The considered a rich social context, we focus our

The general construction of humility has a rich background in theology and philosophy. Because humility often implies recognition and appreciation of knowledge and guidance beyond the self, it is a fundamental principle in all the major religions of the world: Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islamism, etc. Humility is also central to many philosophical discussions of morality. Immanuel Kant, for example, saw humility as a “metaattitude that constitutes the moral agent’s own perspective on himself” and a fundamental virtue for most other virtues (Grenberg 2005, p. 133). Humility in general has been categorized as a virtue of temperance that protects against excess (Park and Peterson 2003).Although the virtue of humility has rich historical roots, the conceptualizations of humility vary significantly through philosophical, theological, and psychological perspectives. These different conceptualizations have made it difficult to derive consensus on the definition of humility. In addition, attempts to assimilate different conceptualizations of humility in these fields have led to complex definitions that, in some cases, contain up to 13 different dimensions (Vera and Rodríguez-Lopez 2004), making humility a Construction difficult to handle for operationalizing.One possible reason why the previous definitions of humility are so complex is that humility can have different forms or types. Some components of the definitions of humility of the past have an intrapersonal, internal, and clear personal approach (i.e., a balanced processing of personal strengths and weaknesses, see Owens 2011); Other definitions capture the manifested, external, expressed or interpersonal properties of humility (i.e., they show a predilection for seeking to learn from others; see Vera and Rodríguez-López 2004). Given the conceptual and operational implications for these differences, it is not surprising that the past definitions of humility have been confusing and the attempts of the past to measure humility are unsuccessful. Because our purpose is to examine humility in the context of organizations, which is generally considered a rich social context, we focus our attention on the expressed and interpersonal nature of humility.