Toxic leader

Leader who abuses the leader–follower relationship
A toxic leader is a person who has responsibility for a group of people or an organization, and who abuses the leader–follower relationship by leaving the group or organization in a worse condition than it was in. Good and bad leadership styles can propagate downwards in an organisation, and there may therefore be little support to be gained by reporting toxic leadership upwards in the hierarchy.

In his 1994 journal article "Petty Tyranny in Organizations" Blake Ashforth discussed potentially destructive sides of leadership and identified what he referred to as "petty tyrants", i. e. leaders who exercise a tyrannical style of management, resulting in a climate of fear in the workplace. In 1996 Marcia Lynn Whicker popularized the term "toxic leader".

The basic traits of a toxic leader are generally considered to be either/or insular, intemperate, glib, operationally rigid, callous, inept, discriminatory, corrupt or aggressive by scholars such as Barbara Kellerman.

Workload: The setting up to fail procedure is in particular a well established workplace bullying tactic that a toxic leader can use against his rivals and subordinates. Corporate control systems: They could use the processes in place to monitor what is going on. Disciplinary systems could be abused to aid their power culture. Organizational structures: They could abuse the hierarchies, personal relationships and the way that work flows through the business. Corporate power structures: The toxic leader controls who, if any one makes the decisions and how widely spread power is. Symbols of personal authority: These may include the right to parking spaces and executive washrooms or access to supplies and uniforms. Narcissistic symbols and self images (i. e. workplace full of self portraits). Workplace rituals and routines: Management meetings, board reports, disciplinary hearing, performance assays and so on may become more habitual than necessary. Heavy running costs and a high staff turnover/overtime rate are often also associated with employee related results of a toxic leader.

In their book, The Allure of Toxic Leaders: Why We Follow Destructive Bosses and Corrupt Politicians—and How We Can Survive Them, Jean Lipman Blumen explained that there was and still is a tendency among contemporary society to seek authoritative, even dominating characteristics among our corporate and political leaders because of the public's own personal psycho social needs and emotional weaknesses. Lipman Blumen noticed "toxic leadership" was not about run of the mill mismanagement. Rather, it referred to leaders, who, by virtue of their "dysfunctional personal characteristics" and "destructive behaviours" "inflict reasonably serious and enduring harm" not only on their own followers and organizations, but on others outside of their immediate circle of victims and subordinates, as well. A noted rule of thumb suggests that toxic leaders leave their followers and others who come within their sphere of influence worse off than they found them either on a personal and/or corporate basis. Lipman Blumens' core focus was on investigating why people will continue to follow and remain loyal to toxic leaders. She also explored why followers often vigorously resist change and challenges to leaders who have clearly violated the leader/follower relationship and abused their power as leaders to the direct detriment of the people they are leading. Lipman Blumen suggests there is something of a deeply psychological nature going on. She argues the need to feel safe, specialness and in a social community all help explain this psychological phenomenon.

In his book, Understanding Ethical Failures in Leaders, Terry L. Price argues that the volitional account of moral failures in leaders do not provide a complete account of this phenomenon. Some have suggested that the reason leaders misbehave ethically is because they willingly go against what they know to be wrong. Professor Price however, offers an alternative analysis of leaders who excuse themselves from normally applicable moral requirements. He argues that a cognitive account for ethical failures in leaders provides a better analysis of the issues involved in all the ethical conundrums under the rubric of "toxic leadership". Leaders can know that a certain kind of behavior is generally required by morality but still be mistaken as to whether the relevant moral requirement applies to them in a particular situation and whether others are protected by this requirement. Price demonstrates how leaders make exceptions of themselves, explains how the justificatory force of leadership gives rise to such exception making, and develops normative protocols that leaders should adopt.