1. INTRODUCTION Over the last decade, an increasing number of academicians and practitioners have noted the need to adopt authentic leadership (AL) for sustainable business performance (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Cov‐ elli & Mason, 2017; George, 2003; Malik & Khan, 2019). There also is a demand from society for orga‐ nizational leaders to not only emphasize generating profit, but maintain high levels of integrity and moral‐ ity (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber, 2008). Authentic leadership behavior provides not only the means to build an effective follower–leader relationship, but also to rebuild employee trust and foster corporate employee behavior (George & Sims, 2007). Authentic leadership is characterized by a leader’s transparency, genuineness, openness, self‐awareness, and clarity in behavior (Luthans & Avolio, 2003; Wang et al., 2014). Various researchers have emphasized the role of self‐awareness triggers (SATs) and their impact on authentic leadership, but a review of the literature shows a lack of conceptualisation and reliable scales to examine self‐awareness triggers. Thus, this study developed a reliable and valid scale, and examined the role of self‐awareness triggers in authentic leadership. The re‐ search was based on four separate studies to develop the scale and analyse the impact of the SAT on authentic leadership. In Study 1, the self‐awareness trigger was operationalized, and items were generated using qualitative research. Study 2 con‐ ducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to examine the factor structure of the construct. Study 3 conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was to examine construct validity. Reliability and construct validity were assessed based on composite reliability, convergent validity, and divergent validity. Scale development led to a two‐dimensional self‐awareness trigger scale. Study 4 examined the impact of the SAT on authentic leadership. We collected data on authentic leadership from team members, and self‐awareness trigger data from team leaders. Data were collected from full‐time employees in the financial sector of India. The study had 471 dyads of team leaders and team members. Findings indicated that SAT is related positively to authentic leadership. Findings suggest that organizations proactively can enhance authentic leadership through SAT. Keywords: Authentic Leadership, Self‐Awareness Triggers, Interpersonal Triggers, Internal Triggers Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 23 SELF‐AWARENESS TRIGGER LEADING TO AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP: CONCEPTUALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF RELIABLE AND VALID SELF‐AWARENESS TRIGGER SCALE Beena Prakash Nair National Institute of Industrial Engineering, India beenani99@gmail.com Teegalapelly Prasad National Institute of Industrial Engineering, India tprasad@nitie.ac.in Shreekumar K. Nair National Institute of Industrial Engineering, India shreekumar@nitie.ac.in Abstract Vol. 10, No. 1, 23‐44 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2021.v10n01a02 DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 23 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 24 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale Defining the genuineness of leaders, George and Sims (2007) described authentic leaders as gen‐ uine individuals who do not act as per the expecta‐ tions of others: “true to themselves and to what they believe in. Rather than letting the expectations of other people guide them, they are prepared to be their own person and go their own way” (p. xxxi). Wong and Cummins (2009) stated that “authentic leaders value and work to achieve transparency and truthfulness in their relationships by asking for feed‐ back, listening and accepting other viewpoints, and acting on suggestions” (p. 2). Further explaining the openness and transparency of authentic leaders, Shrivastava (2018) and Tapara (2011) stated that au‐ thentic leaders tend to demonstrate openness and transparency by not hiding their vulnerability but by illustrating their ability to accept different views from various stakeholders. Kernis (2003) defined self‐awareness as “having awareness of, and trust in, one’s motives, feelings, desires, and self‐relevant cognitions’ (p. 13). This implies that through self‐re‐ flection, individuals become aware of their strengths, weakness, motives, and values. Nielsen, Mearns, and Larsson (2013) stated that “trans‐ parency, self‐awareness, balanced processing, and moral perspectives are integrated parts in the leader‐follower exchange that can contribute to worker perceptions of safety climate” (p. 322). Various studies have examined the positive im‐ pact of authentic leadership on individual and orga‐ nizational outcomes, for example, organizational performance (e.g., Laraib & Hashmi, 2018; Ling et al., 2017; Luu, 2020; Ribeiro, Duarte & Filipe, 2018; Wong & Laschinger, 2013), job satisfaction (Rahimnia & Sharifirad, 2015; Wong & Laschinger, 2013), organizational commitment (e.g., Emuwa, 2013; Baker, 2020), trust in the leader (Wong et al., 2010; Maximo, Stander & Coxen, 2019), and unique vision (Loci, 2016). However, comparatively, few studies have examined antecedents of authentic leadership—e.g., psychological capital (Petersen & Youssef‐Morgan, 2018) or emotional intelligence (Miao, Humphrey & Qian, 2018). A lifespan perspective requires analyzing lead‐ ership development to better understand the role of critical events or triggers that stimulate positive growth in leaders (Luthans & Avolio, 2003). Triggers were described by Luthans & Avolio (2003) as both positive and negative events that can lead to lead‐ ership development. Luthans and Avolio (2003) ar‐ gued that “traditionally negative trigger events are considered to contribute significantly to leadership development, but we also believe that positive events can trigger leadership development” (p. 247). Substantiating this argument, drawing from the life stories approach, Shamir and Eilam (2005) stated that “reflection into key life events over the time facilitates positive self‐development” (p. 398). Furthermore, a conceptual framework for authentic leadership and the follower’s development model proposed by Gardner et al. (2005) postulates that “personal history and key trigger events as an‐ tecedents for authentic leadership development” (Gardner et al., 2005). Although various researchers have postulated the positive role of trigger events (e.g., Gardner et al., 2005; Luthans & Avolio, 2003; Shamir & Eilam, 2005), based on the authors’ best knowledge, there is a lack of empirical study examining the relation‐ ship between self‐awareness triggers and authentic leadership. Shannon (2020) explored trigger events and authentic leadership development through criti‐ cal incident technique. Loci (2016, p. 46) described various factors that can contribute toward further “developing the unique vision of the authentic lead‐ ers are (e.g., past experience, education, modified identity, cognitive skills, self‐awareness, self‐regula‐ tion, self‐integrity, level of creativity, level of ration).” A review of authentic leadership studies indicated a lack of conceptualization of self‐awareness triggers. Gardner et al. (2011) call for examination of the role of self‐awareness triggers by. We consider it a signifi‐ cant research gap that needs to be addressed. As leaders strive for self‐excellence, self‐aware‐ ness can play an important role and help the leaders to unlock their potential (Caldwell & Hayes, 2016). Drawing from positive organizational behavior (POB) (Luthans, 2002) and moral perspective‐taking capac‐ ity and development, Luthans and Avolio (2003) de‐ scribed a positive organizational context as “culture [that] would itself be transparent, energizing, intel‐ lectually stimulating, and supportive of developing leaders and followers to their full potential” (p. 256). Positive organization context, life challenges, and trigger events can lead to positive self‐development. The leader faces various difficulties in life and strives DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 24 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 25 through them. Furthermore, Yaacoub (2016) de‐ scribes “authentic leaders venture into an in‐ward journey to digest their experiences, learning from their ascriptive, biographical, and societal life chal‐ lenges to explore their values and beliefs” (p.48). This leads to greater self‐awareness. Further positive self‐development provides self‐awareness and self‐ regulation, leading to authentic leadership develop‐ ment in an individual (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Previous studies indicated that leaders in their lifes‐ pan experience both positive events—“for example, a new project that has never been done before; meeting a significant other in one’s life who has an entirely different worldview; traveling to a distinctly different culture; working with a new associate who brings a new direction to your work” (p. 247)—and negative trigger events (such as the loss of a loved one, loss of a business deal, failure in business, and conflict). In such a context, Luthans and Avolio (2003) stated that, based on positive psychology and POB, leaders reflect on negative events to strengthen their authenticity through learned capac‐ ities such as confidence, hope, optimism, and re‐ siliency, leading to self‐awareness. Therefore, drawing from self‐awareness theory and authentic leadership framework, we propose three key objectives of this study: (1) conceptualize self‐awareness triggers; (2) develop a reliable and valid SAT scale; and (3) examine the impact of SAT on AL. To achieve the stated research objectives, we conducted four separate studies. In Study 1, self– awareness triggers were operationalized, and items were generated using narrative research and inter‐ views with practicing senior leaders in the industry. Because the narrative approach assumes that a per‐ son feels, thinks, and acts from a “meaning system” which helps the narrator to analyze and interpret reality in a way that gives it a personal meaning (Kegan & Lahey, 1984), it was considered an appro‐ priate qualitative method to generate items for de‐ veloping the SAT scale. Study 2 conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to examine the fac‐ tor structure of the construct. Study 3 conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to examine con‐ struct validity. Reliability and construct validity were assessed based on composite reliability, convergent validity, and divergent validity. Study 4 examined the impact of the SAT on authentic leadership. This study makes an important theoretical and practical contribution to the authentic leadership lit‐ erature. First, the study makes an important theo‐ retical contribution by developing a self‐awareness trigger scale. Second, by examining the role of SAT and authentic leadership, the study expands the nomological network of authentic leadership litera‐ ture. Third, limited studies have examined authentic leadership constructs in the Indian context. As pro‐ posed by Cooper, Scandura & Schriesheim (2005), understanding and applying trigger events can be‐ come important pathways to develop authentic leadership development. Thus, this study is an im‐ portant practical contribution for HR managers to develop authentic leaders through diverse programs using triggers and critical incidents through iterative loops and through subsequent reflections. This paper begins with a discussion of the the‐ oretical background of authentic leadership and self‐awareness. The second section presents Study 1 were SAT was operationalized, and items were generated using narrative research. In the third sec‐ tion, Study 2 applies EFA to examine the factor structure of the construct is presented. It is followed by Study 3, conducted to examine construct validity. Next session presents Study 4, analysing the impact of the SAT on authentic leadership. The paper con‐ cludes with a discussion of results, theoretical and practical contributions, limitations, and future re‐ search directions. 2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2.1 Authentic Leadership Authentic leadership theories have emerged from the intersection of leadership, ethics, and the positive organizational behavior and scholarship literature over the past several years (Avolio, 2004; Cameron, Dutton & Quinn, 2003; Cooper & Nelson, 2006; Luthans & Avolio, 2003). Luthans and Avolio (2003) defined authentic leadership “as a process that draws from both positive psychological capac‐ ities and a highly developed organizational context, which results in both greater self‐awareness and self‐regulated positive behaviors on the part of leaders and associates, fostering positive self‐de‐ velopment” (p. 243). The concept of authenticity DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 25 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 26 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale can be traced back to the 1950s, when humanistic psychologists regarded authenticity as a reflection of the congruence between one’s self‐concept and immediate experiences (Rogers, 1963) or attain‐ ment of self‐actualization (Maslow, 1968). Addi‐ tionally, Erickson (1995) and Harter (2002) comprehensively reviewed the literature on au‐ thenticity. Recent conceptualizations of authentic‐ ity were influenced by self‐determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1995). Based on the positive organi‐ zational scholarship theory, Luthans and Avolio (2003) proposed the developmental model of au‐ thentic leadership. According to their model, au‐ thentic leadership development is a dynamic lifespan process. Various trigger events during the different stages of life help to shape authentic leadership development. These experiences in life lead to the development of positive psychological capacities (confidence, hope, optimism, and re‐ siliency). Likewise, Shamir and Eilam (2005) and Michie and Gooty (2005) proposed four key com‐ ponents of authentic leadership development, en‐ compassing the development of a leader’s identity as a central component of the person’s self‐con‐ cept, development of self‐knowledge and self‐con‐ cept clarity, development of goals that are concordant with the self‐concept, and increasing self‐expressive behavior. Luthans and Avolio (2003) stated that an authentic leader is driven by a set of terminal values that describes “what is right and fair and such leaders identify with their followers’ by leading from the front, openly discussing their vulnerabilities and those of the followers, and con‐ stantly emphasizing the growth of followers” (p. 248). Thus, we argue that authentic leaders do not create a negative attitude toward their followers. Further substantiating the preceding argument, authentic leaders foster positive expectations and trust among followers so that leaders and follow‐ ers can discuss issues openly and have trans‐ parency. Life stories help describe the relationship be‐ tween life experiences and organized stories of the storyteller (Shamir & Eilam, 2005, p. 396). Kegan and Lahey (1984) stated that life stories provide leaders with a meaning system from which they can act authentically, that interprets reality and act in a way that gives their interpretations and actions a personal meaning (p. 220). Substantiating the pre‐ ceding statement, Shamir and Eilam (2005) stated that “to develop an authentic leadership compo‐ nent, leaders must first have self‐knowledge, self‐ concept clarity, and personal‐role merger, which are derived from an understanding of the leader’s life‐story” (p. 406). Authentic leadership has been studied exten‐ sively by various researchers (Baker, 2020; Cha et al. 2019; Eriksen, 2009; Shannon, 2020; Vogel, Re‐ ichard, Batistič & Černe, 2020; Weiss, Razinskas, Backmann & Hoegl, 2018). Some of the antecedents leading to the manifestation of authentic leadership are psychological capital, optimism, self‐monitoring (Alilyyani et al., 2018; Peus et al., 2012). Addition‐ ally, studies have found that authentic leadership has a positive relationship with job satisfaction (Cerne et al., 2014; Penger & Cerne, 2014; job per‐ formance (Wei et al., 2018), organizational commit‐ ment (Gatling et al., 2016; Hassan & Ahmed, 2011; Stander et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2020), and the meaningfulness of work (Ashley & Reiter‐Palmon, 2012; Monat, 2017; Morin, 2011). 2.2 Self‐Awareness Most research conducted on self‐awareness before 1972 was phenomenological in nature (Rime & LeBon, 1984). Drawing from self‐awareness the‐ ory, Duval and Wicklund (1972) stated that any stimuli in one’s environment that focus one’s atten‐ tion on the self can lead to a motivational state of self‐awareness. Franzoi and Davis (1999) described self‐awareness as the transient state of self‐focus, and it can be either public or private. Public self‐ awareness considers the self as a social object, whereas private self‐awareness considers it to be the inner self. Self‐focus leads to a comparison of self with an ideal or standard, resulting in discrep‐ ancy (Franzoi, Davis & Markwiese, 1999). The dis‐ crepancy can motivate someone to escape, if possible, or reduce the discrepancy by regulating either standards or the self (Dana, Lalwani & Duval, 1997). An effective leader needs to integrate the standards of relevant stakeholders into their self (Tsui & Ashford, 1994). Carver and Scheier (1981) argued that self‐awareness triggers a comparison between self and standards but that the regulation DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 26 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 27 is automatic and not motivational. Furthermore, private self‐awareness leads to a comparison be‐ tween the self and personal values, whereas public self‐awareness results in a comparison between the self and others’ values. For example, public self‐ awareness increases conformity, whereas private self‐awareness leads to relative independence from the majority (Froming & Carver, 1981; Forming, Walker & Lopyan, 1982; Ashley & Reiter‐Palmon, 2012; Eurich, 2018; Goukens et al., 2009; Monat, 2017; Morin, 2011; Showry, 2014) To study self‐awareness. scales developed by Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss (1975), Burnkrant and Page (1984), and Trapnell and Campbell (1999) were considered. The self‐consciousness scale de‐ veloped by Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss (1975) de‐ scribes self‐consciousness as stable enough to be considered as a personality trait (Davis & Franzoi, 1991). The self‐consciousness scale consists of three subscales: Private and public self‐conscious‐ ness, and social anxiety. Trapnell and Campbell (1999) reassessed the psychometric characteristics of the self‐consciousness scale. They showed that the private self‐consciousness subscale measures two different constructs: self‐reflection and self‐ru‐ mination (Morin, 2002). Self‐reflection represents a genuine curiosity in which an individual is inter‐ ested in understanding their values, emotions, thought processes, and attitude, leading to self‐ knowledge and self‐regulation. During self‐rumina‐ tion, a person keeps focus on self and is anxious as they keep wondering about their self‐worth (Joire‐ man, Parrott & Hammersla, 2002). Spontaneously occurring fluctuations in self‐awareness can be measured with the Situational Self‐Awareness Scale developed by Govern and Marsch, (2001). The scale developed by Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss (1975) recognized the aspects of self‐reflection and atten‐ tion but lacks factors leading to self‐awareness. Al‐ though the self‐awareness literature describes various self‐awareness scales, for example, those of Burnkrant and Page (1984) and Trapnell and Campbell (1999), no empirical studies have exam‐ ined self‐awareness triggers. To address the re‐ search gap, the present research focused on conceptualizing and developing the SAT scale. 