“You learn far more from negative leadership than from positive leadership. Because you learn how not to do it. And, therefore, you learn how to do it.” – General H. Norman Schwarzkopf
We love to throw around a term like toxic leadership as a catchall for every leadership sin that rolls down the pike. If you yell, you’re toxic. If you make bad decisions, you’re toxic. If you have no personality, you’re toxic.
By the time the term reached buzzword status, we tried to shift the focus toward the behaviors rather than the outcomes, leaning into “counterproductive leadership” as a more appropriate characterization. But even that term falls short. “Counterproductive” simply fails to address the full scope of the issue of negative leadership.
At its heart, negative leadership is destructive. Their behaviors are definitely counterproductive, but the results of those behaviors wreak havoc on the organization and its people. But if we constrain ourselves to an antiseptic focus on counterproductive leadership, we hinder our ability to control and limit the damage it causes.
Eve of Destruction
Leaders who can’t control their emotions or actions create hostile environments that foster all manner of destructive behavior. Leaders who see themselves “above the law” set a deeply destructive example in how they lead their lives. A leader who is indecisive, who lacks presence, or fails to develop subordinate leaders is just as destructive as one who can’t communicate without screaming. A leader unable to set the example, unwilling to empower his subordinates, or unable to communicate vision and direction can be equally destructive as one who fails to uphold the values of our profession.
How does this destructiveness impact the organization? In a 2022 Forbes article, Willena Long summed it up perfectly: “a destructive leader thinks they are perfect, thinks they know everything there is to know about leadership, believes their way is the only way (and will force it on others) and has no interest in improving themselves.” The destructive leader creates chaos and instability across the organization and despite outward appearances – they are also masters of disguise – typically leaves a trail of ruin in their wake. They’re not simply counterproductive: their approach to leadership is attritional in nature and annihilates organizational culture.
The Dark Side
Nevertheless, there is some degree of value to focusing on behaviors. However, a trait-based approach to leadership is only truly useful if it’s applied as a predictive model. Ironically, we often ignore the negative behaviors of the most destructive leaders because we convince ourselves that the ends (productivity) justify the means. In reality, that success is achieved at the expense of the organization, on the backs of people whose hard work typically benefits only the aspirations of the destructive leader.
The signs are always there, we just choose to look the other way. If we really want to limit the effects of negative leadership, we have to identify the archetypes early on and address them before they cause too much destruction.
1. The Screamer.
They’re the archetype of toxic leaders, hotheaded tyrants who possess no measurable emotional control. At any given moment, their unpredictable mood shifts and erratic behavior can lead to fits of unbridled emotion, impulsive decision-making, and bouts of petulance. And they make a point of crushing anyone and anything in their path.
2. The Robot.
On the other end of the emotional spectrum is the leader who lacks any sense of empathy. They’re as disconnected and dispassionate as it gets, unable to relate to others or their feelings. For them, work-life balance and organizational culture are little more than flat earth conspiracies inspired by lazy employees.
3. The Schemer.
Every workplace has someone who would steal your lunch from the break room fridge. When those people are eventually promoted into positions of authority, their schemes become more elaborate and increasingly unethical. They’re always looking for personal gain, regardless of the cost to the organization.
4. The Ghost.
A close cousin of the robot, the ghost is rarely present, doesn’t engage with the team, and generally leads from a keyboard behind a locked door. Their inability to provide meaningful guidance and intent ensure the organization is rudderless most of the time, floating aimlessly without a leader at the wheel.
5. The Dinosaur.
Cognitive ossification is a serious detriment to effective leadership. When leaders are unwilling or unable to adapt to change, resistant to innovation, or wedded to outdated methods, the entire organization slips into an abyss of irrelevance. “Adapt or die” is a 65-million-year-old mantra.
6. The Overlord.
The surest sign of someone unsuited to a leadership role is micromanagement. Instead of leading the organization forward, they interject themselves into the most minute internal details, over-supervise, and refuse to delegate. In doing so, they stifle growth, development, and autonomy within the organization, which quickly stagnates.
While the Sinister Six are bad in their own right, there’s another form of ineffective leader that deserves mention. When someone in a position of authority lacks the knowledge, skills, and abilities to lead effectively, they create their own unique form of chaos. The Idiot fumbles, stumbles, and bumbles their way to bad decisions and judgement errors while leading the organization down a path of irreversible destruction. And, because they’re not exactly the brightest bulbs, they’re oblivious to it all.
