs. This study revealed that training in self-leadership competencies and skills improved stress resilience, job performance and satisfaction, and positive attitudes and increased leaders’ abilities to organize and motivate their teams. Mindfulness training was strongly linked to stress reduction and self-regulation as well as to enhanced sleep and reduced burnout. Mindfulness also appeared to improve job performance and emotional regulation and to increase the ability to establish positive relationships with employees.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The relationship between leadership competence and firm performance is multidimensional, nuanced, and well studied. Employee engagement and motivation are especially important for agile and cross-functional teams (Dusdal and Powell 2021). Furthermore, both factors depend on managerial foresight and leaders’ abilities to foster an appropriate social environment (Edmondson et al. 2019). Even senior leaders must maintain emotional and psychological relationships with employees that extend beyond the immediate concerns of the workday (Nowiński and Haddoud 2019; Stokes 2019; Wolor et al. 2022).
The leadership development programs (LDPs) that instill these capacities for both rising and established leaders remain largely unexplored (Subramony et al. 2018). Two promising types of LDPs seek to teach self-leadership and mindfulness since these capacities are relevant to both leader and leadership development (Day 2000; Day et al. 2014). Whereas leader development is intrapersonal and individual, leadership development is interpersonal and relational and focuses on the establishment of mutual commitment, trust, and respect between leaders and team members. Day (2000, p. 583) described leadership as “an emergent property of effective systems design”. A useful LDP prepares leaders to maintain positive relationships between themselves and members of their teams (Day 2000). Because of this specific need, self-leadership and mindfulness are highly valuable LDP goals.
Self-leadership is an approach to motivation and responsibility that can be contrasted with external leadership or outside direction. Self-leadership is defined by personal responsibility and initiative, setting and monitoring one’s goals, and effectively employing strategies to improve performance or well-being. This construct is positively associated with individual and team performance. Senior leadership appears to play an important role in the development of bonds of trust with and respect for employees (Quinteiro et al. 2016; Yadav and Mishra 2019; Goldsby et al. 2021; Ugoani 2021).
Mindfulness refers to a (complementary) habit of awareness and mental presence regarding one’s immediate surroundings. This factor has also been linked to both job performance at all levels and leadership performance in senior positions (Reb et al. 2019; King 2022). Self-leadership and mindfulness are foundational elements of the broader category of “inner” leadership qualities, including self-awareness, emotional intelligence, and intrapersonal skills (Furtner et al. 2018).
Both self-leadership alone and in combination with mindfulness show substantial promise for LDPs designed to help trainees cope with the psychological demands associated with intense, stressful jobs (Furtner et al. 2015, 2018). Substantial evidence indicates that standard training programs that focus more narrowly on job competencies fail to instill in leaders the confidence, equanimity, and resilience necessary to apply their novel skills successfully in the workplace (Allio 2005; Tharenou et al. 2007; Hylton 2021). LDPs that focus on self-leadership are intended to strengthen those qualities and may therefore be useful for addressing the limitations of other types of programs.
The combination of self-leadership and mindfulness is of particular interest. These two constructs share a core of self-regulatory qualities, and both have direct beneficial effects on leader and firm/team performance. By combining the motivational, performance-related, and organizational benefits of self-leadership with the well-being and epistemic benefits of mindfulness, leaders can become more aware of and more able to control their emotions, behaviors, and ideas, which ultimately helps them develop self-awareness that is intrinsically empathetic and action-oriented (Furtner et al. 2018). These mindful self-leaders can consciously choose courses of action that are in line with their values and become more resilient, positive leaders for their teams (Furtner et al. 2015; Sampl et al. 2017).
In light of the evidence described in this article, both self-leadership and mindfulness training programs are emerging as valuable tools for developing more resilient and effective team leaders. Manifestations of these positive effects can be observed from both theoretical and practical perspectives. This combination of these two powerful tools provides an integrated strategy for leadership that fosters an innovative, resilient, and morally sound culture within companies in addition to increasing personal efficiency.
Theoretically, learning about self-leadership and mindfulness training expands our understanding of leadership as a complex and changing process. By combining knowledge from organizational behavior, psychology, and neuroscience, researchers are able to better understand the cognitive, emotional and behavioral processes that underlie effective leadership (Hoffmann 2023), leading to novel theories that consider a more holistic approach to leadership, namely, “inner” and “outer” leadership (Poetz and Volmer 2024). This cross-disciplinary method promotes techniques that are based upon actual investigations and practical implementations in addition to advancing theoretical concepts.
From a practical perspective, learning about self-leadership and mindfulness training provides leaders with the tools they require to successfully overcome the challenges of contemporary leadership positions. Self-leadership encourages independence and self-management during decision-making by enabling people to accept responsibility for their ideas, feelings, and actions. These skills can be successfully taught through self-leadership training programs (e.g., Krampitz et al. 2023). Building self-awareness and self-efficacy helps leaders cope more effectively with stress, adjust to change, and stay focused in the face of distractions (Harunavamwe and Kanengoni 2023; London et al. 2023). This improves their capacity to uplift and encourage people toward common objectives. By helping leaders develop skills regarding nonjudgmental acceptance and being present in the moment, mindfulness training enhances self-leadership (Kelly 2023). Leaders may handle interactions with other people with openness and understanding by cultivating emotional intelligence, empathy, and resilience via mindfulness activities, including meditation and mindful breathing. Additionally, mindfulness cultivates a profound comprehension of collaboration and connectivity and promotes inclusive leadership approaches that place a premium on diversity and cooperation (Doornich and Lynch 2024). Research on self-leadership and mindfulness training adds to continuing discussions about sustainability and ethics in leadership. Leaders who foster introspection and ethical judgment are more competent at resolving moral conundrums and maintaining integrity in their actions, particularly during stressful situations (Han and Preston 2023). Additionally, mindfulness encourages equitable treatment and responsibility for the environment, which harmonizes leadership techniques with broader goals for environmental and social change.
However, both self-leadership and mindfulness are rarely discussed or studied in corporate contexts. Consequently, a substantial knowledge gap is evident regarding their importance and efficacy (Ugoani 2021; Konte 2022; Lee and Jung 2022). Moreover, currently established leadership development programs remain largely ineffective (Kurniatun et al. 2021).
2 Background
2.1 Implementing self-leadership
The review process employed in the present study relied on a definition of self-leadership that emerged from previous foundational research efforts (Manz 1986; Neck and Manz 1996). These initial theories viewed self-leadership in terms of a set of concepts related to self-possession or control of one’s thoughts (Houghton and Neck 2002). This pioneering research was preceded by examining the influence of self-control (Cautela 1969; Mahoney and Arnkoff 1979). Self-control is a construct that pertains primarily to training and habituation and is firmly rooted in clinical psychology. Its outcomes are presented in terms of changes in habitual behaviors. Another avenue of research has focused on self-regulation, particularly regarding background routines, stable habits, and subconscious processes (Kanfer 1970). The use of the term “regulation” is a result of the influence of cybernetics and control theory combined with the resulting focus on inherent mental or cognitive systems that facilitate reflection on or modification of states of mind in light of changing situational requirements (Carver and Scheier 1981).
A third area of research that contributes to self-leadership theory focuses on self-management. This line of research can be differentiated by its emphasis on moral accountability and personal responsibility. Self-management involves the use of managerial tools such as goal setting, evaluations, and incentive structures to improve or modify one’s performance in the workplace (Luthans and Davis 1979; Manz and Sims 1980; Andrasik and Heimberg 1982). This line of research emphasizes behavioral psychology and the use of strategies to suppress undesirable behavior.
Currently, several models of self-leadership training are available. These models do not correspond directly to the concept’s original theories; instead, they are differentiated by the immediate, practical differences exhibited by the strategies they employ to shift mental habits, thought patterns, and behavioral routines (Manz 1992; Houghton and Neck 2002). Three broad models can be summarized as follows:
-
Behavior-focused strategies emphasize the need to train individuals in behavioral self-control to prevent adverse behavior while encouraging positive and productive behavior. Examples of behavior-focused strategies include self-monitoring or observation, setting concrete goals for oneself, quantifying behavioral metrics, and implementing rewards or punishments for particular behavioral outcomes (Politis 2006; Su and Hahn 2022).
-
Natural reward strategies reinforce the positive elements of a chore or task. These techniques rely on such reinforcement to increase the inner or intrinsic motivation to engage in that task in the future, thereby enhancing behavioral self-control with respect to the desired behaviors (Manz 1992).
-
Constructive thought strategies focus on recognizing irrational inner convictions that might impede one’s personal development and replacing them with constructive mental patterns. Although the analogy is imprecise, these techniques can be compared to the techniques used in therapeutic approaches such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) (Godwin and Hershelman 2021).
These strategies were developed into empirically useful inventories and subsequently validated for use by organizational psychologists and researchers in adjacent fields (Anderson and Prussia 1997; Houghton et al. 2012). A list of relevant inventories is provided in Table 6 (“Appendix 3”).
2.2 Implementing mindfulness
In contrast to the roots of self-leadership in clinical psychology, cybernetics, and organizational behavior, the concept of mindfulness originated in Buddhist philosophy and emerged as a popular psychological/spiritual practice in the West (Kabat-Zinn et al. 1987; Gethin 2011; Dhiman 2020). Mindfulness has been implemented for both study and training purposes (Chan et al. 2016; Teixeira et al. 2017; Droutman et al. 2018). In essence, mindfulness is an inner meditative attitude that is conducive to the achievement of a deep state of relaxation, mental clarity, or enlightenment (Cullen 2011).
A full list of definitions of mindfulness obtained from the articles reviewed as part of this study is presented in Table 7 (“Appendix 3”). For the present purposes, however, the contents of that table can be summarized by describing four critical elements linked to the predominant approaches to mindfulness, including the elements that inform and guide LDPs that rely on mindfulness practices. These four elements are as follows:
-
Consciousness: Mindfulness is (or requires) mental presence and the possession of a state of mind. In this sense, consciousness is the ability to function as an observer of oneself, others, and the outside world and is linked to one’s sense of self (Jha et al. 2007).
-
Awareness: Mindfulness requires mental orientation toward a target, property, or characteristic that is closely related to the Western philosophical concept of intentionality or intentional directedness (Shapiro et al. 2006; Gethin 2011).