3. STUDIES 3.1 Study 1: Conceptualization and Item Generation for the Development of the Self‐ Awareness Trigger Scale Studies examining the role of self‐awareness and authentic leadership are limited. Studies exam‐ ining types of self‐awareness triggers also are very few, and qualitative in nature. Furthermore, the au‐ thentic leadership literature also lacks operational‐ ization of self‐awareness trigger constructs. Hence, this study conceptualized and generated items for the SAT scale, using both the deductive and the in‐ ductive methods. The inductive method adopted a qualitative study to explore items using the narra‐ tive research approach and interview method. The deductive method involved item generation based on an extensive literature review. By integrating objective self‐awareness theory (Duval & Wicklund, 1972) and positive organiza‐ tional behavior (Seligmann), this study explored the role of SAT and authentic leadership. According to the theory of objective self‐awareness, self‐aware‐ ness is a state in which an individual focuses on themself as an object of attention. An examination of the effects of self‐awareness on self‐regulatory behavior by social psychologists such as Duval and Wicklund (1972) proposed that self‐directed behav‐ ior helps to align behavior with salient behavioral standards or values. In the authentic leadership de‐ velopment model, self‐awareness, the self‐regula‐ tion process, and positive modeling play an important role in achieving authenticity in both leaders and followers. Through self‐reflection, a leader achieves greater self‐awareness and be‐ comes more aware of their values, identity, emo‐ tions, motives, and goals. The theory further states that when individuals focus attention inward, atten‐ tion shifts to salient aspects of self. Drawing from the authentic leadership devel‐ opment framework (Avolio et al., 2005; Cooper et al., 2005; Turner et al., 1978), trigger events are described as a catalyst which can be perceived as positive or negative, leading to a heightened level of self‐awareness (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans & May 2004). Cooper et al. (2005) as‐ serted that individuals need time to experience DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 27 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 28 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale various trigger events and then to reflect upon them, which influences moral development. Highly self‐conscious people use imagery as a mechanism for self‐reflection (Turner et al., 1978). The impact of the role of trigger events on authentic leader‐ ship can be affected by various moderators such as the psychological capital of the leader, the socio‐ moral climate of the organization, a climate of trust, and core self‐evaluation. Previous studies ex‐ amined the moderating role of psychological capi‐ tal (Woolley, Caza & Levy, 2011), organization culture (Zubair & Kamal, 2016), trust (Erkutlu & Chafra, 2013), and self‐efficacy of the leader in an authentic leadership context. Traditionally, trigger events have been viewed as negative events involving crisis, trauma, loss of a loved one, health problems, or financial hard‐ ship, but positive events (for example, a voluntary decision to change careers, a major promotion with expanded responsibility, or an international assignment) likewise can trigger self‐awareness leading to leadership development (Avolio et al., 2005). Both positive and negative triggers contin‐ uously shape the development of a leader based on the extent to which they are reflected upon and interpreted in terms of the self. Puente, Crous & Venter (2007) explored the role of the positive trig‐ ger, because most of the triggers assumed are ma‐ jorly negative. Their findings indicated that appreciative inquiry has potential as a positive trig‐ ger for authentic leadership development. Addi‐ tionally, Shannon (2020) examined the role of the trigger on authentic leadership development using qualitative interviews and critical incident tech‐ nique(CIT). The result indicated that trigger events were experienced, and characteristics of authentic leadership were present in the participants. Based on the preceding discussion, it can be concluded that self‐awareness triggers can be either subtle or intense and overwhelming events, and they can be either positive or negative events. Moreover, based on the ability of the leader and the extent to which the leader thinks about such events, lead‐ ership development occurs. Thus, a self‐awareness trigger is operationally defined as “the ability of an individual to use the events as a trigger leading to self‐awareness where trigger event can be a dra‐ matic event or subtle, profound moment.” 3.1.1 Sample and collection of data In addition to drawing indicators from the aca‐ demic literature, we also adopted a narrative re‐ search and interview method to understand self‐awareness triggers experienced by leaders throughout their lives. Because the narrative ap‐ proach assumes that a person feels, thinks, and acts from a “meaning system” that enables him or her to analyze and interpret reality in a way that gives it a personal meaning (Kegan & Lahey, 1984), it was con‐ sidered to be an appropriate qualitative method to understand trigger experienced by leaders. Denzin (1989) stated that biographic narrative writing should identify an objective set of experience in the subject’s life. Narrative qualitative research mostly considers purposive sampling (Creswell, 2003) in which the in‐ quirer selects individuals for study because they pur‐ posefully can inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study. Patton (2002) explained that purposeful sam‐ pling involves selecting information‐rich cases. Hence, we selected a purposive sampling strategy for the study which adopted critical case sampling. To se‐ lect the cases for narrative research, we prepared a list by selecting leaders from the diverse field, which was vetted by a panel of experts. Of eleven leaders, three leaders were shortlisted by asking the panel to rank the three most authentic leaders. We did not limit ourselves to a single sample, but selected auto‐ biographies (Table 1) of three recognized leaders. The leaders thus shortlisted were Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (freedom fighter), Dr. Homi Jehangir Bhabha (Director of TIFR), and Dr . A. P . J. Abdul Kalam (former President of India and Project Director, ISRO). Step 1: Narrative Research We included in the analysis all sections of the life story that we thought expressed something about the leaders’ development, even if the teller did not provide an explicit link between the told events and his or her development. We approached the stories as “depositories of meaning” (Gabriel, 2000) and read them from the perspective of asking about the meaning of the story from a leadership development point of view. Drawing from narrative inquiry, some of the examples of events leading to self‐awareness across three cases are as follows. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 28 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 29 Gandhi narrated an event in which he commit‐ ted a mistake and confessed to his father by writing a note. Gandhi handed the note and waited for his father’s reaction, Gandhi stated that “for a moment he closed his eyes in thought and then tore up the note, I also cried. I could see my father’s agony” (Gandhi, 2008, p. 26). Observing the agony experi‐ enced by his father was an overwhelming moment for Gandhi, and it led to further introspection and self‐awareness. Kalam also narrated, his experience post rejec‐ tion from the pilot interview profile, thathe felt de‐ jected and dragged himself out of the selection panel and stood at the edge of the cliff; he went to an ashram where Guruji told him “when the student is ready, the teacher will appear . Here was a teacher to guide a student who had nearly gone astray. Ac‐ cept your destiny and go ahead with your life. Search for the true purpose of your existence” (Kalam & Tiwari, 1999, p. 25). The incident depicts how rejection in life led to self‐examination and greater self‐awareness. A similar event occurred when Homi Bhabha experienced a dilemma in making a critical decision that could decide the future course of his life: “He could return to Europe and resume the purely sci‐ entific career that was assured to take him to great achievements or stay back in India and contribute to the development of Indian science” (Deshmukh, 2010, p. 3). The decision‐making process led to greater self‐analysis. In narrative research, autobiographical and bi‐ ographical data are considered a very important source of data because they capture the experi‐ ences of the narrator (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). Because narrative research is driven by sense of the whole, thus, the researcher has to glean the overall narratives to arrive at themes to understand the phenomena (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). The re‐ searchers analyzed the texts by asking the questions presented in the succeeding section and coded the data. The researchers read the text in the first iter‐ ation and asked questions, for example: 1. What are the actions demonstrated by the leaders? 2. What are the events experienced by the leader? 3. How leaders react to various events? 4. What are the outcomes experienced by their followers? 5. What are the personality qualities demonstrated by the leaders? A similar method has been followed in narra‐ tive research work (e.g., Shamir et al., 2005; Colton, 2018; Van der Vyver & Marais, 2015). Based on the preceding questions, the text was coded (for exam‐ ple, determination, calm, rejection, duty, commit‐ ment, evaluation). The autobiography of Abdul Kalam, Wings of Fire (Kalam & Tiwari, 1999), had 180 pages; Biography of Jehangir Homi Bhabha (Deshmukh, 2010) had 135 pages, and My Experi‐ ment with Truth (Gandhi, 2008) had 490 pages. The text was coded using computer‐assisted qualitative analysis software QDA Miner Lite. Additionally, semi‐structured interviews with industry leaders were conducted for item genera‐ tion to further enhance in‐depth understanding of trigger events and triangulation of data. We inter‐ viewed leaders from diverse fields. Inclusion criteria were leaders with more than 10 years’ experience in a leadership position. After completing five inter‐ views, a saturation of data was arrived as the same Leader Position held Lifespan Biography Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi National Activist (freedom fighter), President of the Indian National Congress 2 October 1869–30 January 1948 My experiment with truth (Gandhi, 2008) Homi Jehangir Bhabha Director of TIFR and AEET Atomic Energy Establishment, Trombay (AEET) 30 October 1909–24 January 1966 Biography of Jehangir Homi Bhabha (Deshmukh, 2010) A. P . J. Abdul Kalam President of India Project director, ISRO, Chief Scientific Adviser to the Prime Minister 15 October 1931–27 July 2015 Wings of Fire (Kalam & Tiwari, 1999) Table 1: Study 1 sample characteristics of leaders considered for narrative research DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 29 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 30 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale themes were appearing. The interviews were con‐ ducted during the period November–December 2017. The profiles of the respondents are presented in Table 2. Interview questions for item generation for the self‐awareness trigger questionnaire are pre‐ sented in the following section. Questions asked during the interviews were: 1. What does the term self‐awareness mean to you? 2. What leads to self‐awareness? 