12.2 Leadership
12.2 Confronting Destructive Leadership in Practice
Learning Objective
Analyze methods for addressing toxic leadership through the perspectives of leaders, followers, and context.
Introduction
This chapter contrasts previous discussions of practicing leadership by examining how to restrain toxic leaders and change leadership from destructive to constructive.
Central concept: Toxic Triangle - examines destructive leadership from three perspectives:
- Leaders
- Followers
- ContextThese perspectives together provide a robust basis for strategies to combat destructive leadership.
Leaders
Recognition of Destructive Leaders:
- Recognizing destructive leaders is relatively easy; however, removing them can be very difficult.
- Characteristics:
- Charisma: Makes them persuasive.
- Power: They display power for personal gains.
- Narcissism: Reduces empathic capabilities.
- Psychological Needs: Often linked to unresolved childhood traumas that manifest in abusive behavior.Challenges in Removal:
- Changing or removing destructive leaders is often challenging or impossible.
- Examples of historically toxic leaders:
- Jim Jones (cult leader)
- Adolf Hitler (dictator)
- Harvey Weinstein (corporate CEO)
- In these instances, despite the apparent toxicity, avenues for combating them were limited.Strategies for Organizations to Combat Destructive Leadership:
- Implementing effective selection and development processes to identify potentially destructive leaders.
- Role of Human Resource Departments:
- Central mission to dissuade the hiring or promotion of destructive leaders.
- Utilization of psychological tests to identify candidate attributes, such as:
- Willingness to listen
- Empathic abilities
- Need for control
- Narcissism
- Ethical and moral standards assessment:
- Low scores on ethical quality can indicate potential for destructive leadership, leading to elimination from candidate pools.Challenges of Destructive Leaders:
- There is no one-size-fits-all solution; destructive leaders will always exist, posing an insidious impact on both people and organizations.
- In situations where channels exist for communication or legal recourse, individuals must speak out, confront leaders, and advocate for change—a challenging but necessary process.
Followers
Case Study:
- Reflect on Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos; questions about why followers did not stop her destructive leadership.
- Although she was destructive, the company operated successfully under her leadership for almost a decade.Strategies for Followers:
- Whistle-Blowing:
- A method for followers to disrupt destructive leadership.
- Example from Theranos: Employees reported wrongdoing, leading to the company’s downfall via media exposure.
- Courage and Fortitude:
- Legal protections exist for whistle-blowers, but acting against toxic leadership requires personal bravery.
- Cultural Support:
- Followers can better confront destructive leaders within cultures that prioritize collaboration and empowerment.
- Cultivating staff development programs can promote future leadership potential, counteracting the neglect of such programs by destructive leaders.Psychological Factors in Following:
- Factors contributing to follower susceptibility to bad leaders (see Table 12.1).
- Methods for followers to resist and address these factors:
- Internalize personal strength and capability to confront obstacles.
- Learn to manage ambiguity and uncertainty, recognizing them as part of life.
- Resist compliance with destructive leaders to nourish one's identity.
- Maintain one's uniqueness; acceptance does not require compromising individuality.
- When necessary, challenge group norms when leaders are destructive, even at the risk of isolation.
- Speak Truth to Power:
- Followers should cultivate the courage to express dissent and combat destructive leadership.
- Emphasize personal agency to oppose bad leadership, irrespective of group pressure to conform.
Context
Organizational Norms and Procedures:
- Address destructive leadership through creating norms, rules, and procedures that promote accountability.Checks and Balances:
- Critical to prevent destructive leadership by establishing strong checks and balances across organizational units.
- Example: A university political science department with a detailed governance document outlining faculty roles and interaction with department leadership to promote accountability.
- The document contains:
- Clarification of roles
- Procedures for faculty input on scheduling, workload, and organizational decisions
- Specifications on merit pay and promotion processes.Importance of Governance:
- Governance systems that discourage the emergence of destructive leadership are essential.Oversight Through Boards of Directors:
- Importance of independent oversight in organizations; checks and balances mitigate the risk of abusive leadership.
- Sarbanes-Oxley Act relevance:
- Enacted post-Enron and WorldCom scandals, mandates increased board involvement and transparency, holding them accountable for corporate disclosures.
- Focus on independent board composition to ensure effective oversight of executives.Preventing Power Abuse:
- Organizations strive for a strong ethical climate through established norms and values that promote honesty, fairness, and respect.
- Establishing such a climate can deter leaders from engaging in abusive or destructive behaviors towards followers.