-
Attention: A closely related aspect of mindfulness is attention, which combines direction with alertness, effort, or control of one’s mental attitude, resulting in focusing on or delineation of an object of mental regard (Bishop et al. 2004; Siegel 2007).
-
Openness/Nonjudgment: The most explicit emotional and normative element of mindfulness practice involves openness toward the object under consideration, whereby the individual avoids any valuation or emotion, particularly habitual or prejudiced reactions (Kabat-Zinn 1994; Jha et al. 2007).
The state of mindfulness and progression toward greater levels of mindful awareness are measurable using validated and empirically reliable instruments (Tanay and Bernstein 2013; Veneziani and Voci 2015; Droutman et al. 2018). The scales that are most relevant to LDPs, self-leadership, and organizational/firm performance are summarized in Table 8 (“Appendix 3”).
The aim of this study was to examine the previous literature through mapping a systematic literature review with a focus on the practical utility of LDPs that emphasize and incorporate self-leadership and mindfulness practices within their programs.
3 Methods
This investigation employed a systematic mapping review following the procedural recommendations of Bichler et al. (2022). This evaluation was conducted to achieve two main goals: to identify gaps in the literature on these topics (Snyder 2019) and to determine the extent to which the current literature supports the use of these methods for leadership training in the corporate context. Following Kraus et al.’s (2022) discussion of best practices for literature reviews as standalone studies, this article presents a domain-focused review (rather than a review focused on a particular theory or method) of a hybrid type that engages with two particular concepts (self-leadership and mindfulness) within the field of leadership development. Consequently, the method employed here is qualitative and relies on thematic content analysis rather than on quantitative or semiquantitative approaches.
The study began with a process of article selection consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and previous studies (Moher et al. 2011; Bichler et al. 2022). Thus, only articles published in peer-reviewed academic journals and conference proceedings written in either German or English with a date range limited to 1990–2024 to ensure relevance in the context of a dynamically evolving field were considered. The Google Scholar, EBSCOhost, WISO, Web of Science, ProQuest, and ScienceDirect databases were queried using the following keyword strings: (1) “Self-leadership” OR “self-leadership training” AND leadership AND [impact OR effect] AND “intervention” and (2) “Mindfulness” OR “mindfulness training” AND leadership AND [impact OR effect] AND intervention.”
These queries returned 284 candidate articles, which were subsequently subjected to automated analysis following the review procedure suggested by Webster and Watson (2002). This led to the removal of 52 duplicate, 51 noneligible, and 50 otherwise inadequate studies. The titles and abstracts of the remaining 131 articles were manually screened for their relevance to leadership development and/or leadership performance, resulting in the removal of 18 studies. Among the 113 studies identified for retrieval, full-text versions were unavailable for 44 studies. Textual analysis was performed on the remaining 69 studies, resulting in the removal of 17 studies that did not contain novel information. The final pool consisted of 26 articles on self-leadership and 26 articles on mindfulness.
Each of the 52 selected articles was subsequently entered into a content matrix in Microsoft Excel software. In addition to bibliographic information, the matrix included the following data for each study: size and description of the sample/participant pool, evaluation method (e.g., review, quantitative empirical, or qualitative empirical), input variables and definitions (e.g., self-leadership and mindfulness), controlling and mediating variables, target variables, correlations identified (indexed with “ + ” to indicate a positive association, “−” to indicate a negative association, and “0” to indicate no confirmed impact), and notes for critical reflection (see “Appendix 1”).
The content matrix was then inverted to create a concept matrix that transformed contents into codes, as previously described (Webster and Watson 2002). Each row of the resulting table corresponded to a particular concept or subject, with subconcepts nested under higher-level categories (see Tables 3 and 4, “Appendix 2”). Constructing the table in this manner facilitated the open-ended identification of impact and impact categories rather than relying on predefined codes. Instead, categories emerged inductively during the coding process. A second benefit of this process was that it ensured that all relevant effects of self-leadership and mindfulness were included, which facilitated the classification of the impact into levels based upon contingency relationships among the effects.
The final step of this study focused on textual evaluation and analysis and comprised a descriptive evaluation of relevant information, an outline of contradictions, and a synthesis of the information retrieved. The results of this process are summarized in the following section, where they are organized according to the themes and impacts identified in the concept matrix.
4 Results
4.1 Core concepts
It is first necessary to differentiate self-leadership and mindfulness from a set of related concepts that have frequently appeared in the literature on leadership (complete lists of the definitions and assessment instruments used for both self-leadership and mindfulness appear in “Appendix 3”). Self-leadership overlaps with the concepts of both self-efficacy and self-control (King and Haar 2017; Bracht et al. 2021) and should be viewed as a descriptive rather than normative category (DiLiello and Houghton 2006). In the context of personal development, self-leadership consists of behavior-focused strategies and productivity-related patterns of positive thought (Goldsby et al. 2021; Ugoani 2021; Inam et al. 2023).
Mindfulness is broadly defined as a combination of conscious awareness or attention with openness/nonjudgment (Konte 2022; Urrila 2022). Self-leadership is a well-defined concept (Rau and Williams 2016) that can be understood as an antecedent to self-leadership since self-leadership is possible only for individuals who are sufficiently self-aware and able to observe their own thoughts, ideas, and behaviors (Furtner et al. 2018).
A critical appraisal of these two theories highlights their pragmatic relevance in addition to their theoretical complexity and multivalence. Self-leadership, as a descriptive concept, refers to a bundle of trainable competencies that enable individuals to cope and be organized. It consists of abilities, capacities, and, to a certain extent, particular skills that are of immediate practical and heuristic relevance to managers, leadership trainees, and employees on a daily basis. Consequently, this is not a theoretically unadulterated concept. Any well-formed and evidence-based theory of management or workplace performance necessarily addresses many identical topics and considerations (Markham and Markham 1995; Guzzo 1998).
Although mindfulness is relatively more defined due to its longer history, it has also faced numerous important critiques. Discussing the origins of this concept in spiritual traditions, Grossman (2011) questioned the assumed homogeneity of mindfulness as a state of mind that is available to everyone. While anyone can practice identical mindfulness techniques or training following an identical set of instructions, individual variations in psychology, emotion, and physicality can lead to profoundly different experiences. Grossman (2011) argued that efforts to operationalize the idea within the concept of standardized training suffer from distortion because the concept’s original meaning (including subtle, richly nuanced spiritual and emotional elements) is not adequately captured by measuremnts and scales that assess daily function-oriented experiences, such as simply being attentive or inattentive at a given moment (Grossman 2011).
In the narrower context of mindfulness as an antecedent of self-leadership capacities, however, these contemporary functional accounts have been shown to be useful as the basis for training and assessments concerned with measurable outcomes, namely, efficiency and productivity (Gunasekara and Zheng 2019). Within the scope of this wave of research, multiple distinct (or partially distinct) forms of mindfulness have been reported in the literature. Mindfulness overlaps with several of the “Big Five” personality traits as well as with constructs such as self-regulation, self-efficacy, and the psychological need for achievement (Rau and Williams 2016). These overlaps have not generally been considered to blur the lines between what is and is not a mindfulness practice; instead, they serve as links between mindfulness and related modes of thinking that involve similar abilities and habits. Consequently, mindfulness can be understood as a distinct standalone concept (Furtner et al. 2015) that comprises a set of descriptive nonnormative dimensions that vary among individuals and can be taught. Concerns that this type of operationalized definition of mindfulness does not conform to older, more spiritually grounded understandings of the concept are not barriers to this research tradition. The instruments that have been developed to measure it have been shown to be reliable and consistent across studies, and they remain correlated with a range of relevant outcomes (Brown et al. 2011).
In addition, the overlap between mindfulness and related concepts that are grounded in other intellectual traditions facilitate the identification of interrelations between self-leadership and mindfulness. The features of mindfulness identified above, such as consciousness, awareness, attention, and openness (Kabat-Zinn 1982; Bishop et al. 2004), are closely related to the characteristics of self-leadership, such as self-observation and control, self-motivation, and the formation and use of constructive thought patterns (Furtner et al. 2015, 2018). Mindfulness enhances performance in achievement-focused contexts by fostering emotional control. Similarly, self-leadership enables individuals to maintain cognitive self-control and remain on track even under adverse conditions, such as intense workplace stress (Furtner et al. 2015). Mindfulness meditation improves individuals’ competency in self-observation and behavioral control (Hilton et al. 2019), both of which are essential for the development of the competencies that fall under the banner of self-leadership. Collectively, the relationship between these two concepts can be summarized by considering mindfulness to be a precondition or antecedent of self-leadership.
4.2 Effects on leadership performance
Given these definitions, three major categories of impact of self-leadership training on the performance of organizational leaders were identified in this systematic literature search. These categories can be described as reducing perceived stress exposure, improving job-related attitudes, and enhancing leadership competencies and outcomes (Neck et al. 1999, 2003). All three categories add nuance and detail to the previous finding that self-leadership is positively correlated with job performance and therefore has an indirect positive relationship with company performance on a broader scale (Neck and Manz 1992).
In the first of these categories, higher self-leadership substantially increases individual resilience to stress (Unsworth and Mason 2012). LDPs that emphasize self-leadership equip trainees with natural reward strategies, self-observation skills, and thought patterns (such as self-queuing) that support self-control and efficiency, thus allowing them to continue to execute decisions and process information even when they face severe stress (Sesen et al. 2017). Other studies have identified similar effects and have shown that self-leadership increases stress resilience by improving the mediating factors of self-efficacy and positive affect through behavioral and cognitive strategies that include self-talk, constructive imagery, and goal setting (Houghton et al. 2012). In addition, self-leadership mediates organizational commitment by instilling a sense of empowerment in employees. “Empowerment” subsumes several cognitive components identified by other studies, including positive affect and job satisfaction (Stander and Rothmann 2009). This finding has been replicated across multiple workplace contexts (Chaijukul 2010) and firmly links stronger self-leadership to both perceived self-efficacy and job satisfaction, two variables that have intrinsic stress-protective effects (Cabrera-Aguilar et al. 2023). This is also true for the observed ability of self-leadership to effectively balance work with leisure, leading to improved overall satisfaction and reduced stress levels due to a more relaxed lifestyle and schedule (Cunha et al. 2017). The authors attribute these effects to the “reflexive work” involved in developing and practicing self-leadership, which involves a set of qualities that implicate both awareness and control of one’s habits and predispositions with a resulting indirect but robust link to a balanced lifestyle (Cunha et al. 2017).
