top of page
Search

Fostering Human Potential: Why Compassion Unlocks Employee Engagement and Innovation


Effective leadership is crucial for organizational success. However, the approach to leadership has varied significantly over time, with different styles advocated as best practices. Some argue that a "tough" leadership approach is necessary to drive results and keep employees accountable. Others counter that compassion is a much more impactful leadership quality.


Today we will explore how a compassionate leadership style leads to greater organizational and employee well-being compared to a tough approach.


Research on Leadership Styles


Transactional vs Transformational Leadership


Many scholars studying leadership styles draw a distinction between "transactional" and "transformational" approaches (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Transactional leadership focuses primarily on exchanges between managers and employees based on economic transactions. Leaders use rewards and punishments to motivate employees to achieve expected goals and standards. In contrast, transformational leadership looks to inspire employees and foster long-term commitment through vision, inspiration, intellectual stimulation, and consideration of individual needs (Bass & Riggio, 2006).


Research consistently shows that transformational leadership leads to better organizational outcomes compared to transactional exchanges (Nemanich & Keller, 2007; Wang et al., 2011). Transformational leaders create motivation beyond just economic incentives by appealing to higher ideals and encouraging creativity. This inspires employees to perform above typical expectations and take ownership of the organization's goals.


Authentic vs Inauthentic Leadership


Another body of research examines the difference between "authentic" and "inauthentic" leadership approaches (Avolio et al., 2004). Authentic leaders demonstrate self-awareness, balanced processing of information, relational transparency, and an internalized moral perspective (Walumbwa et al., 2008). In contrast, inauthentic leaders can try to force obedience through coercive, manipulative, or deceptive tactics rather than inspiring through authentic values and behaviors.


Studies find authentic leadership is positively linked tofollower job satisfaction, commitment, engagement, andtrust in leadership, while also reducing intent to turnover(Wong & Cummings, 2009; Clapp-Smith et al., 2009). Employeesconnect more deeply with leaders they see as genuinelycarrying themselves with wisdom, empathy, and integrityrather than trying to control through fear or dishonest means.


The Benefits of Compassionate Leadership


The research on transformational and authentic leadership points to compassion as a highly effective managerial quality. Compassion involves understanding others' suffering and desires to help relieve that suffering (Goetz et al., 2010). It conveys care, sensitivity, and concern for employee well-being beyond just task performance. Several benefits result from taking a compassionate approach:


  • Increased Employee Engagement and Discretionary Effort: When employees feel truly cared for by their leaders, they are far more invested in the organization's success and willing to go above basic job duties. Compassion signals that leaders want people to thrive in their roles, rather than seeing them as disposable cogs in the system. This trust and goodwill inspires discretionary effort, as employees feel they are working with—not just for—their leaders (Dutton et al., 2006).

  • Improved Psychological Safety and Creativity: Compassion builds trust and makes people feel secure taking risks, making mistakes, and contributing new ideas without fear of retribution. It fosters an environment where people are not afraid to propose solutions outside the box for fear of causing offense or displeasing managers (Bradley et al., 2013). This psychological safety unleashes greater creativity and innovation within companies.

  • Lower Stress and Burnout: Compassion signals that leaders genuinely care about employee well-being beyond task performance. This helps reduce stress, as people do not feel constantly pressured or worried about harsh condemnation for imperfect work. Over time, compassion can prevent burnout from constantly feeling overworked under uncaring supervision (Krasikova et al., 2013).

  • Stronger Commitment to Organizational Values: When leaders display compassion consistently with their words and actions, it builds trust that the company truly cares about people and not just profits. This cultural value of compassion is then internalized and lived by employees as well. It strengthens commitment to the organization's mission and vision (Jordan et al., 2013).

  • Improved Physical and Mental Health: Not only does compassion reduce stressors, research also links compassionate supervision directly to improved worker health outcomes (Barnard & Curry, 2011). Specifically, compassion is tied to lowering blood pressure, strengthening the immune system, and reducing depression/anxiety (Poulin et al., 2013). Healthy, happy employees are more productive long-term.


Applying Compassion in the Workplace


Starbucks


Starbucks has built its brand and employee culture around compassion. Former CEO Howard Schultz emphasized caring for "partners" holistically—not just customers. The organization offers healthcare benefits even for part-time workers, paid sick leave, tuition reimbursement, and mental health services. Starbucks also shuts stores on many holidays to ensure workers get time off (Wharton, 2007).


