Whilst women comprise over 50% of the higher education labour force in South Africa, they are still severely under-represented in leadership positions (Kele & Pietersen, 2015; Pillay, 2020). The lack of women leaders indicates a business case, a wastage of resources, as well as a case for inequities in processes and practices within higher education (Morley, 2013). The underrepresentation of women leaders in higher education has resulted in the expertise and skills of a significant part of the workforce are being under-utilised, which negatively affects the performance of these institutions (Morley, 2013). Research on female leadership in the higher education sector (Kele & Petersen, 2015; Linden, 2012; Morley, 2013; Pillay, 2020) has established that a key factor contributing to the lack of female leaders in higher education includes numerous barriers women face. These barriers include but are not limited to women not having a leadership identity, lack of opportunity and support in the higher education sector, discouragement and sabotage and the different expectations for men and women leaders (Hannum, Muhly, Shockley-Zalabak, & White, 2015). Whilst the significance of these barriers has been acknowledged, researchers (Reed & Blaine, 2015; Weatherspoon-Robinson, 2013) argue that the few women, who are able to successfully overcome these barriers to achieve leadership positions, possess the psychological strength of resilience and this sets them apart from women who succumb to these barriers.

Whilst the concept of resilience pervades us in everyday life, its role in the workplace is fundamental in understanding how organisations and more specifically their female leaders effectively handle adversity, a concept that has become even more important given the current disruptive and adverse work environment (Hartmann, Weiss, Newman, & Hoegl, 2020). In addition to dealing with the barriers to career progression which their male counterparts do not have, female leaders in South Africa have to lead during the global pandemic and civil and political unrest in the country, which makes resilience an increasingly important resource to have. Given the importance of resilience for female leaders, researchers (Forbes-Genade & Van Niekerk, 2019; Pillay, 2020) have emphasised the need to investigate different factors that can enhance resilience for women in the workplace within the context of leadership. Authors argue that the existing literature on protective resilience factors and their underlying mechanisms cannot simply be transferred to the leadership context as the effects of those factors depend on the context (Foerster & Duchek, 2017). This suggests that the psychological resources that are effective in enhancing the resilience levels of the general working population might not yield the same results for the resilience of female leaders.

Whilst research in the field of female leadership has attempted to explore how resilience is enhanced, a large number of studies have adopted a socio-ecological approach in investigating resilience. These studies focus on external factors that influence resilience processes, such as organisational climate (Manomenidis, Panagopoulou, & Montgomery, 2019), work experiences (Southwick, Martini, Charney, & Southwick, 2017) and social and professional support (Cusack et al., 2016). In addition, studies that have focused on internal factors of resilience tend to concentrate on direct relationships without any attempt to understand the processes through which internal factors can indirectly explain resilience (Duchek, 2018). As a result, authors in the field of resilience (Gray & Jones, 2018; Tau, Du Plessis, Koen, & Ellis, 2018) argue for the importance of studies that investigate the internal processes and mechanisms, that is, the processes through which emotions, behaviour and cognitions can work interdependently to explain resilience processes for female leaders. Hence, there is a call for studies that aim to shed light on how internal aspects of functioning such as affective (processes related to managing and regulating emotions), behavioural (processes related to understanding and modifying behaviours) and cognitive strategies (processes related to understanding and controlling thoughts and thinking patterns) all associate with each other to explain the resilience process for female leaders (Duchek, 2018). This study answers this call by investigating affective (positive affect), behavioural (self-regulation) and cognitive (self-efficacy) factors and how they work both directly and indirectly to explain resilience for female leaders.

Studies on female leadership have indicated that equipping female leaders with the necessary resources to resist disruptions that threaten their career journeys is paramount in reducing the underrepresentation of females in leadership positions. Hence, resilience is a critical resource that can assist female leaders to successfully deal with barriers in the workplace allowing them to bounce back from setbacks. Several authors have argued that there are psychological strengths such as self-efficacy and self-regulation that can be used to explain the process of resilience and that exploring these strengths and the processes between them can assist researchers and organisations in promoting resilience amongst female leaders. The current study focused on assessing the proposed hypotheses which aimed to investigate the direct and indirect effects between positive affect, self-efficacy, self-regulation and resilience.