The second category focuses on the correlation between higher self-leadership and positive attitudes toward an individual’s job, workplace, and colleagues. Self-leadership has been linked to organizational creativity and the capacity for innovation (Ghosh 2015), as well as the desire for professional achievement and feelings of psychological empowerment (Amundsen and Martinsen 2015). There is a cultural or emergent aspect to these links. Ghosh (2015) specifically noted the importance of a “creativity climate” and “workplace innovative orientation” in addition to individual qualities such as personal creativity. In a context where innovation, values and creativity are encouraged, self-leadership becomes the motivating force that allows individuals to actualize creative thoughts as concrete innovative outcomes (Kalyar 2011). Amundsen and Martinsen (2015) reported a similar dynamic for self-leadership and psychological empowerment with both direct and indirect positive effects. The authors argue that the behavioral and cognitive elements of self-leadership, such as self-talk, self-queueing, and a focus on natural rewards, improve perceived psychological empowerment and increase factors such as creativity and work effort that are also related to empowerment. Other studies have offered a possible explanation for the association between self-leadership and increased innovation by suggesting that self-leadership competencies encourage entrepreneurship, affective commitment, and transformational leadership, all of which improve innovation for both leaders and their teams (Andressen et al. 2012; Kör 2016). Self-leadership has also been reported to be correlated with the positive character traits of conscientiousness, openness, and extraversion, strengthening leaders’ capacity for productive thinking and constructive attitudes toward job-related tasks. The authors of this study also reported that two particular aspects of self-leadership, natural reward strategies and behavioral strategies, account for the majority of its positive effect on job performance (Harari et al. 2021).
Finally, self-leadership has been found to be associated with leaders’ abilities to motivate and organize their teams. Several studies have reported direct associations between self-leadership and improved team collaboration, facilitated mediation in team conflicts, and reduced emotionality during periods of controversy (Quinteiro et al. 2016; Flores et al. 2018). Flores et al. (2018) sought to understand the role of self-leadership as an explanation for why intrateam conflict may either improve or deteriorate team-level decision making. The literature they reviewed revealed that the regulatory benefits for emotions allowed skillful self-leaders to engage with intrateam conflict primarily through ideas and suggestions (rather than interpersonal confrontation), leading to more productive discussions and interactions. Similarly, Quinteiro and colleagues’ study of 103 teams revealed that “team-level self-leadership,” or “the extent to which team members collectively engage in the analysis and debate of beliefs and assumptions, internal dialogs and mental images” (p. 112), was strongly correlated with team-level collective efficacy and helped teams shape tasks, plan processes, and coordinate actions (Quinteiro et al. 2016).
Other studies have reinforced this finding by emphasizing the importance of self-leadership for teamwork in addition to improvements in individual performance, thereby leading to greater group-level productivity (Konradt et al. 2009). Rambe and colleagues examined engineering staff at an underperforming firm and found that behavior-focused self-leadership and constructive thought patterns were the key variables that differentiated productive staff from those with lower job performance (Rambe et al. 2018). Regarding both individual contributors and managers/leaders, self-leadership has an indirect but strong effect on the ability to contribute that is modified through both self-efficacy and specific job-related skills (Singh et al. 2017). Similar studies focused on leaders’ perceived self-efficacy, psychological empowerment, job satisfaction, and moral judgment, all of which improve job performance (Politis 2006). Steinbauer et al. (2014), for instance, found that on-the-job judgment quality was dependent upon prejudgement cognitive self-leadership, which promoted accountability and engagement with workplace expectations. In reviews, self-leadership has been associated with improved goal achievement and the constructive, target-oriented organization of thoughts, which can help business leaders remain focused and engaged in job-related tasks (Neck et al. 2003; Lovelace et al. 2007). Self-leadership LDPs have also been found to lead to short-term behavioral changes in the form of increased job efficiency (Cox 1993).
Mindfulness, understood as an antecedent of self-leadership in the context of LDPs, was initially linked to the first and third impact categories described above. The effectiveness of mindfulness practices (such as meditation) for stress reduction has been well supported, and mindfulness training has been found to be effective in preventing stress and instilling constructive attitudes toward affective concerns (Brendel et al. 2016; Mahfouz 2018). Importantly, given the relationship between emotional regulation and job performance, mindfulness is linked to improving the capacity for self-care, self-regulation, and self-reflection, both traditionally and in studies using contemporary operationalized versions of the concept (Sampl et al. 2017; Rupprecht et al. 2019). Other studies have reported similar and complementary effects of mindfulness and have revealed that mindful practices lead to better sleep and lower perceived psychological distress (Bartlett et al. 2019), as well as increased prosocial attitudes and greater relaxation (Meiklejohn et al. 2012). The effects that stem from stress-related mindfulness training persist for prolonged periods, even after the cessation of training sessions (Christopher et al. 2011). While these findings are not limited to the domain of leaders’ job performance or competence, they remain critical in that context. Stress is a major factor that contributes to burnout and decreased mental function, both of which significantly impair job performance (Li et al. 2017; Lomas et al. 2019).
These findings are directly related to the second category concerning the impact of mindfulness training, namely, that mindful leaders are more competent and effective at their core job responsibilities (Glomb et al. 2011; Magyari 2015). For example, a study of corporate leaders in Australia reported that, especially for leaders with fewer years of job experience, greater mindfulness predicted leadership self-mastery (a measure that includes both technical and emotional competencies), which consequently predicted leaders’ ability to “create and drive change” within their organizations (King and Haar 2017). While this relationship can be summarized by stating that mindful, stress-resilient, and self-efficacious leaders are likely to perform better on the job, the truth is substantially more nuanced. In addition to leadership self-mastery, some studies have pointed to other mediating factors between mindfulness and measures of efficacy, such as transformational leadership, positive affect, and self-efficacy (Carleton et al. 2018), as is also the case for self-leadership. Crucially, after participating in mindfulness training, leaders perceived themselves as possessing higher self-efficacy, commitment, and role performance levels (Reb et al. 2014; Rupprecht et al. 2019). Among the various components of mindfulness, refined attention skills and nonjudgmental awareness are especially closely related to workplace engagement (Gunasekara and Zheng 2019).
The benefits of mindfulness-focused LDPs extend beyond resilience and on-the-job efficacy and include emotion-related skills with broad positive effects. These LDPs have been found to improve leaders’ emotional intelligence and control of their emotions, thereby reducing job-related tension (King and Haar 2017). Similar to studies of self-leadership that show positive effects linked to emotional regulation, mindfulness has been reported to increase trainees’ self-efficacy, perceived well-being, and ability to manage their workplace environment effectively (Meiklejohn et al. 2012). Other studies offer further insight by filtering multiple emotion-related aspects of mindfulness. For example, after controlling for employee-related and organizational parameters, mindful leaders exhibit greater levels of empathy and compassion and develop closer and more constructive relationships with their employees (Reb et al. 2014; Lomas et al. 2019). Mindful leaders exhibit greater empathy in their communication styles, which is another factor that contributes to positive workplace atmospheres and leader–employee exchange quality (Arendt et al. 2019). Mindful leaders also report remaining calm more often in situations characterized by uncertainty, a trait linked to stress resilience and self-efficacy (Chesley and Wylson 2016).
In addition to personal-level outcomes, such as improved job performance and stronger emotional skills, mindfulness in leaders has been found to coincide with more positive workplace environments. Specifically, positive emotions and high perceived self-efficacy cause leaders to become more transformational and authentic, enabling them to lead more effectively. As an added benefit, this kind of transformational leadership is strongly correlated with increased employee well-being (Zhang et al. 2020). Multiple studies support this link, with subordinates of mindful leaders reporting higher well-being status and perceiving their work environments as more harmonious, thus increasing employee satisfaction (Saragih et al. 2020). An important aspect of this relationship is that, like many of the positive effects of leaders’ self-efficacy, the benefits of leaders’ mindfulness include an institutional or workplace-culture component. Saragih et al.’s (2020) investigation of “leader-member exchange quality” revealed that while this quality was improved by leaders’ mindfulness, the relationship was mediated by informational and interpersonal justice in the workplace.
The importance of this cultural layer is emphasized by studies in which mindfulness training enables leaders to identify and pursue positive developments in their workplace environments, with effects persisting for as long as 12 months (Wasylkiw et al. 2015; Rupprecht et al. 2019). According to the detailed qualitative work of Rupprecht et al. (2019), improved mindfulness among leaders leads to many benefits linked to self-efficacy, including self-care, self-reflection, relating to others, and adapting to change. Therefore, increased mindfulness was associated with an approach to leadership that improved overall organizational health, promoted teamwork, and increased team efficacy. Similar to self-leadership, these positive outcomes were mediated by the personal and interpersonal qualities that mindfulness both enables and encourages, such as self-efficacy, positive affect, stress resilience, and emotional intelligence.
5 Discussion
The core findings presented in the previous section are relevant both to the practice of leadership development and the design of LDPs and to ongoing scholarly work in the field. The present review highlights numerous gaps in the literature. The choice of a mapping review rather than a narratively structured review reflected the goal of critically evaluating the full range of previous findings on self-leadership and mindfulness in the context of LDPs.
5.1 Summary of results and analysis of seminal identified studies
Based on a systematic mapping review, this study critically evaluated the extant empirical literature on self-leadership and mindfulness training following the guidelines of Bichler et al. (2022) and PRISMA (Moher et al. 2011). The impacts of different dimensions of leadership competence, particularly self-leadership and mindfulness, on leadership quality and firm performance were evaluated according to previous empirical research, as was the impact of leadership development programs.
-
Self-leadership, a method of promoting self-motivation and responsibility, is associated with setting personal goals and improving team performance and is positively related to performance and trust development in senior leadership (Quinteiro et al. 2016; Goldsby et al. 2021; Ugoani 2021).
-
Mindfulness, a complementary practice focused on awareness and mental presence, is linked to enhanced job and leadership performance at various levels (Reb et al. 2019; King 2022).
-
The proposed impacts of self-leadership on leadership performance through stress reduction, improved job attitudes, and enhanced leadership competencies confirms previous studies (Neck and Manz 1992; Neck et al. 1999, 2003).
