The study explores early career academics’ conceptualisation of intellectual humility and intellectual humility being an important attribute for academics within an academic environment. Early career academics are presented as emerging academic scholars with less than 10 years of academic experience. These academics are typically in need of not only career support and mentoring but also want intellectual stimulation, opportunities to apply their skills and autonomy (Barnes et al., 2021; Lesenyeho et al., 2018; Owusu-Agyeman, 2022). With transformation in South Africa, and the academic environment being more diverse, early career academics may find themselves in spaces where their knowledge is contested by more experienced academics, and where they themselves may contest traditional knowledge, especially within the context of decolonisation (Maluleka, 2024). In this respect, Nästesjö (2024) notes that if early career academics feel intimidated by those with more academic experience, they may subsequently hold back from sharing their perspectives or alternatively feel compelled to display their knowledge. Early career academics may also expect leaders to display and create a culture of intellectual humility in which awareness of intellectual fallibility and diverse views are encouraged (Krumrei-Mancuso & Begin, 2022).

Intellectual humility within an academic environment is considered essential because of a variety of reasons. Firstly, technological advancement, economic challenges and power dynamics result in a constantly changing world, requiring critical thinking, new insights and creative solutions rather than relying on traditional knowledge bases (Cousins, 2018; Ehlers & Lazenby, 2019). Holding on to traditional knowledge bases without considering changing contexts could reflect a lack of intellectual humility. As such, intellectual humility is necessary to prevent dogmatism and confirmation bias, foster interactions with diverse others and formulate innovative solutions to emerging challenges. Secondly, higher educational institutions need to foster learning and intellectual capital among scholars enabling them to deal with complexity and find innovative solutions to persistent wicked problems (Selesho & Naile, 2014). Academic institutions should therefore establish a culture of intellectual humility that encourages diverse perspectives and collaboration. Thirdly, academic institutions in South Africa need to enhance equality, diversity, inclusion and belonging, and therefore promote diverse perspectives that may be in conflict with traditional ways of thinking and doing (Breetzke & Hedding, 2016; Dhanpat et al., 2019). In this respect, the voices of previously marginalised groups in South Africa, such as black people and women, need to be elevated and heard, requiring intellectual humility from especially white male leaders and senior academics (Maluleka, 2024; Urban & Kujinga, 2017). The above scenarios call for an openness to new information, knowledge sharing, collaboration and a disapproval of intellectual arrogance.

The study draws from seminal work on intellectually humility performed by Krumrei-Mancuso and Rouse (2016). According to these researchers, being intellectually humble makes one cautious of one’s own knowledge and more open to diverse perspectives, a stance which is deemed essential for learning, collaboration and innovation within a rapidly changing environment (Cousins, 2018). The study adopts a qualitative approach to empirically explore the knowledge and understanding of early career academics of intellectual humility and its importance in a diverse academic environment (Owusu-Agyeman, 2022). In terms of social identity, the study sheds light on the identity of early academics in terms of their contribution to the academic discourse, and questions such as: Who am I as an academic? Do I fit? How do I fit? Do others see me as a fit? As such, the study sheds light on the cognitions of early career academics of the phenomenon of intellectual humility within an academic environment, which may have implications for their career growth, satisfaction and retention as well as for transformation (Hlatshwayo & Majozi, 2024).

The purpose of the study was to explore intellectual humility in an academic environment from the perspective of early career academics. The objective was to explore how they conceptualise intellectual humility and whether they deem intellectual humility as necessary in the academic environment.

Intellectual humility is a form of humility, with humility being presented as a core trait of leaders and a trait associated with moral behaviour, empathy, perspective-taking and kindness towards others (Friedman et al., 2017; Krumrei-Mancuso, 2018). Humility is defined as having an accurate view of oneself, an accurate view of others and an accurate awareness of being part of something bigger (Council & Sowcik, 2021; Krumrei-Mancuso & Rowatt, 2021). Humility had been interpreted as either a positive or negative characteristic. The negative view depicts a humble person as being submissive and lacking self-esteem, while the positive view posits humility as recognising, valuing and appreciating the abilities and strengths of others, rather than having a negative view of oneself (Council & Sowcik, 2021; Friedman et al., 2017). From a positive perspective, humility is considered key in reducing power differentials and building constructive relationships (Krumrei-Mancuso, 2018). A concept associated with positive organisational scholarship (POS), humility was first classified as a character strength but then reclassified as a virtue with an understanding that humility can be learned, as evidenced in leadership studies (Hendijani & Sohrabi, 2019; Krumrei-Mancuso & Rowatt, 2021; Ross & Wright, 2021; Wright et al., 2016).

