Assignment on Self-Leadership - Introduction

Running head: SELF-LEADERSHIP
1
Self-Leadership
Name
Institution

SELF-LEADERSHIP 2
Introduction
Self-leadership provides the answer on how individuals develop themselves to thrive as
well as survive in a complex, ambiguous, volatile, as well as uncertain world. First used in 1983,
Charles Manz defined self-leadership as a detailed and self-influence perspective that pertains to
leading oneself. This concept of self-leadership can be traced to philosophical and poetical
writings, both Western and Eastern. In regards to self-leadership or the influencing of one’s self
towards the attainment of set goals, both social cognitive and intrinsic motivation theories
produce self-efficacy albeit in the following different manner described. In this paper, the focus
shall be to compare and contrast the two theories and also the concept of self-efficacy as relates
to them will also be discussed. Besides, the paper will also provide a detailed discussion on my
sources of self-efficacy by drawing on J.K. Rowling’s and her journey.
Comparison between Social Cognitive Theory and Intrinsic Motivation Theory
According to Chaudhuri (2020), Social cognitive theory can be understood as a theory of
psychological functioning where learning primarily takes place from the environment. This
means that essentially, people develop a sense of agency from the various interactions of social,
behavioral, personal, and environmental factors. The motivation for the individual, therefore,
arises externally as opposed to internally or from within one’s self. As such, learning may be
vicarious depending on social symbolism, outcome expectations as well as social values and
comparisons. The goals set by the individual in this theory, are thus attained through self-
efficacy and motivation arising from the environment. Self-efficacy here refers to the belief of a
person in their capacity or ability to carry out behaviors necessary to achieve particular
performance outcomes or attainments (Cook & Artino Jr, 2016). On the other hand, intrinsic

SELF-LEADERSHIP 3
motivation theory, suggests that individuals optimize performance results in line with set goals
due to intrinsic interests or internalized extrinsic values that have become integrated into their
inner self. For example, people act due to certain internal needs for autonomy, relatedness as
well as self-competence. Self- efficacy in intrinsic motivation theory, is thus a product of these
internal processes in the individual. In his study, Singh (2016) notes that several factors drive
intrinsic motivation. The factors comprise of curiosity, control, challenge, cooperation,
recognition, fantasy, along with competition.
Kuvaas et al., (2017) uses the terms extrinsic and intrinsic to differentiate self-efficacy as
applied to social cognitive theory and the intrinsic motivation theory. Accordingly, she
distinguishes the first as instrumental in nature so that extrinsic motivation aims at action to
bring about another outcome. To illustrate, a student may be motivated to score an A in an exam
to impress the parents. By contrast, intrinsic motivation is inherent and produces enjoyment in
the individual of its own accord. This means that intrinsic motivation is not instrumental and
therefore, it does not depend on contingent outcomes to be worthwhile (Wulf & Lewthwaite,
2016). The means and the end are not separated in this instance for example, when a child is
riding a swing, it is for that very pleasure and not for any other contingent purpose. Summarily,
the first arises externally from the society and environment while the latter arises from within the
individual as motivated by goals of autonomy and competence at the level of the self (Cerasoli &
Ford, 2014). Whereas both the social-cognitive theory and the intrinsic motivation theory
emphasize self‐efficacy as the primary driver of motivated action, social cognition additionally
recognizes those cues from the environment that affect self‐efficacy and self‐regulated learning.