-
Mindfulness is linked to stress resilience, emotional intelligence, and effective leadership (Brendel et al. 2016; Mahfouz 2018).
Based on this review, seven articles were found to be of seminal importance for highlighting the value of self-leadership and mindfulness practices together with the potential positive impact on leaders when these practice training programs are incorporated within LDPs.
One of the four seminal articles that highlights the importance of self-leadership is the study conducted in 2021 by Goldsby and colleagues. This investigation analyzed previous articles on self-leadership published between 2011 and 2020 and summarized the findings of two other major review articles in the field of self-leadership that were published between 2006 and 2010. The conclusions of this article, which comprehensively spans four decades of previous research on self-leadership, include the proposal of the meta-performance model. This novel paradigm presents self-leadership as an assortment of abilities to improve the personal performance of leaders who pursue growth by way of professional certification programs and carry on that legacy. Professional certification programs and self-leadership are frequently considered independent disciplines. However, the article in question argues that professionals might benefit from integrating other professional development initiatives in combination with self-leadership training (Goldsby et al. 2021).
The seminal investigation conducted by Quinteiro and colleagues in 2016 revealed an additional body of evidence concerning the potential value of self-leadership. This study focused on the multifaceted and complex nature of self-leadership thought practices in the workplace. The authors scrutinized the link between team efficiency (i.e., performance and viability) and self-leadership via collective efficiency from a team-level perspective. In this study, 103 self-management teams (453 people) participated in a 5-week management competition. According to the findings derived from the multilevel confirmatory factor assessment, self-leadership was functionally comparable across all analytical levels (i.e., for both people and teams). Furthermore, through collective efficacy, this investigation revealed an indirect relationship between team-level self-leadership and team efficiency criteria. These outcomes paved the way for future studies on self-managing work teams, expanded upon earlier findings regarding self-leadership and team performance, and offered recommendations to companies that want to encourage teamwork and sustainability among their employees (Quinteiro et al. 2016).
The third seminal article identified through this review that discussed the importance of self-leadership for possible implementation within LDPs was an investigation conducted by Ugoani (2021). The results of this investigation revealed that self-leadership was the fundamental skill that justified the overall level of organizational effectiveness. The findings stress that, to enhance performance and organizational effectiveness, institutions should engage in the systematic development of leadership skills among their managerial cadre (Ugoani 2021).
The proposed impact of self-leadership on leadership performance through stress reduction, improved job attitudes, and enhanced leadership competencies in the seminal work by Neck and colleagues deserves additional emphasis. The Neck and Manz study conducted in 1992 focused on the importance of thought self-leadership and the possible influence of self-talk and mental imagery on personal performance and productivity levels, especially for leaders of organizations (Neck and Manz 1992; Neck et al. 1999, 2003). This study concluded that optimizing cognitive methods for positive thinking management can result in improved performance at both the individual and organizational levels (Neck and Manz 1992). It also established a school of thought that promotes the concept of thought self-leadership, whereby cognitive methodologies that are based on self-dialog, mental imagery or visualization exercises, beliefs and assumptions can boost individual self-influence, particularly for leaders of organizations (Neck et al. 1999). Following this school of thought, in their 2003 investigation, Neck and colleagues reported that self-leadership practices positively influence the effectiveness of goal setting among leaders who practice thought self-leadership. This was postulated by the suggestion that employees can increase goal-setting abilities (and consequent goal attainment rates) through efficient participative goal-setting behaviors that are augmented by the positive implementation of social cognitive theory methodologies, including the practice of thought self-leadership (Neck et al. 2003).
Regarding the importance of implementing mindfulness in leadership training, three recent seminal studies identified through this review emphasized the value of this essential mental tool for management implementation and effectiveness.
One seminal article on the utility of mindfulness identified in this review was the investigation conducted by Reb and colleagues in 2019, in which the investigators probed the possible links between leaders’ mindfulness levels and employees’ productivity from the perspective of organizational justice and leader-member interaction. The hypotheses of this investigation were that employees who reported to leaders with an enhanced level of mindfulness practice would have more positive and higher-quality relationships with their leader as perceived by the employees through leader–member exchange (LMX) quality. This hypothesis could also be augmented by two important potential mechanisms, namely, enhanced interpersonal justice (i.e., employees receive an enhanced level of respect from a mindful leader) and minimized employee stress levels. The results of a triadic leader-employee-peer study and a dyadic leader-employee study supported the validity of these hypotheses and suggested that LMX quality can act as a mediator for ascribing levels of leaders’ mindfulness implementation with enhanced levels of employees’ productivity and performance, as described through in-role and extrarole effectiveness (Reb et al. 2019).
Concerning the links among mindfulness, stress resilience, and effective leadership, the 2016 study by Brendel and colleagues involved a 45-min mindfulness practice protocol for 20 organizational leaders on a weekly basis for a total of 8 weeks to identify the influence of mindfulness on five personal character traits. The results of this pioneering investigation revealed that in addition to exhibiting a substantial decrease in trait anxiety and tension, individuals in the mindfulness practice condition showed a significant increase in regulatory attention. Regarding ambiguity tolerance and resilience, no noticeable shifts were observed. Substantial intercorrelations were also found in this investigation across trait anxiety scores and several other factors, particularly promotional regulatory emphasis (Brendel et al. 2016).
Another seminal study conducted by Mahfouz and colleagues in 2018 evaluated the effect of a specific mindfulness-based professional development course, called Cultivating Awareness and Resilience in Education (CARE), on the leadership and well-being levels of 13 school administrators. The results of this study correlated exposure to the CARE course with enhanced leadership abilities, including heightened introspection, enhanced interpersonal connections, and self-care compliance. Improved self-awareness, self-management, and self-compassion have been correlated with these abilities. Additionally, participants claimed to be better able to identify their emotional responses, which helped them comprehend how their leadership responsibilities influenced the climate of their organizations (Mahfouz 2018).
5.2 Limitations
Despite every effort to avoid issues in this study, several limitations remain. This investigation employed a mapping systematic review approach, which, despite being a useful method for detecting gaps in the literature and synthesizing the available data, is not without limits. First, the likelihood of bias in the selection and inclusion of reviews is a major drawback of mapping systematic reviews (Uttley et al. 2023). To identify pertinent systematic reviews, mapping studies rely on predetermined criteria, which may unintentionally omit certain studies or themes, producing biased or incomplete findings (Shaheen et al. 2023).
Second, standardizing lexicons and methods across many sectors and fields may present difficulties when mapping systematic reviews (Cook 2019). Heterogeneity in mapping studies can be introduced by differences in search strategies, eligibility criteria, and data extraction techniques, rendering it challenging to compare results among reviews and reach firm conclusions (Büchter et al. 2023). Third, the lack of a common language for defining review features such as bias risk or quality assessment standards might make mapping research less transparent and reproducible (Uttley et al. 2023).
Fourth, the likelihood of an outdated or inadequate synthesis of evidence is another drawback of mapping systematic reviews (Uttley et al. 2023). The main data source for mapping studies is previously published systematic reviews, which might not necessarily include the most recent findings or new directions in the field (Petersen et al. 2015). Furthermore, rather than updating or synthesizing new research, mapping studies occasionally concentrate on summarizing previously published evaluations, which might leave gaps or discrepancies in the body of evidence (Munn et al. 2018).
Fifth, evaluating and combining varied data across numerous studies might be difficult when mapping systematic reviews (Bramer et al. 2017). The task of synthesizing information and arriving at significant findings might be complicated by differences in research designs, demographics, treatments, and results across the included reviews (McKenzie and Brennan 2019). Furthermore, when reviews use disparate methodologies or reporting standards, mapping studies may encounter challenges in evaluating the caliber or dependability of the included reviews (Kolaski et al. 2023).
A sixth potential challenge is that this review relied primarily on published literature, which might inherently entail publication bias. Specifically, studies that offer positive findings are more likely to be published, potentially overshadowing research that does not highlight the significant effects of self-leadership or mindfulness on leadership performance. This situation could lead to an overestimation of the effectiveness of these constructs in the context of leadership development.
Seventh, the studies included in the review involved a range of methodologies, sample sizes, and contexts. This heterogeneity might affect the robustness and generalizability of the findings. The results of different studies might not be directly comparable, leading to potential misinterpretation or overgeneralization. Additionally, as discussed above, some aspects of LDPs, such as the impact of organizational culture on the effectiveness of self-leadership and mindfulness training and on the impact of training rather than qualifications or competencies themselves, are not addressed in the primary literature on this topic or are addressed inadequately. These aspects may not have been explored in depth in the review. This situation leaves a gap in the understanding of how different organizational settings or mindfulness training might influence the adoption of alternative leadership patterns and the business success of these practices.
Eighth, although this review mentions the potential of innovative digital technology in leadership training, it does not explore current digital and technological advancements or their implications for training practice in sufficient detail since studies in the field remain ongoing.
Finally, this review lacks insight into the long-term efficacy and sustainability of self-leadership and mindfulness training in organizational contexts since few longitudinal studies on this topic are available. Future research should investigate the effect of leadership training more directly, such as by examining not only self-leadership, understood as a construct or set of skills but also the measurable, business-relevant outcomes of investments in programs designed to strengthen self-leadership in combination with mindfulness. In particular, future studies should attempt to assess changes in leadership competence, stress resilience, and managerial performance by conducting surveys of employees, using objective indicators of firm performance, and employing other accepted measures. One possibility of particular interest pertains to mindfulness-based self-leadership training. The only extant example of such a training program was described by Sampl et al. (2017); however, that study considered only outcomes related to academic achievement (Sampl et al. 2017).
5.3 Practical implications of implementing self-leadership and mindfulness training within leadership development programs
The use of self-leadership and mindfulness training in leadership development has many real-world applications that could enhance overall productivity, employee well-being, and organizational success. Organizations may cultivate a culture of ethical leadership, resilience, and constant evolution by incorporating these principles into their leadership development programs. As discussed above, training in self-leadership and mindfulness gives leaders the critical abilities they need to negotiate the intricacies of contemporary work contexts. Goal setting, self-monitoring, and self-reinforcement are examples of self-leadership practices that help leaders become more adept at time management, task prioritization, and staying focused in the face of distractions (Steinmann et al. 2018). In a similar vein, leaders may improve their ability to lead with clarity, calmness, and authenticity by developing present-moment awareness, emotional intelligence, and stress resistance via mindfulness activities (Issac et al. 2024).