Intellectual humility as a scholarly concept emerged within the field of psychology and gained attention in disciplines such as philosophy and theology (Krumrei-Mancuso & Rouse, 2016; Mitu, 2021) with less exploration of the concept in studies on leadership and organisational behaviour. Intellectual humility is defined as a non-threatening awareness of one’s intellectual fallibility, rendering one more open to the teachings and wisdom of others (Deffler et al., 2016; Krumrei-Mancuso & Rouse, 2016; Porter et al., 2021). Thus, individuals who have a high level of intellectual humility recognise that despite their acquired knowledge, their cognitive abilities may be fallible and that their perspectives may be limited or skewed. This self-knowledge or self-awareness of one’s cognitive limitations prevents one from accepting one’s own viewpoints as ultimate or superior and renders one open to new insights or information that can improve problem solving. It is therefore deduced that intellectual humility is important in an academic environment, especially in institutions of higher learning where the emphasis is on generating and disseminating knowledge for developing future leaders and future sustainability. Intellectual humility improves learning and a culture of continuous learning as it requires the learner to acknowledge gaps in existing knowledge and become receptive to new perspectives (Krumrei-Mancuso, 2018). Intellectual humility had been linked to an increased desire to learn for the sake of learning, enjoyment of the process of learning and academic efficacy (Huynh et al., 2025). Factors contributing to the development of intellectual humility include metacognition, personality, curiosity and cultural norms (Krumrei-Mancuso et al., 2020; Zhu, 2024).

Krumrei-Mancuso and Rouse (2016), leading authors in the field of intellectual humility, identified four main aspects of intellectual humility, demonstrating its multifaceted nature. These dimensions are depicted in Table 1 with descriptives of each dimension provided.

The dimensions of intellectual humility depict a person with intellectual humility as one having a viewpoint on an issue, but at the same time, being open to learning from others and willing to adjust one’s viewpoint as new insights become evident. Stanley et al. (2020) describe intellectual humility as both cognitive and interpersonal, emphasising intellectual humility in terms of knowledge gain as well as in terms of relating to others. Jarvinen and Paulus (2017) and Jayawickreme and Fleeson (2022) present intellectual humility as a virtue and as intellectual character. From the other side, a lack of intellectual humility is reflected in incivility, arrogance and dogmatism, which Barrett (2017) indicates is often prevalent in public discourse and in academia. Porter and Schuman (2017) found a link between a growth mindset of intelligence and intellectual humility, demonstrating that intellectual humility can be developed. They also found that intellectual humility is consistently linked to respect for and openness to opposing views.

Intellectual humility may appear incompatible with an academic environment where knowledge is an attribute of academic achievement. Knowledge creation and dissemination are crucial in an ever-changing world where new solutions to problems need to be created (Bolisani & Bratianu, 2018; Budevici-Puiu, 2020) and elevates the role that higher education institutions and academics play in the economy and society (Budevici-Puiu, 2020; Matsepe et al., 2020). However, academics may display resistance to change and alternative views and become resolute in promoting their own ideas and traditional knowledge bases (Leary et al., 2017). Buchheit (2020), for example, bemoans the rush among academics to publish for personal gain and calls for more humility and less hubris. Roberts and Zigarmi (2014) and Mitu (2021) also opine that academics may hold on to traditional knowledge bases in resistance to change, with downstream consequences for students’ ability to address real-life issues with fresh perspectives and critical thinking. Holding on to traditional views without interrogating the truth is counterproductive to constructive discourse on political and social issues and not indicative of intellectual humility (Porter & Schumann, 2017). Using a series of experiments, these researchers found that participants who displayed intellectual humility were more open to learning and exposed themselves more to opposing views and different political perspectives, making debate more constructive. As such, institutions of higher learning play a critical role in creating platforms for debate, dialogue and knowledge generation and should initiate complex conversations that include faculty members as well as students (Engelbrecht, 2022; Frantz et al., 2022; Porter & Schuman, 2017).