This compassion has paid off. Starbucks has low turnover compared to the food industry and a dedicated, high-performing workforce. Partners take pride in the company and feel loyalty. Even during difficult periods, compassion has fueled employee goodwill for navigating storms together as a community. Prioritizing humanity has powered Starbucks' sustained success for decades.


Google


Google exemplifies compassion through its focus on employee wellness and flexibility. The company offers three free meals daily, free massages/gym access, on-site doctors/dentists, and 20% project time to work on passion areas. Google also believes in flexibility to live balanced lives. For example, working remotely and non-traditional schedules are supported (McGregor, 2015).


This pervasive culture of compassion has attracted top talent worldwide. Valuing humanity over rigidity inspires discretionary creativity in engineers to push boundaries. Low stress from flexible support has yielded major innovations driving growth for Google as a market leader. Compassion seeds empowerment and purpose over mere compliance.


Quicken Loans


Under Dan Gilbert's leadership, Quicken Loans has emphasized heart over processes alone. The company aims to "create meaningful impact in people's lives" through a culture of compassion (Forbes, 2019). Not only does Quicken offer benefits like full tuition reimbursement, it also grants paid leaves for life events like pregnancy or caring for family.


This has translated to massive talent retention. Quicken continuously ranks among the best places to work, with employees lauding genuine care over short-term demands. Low turnover saves Quicken millions and lets talent maximize potential long-term. Compassion breeds dedication that surmounts challenges as "one family, united by heart."


Conclusion


Rather than drive outcomes through fear or control, real leadership is about empowering human potential. While toughness and discipline have their place, compassion is a far more sustainable and impactful managerial approach. It cultivates the loyalty, creativity, dedication and well-being that fuel long-term business success. As evidenced through Starbucks, Google and Quicken Loans, prioritizing employee humanity inspires discretionary effort that surmounts difficulties. When people feel truly cared for, they in turn care deeply about the organization's vision. Compassion is the superfuel propelling top talent and innovation to new frontiers. It grows both business and humanity in a holistically thriving direction.


References


  • Barnard, L. K., & Curry, J. F. (2011). The relationship of clergy burnout to self-compassion and other personality dimensions. Pastoral Psychology, 60(6), 749–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-011-0377-0

  • Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

  • Bradley, B. H., Postlethwaite, B. E., Klotz, A. C., Hamdani, M. R., & Brown, K. G. (2013). Reaping the benefits of task conflict in teams: The critical role of team psychological safety climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(1), 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023677

  • Clapp-Smith, R., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Avey, J. B. (2009). Authentic leadership and positive psychological capital: The mediating role of trust at the group level of analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(3), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051808326596

  • Dutton, J. E., Workman, K. M., & Hardin, A. E. (2006). Compassion at work. In J. E. Dutton & B. R. Ragins (Eds.), Exploring positive relationships at work: Building a theoretical and research foundation (pp. 245–267). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

  • Goetz, J. L., Keltner, D., & Simon-Thomas, E. (2010). Compassion: An evolutionary analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018807

  • Jordan, P., Dasborough, M., Daus, C., & Ashkanasy, N. (2013). A call for compassion in organizational research. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 586–588. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2012.0378

  • Krasikova, D. V., Green, S. G., & LeBreton, J. M. (2013). Destructive leadership: A theoretical review, integration, and future research agenda. Journal of Management, 39(5), 1308–1338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312471388

  • McGregor, J. (2015, June 18). Google’s HR secrets: Fun, flexibility and compassion. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeannemeister/2015/06/18/googles-hr-secrets-fun-flexibility-and-compassion/#67a03b4a6ece

  • Nemanich, L. A., & Keller, R. T. (2007). Transformational leadership in an acquisition: A field study of employees. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(1), 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.11.003

  • Poulin, M. J., Brown, S. L., Dillard, A. J., & Smith, D. M. (2013). Giving to others and the association between stress and mortality. American Journal of Public Health, 103(9), 1649–1655. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300876

  • Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913

  • Wang, H., Law, K. S., Hackett, R. D., Wang, D., & Chen, Z. X. (2011). Leader-member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers’ performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0562

  • Wharton University of Pennsylvania. (2007). Starbucks: Delivering customer service. Knowledge @Wharton. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/starbucks-delivering-customer-service/

  • Wong, C. A., & Cummings, G. G. (2009). The influence of authentic leadership behaviors on trust and work outcomes of health care staff. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(2), 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.20104

 

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Chair/Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.



13 views

Comments


bottom of page