Results of the statistical analysis confirmed that positive affect was significantly associated with levels of resilience and this relationship was independent of the indirect relationships hypothesised in this study. These findings are consistent with Sagone and Indiana (2017) who reported that in their study that positive affect was positively related with high resilience. The authors also reported positive significant relationships between positive affect and aspects of resilience such as adaptability, sense of humour, control and engagement. Similarly, in their analysis of positive emotional states on resilience, Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh and Larkin (2003) reported that positive emotions such as confidence, happiness and hope have been proven to significantly influence levels of resilience. According to the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2003), experiencing a positive mood state elicits responses that are likely to facilitate resilience. Fredrickson (2003) argues that positive mood or affect broadens the mindset from a problem-focused approach to an approach that is solution-oriented. As a result, individuals who maintain a positive affect are generally able to deal with setbacks as they focus on solutions rather than problems. This allows them to remain resilient during stressful periods. Whilst it can be argued that maintaining a positive affect during adversity is rare, the consequence of the broadened mindset brought about by positive affect results in the discovery of new and innovative actions. These actions strengthen an individual’s personal resources, which are then drawn upon when dealing with setbacks. This is primarily because the individual resources accumulated during experiences of positive emotions are long-lasting, that is, they carry on long after the transient emotional states that led to their acquisition end (Fredrickson, 2003). This explains why female leaders who display a positive affect are more likely to be resilient as they possess a wider range of resources to assist them in dealing with setbacks.

Once the direct relationship between positive affect and resilience was confirmed, the researchers aimed to investigate how positive affect explains resilience through three indirect explanatory mechanisms, that is, self-efficacy, self-regulation and the serial mediation of self-efficacy and self-regulation. In order to assess these explanatory mechanisms, a two-step process was adopted. In the first step, attempts were made to assess whether there is a mediation effect of self-efficacy, self-regulation and the serial mediation of self-efficacy and self-regulation in the relationship between positive affect and resilience. In step two, attempts were made to compare each indirect effect to determine if there were any significant differences between them.

Based on the results of the mediation analysis, the relationship between positive affect and resilience was mediated by self-efficacy. Importantly, the results of the indirect effect indicated that the relationship between positive affect and resilience remained significant. This suggests that positive affect has a positive association with resilience independent of the indirect effect through self-efficacy. According to Sabouripour, Roslan, Ghiami and Memon (2021), the role of self-efficacy as a mediator in the relationship between positive affect and resilience lies in the notion of self-belief. A female leader’s belief in her ability to successfully overcome barriers in the workplace has a significant effect on whether she is able to adjust to difficulties in the work environment, that is, resilience. This self-belief comes from maintaining a positive affect as it is the positive disposition that boosts self-confidence, which encourages positive beliefs in one’s abilities. Positive self-beliefs increase the likelihood of female leaders overcoming barriers in the workplace, which ultimately explains whether they are resilient. As a result, a positive affect explains whether the female leader has positive beliefs regarding her ability to overcome barriers in the workplace and this positive belief explains whether she is resilient. Self-efficacy may serve as an explanatory mechanism in the relationship between positive affect and resilience by accounting for the concept of self-belief.

The present study also found that self-regulation mediated the relationship between positive affect and resilience. However, it should be noted that the relationship between positive affect and resilience remained significant. This suggests that positive affect has a positive association with resilience independent of the indirect effect through self-regulation. Whilst maintaining a positive affect has been known to lead to broadened thought action repertoires, which facilitates positive response to setbacks, that is, resilience, Aspinwall (1998) argues that these broadened thoughts and actions can also facilitate self-regulatory processes which then go on to explain why some people are better able to regulate their behavioural responses and positively deal with threat, that is, resilience. Authors in the field of self-regulation argue that self-regulation as an explanatory mechanism in the relationship between positive affect and resilience can be explained by the role affect on judgement. When people who display a positive affect make judgments about situations, these judgments tend to be more flexible and creative than judgments made by people in negative or neutral moods. As a result, these creative judgments facilitate the active regulation of emotions, behaviours and thoughts in creative ways, that is, self-regulation. The positive regulation of emotions, behaviours and thoughts allows the individual to adapt to threating situations and bounce back after setbacks, that is, resilience.

The final indirect effect focused on the relationship between positive affect, self-efficacy, self-regulation and resilience using a serial mediation model. With this model, it was assumed that positive affect is associated with resilience but that both self-efficacy and self-regulation would mediate the relationship between positive affect and resilience with a causal linkage between the two mediators. Results of the statistical analysis confirmed the serial mediation of self-efficacy and self-regulation in the relationship between positive affect and resilience. The relationship between positive affect and resilience remained significant when self-efficacy and self-regulation (in serial) were controlled. This suggests that positive affect has a positive association with resilience independent of the indirect serial effect through self-efficacy and regulation. The significant result provides a reason to believe that positive affect explains self-efficacy, which explains self-regulation, and these mechanisms go on to explain levels of resilience. In a study conducted by Totawar and Nambudiri (2014), the authors argued that positive affect or mood is associated with levels of self-efficacy as it increases self-beliefs and promotes positive beliefs about one’s abilities to overcome barriers in the work environment (i.e. people feel more capable and efficient when they are in a good mood or maintain a positive affect). The positive belief (self-efficacy) that one has in one’s abilities goes on to promote positive regulation of thoughts and behaviour explaining why some people are able to remain resilient during unfavourable conditions. In their study, Bouchard, Parent and Larivee (1991) concluded that self-efficacy wielded substantial influence on several aspects of self-regulation including task persistence. The link between self-efficacy and self-regulation found in the sample of women leaders in this study is also consistent with the study by Klassen (2010) who concluded that the link between self-efficacy and self-regulation could be understood through how self-efficacy leads to regulatory behaviour. The author argued that positive self-efficacy beliefs that are a result of positive affect increase one’s level of control over the belief that they can overcome challenges and obstacles in the workplace. This belief goes on to motivate individuals to regulate their behaviour, emotion and thoughts accordingly, which leads to more adaptive ways of dealing with setbacks, which results in greater resilience.