The cultivation of an innovative, cooperative, and trusting corporate culture is facilitated by self-leadership and mindfulness training. Organizations may establish a work atmosphere where employees feel appreciated, empowered, and inspired to put out their best efforts by giving leaders the freedom to set a good example and promote psychological safety within their teams (Edmondson 2004). Furthermore, mindfulness techniques encourage innovation, flexibility, and open-mindedness, which supports a culture of lifelong learning and acclimatization to change (Loucks et al. 2022). Additionally, there are noticeable advantages for workers’ happiness and well-being when self-leadership and mindfulness training are included in leadership development programs. Leaders who put their own health and well-being first set a good example for their teams, encouraging them to follow suit with good work habits and self-care routines (Steinmann et al. 2018). Furthermore, mindfulness training decreases stress, anxiety, and burnout in managers and staff, which improves work satisfaction, engagement, and retention in businesses (Slutsky et al. 2019). Investment in self-leadership and mindfulness training for leadership development has long-term benefits for organizational sustainability and performance, as seen from a strategic standpoint. Leaders who place a high value on self-awareness, emotional intelligence, and moral judgment are better able to handle difficult situations, encourage creativity, and lead tactical projects that support company objectives (Ikart 2023). Additionally, mindfulness exercises foster a feeling of social responsibility and interconnection, which encourages moral leadership behaviors that prioritize the welfare of team members, stakeholders, and the general public (Patel and Holm 2018).
Overall, there are many reasons to use self-leadership and mindfulness training in leadership development, from improving individual performance to fostering a healthy workplace culture and aligning strategy with long-term objectives. Organizations can cultivate leaders who are ethical, inventive, and resilient and can promote long-term success and the welfare of all stakeholders by incorporating these strategies into their leadership development programs.
5.4 Recommendations for practice
The insights obtained from this systematic literature review offer valuable recommendations for business practices, particularly in the fields of leadership development and organizational performance enhancement. Organizations should prioritize the inclusion of self-leadership and mindfulness training in their LDPs. The evidence suggests that these competencies are crucial for enhancing leadership effectiveness and organizational performance. Incorporating training modules that focus on self-awareness, emotional regulation, and personal responsibility can be beneficial (Goldsby et al. 2021; Ugoani 2021).
It is important for organizations to customize their LDPs to suit their specific cultural and operational environments. This task involves considering the unique challenges and needs of their workforce and adapting the training accordingly. Customization ensures that the training is relevant and resonates with the participants, thereby enhancing its effectiveness (Stander and Rothmann 2009; Ghosh 2015).
Businesses should encourage regular mindfulness practices among both leaders and employees. This goal can be achieved through organized sessions such as meditation programs, workshops on mindfulness techniques, or the integration of mindfulness exercises into daily routines. The cultivation of mindfulness has been linked to improved job performance, stress reduction, and enhanced leadership capabilities (Kabat-Zinn et al. 1987; Magyari 2015).
Creating a culture of continuous learning and self-development can further enhance the efficacy of leadership training. Encouraging leaders to engage in self-reflection, goal setting, and self-monitoring activities can foster a self-leadership mindset. This self-improvement culture is consustent with the core principles of self-leadership and can lead to improved decision-making and personal accountability (Manz and Sims 1980; Harari et al. 2021).
Implementing mechanisms to monitor progress and provide feedback on the development of self-leadership and mindfulness skills is crucial. These mechanisms could involve regular assessments, feedback sessions, and reflective practices that can help leaders track their growth and identify areas for improvement. These types of mechanisms can ensure that the training results in tangible changes in behavior and leadership style (Cox 1993; Sesen et al. 2017).
Organizations should establish an environment that supports the practice and application of self-leadership and mindfulness skills. This task includes providing the resources, time, and support that are necessary for leaders to engage in these practices. A supportive environment not only facilitates learning but also encourages the application of these skills in real-world scenarios (Neck and Manz 1992; Furtner et al. 2015).
Senior leaders and executives should act as role models with respect to practicing and advocating for self-leadership and mindfulness. Their commitment to these practices can inspire others within the organization and establish a culture that values and prioritizes these competencies (Goldsby et al. 2021; Ugoani 2021).
Organizations should also consider leveraging technology to enhance their leadership training programs. Digital platforms, virtual reality, and online resources can provide accessible and flexible options for training in self-leadership and mindfulness. These factors are especially relevant in the context of remote work and the corresponding increasing reliance on digital solutions in the workplace (Du Plessis 2019; Krampitz et al. 2021).
By implementing these recommendations, businesses can harness the benefits of self-leadership and mindfulness, leading to improved leadership capabilities and overall organizational performance. These practices not only benefit individual leaders but also contribute to the development of a more resilient, adaptable, and effective workforce.
5.5 Future research
The literature reviewed in this article suggests a strong positive connection between leadership training grounded in self-leadership and mindfulness, with concrete firm-level results related to improved leadership performance. However, it also clarifies where current understanding in the field is lacking, what questions remain unanswered (as practitioners seek to identify best practices for LDPs), and where future research might focus most productively. Collectively, these issues can be grouped into the category of open questions in the field of leadership development training.
First, it is helpful to note the variety of research designs that are underrepresented or simply absent from the studies identified in this systematic review. Longitudinal studies would allow researchers to observe the development of these skills over time and their continuous impact on leadership effectiveness, firm performance, workplace culture, professional success, and the development of other employees into leaders in their own right.
Second, intervention studies utilizing experimental methodologies were largely missing from the field at the time of writing. Empirical work is limited primarily to observational methods, such as the use of questionnaires, semistructured interviews, and psychological assessments. Robust experimentation, especially the application of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to LDPs focused on self-leadership and mindfulness capabilities, would allow for a much clearer and more persuasive account of how such training can contribute to corporate performance (Quinteiro et al. 2016; Goldsby et al. 2021). A closely related concern is that the work conducted thus far has varied widely in its setting and subjects, from university students to primary school teachers, athletes, low-level employees, and middle managers. If resources are to be invested in an RCT, the study’s setting must reflect the types of workplaces for which the findings will be of greatest practical relevance.
Third, the second set of open questions concerns particular understudied topics related to self-leadership and mindful LDPs. Among these is that while the positive correlations between self-leadership, mindfulness, and leadership performance are evident, the mechanisms underlying these correlations remain unclear. Future research should explore the mediating and moderating variables that influence this relationship to a greater extent than has been achieved thus far, with a special focus on the psychological constructs identified here as most likely to be relevant, such as stress resilience, emotional intelligence, cognitive flexibility, positive effect, and self-efficacy.
Similarly, there are many extant models for LDPs that may or may not focus on self-leadership and mindfulness. If the field is to offer actionable recommendations to business leaders, it is vital that future efforts compare the effects of these models and examine the impact of duration and structure, teaching methods, and course content, among other variables. Future studies could also probe the efficacy of various self-leadership and mindfulness training delivery formats and modalities in the context of leadership development. Research comparing the effectiveness of online courses, coaching sessions, in-person workshops, and blended learning approaches may be used to determine which approaches are most scalable and successful in providing training to leaders in a variety of organizational settings and situations. Furthermore, studies could examine how organizational support systems, such as peer mentorship, leadership coaching, and organizational culture programs, help leaders maintain and strengthen their practices of self-leadership and mindfulness. Such research would be invaluable for organizations seeking to select and design training programs tailored to their specific needs (Manz 1992; Houghton et al. 2012).
Fourth, researchers should also investigate how cultural norms and organizational structures impact the adoption and effectiveness of these training programs. This line of inquiry is particularly pertinent in the context of an increasingly globalized and diverse workforce (Furtner et al. 2015; Krampitz et al. 2021), as is another understudied topic: the role of technology in enhancing self-leadership and mindfulness training in LDPs. Studies on the use of virtual reality, gamification, and digital platforms could provide insights into innovative and scalable training methods. Such research is especially relevant in the context of remote work and digital transformation in organizations (Cox 1993; Du Plessis 2019). Fifth, this context requires the timely examination of issues that impact the scalability of LDPs that focus on self-leadership and mindfulness. Research should examine the challenges and strategies associated with implementing these programs at various scales and across differing organizations. This task includes evaluating cost-effectiveness, measuring the impact on organizational culture, and assessing the adaptability of programs across differing leadership levels (Neck and Manz 1992; Sesen et al. 2017). Sixth, research on the synergistic impact of coaching, mentorship, feedback systems, organizational change efforts, and self-leadership and mindfulness training can provide insight into the best practices for developing organizational resilience and excellence in leadership. Additionally, studies should examine how individual variations in leadership styles, cultural backgrounds, and personality features affect the success of self-leadership and mindfulness practices as well as how treatments might be modified to accommodate a range of requirements and preferences.
Finally, research on the effects of self-leadership and mindfulness training on leadership development in developing contexts such as virtual leadership, global teams, and remote work environments may be conducted in the future. Research investigating how leaders can modify self-leadership and mindfulness techniques to successfully overcome the distinct obstacles and possibilities brought about by digitalization, globalization, and telecommuting can provide significant perspectives on future-proofing leadership development programs and cultivating inclusive, resilient, and flexible leadership approaches in the digital era.
Further investigation into the application of self-leadership and mindfulness training in leadership development has significant potential for advancing leadership theory and practice, improving organizational efficacy, and fostering workplace well-being. By investigating these paths, academics may make valuable contributions to the continuous advancement of leadership development methodologies and enable leaders to prosper in a world that is becoming more intricate and unpredictable.
6 Conclusion
Although a tremendous amount of work remains to be done to advance the understanding of self-leadership and mindfulness as techniques for effective leadership, this systematic review makes it clear that they are useful and readily available tools for leadership improvement. The studies reviewed here document widespread positive outcomes, from improvements in both leaders’ and employees’ self-leadership and mindfulness to outcomes mediated by numerous other constructs, from self-efficacy to positive workplace environments and relationships, creativity, and emotional regulation. Many of these mediating constructs and qualities are well studied in the context of leadership development, and this rich background lends further support to the broad conclusions presented here.
Data availability
The author confirms that all the data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.