3. Have you experienced events/ triggers leading to self‐awareness? Describe it. 4. Have you experienced self‐awareness triggers as a continuous or onetime event? 5. What is the nature of stimuli experienced by you, are they positive or negative triggers lead‐ ing to self‐awareness? Triggers from narrative research were obtained in two categories (Table 3), individual triggers and interpersonal triggers. Triggering events drawn from the interviews with leaders led to the identification of triggers in two categories (Table 3). The interview responses were analysed and coded; a sample in‐ terview response is presented in Appendix 2. The study also adopted the deductive method and drew triggers refereed by previous studies, for example, from the research work of Luthans and Avolio, (2003) and Gardner et al. (2005). Two additional sources of data—letters and articles published by leaders and their team members for triangulation— were considered. Based on the preceding categories of triggers, the study generated 40 items. Step 2: Content Validity The item content must be deemed valid to instil confidence in all consequent inferences (Nunnally, 1978). Thus, content validity assessment was con‐ ducted, because inferences were made based on the final scale items. To ensure the content validity, opinions from panel members were sought. The panel comprised three experts with Ph.D.s in psy‐ chology and expertise in scale development. Step 3: Psychometric Analysis As per DeVellis (2003), reliability is a measure of score consistency, usually measured by internal con‐ sistency, test–retest reliability, split‐half, item‐total Respondent no. Type of organization Profile of respondent 1 Private bank Cluster head 2 Construction firm Sr. V. P . (commercial) 3 Logistics Firm M.D. 4 Research and Development (R&D) Sr. V. P . (production) 5 Waste treatment Sr. V. P . (R&D) Table 2: Study 1 profiles of the participants interviewed (for item generation for self‐awareness trigger) Table 3: Study 1 categories of SAT from narrative research and interviews with leaders Method Categories of triggers Events Narrative research Individual triggers Interpersonal triggers Rejection, trauma, theatre play, financial hardships, stimulating work, cheating, repent, confession, experiment, fasting, Dandi March, struggle for independence, challenging assignment, failure, agony, thought‐provoking incidences, inspiring work Interview Individual triggers Interpersonal triggers Failure in a project, rejection, struggle, promotion, career progression, lack of acceptance, difficult project Challenging group assignment, group conflict, feedback, resolving the dispute, financial challenges faced by my brother, negotiation, trauma faced by my friend DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 30 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 31 correlation/interitem reliability, and interobserver reliability. Construct validity can be assessed using exploratory factor analysis; confirmatory factor anal‐ ysis and convergent, discriminant, predictive/nomo‐ logical, criterion, internal, and external validity (Podsakoff et al., 2013, Hair et al.; 2010). For this study, Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability were examined for reliability and average variance extracted for discriminant validity (Hair et al.; 2010). 3.2 Study 2: Exploratory Factor Analysis The goal of factor extraction is to identify the number of latent dimensions (factors) needed to ac‐ count accurately for the common variance among the items. The factor extraction method adopted in this study was principal component analysis because of its strength relative to other techniques. The ro‐ tation type adopted was varimax because it is the most widely used rotation method. Findings are pre‐ sented in section “Study 2: Results and Discussion.” 3.2.1 Sample and collection of data To study the psychometric properties of scale, full‐time employees working in different organiza‐ tions in the Mumbai Region were approached. Data were collected for three months, from June to Au‐ gust, 2017. All the participants who gave consent were briefed about the objectives of the study. All the participants were assured of the confidentially of their responses. Data were collected using a paper‐and‐pencil survey. Respondents were asked to reflect on each item and select the most appro‐ priate option using a five‐point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). One hun‐ dred seventy‐two responses were received. Twenty questionnaires were rejected because the data were incomplete. The sample (n = 152), comprised 63% males and 37% females; 30% of the sample be‐ longed to the 31–40 age group, and 46% of the sam‐ ple belonged to the 41–50 age group. 3.2.2 Item Purification Based on responses received, data were orga‐ nized and processed for item purification. For item purification, corrected item‐total correlation (CITC) was used because it helps to remove garbage items (Churchill, 1979). Furthermore, Clark and Watson (2016) recommended retaining items with mean a interitem correlation within the range 0.40–0.50 for those measuring narrow characteristics. As recom‐ mended by Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2003), items with a factor loading of 0.50 or more on a single factor were retained and items loading on two or more fac‐ tors were deleted. Post EFA (Table 4) items S4, S9, S7, S18, S32, and S36 were retained. The Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.75, which was more than the recommended value of 0.6 (Hair, 2010). Mean, standard deviation, and interitem correlation matrix are presented in Table 4. The interitem correlation matrix indicated that all items were positively and significantly correlated with each (Table 4). 3.2.3 Results and Discussion The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure for sampling adequacy was 0.729, which was more than 0.6, as prescribed. Bartlett’s test of sphericity Table 4: Study 2 means, standard deviations, and inter‐item correlation matrix Note: n = 152. Item S9 is reverse coded. **p < 0.01. Item Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 S4 3.59 1.12 1.000 2 S9 3.61 1.08 0.20** 1.00 3 S7 3.61 0.85 0.18** 0.35** 1.000 4 S18 3.82 0.84 0.38** 0.67** 0.33** 1.00 5 S32 3.34 0.92 0.53** 0.24** 0.13** 0.36** 1.00 6 S36 3.59 0.60 0.54** 0.31** 0.16** 0.38** 0.42** 1.00 DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 31 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 32 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale was found to be significant, which indicated that the sample was suitable for factor analysis. EFA using principal component analysis and varimax rotation obtained two components with a cumulative vari‐ ance of 66.2%. The factor loading for each item ob‐ tained was above 0.5 (Table 5). Based on the results of EFA, the factor structure is presented in which Factor 1 items related to misery, physical agony, fi‐ nancial challenges faced by parents, and ordeals and trauma experienced by individuals have loaded. It shows self‐awareness triggers are experi‐ enced by observing challenges faced by parents, sib‐ lings, and others. Thus, Factor 1 is termed “Interpersonal triggers.” In Factor 2, items related to handling challenging problems, resolving the dis‐ pute, denial of rights have loaded. This shows that self‐awareness is achieved by experiencing chal‐ lenges faced by the self at the workplace. Thus, the second factor is termed “Challenges faced by self.” Table 5 presents the dimension and description of each factor. 3.3 Study 3: Confirmatory Factor Analysis To confirm the exploratory model and study construct validity, CFA was conducted using Analy‐ sis of Moment Structure (AMOS) software (Ar‐ buckle, 2006). The study was conducted on a new Table 5: Study 2 results of EFA Source: Authors findings. Note: n = 152. Item S9 is reverse coded. **p < 0.01. Table 6: Study 2 factor structure self‐awareness trigger Source: Author’s findings. Items Component α Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 1 S4: Financial challenges faced by my parents have led to my self‐awareness 0.727 0.848 S32: Ordeals faced by people have led to my self‐examination. 0.793 S36: Observing trauma experienced by individuals has led to my self‐awareness. 0.759 Factor 2 S7: After denial of my rights, I introspected, leading to my self‐awareness. 0.714 0.706 S18: I have become more self‐aware after resolving organizational disputes. 0.768 S9: Acceptance of mistakes does not enhance my self‐awareness. 0.849 Factors Dimension Description Factor 1: Interpersonal triggers (Observing challenges faced by others has led to self‐awareness) Financial challenges faced by my parents has led to my self‐awareness The ordeal faced by people has led to my self‐ examination Observing trauma experienced by individuals has led to my self‐awareness Observing various challenges and difficulties faced by parents and others, such as trauma, financial crisis, physical agony, and ordeals, has led to self‐ awareness Factor 2: Individual triggers (Experiencing challenges faced by self has led to self‐awareness) After denial of my rights, I introspected, leading to my self‐awareness I have become more self‐aware after resolving organizational disputes Acceptance of mistake does not enhance my self‐ awareness Facing personal challenges such as handling difficult problems, resolving disputes, denial of rights, and rejection has led to self‐awareness, DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 32 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 33 set of samples, comprising employees working in different organizations in Mumbai. The study tested and compared two measurement models, the one‐ factor model and the two‐factor model. To examine which model fit better to self‐awareness triggers, five indices were used: the goodness of fit index (GFI), the Trucker–Lewis index (TLI) (Trucker & Lewis, 1973), the comparative fit index (CFI) (Bentler, 1990), the root mean square error of ap‐ proximation (RMSEA), and the chi‐squared/df ratio. Values of 0.90 and above for TLI, CFI, GFI are con‐ sidered acceptable for the model. The chi‐ squared/df ratio indicates how perfectly the model is achieved; values less than 3 generally indicate a good model fit. For RMSEA, a parsimony‐adjusted index, values less than 0.05 indicate appropriate fit (Hu & Bentler, 1998). 