In the second step of the mediation analyses, attempts were made to compare the three indirect effects to determine whether there were significant differences in the explanatory mechanisms of self-efficacy, self-regulation and the serial link of self-efficacy and self-regulation in the relationship between positive affect and resilience. Results indicated that the indirect effect of positive affect on resilience through self-regulation is significantly different from the indirect effect of positive affect on resilience through self-efficacy and self-regulation (in serial) indicating that self-regulation (as a mechanism) provides a stronger explanation for the association between positive affect and resilience than both self-efficacy and self-regulation (in serial). A possible reason for the effectiveness of self-regulation as an explanatory mechanism in the positive affect-resilience relationship could lie in different processes through which emotion affects behaviour. Baumeister, DeWall, Vohs and Alquist (2010) argue that there are two primary processes through which emotions translate into behaviour. In the first process, emotion can be described as a conscious state of feeling, which is characterised by a bodily response, such as physiological arousal. In most cases, the individual tends to experience one emotion at a time and these emotional states are slow to arise and slow to dissipate. The link between these emotional states and behaviour, in most cases, occurs through cognitive processes (i.e. individuals consciously experience an emotion which informs how they cognitively process an event which informs their behaviour). The second and most common process in which emotion may explain behaviour is through automatic affect. Baumeister et al. (2010) argue that this process occurs unconsciously as affect is usually an enduring mood state that the individual maintains across a range of situations. Process one (i.e. conscious emotion), typically, involves a bodily response, including arousal that can take some time to develop, and as a result may not be effective for providing input into behavioural decisions in a fast-changing or newly emerging situation. In contrast, process two (i.e. automatic affect) arises within milliseconds and occurs fast enough to contribute to quick reactions. Within the current study, the process between emotion and behaviour was framed in line with process two in which affect is automatic, that is, positive affect is an enduring mood state, and leads to automatic behavioural responses (self-regulation). Baumeister et al. (2010) argue that in process two in which emotion is described as an automatic affective state, emotion is independent of cognition. The authors state that when affect is used, the individual is able to decide whether an event is favourable or unfavourable almost immediately after encountering the event and based on that feeling, the individual reacts accordingly. Therefore, very little cognitive processing is required beyond knowing whether something is favourable or unfavourable and perhaps having one simple association. It has been suggested that self-regulation strategies can be used to either influence the intensity and/or the duration of an emotional state (Larsen & Prizmic, 2004). It is therefore likely that individuals can use self-regulation to maintain a positive mood for much longer (even in the face of adversity) to increase their resilience. Hence, self-regulation may assist in allowing individuals to use positive affect (as a resource) to enhance their levels of resilience. This could explain why the process of positive affect (emotion) to self-regulation (behaviour) was a better explanatory mechanism for resilience than positive affect (emotion) to self-efficacy (cognition) to self-regulation (behaviour) to resilience in the current study.

Although not directly related to the purpose of the present study, it could be of interest to answer the following question (stemming from the results associated with comparing each indirect effect to determine if there were any significant differences between them): why would there be no significant difference between the indirect effect through self-efficacy and the indirect effect though self-regulation? Self-regulation refers to ‘self-generated thoughts, feelings and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals’ (Zimmermann, 2005, p. 14). In contrast, self-efficacy relates to individuals’ beliefs about their ability to successfully perform certain tasks and achieve the goals they have set (Bandura, 1997). According to Zimmerman (2005), self-regulation consists of three phases: forethought (when goals are set and strategies are planned and selected), performance (the implementation of strategies selected/planned during the forethought phase) and self-reflection (motivation and emotion). According to Zimmerman’s self-regulation model (2005), self-efficacy is viewed as a motivational component of forethought, influencing the choice of strategies selected and implemented to attain personal goals. It therefore seems likely that because self-efficacy is a motivational component of self-regulation, it is ‘part of’ self-regulation and can be incorporated in an individual’s self-regulatory behaviours and thoughts – hence no difference in the effect between self-regulation and self-efficacy.