References
Allio RJ (2005) Leadership development: teaching versus learning. Manag Decis 43:1071–1077. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740510610071
Amundsen S, Martinsen ØL (2015) Linking empowering leadership to job satisfaction, work effort, and creativity. J Leadersh Organ Stud 22:304–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051814565819
Anderson JS, Prussia GE (1997) The self-leadership questionnaire: preliminary assessment of construct validity. J Leadersh Stud 4:119–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/107179199700400212
Andrasik F, Heimberg J (1982) Self-management procedures. In: Frederikson L (ed) Handbook of organizational behavior management. Wiley, London, pp 219–247
Andressen P, Konradt U, Neck CP (2012) The relation between self-leadership and transformational leadership. J Leadersh Organ Stud 19:68–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051811425047
Arendt JFW, Verdorfer AP, Kugler KG (2019) Mindfulness and leadership: communication as a behavioral correlate of leader mindfulness and its effect on follower satisfaction. Front Psychol 10:667. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00667
Baer RA, Smith GT, Allen KB (2004) Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: the kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Assessment 11:191–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191104268029
Baer RA, Smith GT, Lykins E, Button D, Krietemeyer J, Sauer S, Walsh E, Duggan D, Williams JMG (2008) Construct validity of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire in meditating and nonmeditating samples. Assessment 15:329–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191107313003
Bartlett L, Martin A, Neil AL, Memish K, Otahal P, Kilpatrick M, Sanderson K (2019) A systematic review and meta-analysis of workplace mindfulness training randomized controlled trials. J Occup Health Psychol 24:108–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000146
Bichler BF, Petry T, Kallmuenzer A, Peters M (2022) Get on task: a pragmatic tutorial on planning and conducting a systematic literature review. In: Okumus F, Rasoolimanesh S, Jahani S (eds) Contemporary research methods in hospitality and tourism. Emerald Publishing Limited, New York, pp 39–53
Bishop SR, Lau M, Shapiro S, Carlson L, Anderson ND, Carmody J, Segal ZV, Abbey S, Speca M, Velting D, Devins G (2004) Mindfulness: a proposed operational definition. Clin Psychol Sci Pract 11:230–241. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.bph077
Bracht EM, Keng-Highberger FT, Avolio BJ, Huang Y (2021) Take a “selfie”: examining how leaders emerge from leader self-awareness, self-leadership, and self-efficacy. Front Psychol 12:635085. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.635085
Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH (2017) Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev 6:245. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y
Brendel W, Hankerson S, Byun S, Cunningham B (2016) Cultivating leadership Dharma: measuring the impact of regular mindfulness practice on creativity, resilience, tolerance for ambiguity. J Manag Dev 35:1056–1078. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmd-09-2015-0127
Brown KW, Ryan RM (2003) The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol 84:822–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822
Brown KW, Ryan RM, Loverich TM, Biegel GM, West AM (2011) Out of the armchair and into the streets: measuring mindfulness advances knowledge and improves interventions: reply to Grossman (2011). Psychol Assess 23:1041–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025781
Bryant A, Kazan A (2012) Self-leadership: how to become a more successful, efficient, and effective leader from the inside out. McGraw Hill Professional, New York
Buchheld N, Grossman P, Walach H (2001) Measuring mindfulness in insight meditation (vipassana) and meditation-based psychotherapy: the development of the freiburg mindfulness inventory (FMI). J Medit Medit Res 1:11–34
Büchter RB, Rombey T, Mathes T, Khalil H, Lunny C, Pollock D, Puljak L, Tricco AC, Pieper D (2023) Systematic reviewers used various approaches to data extraction and expressed several research needs: a survey. J Clin Epidemiol 159:214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.05.027
Buckley CM, Sipe MH (2024) Nurse leader mindfulness pilot impact on perceived stress: a quality improvement project. Nurs Adm Q 48:180–186. https://doi.org/10.1097/naq.0000000000000636
Cabrera-Aguilar E, Zevallos-Francia M, Morales-García M, Ramírez-Coronel AA, Morales-García SB, Sairitupa-Sanchez LZ, Morales-García WC (2023) Resilience and stress as predictors of work engagement: the mediating role of self-efficacy in nurses. Front Psychiatry 14:1202048. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1202048
Cardaciotto L, Herbert JD, Forman EM, Moitra E, Farrow V (2008) The assessment of present-moment awareness and acceptance. Assessment 15:204–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191107311467
Carleton EL, Barling J, Trivisonno M (2018) Leaders’ trait mindfulness and transformational leadership: the mediating roles of leaders’ positive affect and leadership self-efficacy. Can J Behav Sci 50:185–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000103
Carver CS, Scheier MF (1981) Attention and self-regulation: a control-theory ap-proach to human behavior. Springer, New York
Cautela J (1969) Behavior therapy and self-control: techniques and applications. In: Franks C (ed) Behavioral therapy: appraisal and status. McGraw-Hill, London, pp 323–340
Chadwick P, Hember M, Symes J, Peters E, Kuipers E, Dagnan D (2008) Responding mindfully to unpleasant thoughts and images: reliability and validity of the Southampton mindfulness questionnaire (SMQ). Br J Clin Psychol 47:451–455. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466508x314891
Chaijukul Y (2010) An examination of self-leadership performance mechanism model in Thai private organization. J Behav Sci 5:15–32
Chan H-L, Lo L-Y, Lin M, Thompson N (2016) Revalidation of the cognitive and affective mindfulness scale—revised (CAMS-R) with its newly developed Chinese version (Ch-CAMS-R). J Pac Rim Psychol 10:e1. https://doi.org/10.1017/prp.2015.4
Chesley J, Wylson A (2016) Ambiguity: the emerging impact of mindfulness for change leaders. J Change Manag 16:317–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2016.1230334
Christopher JC, Chrisman JA, Trotter-Mathison MJ, Schure MB, Dahlen P, Christopher SB (2011) Perceptions of the long-term influence of mindfulness training on counselors and psychotherapists. J Humanist Psychol 51:318–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167810381471
Cook DA (2019) Systematic and nonsystematic reviews: choosing an approach. In: Nestel D, Hui J, Kunkler K, Scerbo M, Calhoun A (eds) Healthcare simulation research. Springer, Cham, pp 55–60
Cox J (1993) The effects of superleadership training on leader behavior, subordinate self-leadership behavior, and subordinate citizenship. Dissertation, University of Maryland
Cullen M (2011) Mindfulness-based interventions: an emerging phenomenon. Mindfulness 2:186–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-011-0058-1
Cunha M, Pacheco M, Castanheira F, Rego A (2017) Reflexive work and the duality of self-leadership. Leadership 13:472–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715015606511
Davids TWR (1881) Buddhist suttas. Clarendon Press, London
Day DV (2000) Leadership development: a review in context. Leadersh Q 11:581–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(00)00061-8
Day DV, Fleenor JW, Atwater LE, Sturm RE, McKee RA (2014) Advances in leader and leadership development: a review of 25 years of research and theory. Leadersh Q 25:63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004
Dhiman SK (2020) Anatomy of mindfulness at work: theoretical construct and practical applications. In: Dhiman S (ed) The routledge companion to mindfulness at work. Routledge, London, pp 3–23
DiLiello TC, Houghton JD (2006) Maximizing organizational leadership capacity for the future. J Manag Psychol 21:319–337. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610663114
Doornich JB, Lynch HM (2024) The mindful leader: a review of leadership qualities derived from mindfulness meditation. Front Psychol 15:1322507. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1322507
Droutman V, Golub I, Oganesyan A, Read S (2018) Development and initial validation of the adolescent and adult mindfulness scale (AAMS). Pers Individ Differ 123:34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.10.037
Du Plessis M (2019) Positive self-leadership: a framework for professional leadership development. In: van Zyl L, Rothmann S (eds) Theoretical approaches to multi-cultural positive psychological interventions. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 445–461
Dusdal J, Powell JJW (2021) Benefits, motivations, and challenges of international collaborative research: a sociology of science case study. Sci Public Policy 48:235–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scab010
Edmondson A (2004) Psychological safety, trust, and learning in organizations: a group-level lens. In: Kramer RM, Cook KS (eds) Trust and distrust in organizations: dilemmas and approaches. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp 239–272
Edmondson A, Casciaro T, Jang S (2019) Cross-silo leadership. Harv Bus Rev 90:130–139
Feldman G, Hayes A, Kumar S, Greeson J, Laurenceau J-P (2007) Mindfulness and emotion regulation: the development and initial validation of the cognitive and affective mindfulness scale-revised (CAMS-R). J Psychopathol Behav Assess 29:177–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-006-9035-8
Flores HR, Jiang X, Manz CC (2018) Intra-team conflict: the moderating effect of emotional self-leadership. Int J Confl Manag 29:424–444. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijcma-07-2017-0065
Furtner M, Hiller L (2013) Self-leadership, self-regulation and emotion regulation: is there a common regulatory core? In: Mohiyeddini C, Eysenck M, Bauer S (eds) Handbook of psychology of emotions: recent theoretical perspectives and novel empirical findings. Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge, pp 407–428
Furtner M, Sachse P (2011) Self-leadership training–wirksamkeitsprüfung mit qualitativ-quantitativer methodenkombination. Wirtschaftspsychologie 2:102–112
Furtner MR, Baldegger U, Rauthmann JF (2013) Leading yourself and leading others: linking self-leadership to transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 22:436–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2012.665605
Furtner MR, Rauthmann JF, Sachse P (2015) Unique self-leadership: a bifactor model approach. Leadership 11:105–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715013511484
Furtner MR, Tutzer L, Sachse P (2018) The mindful self-leader: investigating the relationships between self-leadership and mindfulness. Soc Behav Pers Int J 46:353–360. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.6521
Geschwind N, Peeters F, Drukker M, van Os J, Wichers M (2011) Mindfulness training increases momentary positive emotions and reward experience in adults vulnerable to depression: a randomized controlled trial. J Consult Clin Psychol 79:618–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024595
Gethin R (2011) On some definitions of mindfulness. Contemp Buddhism 12:263–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639947.2011.564843
Ghosh K (2015) Developing organizational creativity and innovation: toward a model of self-leadership, employee creativity, creativity climate and workplace innovative orientation. Manag Res Rev 38:1126–1148. https://doi.org/10.1108/mrr-01-2014-0017
Glomb TM, Duffy MK, Bono JE, Yang T (2011) Mindfulness at work. In: Joshi A, Liao H, Martocchio J (eds) Research in personnel and human resources management, vol 30. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, London, pp 115–157
