Adaptability in Humanitarian Operations: Role of Prosocial Motivation and Authoritarian Leadership

Abstract

Many field office leaders contend that humanitarian aid operations call for authoritarian leadership in order for aid workers to more quickly adapt to changes and thus deliver a better job performance. However, given that field reports highlight leadership as a serious operational failure, is it really effective to lead aid workers with an authoritarian style? We draw on human motivation theorizing to address this question because many aid workers join humanitarian aid operations primarily to help beneficiaries. We test our hypotheses with a sample of 299 aid workers from the field. Contrary to the common view, we find that, when leaders are less authoritarian, aid workers who are prosocially motivated are better capable of adapting to changes and thus performing because leaders would not undermine the autonomy that they require to stay motivated. However, under less authoritarian leaders, the adaptability and job performance of aid workers with lower prosocial motivation continue to suffer. The theoretical and managerial implications of these findings for humanitarian aid operations are discussed.