From the arguments made above, it can be concluded that whilst all three indirect effects explored in the current study were found to be significant, self-regulation was a better explanatory mechanism than the serial effect of self-efficacy and self-regulation in the relationship between positive affect and resilience.

Female leaders in the 21st century are dealing with volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous work environments. In addition to volatile nature of the South African higher education environment and the gender-specific barriers, women leaders in South African higher education institutions must also deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, which has added an extra element of uncertainty to the leadership context. This has made resilience an invaluable resource for female leaders in the workplace. Whilst the role of employees’ wellness programmes has increased significantly during the global pandemic, very few of these initiatives prioritise resilience development for female leaders and even less focus on cultivating psychological strengths such as positive affect, self-efficacy and self-regulation as tools for female leadership during the global crises. Results of the current study indicate that positive affect, self-efficacy and self-regulation can serve as useful psychological resources that may be used mechanisms to facilitate resilience for female leaders.

According to Armenta, Fritz and Lyubomirsky (2017), positive affect can be facilitated through the simple act of expressing gratitude. In terms of female leadership development, this can be facilitated through development programmes that emphasise an appreciative enquiry approach (Wall, Russel, & Moore, 2017). Rogers and Fraser (2003) state that appreciative inquiry methods are based on the premise that highlighting the positive aspects and experiences can encourage positive affect. This approach is based on one of the three pillars of positive psychology, that is, positive experiences, and assumes that emphasising positive experiences will increase positive affect (Lambert et al., 2013). Facilitators of female leadership development programmes can incorporate the appreciative enquiry approaches for female leaders through leadership coaching sessions. Coaches and mentors can work with female leaders to encourage focus on positive aspects of leadership and the progress made in their career journeys.

Based on the positive relationship between positive affect and self-efficacy found in this study, it can be argued that attempts made to increase self-efficacy should first look at increasing positive affect. Additionally, self-efficacy can be enhanced through four specific ways, which include mastery experience, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion and emotional states. Joët, Bressoux and Usher (2011) state that of these sources, the most effective source of self-efficacy usually comes from one’s perceptions of one’s own performance, or mastery experience. This is because when people perceive themselves as being successful in varying tasks, their belief in their abilities begins to increase. Higher education institutions can facilitate mastery experience for female leaders by promoting work challenges and opportunities to learn new skills. This can be carried out by using the existing in-house leadership development programmes and including opportunities to develop advanced leadership skills and providing opportunities to work through tasks related to problem-solving ability, systems thinking and emotional intelligence.

Finally, the results of the study confirmed the invaluable role of self-regulation in mediating the relationship between positive affect and resilience. Results suggest that higher education institutions should prioritise self-regulation as a mediating mechanism between positive affect and resilience. By facilitating and enhancing positive affect and self-efficacy, leadership development programmes can also encourage self-regulatory behaviours amongst female leaders, which is associated with resilience. Johnson (2017) advises that because self-regulation refers to the capacity to develop, exercise and flexibly manage planned behaviour in order to achieve one’s goals, higher education institutions can utilise coaches and mentors in the context of personal development sessions to set career goals. These coaches and mentors can also assist female leaders with regulating their thoughts, behaviours and emotions when these career goals do not go as planned.

Although the measures used in the current study were considered adequate to measure each construct, the use of self-report scales is likely to lead to the subjective interpretations by the female leaders, which could have led to method bias and may have produced inflated correlations between the study variables. As a result, the researchers ran the necessary statistical tests for common method bias and results reveal that there was no method bias. In addition, it must be noted that the correlations reported in the current study were in line with previous published findings, which suggests that the impact of participant’s subjectivity on the overall findings is low.

Secondly, it must be noted that the current sample consisted of highly educated female leaders who possessed many years of experience in leadership roles. These factors could possibly serve as a boundary condition for the applicability of the results to other education groups. Whilst most published studies (Bonanno, Galea, Bucciarelli, & Vlahov, 2007) have reported inconsistent findings regarding differences in the variables under study in terms of education and experience levels, the impact on generalisability of the findings must be noted.

Finally, whilst the current study chose to adopt a micro-level approach, there are a significant number of studies that advocate for a socio-ecological approach to resilience, which considers the macro-level influences on resilience. Given that the focus of the current study was to explore the explanatory mechanisms through which individual psychological resources explain resilience, the use of a micro-level approach was justified in the current study. However, future studies are encouraged to adopt a multi-level perspective, that is, micro- and macro-level approach when investigating resilience.

Overall, the results of this study provide evidence of the importance of positive affect, self-efficacy and self-regulation in predicting levels of resilience. As a result, organisations that intend to increase levels of resilience amongst female leaders must focus on increasing positive affect, self-efficacy and most importantly, self-regulation as these variables were found to facilitate resilience. As indicated by the indirect effects found in the current study, organisations should focus on using these psychological resources individually and in combination with each other.