Leadership growth requires reflection and support — not blame

By Alexandra Richter

BUFFALO, N.Y. — Feeling humbled isn’t the same as becoming humble, and confusing the two may lead to the failure of leadership development efforts intended to foster humility. Moments like failure, criticism and public setbacks are only the starting point, according to new research from the University at Buffalo School of Management.

Forthcoming in the Journal of Management, the study advances a model arguing that whether life experiences actually produce humility depends on how people process them afterward.

Drawing on decades of humility research, lead author Emily Grijalva, PhD, associate professor of organization and human resources in the UB School of Management, and colleagues developed an original theoretical process model that explains how people interpret self-diminishing events. In doing so, the researchers shed light on an active debate in the field of personality and social psychology about the nature of humility itself.

Some scholars have argued that shame, embarrassment, and self-abasement represent a form of humility because people often report feeling these emotions during a humbling experience. Grijalva and colleagues argue these reactions have been mislabeled — they are precursors to humility, not expressions of it. In fact, shame and self-abasement are behaviorally opposite to humility: they pull people inward and away from others, while genuine humility involves low self-focus and an outward orientation toward others. The paper’s clearer account of what humility is, and what it is not, lays the groundwork for better understanding how organizations can cultivate humility, including self-awareness, an appreciation for others’ contributions and openness to feedback, in their workforce.

“One of our key contributions is that feeling humbled in the moment — the embarrassment, the sting of failure, the sudden sense of smallness — is not the same thing as being humble,” says Grijalva. “Those initial reactions are just the starting point and should not be mistaken for humility itself. What matters is whether people do the reflective work to extract a growth lesson from that experience and let it reshape who they aspire to become.”

Another key insight is that not all humbling experiences are the same. The model distinguishes two types of self-diminishing events: those that are self-threatening — such as public failure, criticism or being passed over for promotion — and those that are self-transcending — such as witnessing a team achieve something remarkable or recognizing that one’s own small role is part of something much larger. Both can ultimately cultivate humility, but through different psychological pathways and the distinction has not been fully appreciated.

Whether either type of self-diminishment actually stimulates humility development depends heavily on context—specifically, whether people interpret them as opportunities for growth. The researchers say organizations should emphasize learning rather than blame after failure, and shared accomplishment over individual credit after success — creating the conditions for honest, growth-oriented self-reflection.

“In cultures that value learning, individuals are encouraged to understand what went wrong in the aftermath of failure. When learning is not highly valued, employees are unlikely to grow because acknowledging self-improvement might imply weakness or lack of competence,” says study co-author Timothy Maynes, PhD, associate professor of organization and human resources in the UB School of Management. “For example, a leader whose poor strategic decision led to a major financial loss could be less likely to engage in open self-reflection about their role in the failure when company culture does not create psychological safety or resources to support them.”

In addition, structured reviews after major events, guided by managers or mentors, can help employees understand what contributed to the outcome, reflect on what they learned and apply those lessons to become more effective and humble leaders. Organizations can also encourage growth through supportive coaching.  

And, when leaders share stories about their experiences and insight in meetings or mentoring sessions, they normalize humility and encourage others to embrace their own growth, fostering trickle-down effects throughout the organization.

Grijalva and Maynes collaborated on the study with Benjamin Galvin, PhD, professor of organizational behavior and human resources at Brigham Young University Marriott School of Business, and UB School of Management PhD alumna Katie Badura, associate professor of organizational behavior at Georgia Institute of Technology Scheller College of Business.