Academic leaders should visibly demonstrate intellectual humility in academic spaces (Beerkens & Van der Hoek, 2022; Idahosa & Vincent, 2019). This is especially relevant to institutions of higher learning in South Africa in addressing societal issues such as inequity and poverty and in developing social consciousness among academics and students (Urban & Kujinga, 2017). In South Africa, decolonisation, which is high on the transformation agenda for higher education, calls for intellectual humility and the promotion of alternative knowledge bases, and especially indigenous knowledge bases (Lumadi, 2021). In this respect, student protests of the past decade aimed at highlighting perceived failures in the transformation of institutions of higher learning. A decolonised curriculum presents diverse perspectives, encourages critical thinking and addresses issues relevant to marginalised communities (Lumadi, 2021). Leary et al. (2017) opine that teaching should promote intellectual humility, as teaching and learning should both cement and challenge one’s beliefs and views. This presents intellectual humility as a balance between one’s own knowledge and being open to new learning and highlights that collective intelligence and innovation are required to address cultural, societal and technological changes (Misevic et al., 2023). As such, academic leaders should be intentional and proactive in promoting debate of diverse ideas in a collaborative manner (Beerkens & Van der Hoek, 2022; Higgs, 2016; Idahosa & Vincent, 2019).

Academics may however be conflicted about being intellectually humble. Having legitimately demonstrated knowledge and expertise through obtaining a qualification in a specific field and producing subsequent academic outputs such as research articles may stimulate arrogance (Buchheit, 2020; Leary, 2017; Mitu, 2021). In this respect, Porter et al. (2021) note that intellectual humility is ‘a virtuous balance’ between intellectual arrogance and intellectual hesitancy, while Cousins (2018) highlights the importance of integrating diverse knowledge bases and holistic thinking for dealing with global and humanity problems. This requires purposeful inquiry and curiosity, collaboration and learning from non-homogeneous others rather than continuous improvement in traditional knowledge. Academics need to acknowledge the fallibility of knowledge in a changing world and promote diverse perspectives and collective problem solving. Misevic et al. (2023) use the term collective intelligence to describe intentional openness and collaboration in responding to local and global issues.

Early career academics as emerging scholars are typically appointed at the rank of associate lecturer or lecturer (Barnes et al., 2021) but may also have a doctorate with work experience outside of academia (Bosanquet et al., 2016). Early career academics are within the establishment phase of their academic career which, based on Super’s Career Development Model, is a period of commitment, career advancement and growth (Bosanquet et al., 2016). In South Africa, the development of early career academics is perceived as a national need (Moosa, 2020). Early career academics regard intellectual stimulation and opportunities to apply their skills as important (Barnes et al., 2021; Lesenyeho et al., 2018; Owusu-Agyeman, 2022) but may find themselves in situations where their intellect is not acknowledged or valued because of a lack of intellectual humility among senior academics. In this respect, Maluleka (2024) asserts that in South Africa, early career academics are often disempowered based on age differences and gatekeeping tactics. Maluleka indicates that senior researchers and university professors are often being regarded as legitimate knowers whose knowledge is valued, while early black career academics are delegitimated knowers. This may reflect a lack of intellectual humility and hubris among senior academics. Gatekeeping, a related concept, refers to more experienced academics controlling information that leads to career opportunities and access to resources, with early career academics being excluded from such opportunities.

Early career academics may, irrespective of their achievements, could feel like imposters when they enter the academic environment, especially in fields such as science, technology, engineering and mathematics if they feel their knowledge may be questioned (Chakraverty, 2022). Imposter syndrome, described by Shinawatra et al. (2023), occurs when individuals, even when equally skilled to their colleagues, question their own accomplishments, develop an internal fear of being exposed and a sense of not belonging. This may lead to lower self-efficacy, a lower sense of belonging, feelings of stress and result in academics moving out of education (Maradoglu et al., 2022; Phelan, 2024). The experience of being an imposter is aggravated when early career academics are confronted with senior academics who, based on rank, gender, race or ethnicity, display a lack of intellectual humility and do not consider their ideas (Maluleka, 2024; Phelan, 2024). Colombo et al. (2020) assert that intellectual humility weakens the relationship between perceived dissimilarity and prejudice.

