How Destructive Leaders Gain Power and Hold Onto It

Source: Thomas Andre Fure/Shutterstock

Over the past few years, our culture has seemed to arrive at a reckoning. Abusive behavior from leaders is far less tolerated than it once was, and those that have used their power to create hostile environments and harm their colleagues, co-workers, and employees are increasingly facing the consequences of their actions. The waves are being felt across multiple institutions, including business, academia, and the arts.

This paradigm shift is being met not so much with surprise, but with a feeling of relief that it has finally arrived. Still, a huge question looms. If these destructive leaders are so blatantly harmful, how do they manage to achieve and hold onto their level of power for so long? The root of the problem is the behavioral redundancies that many leaders demonstrate, along with the depths they will go to in order to ensconce themselves, avoid consequences, and cover up their negative impact.

The Dark Triad

Researchers continue to expand their understanding of destructive leadership and the impact it has on humans and organizations. A more recently observed phenomenon is The Dark Triad: the combination of Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy.

Leaders who have all three of these characteristics use their character flaws to engage followers. After all, being an openly flawed person makes a leader appear vulnerable and self-aware, which is likely to appeal to others who have flaws themselves. However, while engaging and charming in short encounters, these leaders cannot sustain positive interactions under stress. That’s where the destructive tendencies come in, doing harm to those around them.

Still, though, these leaders do sustain power, which only means that their stress continues, as do the outbursts and destructive behavior.

When it comes to the Dark Triad, it’s important to understand the differences between the three core traits. Despite the similarities, each predicts unique outcomes. And while the dark triad personality traits may exist independently, they tend to be correlated behaviors

Machiavellianism

A Machiavellian leader usually displays a lack of affect in interpersonal relationships, a lack of concern with conventional morality, gross psychopathology, and low ideological commitment. They believe that others are gullible and, combined with a lack of concern for others, this leads to manipulation.

In the political world, Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to be a true, modern Machiavellian. In 2013, as the U.S. prepared to intervene in Syria, Putin took to the pages of The New York Times and urged caution. As the Guardian pointed out, Putin’s op-ed was a rebuke of America’s morally guided foreign policy initiatives, a move that showed he wasn’t so much concerned with morality as he was in achieving his desired outcome. And it worked, with pundits and politicos who dislike Putin nodding their heads in agreement. In getting that outcome, he could manipulate his followers into believing he had the strength and resolve to solve any problem.

Narcissism

This trait is all too common in leadership roles. It presents as an inflated self-view, delusions of grandeur, attention-seeking behavior, and a focus on ego reinforcement. As I’ve written before, the ability to successfully engage and inspire in a corporate setting strongly corresponds with narcissism. In certain people, this results in negative consequences, which leads to the destructive behavior we see.

Narcissism runs amok in our political system, where it’s not hard to find elected leaders filled with delusions of grandeur and undertaking attention-seeking behavior. We also see negative consequences among narcissistic “celebrity” CEOs such as ex-Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn, who smuggled himself out of Japan while on bail and is now on the lam in Lebanon. His larger-than-life, self-aggrandizing “guru” persona often led to decisions that put his interests over those of the company.

Psychopathy

The final trait is perhaps the most jarring to many. Psychopathic behavior manifests in reckless disregard for societal norms or otherwise anti-social behavior. We almost expect leaders to have narcissistic and Machiavellian traits, and as a result, we accept it. But psychopathy can often be shocking, which is why so much of the news that we see about terrible leaders is shocking.

Psychopathy Essential Reads

Psychology’s Latest Thinking on Psychopathy

Revising My Ideas About a Kid Who Killed

Film, television, and Broadway producer Scott Rudin has been in the news for various misdeeds, including throwing computers at his assistants. But what remains most shocking of all is that his behavior has been considered an open secret across the industries he excelled in, and was largely viewed as the “by-product of an eccentric man,” as New York put it.

Rudin’s behavior seems to be a good example of psychopathy—specifically, corporate psychopathy—and understanding this unique trait gets at the heart of how leaders like this can hold onto power for so long.

Corporate Psychopathy

Corporate psychopathy refers to individuals who function inside an organizational setting, and exhibit dominating behaviors in pursuit of positions of power and influence, as well as personal gain and affluence (Boddy, 22 2013; Spencer & Byrne, 2016; Walker & Jackson, 2016).

Psychopathy in the workplace is distinguished from the psychopathology studied in the psychiatric community in that the former is associated with leaders in organizations who have lower levels of organizational commitment and lower social responsibility tendencies (Boddy, 2013), while the latter is associated with neurological irregularities and criminality. Corporate psychopathy exists on a continuum, and can include any or all of the following traits:

• Reduced guilt/reduced regret/lack of remorse/low on shame/low embarrassment, with individuals begging for forgiveness not out of guilt but to reduce potential consequences.
• Faking morals and emotions
• Taking without reciprocity
• High levels of anger, rage, and indignation
• Corporate crime

It’s difficult to evaluate just how prevalent corporate psychopathy is across the business world, because by definition, these leaders have traits that mask their behavior. They’ve become adept at making it difficult to measure the depth of the harm they’ve caused.

How Do People Gain This Power?

The present moment is showing us just how common corporate psychopathic behavior is, and while the first step is to hold these leaders accountable for their actions, the next reckoning will be examining just how we allow it to continue.

Culture is a key factor, as so much of our language around business is tied to success at all costs and a winner-take-all attitude. Once again looking at Scott Rudin, his abusive behavior was often written off as a sign of his eccentricities. He was successful, so he was allowed to remain abusive.

That level of success also comes with freedom from consequences, for both the perpetrator and those who go along with the behavior. Compliance is rewarded, so behavior perpetuates. This is an example of the Toxic Triangle, the combination of a destructive leader, susceptible followers, and a conducive environment. This perfect storm is responsible for so much of the pain and destruction that happens in corporate environments today, and it’s a big reason leaders rise to the top and maintain their grip on power.

So what can you do if you are a leader in an organization that has allowed a corporate psychopath to prosper, or if you work for someone who fits the description?

Working for or alongside a corporate psychopath is never easy. If you find yourself working for a psychopathic leader, know that your voice matters now more than ever, and actively seek avenues for help. For yourself, certainly, but also for the sake of others who may be experiencing this leader, and the organizations that they may negatively impact.

We’ve reached an inflection point where there is more opportunity to speak up and voice concerns than ever before. However, the opportunity isn’t always equally applied, and one effect of larger-than-life personalities is that those who cast aspersions their way are often viewed with skepticism. It took years for the open secret of Rudin’s behavior to be taken seriously by the press, and not everyone has access to media contacts who can break the dam.

It’s imperative that organizations take steps now to ensure that there are clear channels for those suffering under psychopathic leadership to pursue help, gain internal support, and make a career change if they so desire.

A huge part of this process is for boards and the senior decision-makers who are putting these leaders into power to understand that they may be producing unsustainable short-term business outcomes, due to the human cost surrounding them.

Human resources professionals and other leaders can get educated on the signs/indicators of corporate psychopathy that are outlined here. Be prepared to act, regardless of whether or not you currently see any signs of corporate psychopathy. After all, so many of the examples I’ve provided have remained hidden, and that may be the case right now.

LinkedIn and Facebook image: Thomas Andre Fure/Shutterstock