Godwin JL, Hershelman SM (2021) Utilizing self-leadership to enhance gratitude thought patterns. Adm Sci 11:40. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11020040
Godwin JL, Neck CP, Houghton JD (1999) The impact of thought self-leadership on individual goal performance. J Manag Develop 18:153–170. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621719910257738
Goldsby MG, Goldsby EA, Neck CB, Neck CP, Mathews R (2021) Self-leadership: a four decade review of the literature and trainings. Adm Sci 11:25. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci11010025
Grossman P (2011) Defining mindfulness by how poorly I think I pay attention during everyday awareness and other intractable problems for psychology’s (re)invention of mindfulness: comment on Brown et al. (2011). Psychol Assess 23:1034–1040. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022713
Gunasekara A, Zheng CSM (2019) Examining the effect of different facets of mindfulness on work engagement. Empl Relat 41:193–208. https://doi.org/10.1108/er-09-2017-0220
Guzzo R (1998) Leadership, self-management, and levels of analysis. In: Dansereau F, Yammarino F (eds) Leadership: the multiple-level approaches, classical and new wave. JAI Press, New York, pp 213–219
Han H, Preston JC (2023) Preparing future leaders for immediate response to emergencies through mindfulness education. ABAC ODI J Vis Action Outcome 11:109–127. https://doi.org/10.14456/abacodijournal.2023.33
Harari MB, Williams EA, Castro SL, Brant KK (2021) Self-leadership: a meta-analysis of over two decades of research. J Occup Organ Psychol 94:890–923. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12365
Harunavamwe M, Kanengoni H (2023) Technology self-efficacy and mindfulness as coping strategies for technostress in hybrid work settings. IntechOpen, London
Higgs M, Rowland D (2022) Is change all in the mind? A study of leader mindfulness, leader behaviors in implementing change. J Gen Manag 49:146–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063070221107130
Hilton LG, Marshall NJ, Motala A, Taylor SL, Miake-Lye IM, Baxi S, Shanman RM, Solloway MR, Beroesand JM, Hempel S (2019) Mindfulness meditation for workplace wellness: an evidence map. Work 63:205–218. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-192922
Hoffmann C (2023) Brain-adapted self-leadership. In: Hoffmann C (ed) Brain-adapted leadership: effective leadership according to neuropsychological findings. Springer, Berlin, pp 107–128
Houghton JD, Neck CP (2002) The revised self-leadership questionnaire. J Manag Psychol 17:672–691. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940210450484
Houghton JD, Wu J, Godwin JL, Neck CP, Manz CC (2012) Effective stress management: a model of emotional intelligence, self-leadership, and student stress coping. J Manag Educ 36:220–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562911430205
Hylton J (2021) Leadership development influence on leader self-efficacy (LSE): an explanatory sequential mixed methods study with civilian federal employees in the department of defense. Dissertation, Baylor University
Ikart E (2023) Emotional intelligence: why its matters in change leadership and innovation in the 21st century styles of work. Int J Bus Innov 2:e34732. https://doi.org/10.34624/ijbi.v2i4.34732
Inam A, Ho JA, Sheikh AA, Shafqat M, Najam U (2023) How self leadership enhances normative commitment and work performance by engaging people at work? Curr Psychol 42:3596–3609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01697-5
Issac AC, Dhir A, Christofi M (2024) True knowledge vs empowering knowledge: conceptualizing a theory of mindfulness and knowledge transfer (TMKT). J Manag Psychol 39:264–286. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-05-2022-0217
Jha AP, Krompinger J, Baime MJ (2007) Mindfulness training modifies subsystems of attention. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 7:109–119. https://doi.org/10.3758/cabn.7.2.109
Kabat-Zinn J (1982) An outpatient program in behavioral medicine for chronic pain patients based on the practice of mindfulness meditation: theoretical considerations and preliminary results. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 4:33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/0163-8343(82)90026-3
Kabat-Zinn J (1994) Wherever you go, there you are: mindfulness meditation in everyday life. Hyperion, Ullstein, New York
Kabat-Zinn J, Lipworth L, Burncy R, Sellers W (1987) Four-year follow-up of a meditation-based program for the self-regulation of chronic pain. Clin J Pain 2:159–774. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002508-198602030-00004
Kalyar M (2011) Creativity, self-leadership and individual innovation. J Commer 3:20–28
Kanfer F (1970) Self-regulation: research, issues, and speculations. In: Neuringer C, Michael J (eds) Behavior modification in clinical psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts, London, pp 178–220
Kelly L (2023) Coaching for mindfulness and authentic leadership: practical steps. In: Kelly L (ed) Mindfulness for authentic leadership: theory and cases. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp 287–292
King E, Haar JM (2017) Mindfulness and job performance: a study of Australian leaders. Asia Pac J Hum Resour 55:298–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12143
King E (2022) Developing leaders to perform in uncertainty: the mindfulness solution. Dissertation, Macquarie University
Kolaski K, Logan LR, Ioannidis JPA (2023) Guidance to best tools and practices for systematic reviews. Syst Rev 12:96. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02255-9
Konradt U, Andreßen P, Ellwart T (2009) Self-leadership in organizational teams: a multilevel analysis of moderators and mediators. Eur J Work Organ Psychol 18:322–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320701693225
Konte AG (2022) Mindfulness in organizations: the concept of mindful leadership. In: Crawford J (ed) Leadership: advancing great leaders and leadership. IntechOpen, London, pp 1–31
Kör B (2016) The mediating effects of self-leadership on perceived entrepreneurial orientation and innovative work behavior in the banking sector. Springerplus 5:1829. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3556-8
Krampitz J, Seubert C, Furtner M, Glaser J (2021) Self-leadership: a meta-analytic review of intervention effects on leaders’ capacities. J Leadersh Stud 15:21–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21782
Krampitz J, Tenschert J, Furtner M, Simon J, Glaser J (2023) Effectiveness of online self-leadership training on leaders’ self-leadership skills and recovery experiences. J Workplace Learn 35:66–85. https://doi.org/10.1108/jwl-10-2022-0125
Kraus S, Breier M, Lim WM et al (2022) Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice. Rev Manag Sci 16:2577–2595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00588-8
Kurniatun TC, Adam M, Susila HM, Djamaludin M (2021) Analysis of benefits and problems of leadership training. Adv Soc Sci Educ Humanit Res 526:60–64. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210212.012
Lau MA, Bishop SR, Segal ZV, Buis T, Anderson ND, Carlson L, Shapiro S, Carmody J, Abbey S, Devins G (2006) The toronto mindfulness scale: development and validation. J Clin Psychol 62:1445–1467. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20326
Lee M, Jung M (2022) The mediating effect of empathy between mindfulness and self-leadership in female university students: a cross-sectional study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19:15623. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315623
Li L, Ai H, Gao L, Zhou H, Liu X, Zhang Z, Sun T, Fan L (2017) Moderating effects of coping on work stress and job performance for nurses in tertiary hospitals: a cross-sectional survey in China. BMC Health Serv Res 17:401. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2348-3
Lomas T, Medina JC, Ivtzan I, Rupprecht S, Eiroa-Orosa FJ (2019) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of mindfulness-based interventions on the well-being of healthcare professionals. Mindfulness 10:1193–1216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-018-1062-5
London M, Sessa VI, Shelley LA (2023) Developing self-awareness: learning processes for self- and interpersonal growth. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav 10:261–288. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-044531
Loucks EB, Crane RS, Sanghvi MA, Montero-Marin J, Proulx J, Brewer JA, Kuyken W (2022) Mindfulness-based programs: why, when, and how to adapt? Glob Adv Health Med 11:21649561211068804. https://doi.org/10.1177/21649561211068805
Lovelace KJ, Manz CC, Alves JC (2007) Work stress and leadership development: the role of self-leadership, shared leadership, physical fitness and flow in managing demands and increasing job control. Hum Resour Manag Rev 17:374–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.08.001
Lucke GA, Furtner MR (2015) Soldiers lead themselves to more success: a self-leadership intervention study. Mil Psychol 27:311–324. https://doi.org/10.1037/mil0000086
Luthans F, Davis TRV (1979) Behavioral self-management—The missing link in managerial effectiveness. Organ Dyn 8:42–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(79)90003-2
Magyari R (2015) Mindful-leadership’s contribution to corporate social responsibility objectives: a qualitative study. Doctoral thesis, Capella University
Mahfouz J (2018) Mindfulness training for school administrators: effects on well-being and leadership. J Educ Adm 56:602–619. https://doi.org/10.1108/jea-12-2017-0171
Mahoney M, Arnkoff D (1979) Self-management: theory, research, and application. In: Brady J, Pomerleau D (eds) Behavioral medicine: theory and practice. Williams and Williams, New York, pp 75–96
Manz CC (1986) Self-leadership: toward an expanded theory of self-influence processes in organizations. Acad Manag Rev 11:585–600. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1986.4306232
Manz C (1992) Self-leadership. The heart of empowerment. J Qual Part 15:80–89
Manz CC, Sims HP (1980) Self-management as a substitute for leadership: a social learning theory perspective. Acad Manag Rev 5:361–367. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1980.4288845
Markham SE, Markham IS (1995) Self-management and self-leadership reexamined: a levels-of-analysis perspective. Leadersh Q 6:343–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90013-6
Marlatt GA, Kristeller JL (1999) Mindfulness and meditation. In: Miller W (ed) Integrating spirituality into treatment: resources for practitioners. American Psychological Association Books, New York, pp 67–84
McKenzie JE, Brennan SE (2019) Synthesizing and presenting findings using other methods. In: Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, Welch V (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 64. John Wiley, Chichester, pp 321–347
Meiklejohn J, Phillips C, Freedman ML et al (2012) Integrating mindfulness training into K-12 education: fostering the resilience of teachers and students. Mindfulness 3:291–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0094-5
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D (2011) Bevorzugte report items für systematische übersichten und meta-analysen: das PRISMA-statement. DMW Dtsch Med Wochenschr 136:e25–e25. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1272982
Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E (2018) Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 18:143–143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
Neck CP, Houghton JD (2006) Two decades of self-leadership theory and research. J Manag Psychol 21:270–295. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610663097
Neck CP, Manz CC (1992) Thought self-leadership: the influence of self-talk and mental imagery on performance. J Organ Behav 13:681–699. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130705
Neck CP, Manz CC (1996) Thought self-leadership: the impact of mental strategies training on employee cognition, behavior, and affect. J Organ Behav 17:445–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1379(199609)17:5%3c445::aid-job770%3e3.3.co;2-e