Early career academics’ perceptions of intellectual humility may also be influenced by their experiences with academic leadership, such as heads or supervisors. Humble leaders are preferred and perceived as more effective than arrogant leaders, especially among followers who consider themselves as intellectually humble (Park et al., 2020). In addition, intellectually humble leaders are perceived to promote a culture of intellectual humility (Krumrei-Mancuso & Begin, 2022). Krumrei (2022) notes that managers with a greater need for personal achievement and recognition may lack intellectual humility, while some employees may prefer leaders who come across as infallible. However, she asserts that intellectually humble leaders are more likely to adopt a follower-centred leadership style (e.g. servant leadership), empower followers and increase job satisfaction. Chughtai et al. (2023) found a significant indirect link between leader humility and employee career success, based on the perceptions of a sample of 293 respondents within manufacturing and service organisations. Their study showed that leader intellectual humility positively influenced employees’ psychological coping resources (adaptability), resulting in career success, specifically for employees with proactive personalities. The conclusion is that humble leaders increase employees’ confidence through empowerment and appreciation and motivate them to learn new skills and abilities.

To explore perceptions of early career academics of intellectual humility in an academic environment, an interpretivist paradigm and a generic qualitative research approach were adopted using semi-structured interviews as the data collection method. This approach was deemed suitable for this study to explore the authentic perspectives of early career academics on intellectual humility, its importance within the academic environment and how they make sense of their lived experiences in relation to intellectual humility in academia. Ethics approval for conducting the study was obtained before the empirical study was conducted.

The study explored perspectives of early career academics on intellectual humility and its importance within an academic environment. The research was conducted at an institution of higher learning in South Africa and included early career academics from four faculties, representing fields of business (accounting, management, tourism and human resources), health sciences, nature conservation and education. Early career academics are in the establishment phase of their careers (Bosanquet et al., 2016) and may have conflicting perspectives of intellectual humility and its importance in an academic environment.

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Nelson Mandela Research Ethics Committee (No. H23-BES-HRM-004).

Being aware of the potential impact of diversity, the researchers kept in mind that gender, race and age may potentially have influenced the perceptions of the participants. In addition, participants representing social sciences may potentially be more attentive to the concepts of humility and intellectual humility. However, the sample represented early career academics from different disciplines, gender and race. Two main themes were extracted in relation to the concept of humility: intentional self-reflection and being human-centred (Table 3).

Three themes related to intellectual humility were extracted, these being owning one’s intellectual limitations, respecting other’s viewpoints and learning and sharing (Table 4). These themes depict three dimensions of intellectual humility, the first being a focus on the self, the second a focus on others and, lastly, a focus on learning and sharing.

In terms of the need or space for intellectual humility within an academic environment, four themes emerged: ensuring academic freedom, addressing change, promoting engagement and fostering learning (Table 5).

The study was motivated by an event in which an early career academic with years of industry experience felt belittled after being interrogated by a senior academic about their qualifications and professional registration. Maluleka (2024) noted the vulnerability of early career academics in situations where senior academics claim knowledge and assume a gatekeeping role (Krumrei-Mancuso, 2018). Through demonstrating intellectual humility, the senior academic could have gained more insight into the work experience of the early career academic, and the early career academic could also have gained knowledge, leading to collective intelligence.

The 10 early career academics interviewed for this study were associate lecturers or lecturers, male and female, and represented racial groups in South Africa that historically had been marginalised. It was, however, notable that the participants did not attribute a lack of intellectual humility to ethnic or racial bias. They rather associated a lack of intellectual humility with rank-consciousness and a fixed mental set.

Two themes emerged from the qualitative analysis related to humility: intentional self-reflection and human-centredness. The early career academics described humility in the academic environment as involving self-awareness, specifically in terms of recognising one’s strengths and weaknesses, and being modest. They did not view humility as a sign of weakness, which Mulinge (2018) and Wright et al. (2016) described as being the traditional view of humility. In the past, humility had been associated with submissiveness or low self-esteem, but it is currently framed in a positive light, that of recognising and appreciating the strengths of others without ignoring one’s own strengths (Council & Sowcik, 2021; Friedman et al., 2017). The early career academics indicated that humility should apply to all academics, irrespective of title or achievement. The findings echo observations by Porter et al. (2021), Ross and Wright (2021), Leary et al. (2017) and Krumrei-Mancuso (2016) about humility being a character strength rather than a weakness. A notable contribution made by the early career academics in this study was the focus they placed on human-centredness, as reflective of the value of Ubuntu or Botho, as mentioned by interviewee.

The early career academics conceptualised intellectual humility in terms of three themes: owning one’s intellectual limitations (reigning oneself in, realising one may be wrong or misinformed, being open to correction), respecting other’s viewpoints (being approachable, showing respect for others and their dignity) and learning and sharing (openness to learning; owning one’s knowledge space). These dimensions can be seen in sequence: the self, relationships with others and mutual growth. A comparison between this conceptualisation and the theoretical conceptualisation by Mitu (2021); Porter et al. (2021) and Krumrei-Mancusa and Rouse (2016) is presented in Table 6.