3.3.1 Sample and collection of data To examine the construct validity, full‐time employees working in different organizations in India were approached through email. The email addresses were obtained by contacting and seek‐ ing permission from HR managers of different or‐ ganization. Participants who agreed to the study were briefed about the objective of the study. The six‐item scale was administered to a sample of 530 respondents as a paper‐and‐pencil survey. Re‐ spondents were asked to reflect on each item and give their responses on a five‐point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Re‐ sponses were received from 468 respondents; the sample comprised 50.2% males and 49.8% fe‐ males. The average age of the participant was m = 38 (SD = ±6.4) and the average tenure was m = 8 (SD = ±5.1). 3.3.2 Results and Discussion CFA was conducted to study the two‐factor model of self‐awareness trigger that emerged based on EFA. Factor 1 was interpersonal triggers, and Fac‐ tor 2 was individual triggers. Figure 1 presents the self‐awareness trigger construct. To analyze the con‐ struct dimensionality, the one‐factor model was compared to the two‐factor model. CFA of the one‐ factor model gave a poor fit compared with the two‐ factor model. The results of the one‐factor model (Table 7) were CMIN/df = 3.12, GFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.94, SRMR = 0.06, TLI = 0.90, and RMSEA = 0.07. Results of the two‐factor model were CMIN/df = 1.80, GFI = 0.99), SRMR = 0.04), TLI = 0.96), and RMSEA = 0.04). Convergent and discriminant validity was calculated for each factor. After establishing the dimensionality of the scale, reliability and validity indices were determined. The criterion of Fornell and Larcker (1981) commonly is used to assess the degree of shared variance be‐ tween the latent variables of a model. The scale was found to be reliable (Table 8); the composite reliabil‐ ity, 0.84, was more than the recommended value of 0.7 (Hair et al., 2010), and the discriminant validity, 0.70, also was above the threshold limit of 0.5 (Hu & Bentler, 1998; Hair, 2010). 3.4 Relationship of SAT with Authentic Leadership To examine the impact of the SAT on authentic leadership, a separate study was conducted. Avolio & Gardner, (2005) stated that authentic leadership development in individuals occurs with the help of positive self‐development which further enhances self‐awareness and self‐regulation. Substantiating this, Caldwell & Hayes, (2016) proposed that self‐ awareness and self‐efficacy helps leaders to achieve Table 7: Study 3 CFA model fit indices Source: Author’s findings. Note: n = 468. CMIN/df = chi‐squared/degrees of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; GFI = goodness of fit index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; TLI = Trucker–Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. Model CMIN/df GFI CFI SRMR TLI RMSEA One‐factor model 3.12 0.980 0.941 0.058 0.902 0.067 Two‐factor model 1.80 0.990 0.977 0.044 0.957 0.042 DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 33 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 34 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale Figure 1: Self‐awareness trigger construct Table 8: Study 3 convergent validity and discriminant validity Source: Author’s findings. Note: IP Triggers = interpersonal triggers; IV Triggers = individual triggers. Source: Author’s findings. Note: n = 468. Factors Composite reliability Average variance extracted Discriminant validity Factor 1 Interpersonal triggers 0.80 0.57 0.75 Factor 2 Individual triggers 0.65 0.40 0.63 Scale 0.84 0.48 0.69 DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 34 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 35 self‐excellence. Individuals need to enhance their understanding of self‐efficacy and self‐awareness for personal growth. This can help leaders empower themselves, followers, and their organization (Cald‐ well & Hayes, 2016). Thus self‐efficacy is considered to be an essential leadership competence (Mayer et al., 1995), and leaders can put themselves and oth‐ ers in peril by inadequately comprehending these competencies. Manz (2015) and Burke (1991) stated that self‐awareness requires leaders to truthfully and precisely self‐observe themselves. Self‐awareness re‐ sults in self‐efficacy, further substantiating Smith and Woodworth’s (2012) statement cited by Caldwell and Hayes (2016) that “a leader’s perceptions of his/her values, duties, and roles are directly related to making a difference in the lives of others.” Luthans and Avolio (2003) postulated that triggers can “stim‐ ulate positive growth in leaders” (p. 247). Shannon et al. (2020) also examined self‐awareness triggers and authentic leadership using the critical incident technique. Harvey, Martinko, and Gardner (2006) and Covelli, and Mason (2017) provided primary findings indicating the relationship between SAT and authentic leadership. Thus, we can hypothesize: Hypothesis 1: SAT is positively related to authentic leadership. 3.4.1 Sample and collection of data To collect the data, 52 organizations listed on National Stock Exchange in Mumbai, India were con‐ sidered and invited to participate. Data were col‐ lected during four months, from January to April, 2018. Mumbai was selected as the location because it is considered to be the financial hub of India and because it facilitated repeated data collection and follow‐up surveys. Senior HR managers were ap‐ proached in the 52 organizations via telephone, email, and face‐to‐face meetings. Thirty‐two organi‐ zations (response rate = 61%) agreed to participate in the study. These organizations included banks, fi‐ nancial institutions, and Non‐Banking Financial Com‐ panies (NBFC). Researchers collected data on authentic leadership from team members, and self‐ awareness trigger data from team leaders. The study objectives, data collection procedures, instructions for leaders and followers, and key implications of the study were explained to HR managers and branch managers. Leaders and team members were briefed about the anonymity and confidentiality of the in‐ formation. Each team leader reflected on self‐aware‐ ness triggers. Likewise, each team member independently rated the authentic leadership of their team leader. To facilitate the matching of the questionnaires of team leaders and team members, the questionnaires were coded. Post eliminating missing information from data obtained from various team members,the study had 471 dyads of team leaders and team members. Participants at the leader level were 53% males and 47% females. The average age of the leaders was 38 years (SD = ±6.6), and the average organization tenure was 8.01 years (SD = ±5.3). In addition, 57% of the participants were married, and 43% were single. Among leaders, 45.5% of participants were from senior levels, 51.2% were from middle levels, and 3.3% were from super‐ visor levels. Among team members, 41% were fe‐ males, and 59% were males. The average age of the participants was 32 years (SD = ±7.5), and the aver‐ age organizational tenure was 4.32 years (SD = ±2.8). Regarding educational qualification, 76% of team members were undergraduates, and 24% were post‐ graduates. Data were collected in single point in time itself over 16 weeks. 3.4.2 Measurements Authentic Leadership Walumbwa et al. (2008) developed and vali‐ dated the 16‐item Authentic Leadership Question‐ naire (ALQ) scale to measure authentic leadership. The instrument measures authentic leadership across four first‐order factors: relational trans‐ parency, self‐awareness, balanced processing, and internalized moral perspective. Followers rated this item on a five‐point Likert scale using anchors rang‐ ing from 0 = not at all to 4 = frequently, if not always. A sample item was “solicit views that challenge my deeply held positions.” The scale is considered to be fairly robust, with Cronbach’s alphas for each sub‐ scale and the overall scale higher than 0.70 in a cross‐cultural validation study (Walumbwa et al. 2008). The Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.90 in the present study. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 35 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 36 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale Self‐Awareness Trigger SAT was measured using a six‐item scale devel‐ oped in the present study. The team leaders re‐ flected on SAT items and scored them on a five‐point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A sample item was “I have become more self‐aware after resolving organizational dis‐ putes.” The Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.89. 3.4.3 Data Analysis and Results The data were analyzed using correlation and hi‐ erarchical regression analysis techniques using SPSS version 21. Table 9 lists the mean, standard deviation, and correlation measures of the study variables. There was a significant positive correlation between SAT and authentic leadership (r = 0.09, p < 0.05). To examine the impact of the SAT on authentic leadership, a hier‐ archical regression analysis was conducted. In Step 1, control variables, and gender and age of the leader were entered. In the second step, the independent variable SAT was entered. Results indicated (Table 10) that SAT is positively and significantly related to au‐ thentic leadership (β = 0.06, p < 0.05). The R‐squared was significant (1.4%, and F‐change = 0.04 was signifi‐ cant at p < 0.05). Thus, hypothesis H1 is supported. 4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 4.1 General discussion This research work focused on understanding and further conceptualizing and developing a reliable and valid scale to measure self–awareness triggers in the leadership context. Using narrative research, Study 1 gathered triggers leading to self‐awareness amongst authentic leaders. Items were generated based on in‐ formation from narrative research, interviews, and a literature review. In Study 2, using an exploratory anal‐ ysis, factor structure was obtained. Study 3 assessed the construct validity was. Thus, a reliable and valid scale was developed. Two factors of self‐awareness triggers that emerged from the study are interpersonal M SD 1 2 1. AL 2.63 0.66 1 2 SAT 3.43 0.97 0.09* 1 Table 9: Study 4 means, standard deviations, and correlation matrix Table 10: Study 4 path coefficient between SAT and AL Source: Survey data. Note: TL = 102; TM = 471; dyads = 471. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. Source: Survey data. Note: TL = 102; TM = 471; dyads = 471. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. Unstandardized coefficients Collinearity statistics Model B Error Beta t Sig, Tolerance VIF Model 1 (Constant) 2.69 0.11 24.08 0.00 Gender −0.09 0.06 −0.07 −1.51 0.13 0.99 1.008 Age −0.00 0.04 −0.00 −0.20 0.84 0.96 1.008 Model 2 (Constant) 2.51 0.145 17.26 0.00 Gender −0.08 0.06 −0.06 −1.44 0.15 0.99 1.009 Age −0.02 0.04 −0.02 −0.50 0.61 0.96 1.032 SAT 0.06 0.03 0.09 2.00 0.04 0.97 1.024 DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 36 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 37 triggers and individual triggers. Further corroborating the findings of Gardner et al. (2005); Harvey, Martinko & Gardner (2006); and Avolio and Gardner (2005), this study found a significant, positive impact of SAT on au‐ thentic leadership. Previous study illustrates when leaders and followers demonstrate their true self and act as per their internalized values, it leads to increased productivity, employee engagement, and employee well‐being (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Data triangulation necessitates gathering data from different sources, at different times, or under different conditions. The construction of the ques‐ tionnaire needs data triangulation. In Study 1, data were collected using two different methods—the narrative approach, and the interview method. For the remaining three studies, this research consid‐ ered different samples in Study 2, Study 3, and Study 4. In Study 2, the sample (n = 152) comprised 63% males and 37% females. In Study 3, responses were received from 468 respondents—the sample comprised 50.2% males and 49.8% females. In Study 4, the sample comprised 471 dyads of team leaders and team members. Participants at the leader level consisted of 53% males and 47% females. Common method variance (CMV) refers to a sit‐ uation in which the method of data gathering itself introduces a bias, leading to spuriously elevated cor‐ relations between the concepts being measured. Options for assessing common method bias in a study that employs only one method are limited. Harman’s single factor test is a widely used option (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986). The present study ex‐ amined Harman’s single factor and found a single factor extracted 35.68% of variance, which is less than 50%. Hence, it can be concluded safely that the study did not experience common method bias. The study addressed the quality of research de‐ signs after establishing the dimensionality of the scale by examining reliability and validity indices The criterion of Fornell and Larcker (1981) commonly is used to assess the degree of shared variance be‐ tween the latent variables of a model. The scale was found to be reliable (Table 7), with a composite re‐ liability (0.84) greater than the recommended value of 0.7 (Hair et al., 2010) and a discriminant validity of 0.70, which was greater than the threshold limit of 0.5 (Hu & Bentler, 1990; Hair, 2010). 4.2 Theoretical Contributions The study makes a significant theoretical contri‐ bution by further expanding the authentic leader‐ ship and self‐awareness trigger literature. Previous the authentic leadership studies proposed the role of trigger events leading to authentic leadership, but the lack of a scale led to the limited examination of the role of self‐awareness triggers. First, this study helped conceptualize the self‐awareness trigger con‐ struct. Second, the study developed a reliable and valid self‐awareness trigger scale (Appendix 1). The findings indicated that a self‐awareness trigger is a higher‐order two‐factor structure. Third, the study examined the positive relationship between SAT and AL. The development of the scale addressed the call by Gardner et al. (2011) to examine the role of trig‐ gering events and authentic leadership. The SAT scale will help further expand the nomological net‐ work of authentic leadership behavior by examining it as a significant boundary condition for the mani‐ festation of authentic leadership behavior. 4.3 Practical Implications At the individual and organizational levels, there is growing evidence supporting the need to be authentic in the workplace in the face of grow‐ ing financial fraud and unethical practices (Aguil‐ era, 2005; George, 2003; Ryan & Deci, 2001). Thus, it is imperative to explore the antecedents and moderators of authentic leadership behavior. Based on the findings of the study, the researchers propose that management can enhance the man‐ ifestation of authentic leadership behavior by hav‐ ing planned interventions focused on interpersonal triggers as well as individual triggers. HR practition‐ ers can conduct workshops and assessments based on self‐awareness triggers; this will lead to self‐ex‐ amination and self‐awareness. Moreover, organi‐ zations can develop and use semi‐structured roleplaying and case studies in a planned long‐ term training program based on conflict manage‐ ment and ethical decision making to explore self‐awareness triggers. Further management can embed the role with triggers, for example, chal‐ lenging tasks and stretch assignments based on the organizational context. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 37 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 38 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale 4.4 Limitations of the Study and Scope for Future Research Work Despite significant contributions, the study has some limitations. First, the study used only three leaders in the narrative research to develop indica‐ tors for the SAT. Future, studies can consider more leaders to explore and validate self‐awareness trig‐ gers. Second, there is a limitation is the way the data were collected. The study relied on cross‐sec‐ tional and self‐reported data to measure psycho‐ metric properties of the scale, which are bound to have biases. For this study, self‐reporting was ap‐ propriate because the variables studied were self‐ awareness triggers and authentic leadership. Narrative research was used to overcome this bias. Although the self‐awareness trigger scale was de‐ veloped with different samples in both the stages, future research should test the questionnaire with a more diverse sample. Another limitation of the study is the use of Harman’s single factor to exam‐ ine common method bias. Hence, we propose that future studies should examine CMV with the corre‐ lational marker technique (Lindell & Whitney, 2001), which has garnered much attention from re‐ searchers. This research is likely to open various promising avenues for future research. We explored work by Duval and Wicklund (1972), which focused conceptu‐ ally on objective self‐awareness. The narrative study in the present research adds to the body of knowledge by providing instances of both objective and subjective self‐awareness. Future work can further extend the body of literature. Future studies can explore whether demographic variables have any moderating impact on a self‐awareness trigger variable. In addition, the scale needs to be examined in the Western context to extend the validation of scale across different contexts. 4.5 Conclusion This research focused on the relationship be‐ tween SAT and AL. The study first conceptualized and developed a reliable and valid scale to study self– awareness triggers in the leadership context, and then conducted a separate empirical study to examine the impact of SAT on authentic leadership. This research is likely to open various promising avenues for further expanding literate on authentic leadership and self‐ awareness triggers. The study will help management to focus on individual and interpersonal triggers to en‐ hance the manifestation of authentic leadership. EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLEČEK Različni raziskovalci so predhodno že poudarili vlogo sprožilcev samozavedanja (angl. self‐aware‐ ness trigger; SAT) in njihov vpliv na avtentično vodenje. Kljub temu pregled literature kaže na po‐ manjkanje konceptualizacije in zanesljivosti lestvice za preučevanje sprožilcev samozavedanja. Ta študija je zato razvila zanesljivo in veljavno lestvico ter preučila vlogo sprožilcev samozavedanja pri avtentičnem vodenju. Raziskava je temeljila na štirih ločenih študijah za razvoj lestvice in analizo vpliva SAT na avtentično vodstvo. V študiji 1 je bil sprožilec samozavedanje operacionaliziran, ele‐ menti pa so bili ustvarjeni s pomočjo kvalitativnih raziskav. V študiji 2 smo izvedli odkrivalno faktorsko analizo (EFA), katere namen je bil preučiti faktorsko strukturo konstrukta. V študiji 3 smo za preučitev veljavnosti konstrukta izvedli potrditveno faktorsko analizo (CFA). Zanesljivost in veljavnost konstrukta smo ocenili na podlagi sestavljene zanesljivosti, konvergentne veljavnosti in divergentne veljavnosti. Razvoj lestvice je pripeljal do dvodimenzionalne lestvice sprožilcev samozavedanja. Študija 4 je preučevala vpliv SAT na avtentično vodenje. Podatke o avtentičnem vodenju smo zbirali s strani članov ekipe, podatke o SAT pa s strani vodij ekip. Podatki so bili zbrani na podlagi redno zaposlenih v indijskem finančnem sektorju. Študija je imela 471 diad vodij ekip in članov ekipe. Ugotovitve so pokazale, da je SAT pozitivno povezan z atentičnem vodenjem, kar pomeni, da lahko organizacije s pomočjo SAT proaktivno okrepijo avtentično vodenje. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 38 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 39 REFERENCES Aguilera, R. V . (2005). Corporate governance and director accountability: An institutional comparative perspec‐ tive. British Journal of Management, 16, S39‐S53. Alilyyani, B., Wong, C. A. & Cummings, G. (2018). An‐ tecedents, mediators, and outcomes of authentic leadership in healthcare: A systematic review. Inter‐ national Journal of Nursing Studies, 83(9), 34–64. Arbuckle, J. (2006). Amos 7.0 user’s guide. Marketing Di‐ vision, SPSS Incorporated. Ashley, G. C. & Reiter‐Palmon, R. (2012). Self‐awareness and the evolution of leaders: The need for a better measure of self‐awareness. Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, 14(1), 2. Avolio, B. J. (2004). Examining the full range model of leadership: Looking back to transform forward. In Leader development for transforming organiza‐ tions (pp. 91‐118). Psychology Press. Avolio, B. J. & Gardner, W . L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338. Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O. & Weber, T . J. (2008). Lead‐ ership: Current theories, research, and future direc‐ tions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 421‐449. Baker , N. (2020). Authentic Leadership, Leader Optimism, and Follower Affective Commitment: An Experimental Study. In Leadership Styles, Innovation, and Social Entrepreneur‐ ship in the Era of Digitalization (pp. 329‐344). IGI Global. Bentler, P .M., (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychometrika 107, 238‐246. Burke, R. J. (1991). Early work and career experiences of female and male managers and professionals: rea‐ sons for optimism?. Canadian Journal of Administra‐ tive Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l’ Administration, 8(4), 224‐230. Burnkrant, R. E. & Page Jr, T. J. (1984). A modification of the Fenigstein, Scheier, and Buss self‐consciousness scales. Journal of personality assessment, 48(6), 629‐637. Caldwell, C. & Hayes, L. A. (2016). Self‐efficacy and self‐aware‐ ness: moral insights to increased leader effectiveness. Jour‐ nal of Management Development. 5(9),1163‐1173 Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E. & Quinn, R. E. (2003). An introduction to positive organizational scholar‐ ship. Foundation of a new discipline.(pp. 3‐13). San Francisco:Berrett‐Koehler. Carver, C. S. & Scheier, M. F.(1981). Attention and self‐reg‐ ulation: A control‐theory approach to human behavior . Černe, M., Dimovski, V ., Marič, M., Penger, S. & Škerlavaj, M. (2014). Congruence of leader self‐perceptions and follower perceptions of authentic leadership: Under‐ standing what authentic leadership is and how it en‐ hances employees’ job satisfaction. Australian journal of management, 39(3), 453‐471. Cha, S. E., Hewlin, P. F., Roberts, L. M., Buckman, B. R., Leroy, H., Steckler, E. L. & Cooper, D. (2019). Being your true self at work: Integrating the fragmented re‐ search on authenticity in organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 633‐671. Church, A. H. (1997). Managerial self‐awareness in high‐ performing individuals in organizations. Journal of Ap‐ plied Psychology, 82(2), 281‐292. Churchill Jr, G. A. (1979). A paradigm for developing bet‐ ter measures of marketing constructs. Journal of mar‐ keting research, 16(1), 64‐73. Clark, L. A. & Watson, D. (2016). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Methodological issues and strategies in clinical research (pp. 187–203). American Psycholog‐ ical Association. Colton, R. G. (2020). Modeling Leadership in Tolkien’s Fic‐ tion: Craft and Wisdom, Gift and Task. Journal of Busi‐ ness Ethics, 163(3), 401‐415. Connelly, F. M. & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of ex‐ perience and narrative inquiry. Educational re‐ searcher, 19(5), 2‐14. Cooper, C. D., Scandura, T . A. & Schriesheim, C. A. (2005). Looking forward but learning from our past: Potential challenges to developing authentic leadership theory and authentic leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 475–493. Cooper, C. & Nelson, D. (Eds.). 2006. Positive organiza‐ tional behavior. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Covelli, B. J. & Mason, I. (2017). Linking theory to prac‐ tice: Authentic leadership. Academy of Strategic Man‐ agement Journal, 16(3), 1‐10. Creswell, J.W . (2003). Research Design Qualitative, Quan‐ titative, and Mixed Method Approaches. Sage Publi‐ cations, Thousand Oaks. Dana, E. R., Lalwani, N. & Duval, T. S. (1997). Objective self‐awareness and focus of attention following awareness of self‐standard discrepancies: Changing self or changing standards of correctness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 16(4), 359‐380. Davis, M. H. & Franzoi, S. L. (1991). Stability and change in adolescent self‐consciousness and empathy. Jour‐ nal of research in Personality, 25(1), 70‐87. Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self‐esteem. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Effi‐ cacy, agency, and self‐esteem (pp. 31–49). New York, Plenum Press. Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive biography (Vol. 17). Sage. Deshmukh, C. (2010). Homi Jehangir Bhabha. National Book Trust. DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: theory and ap‐ plications (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage Publications. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 39 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale 40 Duval, S. & Wicklund, R A. (1972). A theory of objective self‐awareness. New York: Academic Press. Emuwa, A. (2013). Authentic leadership: Commitment to supervisor, follower empowerment, and procedural jus‐ tice climate. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 6(1), 45‐65. Erickson, R. J. (1995). The importance of authenticity for self and society. Symbolic Interaction, 18(2), 121–144. Erkutlu, H. & Chafra, J. (2013). Effects of trust and psy‐ chological contract violation on authentic leadership and organizational deviance. Management Research Review, 36(9) 828‐848 Eurich, T. (2018). What self‐awareness really is (and how to cultivate it). Havard Business Review, 1–9. Fenigstein, A., Scheier, M. F. & Buss, A. H. (1975). Public and private self‐consciousness: Assessment and the‐ ory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43(4), 522‐527. Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measure‐ ment error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Market‐ ing Research,18(3), 382‐388 Franzoi, S. L. & Davis, M. H. (1999). Self‐awareness and self‐consciousness. Personality: Contemporary theory and research, 27(2), 281‐308. Franzoi, S. L., Davis, M. H. & Markwiese, B. (1990). A mo‐ tivational explanation for the existence of private self‐consciousness differences. Journal of Personal‐ ity, 58(4), 641‐659. Froming, W . J. & Carver, C. S. (1981). Divergent influences of private and public self‐consciousness in a compli‐ ance paradigm. Journal of Research in Personal‐ ity, 15(2), 159‐171. Froming, W . J., Walker, G. R. & Lopyan, K. J. (1982). Public and private self‐awareness: When personal attitudes conflict with societal expectations. Journal of Experi‐ mental Social Psychology, 18(5), 476‐487. Gabriel, Y . (2000). Storytelling in organizations: Facts, fic‐ tions, and fantasies: Facts, fictions, and fantasies. OUP Oxford. Gandhi, M. (2008). My experiments with truth: An auto‐ biography. Jaico Publishing House. Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R. & Walumbwa, F. (2005). “Can you see the real me?” A self‐based model of authentic leader and follower de‐ velopment. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 343‐372. Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M. & Dickens, M. P . (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the liter‐ ature and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1120–1145. Gatling, A., Kang, H. J. A. & Kim, J. S. (2016). The effects of authentic leadership and organizational commit‐ ment on turnover intention. Leadership and Organi‐ zation Development Journal, 37(2), 181–199. George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey‐Bass. George, B., Sims, P., McLean, A. N. & Mayer, D. (2007). Discovering your authentic leadership. Harvard Busi‐ ness Review, 85(2). Goukens, C., Dewitte, S. & Warlop, L. (2009). Me, myself, and my choices: The influence of private self‐aware‐ ness on choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 46(5), 682–692. Govern, J. M. & Marsch, L. A. (2001). Development and validation of the situational self‐awareness scale. Con‐ sciousness and cognition, 10(3), 366‐378. Hair, J. F, Black, W. C, Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R. E.(2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7 th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Harter, S. (2002). Authenticity. In C. S. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 382– 394). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Harvey, P., Martinko, M. J. & Gardner, W. L. (2006). Pro‐ moting authentic behavior in organizations: An attri‐ butional perspective. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(3), 1‐11. Hassan, A. & Ahmed, F. (2011). Authentic leadership, trust and work engagement. World Academy of Sci‐ ence, Engineering and Technology, 80, 750–756. Hu, L.T. & Bentler, P.M. (1998), Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to under parameter‐ ized model misspecification, Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424‐453. Joireman, J. A., III, L. P . & Hammersla, J. (2002). Empathy and the self‐absorption paradox: Support for the dis‐ tinction between self‐rumination and self‐ reflection. Self and Identity, 1(1), 53‐65. Kalam, A. P . J. A. & Tiwari, A. (1999). Wings of fire: An au‐ tobiography. Universities press. Kegan, R. & Lahey, L. L. (1984). Adult Leadership and Adult Development: A Constructivist View In B. Keller‐ man (ed.) Leadership: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall. Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of opti‐ mal self‐esteem. Psychological inquiry, 14(1), 1‐26. Laraib, A. & Hashmi, S. H. (2018). An empirical study to examine the relation of authentic leadership on em‐ ployee performance; moderating role of intrinsic mo‐ tivation. International Journal of Business and Administrative Studies, 4(4), 137‐145. Lindell, M. K. & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for com‐ mon method variance in cross‐sectional research de‐ signs. Journal of applied psychology, 86(1), 114. Ling, Q., Liu, F. & Wu, X. (2017). Servant Versus Authentic Leadership: Assessing Effectiveness in China’s Hospital‐ ity Industry. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 58(1), 53–68. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 40 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 41 Loci, S. (2016). Authentic leadership: how personal legacy, education, and identity contribute to the level of unique vision. Dynamic Relationships management Journal, 6(1), 35‐49. Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior . Journal of Organizational Be‐ havior, 23, 695‐706. Luthans, F. & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Authentic leadership: A positive developmental approach. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organiza‐ tional scholarship (pp. 241–261). San Francisco. Luu, T . T . (2020). Linking authentic leadership to salespeo‐ ple’s service performance: The roles of job crafting and human resource flexibility. Industrial Marketing Management, 84, 89‐104. Lyu, Y ., Wang, M., Le, J. & Kwan, H. K. (2019). Effects of authentic leadership on work–family balance in China. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(2), 110‐123 Malik, M. F. & Khan, M. A. (2019). “Tracking Engagement through Leader” Authentic Leadership’s Conse‐ quences on Followers’ Attitudes: A Sequential Medi‐ ated Mode. International Journal of Public Administration, 43(10),1‐8. Manz, C. C. (2015). Taking the self‐leadership high road: Smooth surface or potholes ahead?. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(1), 132‐151. Maslow, A. (1968). Motivation and personality (3rd ed.). New York: Harper. May, D. R., Chan, A. Y. L., Hodges, T. D. & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Developing the moral component of authentic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 32(3), 247–260. Miao, C., Humphrey, R. H. & Qian, S. (2018). Emotional intelligence and authentic leadership: a meta‐analy‐ sis. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 39(5),679‐690. Michie, S. & Gooty, J. (2005). Values, emotions, and au‐ thenticity: Will the real leader please stand up?. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 441‐457. Morin, A. (2002). Self‐awareness review Part 1: Do you “self‐reflect” or “self‐ruminate”? Science & Conscious‐ ness Review, 1. Morin, A. (2011). Self‐awareness part 1: Definition, mea‐ sures, effects, functions, and antecedents. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(10), 807–823. Nielsen, M. B., Eid, J., Mearns, K. & Larsson, G. (2013). Authentic leadership and its relationship with risk perception and safety climate. Leadership & Organi‐ zation Development Journal, 34(4), 308‐325. Nunally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. (1978). Psychometric theory. Ed. NY: McGraw‐Hill. Nunnally, J. C. (1994). Psychometric theory 3E. Tata Mc‐ Graw‐Hill Education. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Penger, S. & Černe, M.(2014). Authentic leadership , em‐ ployees ’ job satisfaction , and work engagement : a hierarchical linear modelling approach. Economic Re‐ search‐Ekonomska Istraživanja, 27(1), 508‐526. Petersen, K. & Youssef‐Morgan, C. M. (2018). The “left side” of authentic leadership: contributions of climate and psychological capital. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 40(4), 520‐531. Peus, C., Wesche, J. S., Streicher, B., Braun, S. & Frey, D. (2012). Authentic Leadership: An Empirical Test of Its Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Mecha‐ nisms. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 331–348. Podsakoff, N. P ., Podsakoff, P . M., MacKenzie, S. B. & Klinger, R. L. (2013). Are we really measuring what we say we’re measuring? Using video techniques to supplement tra‐ ditional construct validation procedures. Journal of Ap‐ plied Psychology, 98(1), 99. Puente, S., Crous, F. & Venter, A. (2007). The role of a pos‐ itive trigger event in actioning authentic leadership development. SA Journal of Human Resource Man‐ agement, 5(1), 11‐18. Rahimnia, F. & Sharifirad, M. S. (2015). Authentic leader‐ ship and employee well‐being: The mediating role of attachment insecurity. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(2), 363‐377. Ribeiro, N., Duarte, A. P . & Filipe, R. (2018). How authen‐ tic leadership promotes individual performance. In‐ ternational Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. Rime, B. & Lebon, C. (1984). The concept of self‐con‐ sciousness and its operationalizations. Annee Psy‐ chologique, 84(4), 535‐553. Rochat, P . (2003). Five levels of self‐awareness as they unfold early in life. Consciousness and cognition, 12(4), 717‐731. Rogers, C. R. (1963). The actualizing tendency in relation to motives and to consciousness. In M. R. Jones (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 1–24). Lin‐ coln, NE7 University of Nebrasksa Press. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eu‐ daimonic well‐being. Annual review of psychol‐ ogy, 52(1), 141‐166. Shamir, B. & Eilam, G. (2005). “What’s your story?” A life‐ stories approach to authentic leadership develop‐ ment. Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 395–417. Shannon, M. R., Buford, M., Winston, B. E. & Wood, J. A. (2020). Trigger events and crucibles in authentic lead‐ ers’ development. Journal of Management Develop‐ ment, 39(3), 324‐333 Showry, M. (2014). Self‐Awareness ‐ Key to Effective Leadership. IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 8(1), 15–26. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 41 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale 42 Shrivastava, A. (2018). A small initiative in the journey of making leaders with the help of authentic leadership model. Kybernetes. 47(10),1956‐1972. Smith, I. H. & Woodworth, W . P . (2012). Developing social entrepreneurs and social innovators: A social identity and self‐efficacy approach. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(3), 390‐407. Stander, F. W., de Beer, L. T. & Stander, M. W. (2015). Au‐ thentic leadership as a source of optimism, trust in the organization and work engagement in the public health care sector. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(1), 1–12. Tapara, P. L. (2011). Authentic leadership: Organiza‐ tional outcomes and leader and follower develop‐ ment.(Master Thesis), Massey University, Albany, New Zealand. Trapnell, P. D. & Campbell, J. D. (1999). Private self‐con‐ sciousness and the five‐factor model of personality: distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of personality and social psychology, 76(2), 284‐304. Tsui, A. S. & Ashford, S. J. (1994). Adaptive self‐regulation: A process view of managerial effectiveness. Journal of management, 20(1), 93‐121. Tucker, L. R. & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychome‐ trika, 38(1), 1‐10. Turner, R. G. (1978). Consistency, self‐consciousness, and the predictive validity of typical and maximal person‐ ality measures. Journal of Research in Personal‐ ity, 12(1), 117‐132. van der Vyver, A. G., Williams, B. & Marais, M. A. (2015). Using social media as a managerial platform for an ed‐ ucational development project: Cofimvaba. Interna‐ tional Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(12), 910‐913. Vogel, B., Reichard, B., Batistič, S. & Cerne, M. (2020). A bibliometric review of the leadership development field: How we got here, where we are, and where we are headed. The Leadership Quarterly, [101381]. Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T . S. & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: De‐ velopment and validation of a theory‐based mea‐ sure. Journal of management, 34(1), 89‐126. Wang, H., Sui, Y., Luthans, F., Wang, D. & Wu, Y. (2014). Impact of authentic leadership on performance: Role of followers’ positive psychological capital and rela‐ tional processes. Journal of Organizational Behav‐ ior, 35(1), 5‐21. Wei, F., Li, Y ., Zhang, Y . & Liu, S. (2018). The interactive ef‐ fect of authentic leadership and leader competency on followers’ job performance: The mediating role of work engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(3), 763‐773. Weiss, M., Razinskas, S., Backmann, J. & Hoegl, M. (2018). Authentic leadership and leaders’ mental well‐being: An experience sampling study. The Leadership Quar‐ terly, 29(2), 309‐321. Wolfinbarger, M. & Gilly, M. C. (2003). eTailQ: dimension‐ alizing, measuring and predicting retail quality. Jour‐ nal of retailing, 79(3), 183‐198. Wong, C. A. & Laschinger, H. K. (2013). Authentic leader‐ ship, performance, and job satisfaction: the mediating role of empowerment. Journal of advanced nurs‐ ing, 69(4), 947‐959. Wong, C. A., Spence Laschinger, H. K. & Cummings, G. G. (2010). Authentic leadership and nurses’ voice behav‐ ior and perceptions of care quality. Journal of nursing management, 18(8), 889‐900. Wong, C. & Cummings, G. (2009). Authentic leadership: a new theory for nursing or back to basics? Journal of health organization and management. 23(5), 22‐538. Wong, C., Walsh, E. J., Basacco, K. N., Mendes Domingues, M. C. & Pye, D. R. (n.d.). Authentic lead‐ ership and job satisfaction among long‐term care nurses, 33(3), 247‐263 Woolley, L., Caza, A. & Levy, L. (2011). Authentic leader‐ ship and follower development: Psychological capital, positive work climate, and gender. Journal of Leader‐ ship & Organizational Studies, 18(4), 438‐448. Zhang, S., Bowers, A. J. & Mao, Y . (2020). Authentic lead‐ ership and teachers’ voice behavior: The mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of interpersonal trust. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. Zubair, A. & Kamal, A. (2016). Perceived authentic lead‐ ership, work‐related flow, and creative work behavior: Moderating role of organizational structures. Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences, 9(2), 426‐441. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 42 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 43 Appendix 1 Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale Instructions: Several statements are presented below with which you may agree or disagree. Using the response scale below, indicate your agreement or disagreement by circling the appropriate number for each item. (1= strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5= strongly agree) Note: Item 5 is reverse coded. DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 43 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, May 2021 Beena Prakash Nair, Teegalapelly Prasad, Shreekumar K. Nair: Self‐Awareness Trigger Leading to Authentic Leadership: Conceptualization and Development of Reliable and Valid Self‐Awareness Trigger Scale 44 Appendix 2 Self‐Awareness Triggers: Analysis of Interview Responses Example of Self‐Awareness Triggers: Analysis of Interview Responses DRMJ vol10 no01 2021 (print)4.qxp_Prelom 26/05/2021 10:39 Page 44