Neck CP, Neck HM, Manz CC, Godwin J (1999) “I think I can; I think I can”: a self-leadership perspective toward enhancing entrepreneur thought patterns, self-efficacy, and performance. J Manag Psychol 14:477–501. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683949910287912
Neck CP, Nouri H, Godwin JL (2003) How self-leadership affects the goal-setting process. Hum Resour Manag Rev 13:691–707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2003.11.009
Nowiński W, Haddoud MY (2019) The role of inspiring role models in enhancing entrepreneurial intention. J Bus Res 96:183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.005
Patel T, Holm M (2018) Practicing mindfulness as a means for enhancing workplace pro-environmental behaviors among managers. J Environ Plan Manag 61:2231–2256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2017.1394819
Petersen K, Vakkalanka S, Kuzniarz L (2015) Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: an update. Inf Softw Technol 64:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007
Piet J, Hougaard E (2011) The effect of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for prevention of relapse in recurrent major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 31:1032–1040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2011.05.002
Poetz L, Volmer J (2024) What does leadership do to the leader? Using a pattern-oriented approach to investigate the association between daily leadership profiles and daily leader well-being. J Bus Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-024-09939-6
Politis JD (2006) Self-leadership behavioural-focused strategies and team performance. Leadersh Organ Dev J 27:203–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730610657721
Prussia GE, Anderson JS, Manz CC (1998) Self-leadership and performance outcomes: the mediating influence of self-efficacy. J Organ Behav 19:523–538. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1379(199809)19:5%3c523::aid-job860%3e3.0.co;2-i
Quinteiro PM, Passos A, Curral L (2016) Thought self-leadership and effectiveness in self-management teams. Leadership 12:110–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715014543579
Rambe P, Modise DL, Chipunza C (2018) The combined influence of self-leadership and locus of control on the job performance of engineering workforce in a power generation utility: an empirical perspective. SA J Hum Resour Manag 16:a952. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v16i0.952
Rau HK, Williams PG (2016) Dispositional mindfulness: a critical review of construct validation research. Pers Individ Differ 93:32–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.035
Reb J, Narayanan J, Chaturvedi S (2014) Leading mindfully: two studies on the influence of supervisor trait mindfulness on employee well-being and performance. Mindfulness 5:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-012-0144-z
Reb J, Chaturvedi S, Narayanan J, Kudesia RS (2019) Leader mindfulness and employee performance: a sequential mediation model of LMX quality, interpersonal justice, and employee stress. J Bus Ethics 160:745–763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3927-x
Roche M, Haar JM, Luthans F (2014) The role of mindfulness and psychological capital on the well-being of leaders. J Occup Health Psychol 19:476–489. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037183
Roeser RW, Skinner E, Beers J, Jennings PA (2012) Mindfulness training and teachers’ professional development: an emerging area of research and practice. Child Dev Perspect 6:167–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00238.x
Ruedy NE, Schweitzer ME (2010) In the moment: the effect of mindfulness on ethical decision making. J Bus Ethics 95:73–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0796-y
Rupprecht S, Falke P, Kohls N, Tamdjidi C, Wittmann M, Kersemaekers W (2019) Mindful leader development: how leaders experience the effects of mindfulness training on leader capabilities. Front Psychol 10:1081–1081. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01081
Sampl J, Maran T, Furtner MR (2017) A randomized controlled pilot intervention study of a mindfulness-based self-leadership training (MBSLT) on stress and performance. Mindfulness 8:1393–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0715-0
Saragih J, Pratama I, Wardati J, Silalahi EF, Tarigan A (2020) Can organizational justice dimensions mediate between leader mindfulness and leader-member exchange quality: an empirical study in Indonesia pharmaceutical firms. Syst Rev Pharmacy 11:545–554. https://doi.org/10.5530/srp.2020.2.82
Sesen H, Arlı Ö, Tabak A (2017) Consequences of self-leadership: a study on primary school teachers. Educ Sci Theory Pract 17:945–968. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.3.0520
Shaheen N, Shaheen A, Ramadan A, Hefnawy MT, Ramadan A, Ibrahim IA, Hassanein ME, Ashour ME, Flouty O (2023) Appraising systematic reviews: a comprehensive guide to ensuring validity and reliability. Front Res Metr Anal 8:1268045. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1268045
Shapiro SL (2009) The integration of mindfulness and psychology. J Clin Psychol 65:555–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20602
Shapiro SL, Carlson LE, Astin JA, Freedman B (2006) Mechanisms of mindfulness. J Clin Psychol 62:373–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20237
Shukla K, Shaheen M (2024) I am my own boss: effect of self-leadership on gig worker’s work engagement and performance. Leadersh Organ Dev J 45:35–50. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-03-2023-0146
Siegel DJ (2007) Mindfulness training and neural integration: differentiation of distinct streams of awareness and the cultivation of well-being. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2:259–263. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsm034
Singh R, Kumar N, Puri S (2017) Thought self-leadership strategies and sales performance: integrating selling skills and adaptive selling behavior as missing links. J Bus Ind Mark 32:652–663. https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim-06-2016-0127
Slutsky J, Chin B, Raye J, Creswell JD (2019) Mindfulness training improves employee well-being: a randomized controlled trial. J Occup Health Psychol 24:139–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000132
Snyder H (2019) Literature review as a research methodology: an overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 104:333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Solloway S, Fisher W (2007) Mindfulness practice: a rasch variable construct innovation. J Appl Meas 8:359–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/01612840701244250
Stander M, Rothmann S (2009) The relationship between leadership, job satisfaction and organisational commitment. SA J Hum Resour Manag 6:7–13. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v6i3.145
Steinbauer R, Renn RW, Taylor RR, Njoroge PK (2014) Ethical leadership and followers’ moral judgment: the role of followers’ perceived accountability and self-leadership. J Bus Ethics 120:381–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1662-x
Steinmann B, Klug HJP, Maier GW (2018) The path is the goal: how transformational leaders enhance followers’ job attitudes and proactive behavior. Front Psychol 9:2338–2338. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02338
Stewart GL, Carson KP, Cardy RL (1996) The joint effects of conscientiousness and self-leadership training on employee self-directed behavior in a service setting. Pers Psychol 49:143–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01795.x
Stokes J (2019) Institutional chaos and personal stress. In: Obholzer A, Roberts V (eds) The unconscious at work: a Tavistock approach to making sense of organizational life. Routledge, London, pp 136–143
Su W, Hahn J (2022) Self-leadership and psychological capital as mediators in the influence of leader motivating language on everyday innovative behavior. Int J Bus Commun. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884221119453
Subramony M, Segers J, Chadwick C, Shyamsunder A (2018) Leadership development practice bundles and organizational performance: the mediating role of human capital and social capital. J Bus Res 83:120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.09.044
Tanay G, Bernstein A (2013) State Mindfulness Scale (SMS): development and initial validation. Psychol Assess 25:1286–1299. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034044
Teixeira RJ, Ferreira G, Pereira MG (2017) Portuguese validation of the cognitive and affective mindfulness scale-revised and the philadelphia mindfulness scale. Mindfulness Compassion 2:3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mincom.2017.03.001
Tharenou P, Saks AM, Moore C (2007) A review and critique of research on training and organizational-level outcomes. Hum Resour Manag Rev 17:251–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2007.07.004
Ugoani J (2021) Self-leadership and its influence on organizational effectiveness. Int J Econ Bus Adm 7:38–47
Unsworth KL, Mason CM (2012) Help yourself: the mechanisms through which a self-leadership intervention influences strain. J Occup Health Psychol 17:235–245. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026857
Urrila LI (2022) From personal wellbeing to relationships: a systematic review on the impact of mindfulness interventions and practices on leaders. Hum Resour Manag Rev 32:100837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100837
Urrila LI, Mäkelä L (2024) Be(com)ing other-oriented: mindfulness-trained leaders’ experiences of their enhanced social awareness. Manag Learn 55:273–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076221136923
Uttley L, Quintana DS, Montgomery P, Carroll C, Page MJ, Falzon L, Sutton A, Moher D (2023) The problems with systematic reviews: a living systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 156:30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.01.011
Veneziani CA, Voci A (2015) The Italian adaptation of the cognitive and affective mindfulness scale-revised. Test Psychom Methodol Appl Psychol 22:43–52
Wasylkiw L, Holton J, Azar R, Cook W (2015) The impact of mindfulness on leadership effectiveness in a health care setting: a pilot study. J Health Organ Manag 29:893–911. https://doi.org/10.1108/jhom-06-2014-0099
Webster J, Watson RT (2002) Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review. MIS Q 26:xiii-xxiii
Wolor CW, Ardiansyah A, Rofaida R, Nurkhin A, Rababah MA (2022) Impact of toxic leadership on employee performance. Health Psychol Res 10:57551. https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.57551
Yadav M, Mishra S (2019) Self-leadership as a tool for enhancing performance at workplace. GIS Bus 14:76–88. https://doi.org/10.26643/gis.v14i6.11628
Yun S, Cox J, Sims HP (2006) The forgotten follower: a contingency model of leadership and follower self-leadership. J Manag Psycho 21:374–388. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610663141
Zhang J, Song LJ, Ni D, Zheng X (2020) Follower mindfulness and well-being: the mediating role of perceived authentic leadership and the moderating role of leader mindfulness. Front Psychol 11:879–879. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00879
Funding
Open access funding provided by University of Liechtenstein. The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support was received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All the authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Julia Tenschert, MSc., Prof. Dr. Marco Furtner and Prof. Dr. Mike Peters. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Julia Tenschert, MSc. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All the authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Tenschert, J., Furtner, M. & Peters, M. The effects of self-leadership and mindfulness training on leadership development: a systematic review. Manag Rev Q (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00448-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-024-00448-7