The conceptualisation of intellectual humility by the early career academics was closely aligned with the conceptualisation by Krumrei-Mancuso and Rouse (2015) and Porter et al. (2021). Whereas the literature presents four dimensions of intellectual humility, the empirical study revealed three themes incorporating the self (owning one’s intellectual limitations), others (respecting others’ intellect) and learning and sharing, as indicated in Table 6.

In terms of the need for intellectual humility within an academic environment, four themes emerged: ensuring academic freedom, developing change competence, promoting engagement and fostering learning. Early career academics wanted freedom in expressing alternative views. They perceived intellectual humility as essential for change competence (critical thinking and problem solving), which is in agreement with the views of Budevici-Puiu (2020), Cousins (2018), Ehlers and Lazenby (2019) and Matsepe et al. (2020). They wanted to be empowered, supported and heard, and also to craft their own growth. They perceived intellectual humility as essential in fostering partnerships within the academic space, a view aligned with that of Cousins (2018) who advocates for critical thinking, rigorous debate and innovation across different fields.

The study highlights the role of intellectual humility in creating a climate of engagement, learning, growth and change, specifically in the context of higher education, where teaching, research and engagement are core functions. It is noteworthy that the study was conducted from the perspective of early career academics, which gave them an opportunity to voice their opinion on intellectual humility. The results reflect the expectations they have of academics, including senior academics and academic managers. As such, the study sensitises academic management, leaders and academics in institutions of higher learning to the value of intellectual humility, as well as the perceptions and needs of early career academics.

For academic managers to be effective, they need to continuously develop themselves, others as well as academic system. As such, the first recommendation is for academic managers to reflect on themselves, and specifically on their own levels of intellectual humility. The hard question to ask is whether they exhibit intellectual overconfidence and hubris, as this will negatively influence the development and satisfaction of early career academics. Managers should be taught the value of intellectual humility, which can be linked to contemporary leadership approaches such as servant, transformational and Ubuntu leadership.

The second area for academic managers is to focus on their relationships with others, including early career academics reporting to them. They need to establish respectful relationships with others, create opportunities to listen and learn from others and approach alternative perspectives with an openness. Early career academics expect managers to be open and approachable and to respect their views. Managers should be guided in terms of how they communicate with early career academics to maximise information sharing, perspective-taking and integrated problem solving. Managers should also promote inclusivity and prevent situations in which in- and out-groups are formed that limit participation and development.

The third focus for academic managers is to establish a culture of intellectual humility, focusing on fostering engagement, critical thinking, problem solving and learning. This recommendation is aligned with the perspective of Cousins (2018), who emphasises diverse ideas, rigorous debate and novel solutions, generated in collaboration with diverse stakeholders, for addressing the greater problems in the world. As such, academics managers should purposefully create spaces for discussion and debate. They need to connect academics from different disciplines and create platforms for sharing emerging perspectives in addressing national and global challenges. Such engagements should take place in psychological safe spaces where diverse ideas can be brainstormed and debated irrespective of background, level, discipline or academic rank.

The early career academics highlighted self-reflection, humaneness and respect for alternative perspectives as important aspects of intellectual humility, and for promoting engagement and fostering learning. They also expressed a need for academic freedom to pursue alternative views and experiment with new approaches. This can be done through joining multidisciplinary interest groups and academic discourse groups.

The study contributes to theory and practice. It adds to an understanding of the nature and importance of humility and intellectual humility from the perspective of early career academics at a South African institution of higher learning. The study produced an extended conceptualisation of humility by also including the aspect of humaneness. It highlights intellectual humility as a three-dimensional concept, relating to the self, the relationship with others and learning. The study emphasises that intellectual humility is required for a collaborative, respectful and innovative academic culture.

The study also has practical value in terms of guidelines provided to academic managers and leaders in creating an environment in which academics, and early career academics, can authentically contribute to critical thinking, debate and problem solving. The study contributes to the relatively underexplored area of intellectual humility within institutions of higher learning, and specifically in the South African context.

This study was exploratory in nature and conducted at a selected institution of higher learning. A recommendation for future research is to explore how intellectual humility is fostered with the teaching practices utilised by early career academics in higher education institutions and the strategies they use to promote or elevate student voice and critical thinking rather than focusing on teaching content.